Author Topic: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire (Read 41294 times)

DecemRationis · « **Reply #15 on:** March 15, 2023, 09:38:18 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on March 15, 2023, 09:36:47 AM

I'll try to find it again here. Interestingly, the Council of Florence's EENS definition was almost a verbatim citation from St. Fulgentius.

Appreciated.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #16 on:** March 15, 2023, 09:40:17 AM »

You don't think Trent's catechism has been "updated" after a period of years? If not, i'd say you'd be naive.

DecemRationis · « **Reply #17 on:** March 15, 2023, 09:42:31 AM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on March 15, 2023, 09:40:17 AM

You don't think Trent's catechism has been "updated" after a period of years? If not, i'd say you'd be naive.

Is there a point you want to make here? Please make it.

gemmarose · « **Reply #18 on:** March 15, 2023, 11:44:19 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn on March 15, 2023, 07:35:34 AM

Well, the whole a BOD subject is actually kinda ridiculous imo, I mean, the first ridiculous thing is that the idea itself is only ever defended by those already baptized, think about that for a minute.

I also think in some way that it may well be possible that God may be offended because His own faithful people are promoting the idea that He cannot or will not provide the sacrament that He very clearly mandated as a requirement for salvation (and on that account is obligated to provide), regardless of circuмstances.

"I also think in some way that it may well be possible that God may be offended because His own faithful people are promoting the idea that He cannot or will not provide the sacrament that He very clearly mandated as a requirement for salvation (and on that account is obligated to provide), regardless of the circuмstances."

BINGO! That's why we have the story of the miracle shown in Acts 8.

Stubborn · « **Reply #19 on:** March 15, 2023, 12:28:41 PM »

Quote from: gemmarose on March 15, 2023, 11:44:19 AM

"I also think in some way that it may well be possible that God may be offended because His own faithful people are promoting the idea that He cannot or will not provide the sacrament that He very clearly mandated as a requirement for salvation (and on that account is obligated to provide), regardless of the circuмstances."

BINGO! That's why we have the story of the miracle shown in Acts 8.

There really is so many very good and sound reasons to reject a BOD, that to debate the idea so often is already ridiculous.

Neither Trent nor it's catechism taught it. Trent actually clearly and explicitly condemns it. The only possible way to get a BOD out of either is to first read a BOD *into* them. Which means one must read meanings into words which the words they read do not say, while they fail to advert to what the words do say.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #20 on:** March 15, 2023, 12:44:46 PM »

I found the quotes from St. Fulgentius (but not the source yet).

Quote

And as for that young man whom we know to have believed and confessed his faith, ... God desired that his confession should avail for his salvation ...

So this looks like a statement in favor of BoD, right?

Well, let's add the next part of the sentence:

Quote

But God desired that his confession should avail for his salvation, since he preserved him in this life until the time of his holy regeneration.

There's no reason the Catechism of Trent could not be read in this same way. This "confession" or "desire" (or some equivalent subjective disposition) "avails" to salvation ... in so far as God will prevent such a one as this from dying without the Sacrament of Baptism.

Here's another similar passage from St. Fulgentius:

Quote

If anyone is not baptized, not only in ignorance, but even knowingly, he can in no way be saved. For his path to salvation was through the confession, and salvation itself was in baptism. At his age, not only was confession without baptism of no avail: Baptism itself would be of no avail for salvation if he neither believed nor confessed.

As others have pointed out, there's no statement in the Catechism to the effect that, "if such a one were to die before actually receiving the Sacrament, he would be saved."

It just says that their dispositions to be baptized prevent adults from being in the same danger as infants by delaying Baptism ... because God would make sure they received the Sacrament before they died.

Plenus Venter · « **Reply #21 on:** March 15, 2023, 10:14:57 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on March 15, 2023, 09:40:17 AM

You don't think Trent's catechism has been "updated" after a period of years? If not, i'd say you'd be naive.

"The Catechism of The Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire", thus the title of this thread. Maybe I'm missing something on one of the links, but I can't see anywhere the justification for this statement.

