The Council of Trent
Seventh Session: On The Sacraments in General

IV.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.

If a person receives the grace of justification and dies in that grace without receiving water Baptism where does his soul go? Heaven or Hell?

In order to understand this passage on Justification, it is neccesary to take into account the context. After actually reading the entire treatise (not only the isolated cited paragraph by itself), one realizes that this Decree on Justification is undoubtly teaching that we cannot be justified without water or the will for it, since Our Lord said that we cannot be born again without water AND the Holy Spirit. We need BOTH.

The focus in the word "or" is incorrect. It is to be taken as AND. Trent had just spent paragraphs discussing how the Holy Ghost acts in the soul to cause it to cooperate and to be properly disposed for the Sacrament.

Trent was teaching the relationship between the nature of the Sacrament and the cooperation of the will, both equally needed to obtain the grace of Justification, which is only seal with Baptism. Trent was teaching against the Protestant errors. Again, Trent never taught BOD. Trent is CLEARLY teaching that BOTH the water(Sacrament) AND the cooperation / proper disposition are required for justification. Without BOTH there is no justification.

Indeed, if one tries to make the water or the desire thereof an "either ... or" proposition, then one turns the teaching of Trent into an ERROR. Because you CANNOT BE JUSTIFIED WITH WATER WITHOUT THE WILL OR DISPOSITION.  

Actually, Trent anathematized those who claim that justification can happen only wih water without the cooperation of the will (votum). If someone claims that Trent teaches ONE OR THE OTHER, then he is in error, given that Trent actually condemns those that say that water alone (without the will or desire) is sufficient to justify.

While I am tired, and ignorant of many things on this subject, I do believe Cantarella is correct on this point.

I also admit that she is not a theologian, canonized saint, or a Doctor of the Church who has clearly taught baptism of desire. Nor did she give her imprimatur on countless catechisms which clearly shows what the Church has taught on this matter.

I thought there was an implicit desire, and the godparents speaks on behalf of the infant?

The Council of Trent
Seventh Session: On The Sacraments in General

IV.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.

If a person receives the grace of justification and dies in that grace without receiving water Baptism where does his soul go? Heaven or Hell?

To exemplify what Cantarella stated, you need to read the canon as it is written and it would certainly help to understand the purpose the canon was decreed at all.

The first part of the canon:

If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous;..........let him be anathema.


ALL NSAAers ignore, reject or otherwise completely miss the first and most important part of the canon above.


It then goes on:

and [if anyone saith] that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.



Note the fact that unlike the first part of the canon - and much to the shame of deceitful NSAAers, nowhere in this second part of the canon is salvation ever even mentioned. Rewarding salvation to infidels is an additional leap they make so they may proclaim the sacrament is not necessary, only the desire of it is.

Where the requirement for salvation *is* mentioned and rejected by NSAAers, is in the first part - this requirement really irks the deceitful NSAAers because they cannot make it jive with their adulterating of the rest of the canon without deceiving themselves - and all others of weak or no faith.  

The words "desire thereof" appear two whole times in all of the Council's docuмents - and out of all the teachings to the contrary, NSAAers zoom into those two words and heretically declare, profess, proclaim and defend those two words as dogmatic proof that salvation is rewarded by some desire for the sacrament.

If you read the canon as written, you will find that:

1) The sacraments are necessary unto salvation. (NSAAers cannot stand this fact)

2) Per Trent's catechism explaining the "desire thereof": In the first place they must desire and intend to receive it; for as in Baptism we all die to sin and resolve to live a new life, it is fit that it be administered to those only who receive it of their own free will and accord; it is to be forced upon none.

3) NSAAers who preach a BOD are preaching in exact contradiction of the entire canon since NSAAers preach that without the sacraments, men obtain from God - not the grace of justification, no, that does not suit their purpose - they go all the way and proclaim that without them men obtain from God *salvation* -  and that no sacrament at all is indeed necessary for any individual at all.

Quote from: Ambrose

Quote from: SenzaDubbio

While I am tired, and ignorant of many things on this subject, I do believe Cantarella is correct on this point.

I also admit that she is not a theologian, canonized saint, or a Doctor of the Church who has clearly taught baptism of desire. Nor did she give her imprimatur on countless catechisms which clearly shows what the Church has taught on this matter.

She is wrong, the Council of Trent infallibly taught Baptism of Desire, and all Catholics are required to believe it.

The Feeneyites have adopted a bizarre twisted meaning to Trent, and will not accept correction. The Council is clear, a person is justified by Baptism or the desire thereof.

This point was always understood and uncontested since the Council of Trent, all Catholics realized this truth and believed it.  It is the Feeneyites who in the second half of the 20th century  created an artificial controversy by twisting the meanings of the sacred canons of Trent to appear to be against Baptism of Desire.

