CathInfo.com

I want to analyze St Alphonsus' views on Baptism and BOD.  Here is the main quote that people often use:

Theologia Moralis, Lib.VI, Tract.II, Cap.I, no. 95-97

Baptism, therefore, coming from a Greek word that means ablution or immersion in water, is distinguished into Baptism of water [“fluminis”], of desire [“flaminis” = wind] and of blood.

We shall speak below of Baptism of water, which was very probably instituted before the Passion of Christ the Lord, when Christ was baptised by John. But baptism of desire is perfect conversion to God by contrition or love of God above all things accompanied by an explicit or implicit desire for true Baptism of water, the place of which it takes as to the remission of guilt, but not as to the impression of the [baptismal] character or as to the removal of all debt of punishment. 

It is called “of wind” [“flaminis”] because it takes place by the impulse of the Holy Ghost who is called a wind [“flamen”]. Now it is de fide that men are also saved by Baptism of desire, by virtue of the Canon Apostolicam, “de presbytero non baptizato” and of the Council of Trent, session 6, Chapter 4 where it is said that no one can be saved “without the laver of regeneration or the desire for it.”

To summarize his main points above, they are:
1) Baptism of desire = a) perfect conversion to God by contrition ...or...love of God above all things.  b) a desire for baptism of water.

2) BOD does not provide the baptismal character, and it does not remove temporal punishment of sins.  It only "justifies" one, to remove his sinful guilt.

3) St Alphonsus cites 2 sources for his BOD belief
a) Canon = "de presbytero non baptizato"
b) Trent


Here are the problems with his logic, his definitions and his sources:

1)  How can one have "perfect contrition" and "perfect love of God" prior to receiving the 3 theological virtues?  (which are only received by water baptism)
a.  I could argue that an unbaptized person cannot have "perfect conversion" to God nor a "love of God above all things" because this can only be had by the virtue of Charity, which can ONLY be gotten through Baptism/sacrament.  
b.  The 3 theological virtues can only be gotten by baptism of water, but...since St Alphonsus says they can be gotten PRIOR to baptism, well, it makes no sense, but that's his view.

2)  BOD does not provide the baptismal character, thus it can ONLY provide justification but it CANNOT PROVIDE SALVATION because it is not the sacrament.
a.  Trent's justification provides 3 things -- removal of guilt, remission of punishment, baptismal character.
b.  BOD only provides removal of guilt.
c.  BOD isn't the sacrament and IS NOT THE SAME TYPE OF JUSTIFICATION EXPLAINED BY TRENT.
d.  If it was the same justification, then the effects would be the same, but the effects are different.  1 vs 3.

3)  The Papal Decree "de presbytero non baptizato" proves that BOD is not salvific, but only a justification of guilt.  Not the same justification as in Trent.
a.  This decree is from the Middle Ages when there was a problem discovered of seminarians who wanted to become priests (or, those who had been "ordained") but these men discovered they were not baptized.
b.  This papal decretal (De presbytero non baptizato / "Concerning an unbaptized priest") establishes that baptism is the absolute gateway to all other sacraments.
c.  If a man is never baptized, he cannot validly receive Holy Orders.
d.  Without Holy Orders, he does not receive the sacerdotal (priestly) indelible mark.
e.  Therefore, his attempted ordination is completely null, and he cannot consecrate the Eucharist or absolve sins.
f.  This rule is absolute because ministers are strictly bound by the visible mechanics of the sacraments.

Questions on #3...

1.  Water baptism is necessary for the baptismal mark.
2.  Water baptism is necessary for all other sacraments to be valid.
3.  Water baptism is necessary for a priest to receive the indelible priestly mark.
4.  Water baptism is necessary because the VISIBLE MECHANICS OF WATER affect grace, due to the importance of the indelible mark.

So we have a case where the pope tells us that seminarians (who 100% desired/thought they were baptized) were not, and their priestly orders invalid.  All because the indelible mark is missing.