My Catechism of the Council of Trent (Imprimatur 1923) teaches it explicitly, as does this one from 1905 (during the pontificate of Pius X): The catechism of the Council of Trent : published by command of Pope Pius the fifth : Catholic Church : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

"With regard adults who enjoy the perfect use of reason, persons, for instance, born of infidel parents, the practice of the primitive Church points out a different manner of proceeding... On this class of persons, however, the Church does not confer this sacrament hastily: She will have it deferred for a certain time; nor is the delay attended with the same danger as in the case of infants, which we have already mentioned: and should any unforeseen accident deprive adults of baptism, their intention of receiving it, and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness." (p124,125 of the text)

The words in this edition are different from mine, yet the meaning is identical.

Plenus Venter · « **Reply #22 on:** March 15, 2023, 10:22:53 PM »

There is also from The Council of Trent, Session VII, Decree on The Sacraments, Canon IV:

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

Stubborn · « **Reply #23 on:** March 16, 2023, 04:33:17 AM »

Quote from: Plenus Venter on March 15, 2023, 10:22:53 PM

There is also from The Council of Trent, Session VII, Decree on The Sacraments, Canon IV:

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

The above is the Decree on the sacraments from the 7th session which covers all of the sacraments.

Before anything else, this canon states that the sacraments are necessary for salvation - disagree and you sin ("let him be anathema"). That's what it says. A BOD is not a sacrament, is therefore not salvific - per the above canon.

Next, it does *not* promise a desire for the sacrament of baptism justifies as BODers insist, rather, it clearly says without a desire thereof there is no justification.
1) Trent says: "no sacrament + no desire = no justification/no salvation."
2) BODers insist Trent says: "desire = justification/salvation."

In this canon, the "without the desire thereof" they are speaking of applies to the sacraments of penance and the Holy Eucharist - which coincides with the Church's teachings on Spiritual Communion and Perfect Contrition.

What they miss is the preceding session (6th), which is strictly about the sacrament of baptism when it states that justification cannot be effected "without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof," which is, quite literally, condemning the idea of a BOD.

For reasons known only to BODers, they read this to say "without the laver of regeneration or *without* the desire thereof," then apply idea #2 above into the mix. They then go so far as to insist that even Trent's catechism teaches a BOD.

Plenus Venter · « **Reply #24 on:** March 16, 2023, 07:01:43 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn on March 16, 2023, 04:33:17 AM

What they miss is the preceding session (6th), which is strictly about the sacrament of baptism when it states that justification cannot be effected "without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof," which is, quite literally, condemning the idea of a BOD.

For reasons known only to BODers, they read this to say "without the laver of regeneration or *without* the desire thereof," then apply idea #2 above into the mix. They then go so far as to insist that even Trent's catechism teaches a BOD.

Council of Trent, Session VI, January 13, 1547, Decree on Justification:

"...By which words a description of the justification of the impious is indicated - as being a translation of that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam to the state of grace and of the adoption of the sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, Our Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected without the laver of regeneration or the desire thereof, as it is written: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God".

Surely this affirms BOD and does not condemn it. The obvious sense of the words is not 'without the laver of regeneration and the desire', as you want to make it say, but one or the other, the laver of regeneration or the desire of the laver of regeneration. Otherwise, the Council would be saying that the baptism of a baby is not effected until it is old enough to also have the desire. Surely you can see that.

Also, why would you understand 'or the desire thereof', the exact same phrase, in the Session VII Decree on The Sacraments to mean 'either, or', and not 'both' as you do here? The reason you understood it to mean 'either, or' for that decree, is because that is the obvious sense, which you didn't even think to challenge for that particular statement, because it was not necessary to take it in the less obvious sense in order to preserve the doctrine you have a preconceived notion about.

You cannot possibly believe in Baptism of Blood either if that is your interpretation.

Do you really think the Council would use such an ambiguous phrase, given the teaching of St Thomas Aquinas, when the use of 'both, and', rather than 'or', would have removed all ambiguity?