Be cautious, my friend, these people, though many of them have good intentions, are themselves duped, and they will lead you to deny Catholic teaching, and by that possibly lead you outside the Church.

More lies from one of the chief sacrament despisers here on CI. - - - - "For he who makes no use of what is really useful and necessary must be supposed to despise it" - Trent's Catechism

Accept Trent's authority and embrace the teaching of the Church.

CANON V.-If any one saith, that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema.

 

Why you keep saying the same thing? Who keeps saying getting baptism is optional or not necessary? You have to say it or believe it to get anathema'd.

All the clergy and people know baptism is not an optional rule of God and know it is necessary supernaturally. Thats like saying invincible ignorance is a sin, I know someone cant go to heaven like that, but God punishes for the other sins because he didnt give them a gift of faith.

The Bishop and priest and catechumen all believe it is necessary and not an option, so stop lying about them.

Quote from: Ad Jesum per Mariam

The Council of Trent
Seventh Session: On The Sacraments in General

IV.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.

If a person receives the grace of justification and dies in that grace without receiving water Baptism where does his soul go? Heaven or Hell?

To exemplify what Cantarella stated, you need to read the canon as it is written and it would certainly help to understand the purpose the canon was decreed at all.

The first part of the canon:

If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous;..........let him be anathema.


ALL NSAAers ignore, reject or otherwise completely miss the first and most important part of the canon above.


It then goes on:

and [if anyone saith] that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.



Note the fact that unlike the first part of the canon - and much to the shame of deceitful NSAAers, nowhere in this second part of the canon is salvation ever even mentioned. Rewarding salvation to infidels is an additional leap they make so they may proclaim the sacrament is not necessary, only the desire of it is.

Where the requirement for salvation *is* mentioned and rejected by NSAAers, is in the first part - this requirement really irks the deceitful NSAAers because they cannot make it jive with their adulterating of the rest of the canon without deceiving themselves - and all others of weak or no faith.  

The words "desire thereof" appear two whole times in all of the Council's docuмents - and out of all the teachings to the contrary, NSAAers zoom into those two words and heretically declare, profess, proclaim and defend those two words as dogmatic proof that salvation is rewarded by some desire for the sacrament.

If you read the canon as written, you will find that:

1) The sacraments are necessary unto salvation. (NSAAers cannot stand this fact)

2) Per Trent's catechism explaining the "desire thereof": In the first place they must desire and intend to receive it; for as in Baptism we all die to sin and resolve to live a new life, it is fit that it be administered to those only who receive it of their own free will and accord; it is to be forced upon none.

3) NSAAers who preach a BOD are preaching in exact contradiction of the entire canon since NSAAers preach that without the sacraments, men obtain from God - not the grace of justification, no, that does not suit their purpose - they go all the way and proclaim that without them men obtain from God *salvation* -  and that no sacrament at all is indeed necessary for any individual at all.

You prove my point perfectly. An infant cannot desire baptism of their own free will and accord as you say above (#2). It is the free will and of accord of someone else that enables them to receive water Baptism. Therefore or means "or" and not "and." The infant still receives the grace of justification without the desire. Also, the grace of the Sacrament of Penance does not require the actual reception thereof. Perfect contrition with desire for the Sacrament remits sins. Therefore you are in grave error when you say both Sacrament and the desire for the Sacrament are necessary to obtain the grace of justification.

As for number 3, you seem to say that those who obtain the grace of justification do not obtain salvation if they die in that grace without water baptism. This brings us back to the original question which has not yet been answered.

Quote from: Ambrose

Quote from: SenzaDubbio

While I am tired, and ignorant of many things on this subject, I do believe Cantarella is correct on this point.

I also admit that she is not a theologian, canonized saint, or a Doctor of the Church who has clearly taught baptism of desire. Nor did she give her imprimatur on countless catechisms which clearly shows what the Church has taught on this matter.

She is wrong, the Council of Trent infallibly taught Baptism of Desire, and all Catholics are required to believe it.

The Feeneyites have adopted a bizarre twisted meaning to Trent, and will not accept correction. The Council is clear, a person is justified by Baptism or the desire thereof.

This point was always understood and uncontested since the Council of Trent, all Catholics realized this truth and believed it.  It is the Feeneyites who in the second half of the 20th century  created an artificial controversy by twisting the meanings of the sacred canons of Trent to appear to be against Baptism of Desire.

Be cautious, my friend, these people, though many of them have good intentions, are themselves duped, and they will lead you to deny Catholic teaching, and by that possibly lead you outside the Church.

More lies from one of the chief sacrament despisers here on CI. - - - - "For he who makes no use of what is really useful and necessary must be supposed to despise it" - Trent's Catechism

Accept Trent's authority and embrace the teaching of the Church.

CANON V.-If any one saith, that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary unto salvation; let him be anathema.

 

Does Canon V read "water Baptism" or "Baptism."