This case supports the notion that BOD (since it does not provide the baptismal mark) DOES NOT SAVE, it only justifies in an imperfect way.  BOD is not the sacrament, just like the papal decree says that the unbaptized cannot be ordained.  The missing indelible mark DOES NOT GRANT HEAVEN, just as in Scripture, the missing wedding garment causes the man to be thrown out of the wedding feast.

I fail to see how the papal decree support St Alphonsus' case at all.  In fact, it's the opposite.
  

https://isidore.co/aquinas/english/summa/TP/TP069.html

Whether grace and virtues are bestowed on man by Baptism?
Reply to Objection 2: As stated above (Article [1], ad 2; Question [68], Article [2]) man receives the forgiveness of sins before Baptism in so far as he has Baptism of desire, explicitly or implicitly; and yet when he actually receives Baptism, he receives a fuller remission, as to the remission of the entire punishment. So also before Baptism Cornelius and others like him receive grace and virtues through their faith in Christ and their desire for Baptism, implicit or explicit: but afterwards when baptized, they receive a yet greater fulness of grace and virtues. Hence in Ps. 22:2, "He hath brought me up on the water of refreshment," a gloss says: "He has brought us up by an increase of virtue and good deeds in Baptism."

The logic is the same as confession. When a Catholic has perfect contrition, they already receive God's forgiveness but they are still obligated to confess as soon as they can (if they have any mortal sins to confess).

Baptism of desire is taught by St Augustine, St Thomas Aquinas, St Alphonsus de Liguori, and St Pius X.

I don't see how it can be reasonable to doubt all of those people. Do you think you can accuse any of them of modernism?

My point is three-fold:
1.  You really can't compare desire for confession with desire for baptism.  In the desire for confession, a "perfect contrition" is ONLY possible because...you've already been baptized.  Perfect contrition is only possible if you have the 3 theological virtues -- faith, hope, and charity -- and you only get those by water baptism.  Which leads me back to the original question, St Alphonsus says it's possible to have a "perfect contrition" prior to baptism.  St Thomas says above that you receive graces before baptism, but they aren't perfect (if they were perfect, then St Thomas wouldn't have said that post-baptism you receive the "fullness" of grace).  

Something can't be perfect which isn't full.  Ergo, I don't see how it's possible for an unbaptized person, without the fullness of the sacramental graces, to be able to have a perfect contrition.  That's a contradiction.  

A lack of the fullness of grace = imperfect justification (or as I called it, a natural justification).
An imperfect justification = an imperfect contrition/imperfect love of God.
Something imperfect (grace) cannot provide that which is perfect.

2.  Once you're baptized, you have the fullness of the 3 virtues, with charity being the primary virtue of love of God.  Without charity, you cannot make a perfect act of contrition or perfect love of God.  Ergo, prior to baptism/sacrament, it's impossible to make a perfect act of love or contrition.  Post baptism, one can make these, which is why they suffice to absolve sins if confession is not available.

3.  Even if i'm wrong on #1 and a person can make a perfect act of love prior to receiving the sacrament of baptism, they still don't receive the indelible mark.  And this lack of the baptismal character is my main point of contention, because if a priest cannot be valid without it, then how does one enter heaven without it?

I think one can argue that St Alphonsus is correct that BOD can justify, but 1) it's not the same justification as Trent, 2) it's not salvific.

Why is this topic discussed ad nauseum?  What difference does it make in your own life with God?

Are you a theologian?  Are you an ordinary minister of baptism (ie, a priest)?  Why do people get so hung up on this topic that absolutely nothing else defines whether one is Catholic or not except whether or not they believe in baptism of desire?

I'm genuinely asking... as a priest, it boggles my mind at the obsession with this topic amongst a certain subculture of trads..

It matters because 90% of catholics out there (i.e. novus ordo, sspx, sede) label anyone who asks questions and/or questions the "BOD narrative" as heretics.  I'm tired of being called a heretic and these conversations prove that most people who believe in BOD don't know what they're talking about.

Also, this topic has broken up families, marriages, caused clerics to withhold sacraments from the laity, and also people have gotten kicked out of seminaries.  If you don't know this, then a) you're not a priest, or b) you are extremely sheltered.