Furthermore, the Catechism of the Council of Trent puts any doubt to rest with the passage that I quoted above.

And if there were any doubt remaining, surely St Alphonsus removes it forever with the identical interpretation of the Council of Trent, and even stating that the teaching is de fide:

St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Doctor of the Church, 1696-1787

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.”

Baptism of blood is the shedding of one’s blood, i.e. death, suffered for the Faith or for some other Christian virtue. Now this baptism is comparable to true Baptism because, like true Baptism, it remits both guilt and punishment as it were ex opere operato. I say as it were because martyrdom does not act by as strict a causality [“non ita stricte”] as the sacraments, but by a certain privilege on account of its resemblance to the passion
of Christ. Hence martyrdom avails also for infants seeing that the Church venerates the Holy Innocents as true martyrs. That is why Suarez rightly teaches that the opposing view [i.e. the view that infants are not able to benefit from baptism of blood — translator] is at least temerarious. In adults, however, acceptance of martyrdom is required, at least habitually from a supernatural motive.

It is clear that martyrdom is not a sacrament, because it is not an action instituted by Christ, and for the same reason neither was the Baptism of John a sacrament: it did not sanctify a man, but only prepared him for the coming of Christ.

Plenus Venter · « **Reply #25 on:** March 16, 2023, 07:05:58 AM »

CMRI Have a Very Thorough Treatment of the Subject, God Bless them: Baptism of Blood and of Desire – CMRI: Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen

Baptism of Blood and of Desire
From the teachings of the Popes, the Council of Trent, the 1917 Code of Canon Law, the Roman Martyrology,
the Fathers, Doctors and Theologians of the Church
1. COUNCIL OF TRENT (1545-1563)
Canons on the Sacraments in General (Canon 4):
“If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation, but are superfluous, and that although all are not necessary for every individual, without them or without the desire of them (sine eis aut eorum voto), through faith alone men obtain from God the grace of justiflcation; let him be anathema.”
Decree on Justification (Session 6, Chapter 4):
“In these words a description of the justification of a sinner is given as being a translation from that state in which man is born a child of the first Adam to the state of grace and of the ‘adoption of the Sons’ (Rom. 8:15) of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Savior and this translation after the promulgation of the Gospel cannot be effected except through the layer of regeneration or a desire for it, (sine lavacro regenerationis aut eius voto) as it is written: ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter in the kingdom of God’ (John 3:5).”
2. ST. ALPHONSUS LIGUORI (1691-1787)
Moral Theology (Bk. 6):
“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 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.”
3. 1917 CODE OF CANON LAW On Ecclesiastical Burial (Canon 1239. 2)
“Catechumens who, through no fault of their own, die without Baptism, are to be treated as baptized.” — The Sacred Canons
by Rev. John A. Abbo. St.T.L., J.C.D., and Rev. Jerome D. Hannan, A.M., LL.B., S.T.D., J.C.D.
Commentary on the Code:
“The reason for this rule is that they are justly supposed to have met death united to Christ through Baptism of desire.”
4. POPE INNOCENT III
Apostolicam:
To your inquiry we respond thus: We assert without hesitation (on the authority of the holy Fathers Augustine and Ambrose) that the priest whom you indicated (in your letter) had died without the water of baptism, because he persevered in the faith of Holy Mother the Church and in the confession of the name of Christ, was freed from original sin and attained the joy of the heavenly fatherland. Read (brother) in the eighth book of Augustine’s City of God where among other things it is written, “Baptism is ministered invisibly to one whom not contempt of religion but death excludes.” Read again the book also of the blessed Ambrose concerning the death of Valentinian where he says the same thing. Therefore, to questions concerning the dead, you should hold the opinions of the learned Fathers, and in your church you should join in prayers and you should have sacrifices offered to God for the priest mentioned (Denzinger 388).
Debitum pastoralis officii, August 28, 1206:
You have, to be sure, intimated that a certain Jew, when at the point of death, since he lived only among Jews, immersed himself in water while saying: “I baptize myself in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.”
We respond that, since there should be a distinction between the one baptizing and the one baptized, as is clearly gathered from the words of the Lord, when He says to the Apostles: “Go baptize all nations in the name etc.” (cf. Matt. 28:19), the Jew mentioned must be baptized again by another, that it may be shown that he who is baptized is one person, and he who baptizes another… If, however, such a one had died immediately, he would have rushed off to his heavenly home without delay because of the faith of the sacrament, although not because of the sacrament of faith (Denzinger 413).
5. POPE ST. PIUS V (1566-1572)
Ex omnibus afflictionibus, October 1, 1567
Condemned the following erroneous propositions of Michael du Bay:

