Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire  (Read 64529 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire
« Reply #165 on: March 23, 2023, 03:42:13 PM »
Quote
To restate the same. Justification puts one in a "state of grace." A state of grace has two possible options: 1) no temporal debt remaining or 2) temporal debt still remaining. If he person dies in number 1, he goes straight to Heaven. If a person dies in number 2, he goes to Purgatory.
There is a third option, which the Church Fathers inferred many times (when they said someone was "washed" but "not crowned"), which is Limbo of the Just.  BOD does not provide the sacramental character, the wedding garment, which is necessary for either purgatory/Heaven.  Ultimately, this is the main problem of saying that BOD'ers can get to heaven.

Offline OABrownson1876

  • Supporter
Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire
« Reply #166 on: March 23, 2023, 03:54:36 PM »
I think Robert Cross, in his book, "The Emergence of Liberal Catholicism in America," pretty well sums up the spirit of BOD in this country:

"In the 1880's and 1890's, the Paulists had successfully maintained that one who was invincibly ignorant of Catholicism might belong to the 'soul' of the Church, and thus be saved.  Throughout the 1940's, Father Fenton, believing as Michael Muller did years earlier that the 'lax' or 'liberal' interpretation was a screen for either indifferentism or a condemnable lack of concern for the salvation of non-Catholics, attempted to reestablish the doctrine's stringency.  He discarded the concept of the 'soul' of the Church as a misleading metaphor, and argued that invincible ignorance excused a man for disobedience in remaining out of the Church, but did not excuse him for not being in.  A man must also desire to do God's will, and exercise perfect charity. Even so, his situation would remain, Fenton was forced to conclude 'distinctly unfavorable and unfortunate from the spiritual point of view." (pp. 212, 213) 

Of course I disagree with the notion that the Paulists "successfully" maintained their argument, but the point remains, liberalism in America really ramped up within the late 19th, early 20th centuries.  Many theologians, some willfully and others non-willfully, began mitigating EENS dogma to suit their needs.  After all, is it not just a lot easier to begin feeding your Protestant and pagan neighbors some watered-down salvation doctrine?     


Offline Angelus

  • Supporter
Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire
« Reply #167 on: March 23, 2023, 04:03:48 PM »
There is a third option, which the Church Fathers inferred many times (when they said someone was "washed" but "not crowned"), which is Limbo of the Just.  BOD does not provide the sacramental character, the wedding garment, which is necessary for either purgatory/Heaven.  Ultimately, this is the main problem of saying that BOD'ers can get to heaven.

I agree with BoD means "washed" but "not crowned," aka "justified" but "not saved."

The person who is merely "justified" by BoD is in a very precarious state if his life continues. He DOES NOT have access to the other Sacraments until he is sacramentally water-Baptized. If he was "justified" and he immediately falls back into sin, he does not have access to the "second plank" of the Sacrament of Penance. Can he "receive" BoD again and again? I don't know. I would assume so because all it amounts to is perfect contrition of an unbaptized person. God's mercy is infinite.

But how likely is it that a person who repents and then continues to live a long life without the Eucharist and the Sacrament of Penance can persevere in a state of grace until his death. I would say almost impossible (camel through the eye of a needle stuff). 

Finally, I don't think the sacramental character = the wedding garment precisely. I think the wedding garment is the soul. A clean wedding garment is a justified soul. A filthy wedding garment is a soul in mortal sin. 

The Sacramental character is the ticket to get the other Sacraments to help keep the wedding garment (the soul) clean. So, realistically, without the Sacramental character a person will not persevere with a clean wedding garment (soul) but will stain his wedding garment (soul) through sin and have no easy way to cleanse his wedding garment (the Sacraments). As such, he is likely to fall into despair and then distract himself with worldly pleasures following the mantra "eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die."

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire
« Reply #168 on: March 23, 2023, 04:08:36 PM »
The analogy of the wedding garment is from Scripture, where Christ explains that you either have one or not.  Those that don't have one, cannot stay at the wedding feast (i.e. salvation) and are "cast out into the darkness" (i.e. hell).

The analogy never includes clean vs dirty.

Offline Angelus

  • Supporter
Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire
« Reply #169 on: March 23, 2023, 04:41:07 PM »
The analogy of the wedding garment is from Scripture, where Christ explains that you either have one or not.  Those that don't have one, cannot stay at the wedding feast (i.e. salvation) and are "cast out into the darkness" (i.e. hell).

The analogy never includes clean vs dirty.

I agree. In Jesus's quotes, he speaks of having a wedding garment or not. But in the Apocalypse, St. John speaks of washing the robes. Here is a quote from Chapter 22:

14 Blessed are they that wash their robes in the blood of the Lamb: that they may have a right to the tree of life, and may enter in by the gates into the city. 15 Without are dogs, and sorcerers, and unchaste, and murderers, and servers of idols, and every one that loveth and maketh a lie.

And and speaking of the 144,000 in chapter 6, St. John says:

13 And one of the ancients answered, and said to me: These that are clothed in white robes, who are they? and whence came they? 14 And I said to him: My Lord, thou knowest. And he said to me: These are they who are come out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and have made them white in the blood of the Lamb. 15 Therefore they are before the throne of God, and they serve him day and night in his temple: and he, that sitteth on the throne, shall dwell over them. 16 They shall no more hunger nor thirst, neither shall the sun fall on them, nor any heat. 17 For the Lamb, which is in the midst of the throne, shall rule them, and shall lead them to the fountains of the waters of life, and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.

So I think the two interpretations are not far off. But I think that a baptized soul in a state of grace is in the same situation of cleanness as a justified soul in a state of grace. Both the baptized soul and the justified soul (BoD) are clean at the moment of regeneration but can lose their state of grace. The difference is that the baptized soul is likely to be more vigilant and can more easily recover from his fall. The merely justified soul, after falling a few times, will probably not be able to persevere to the end.