Perfect and sincere charity, which is from a “pure heart and good conscience and a faith not feigned” (1 Tim. 1:5) can be in catechumens as well as in penitents without the remission of sins.
That charity which is the fullness of the law is not always connected with the remission of sins.
A catechumen lives justly and rightly and holily, and observes the commandments of God, and fulfills the law through charity, which is only received in the laver of Baptism, before the remission of sins has been obtained.

6. ST. AMBROSE
“I hear you express grief because he [Valentinian] did not receive the Sacrament of Baptism. Tell me, what else is there in us except the will and petition? But he had long desired to be initiated… and expressed his intention to be baptized… Surely, he received [it] because he asked [for it].”
7. ST. AUGUSTINE, City of God
“I do not hesitate to place the Catholic catechumen, who is burning with the love of God, before the baptized heretic… The centurion Cornelius, before Baptism, was better than Simon [Magus], who had been baptized. For Cornelius, even before Baptism, was filled with the Holy Ghost, while Simon, after Baptism, was puffed up with an unclean spirit” (De Bapt. C. Donat., IV 21).
8. ST. THOMAS AQUINAS
Summa, Article 1, Part III, Q. 68:
“I answer that, the sacrament of Baptism may be wanting to someone in two ways. First, both in reality and in desire; as is the case with those who neither are baptized, nor wished to be baptized: which clearly indicates contempt of the sacrament, in regard to those who have the use of the free will. Consequently those to whom Baptism is wanting thus, cannot obtain salvation: since neither sacramentally nor mentally are they incorporated in Christ, through Whom alone can salvation be obtained.
“Secondly, the sacrament of Baptism may be wanting to anyone in reality but not in desire: for instance, when a man wishes to be baptized, but by some ill-chance he is forestalled by death before receiving Baptism. And such a man can obtain salvation without being actually baptized, on account of his desire for Baptism, which desire is the outcome of faith that worketh by charity, whereby God, Whose power is not yet tied to visible sacraments, sanctifies man inwardly. Hence Ambrose says of Valentinian, who died while yet a catechumen: ‘I lost him whom I was to regenerate: but he did not lose the graces he prayed for.’”
9. ST. ROBERT BELLARMINE, Doctor of the Church (1542-1621)
Liber II, Caput XXX:
“Boni Catehecuмeni sunt de Ecclesia, interna unione tantum, non autem externa”(Good catechumens are of the Church, by internal union only, not however, by external union).
10. Roman Martyrology
January 23: At Rome, St. Emerentiana, Virgin and Martyr, who was stoned by the heathen while still a catechumen, when she was praying at the tomb of St. Agnes, whose foster-sister she was.
April 12: At Braga, in Portugal, St. Victor, Martyr, who, while still yet a catechumen, refused to worship an idol, and confessed Christ Jesus with great constancy, and so after many torments, he merited to be baptized in his own blood, his head being cut off.
11. POPE PIUS IX (1846-1878) — Singulari Quidem, 1856:
174. “It must, of course, be held as a matter of faith that outside the apostolic Roman Church no one can be saved, that the Church is the only ark of salvation, and that whoever does not enter it will perish in the flood. On the other hand, it must likewise be held as certain that those who are affected by ignorance of the true religion, if it is invincible ignorance, are not subject to any guilt in this matter before the eyes of the Lord. Now, then, who could presume in himself an ability to set the boundaries of such ignorance, taking into consideration the natural differences of peoples, lands, native talents, and so many other factors? Only when we have been released from the bonds of this body and see God just as He is (see John 3:2) all we really understand how close and beautiful a bond joins divine mercy with divine justice.”
Quanto Conficiamur Moerore (1863):
“…We all know that those who are afflicted with invincible ignorance with regard to our holy religion, if they carefully keep the precepts of the natural law that have been written by God in the hearts of men, if they are prepare to obey God, and if they lead a virtuous and dutiful life, can attain eternal life by the power of divine light and grace.”
12. POPE PIUS XII (1939-1958) — Mystical Body of Christ (June 29, 1943):
“As you know, Venerable Brethren, from the very beginning of Our Pontificate We have committed to the protection and guidance of heaven those who do not belong to the visible organization of the Catholic Church, solemnly declaring that after the example of the Good Shepherd We desire nothing more ardently than that they may have life and have it more abundantly… For even though unsuspectingly they are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer in desire and resolution, they still remain deprived of so many precious gifts and helps from heaven, which one can only enjoy in the Catholic Church.”
13. FR. A. TANQUERY, Dogmatic Brevior; ART. IV, Section I, II – 1945 (1024-1)
The Baptism of Desire. Contrition, or perfect charity, with at least an implicit desire for Baptism, supplies in adults the place of the baptism of water as respects the forgiveness of sins.
This is certain.
Explanation: a) An implicit desire for Baptism, that is, one that is included in a general purpose of keeping all the commandments of God is, as all agree, sufficient in one who is invincibly ignorant of the law of Baptism; likewise, according to the more common opinion, in one who knows the necessity of Baptism.
b) Perfect charity, with a desire for Baptism, forgives original sin and actual sins, and therefore infuses sanctifying grace; but it does not imprint the Baptismal character and does not of itself remit the whole temporal punishment due for sin; whence, when the Unity offers, the obligation remains on
one who was sanctified in this manner of receiving the Baptism of water.
14. FR. DOMINIC PRUMMER, O.P., Moral Theology, 1949:

“Baptism of Desire which is a perfect act of charity that includes at least implicitly the desire for Baptism by water”;
“Baptism of Blood which signifies martyrdom endured for Christ prior to the reception of Baptism by Water”;
“Regarding the effects of Baptism of Blood and Baptism of Desire… both cause sanctifying grace. …Baptism of Blood usually remits all venial sin and temporal punishment…”

15. FR. FRANCIS O’CONNELL, Outlines of Moral Theology, 1953:

“Baptism of Desire… is an act of divine charity or perfect contrition…”
“These means (i.e. Baptism of Blood and Desire) presuppose in the recipient at least the implicit will to receive the sacrament.”
“…Even if an infant can gain the benefit of the Baptism of Blood if he is put to death by a person actuated by hatred for the Christian faith….”

16. MGR. J. H. HERVE, Manuale Theologiae Dogmaticae (Vol. III: chap. IV), 1931
II. On those for whom Baptism of water can be supplied:
The various baptisms: from the Tridentinum itself and from the things stated, it stands firm that Baptism is necessary, yet in fact or in desire; therefore in an extraordinary case it can be supplied. Further, according to the Catholic doctrine, there are two things by which the sacrament of Baptism can be supplied: namely, an act of perfect charity with the desire of Baptism, and the death as martyr. Since these two are a compensation for Baptism of water, they themselves are called Baptism, too, in order that they may be comprehended with it under one, as it were, generic name, so the act of love with desire for Baptism is called Baptismus flaminis (Baptism of the Spirit) and the martyrium (Baptism of Blood).
17. FR. H. NOLDEN, S.J., FR. A. SCHMIT, S.J. — Summa theologiae moralis (Vol. III de Sacramentis), Book 2 Quaestio prima, 1921
Baptism of spirit (flaminis) is perfect charity or contrition, in which the desire in fact to receive the sacrament of Baptism is included; perfect charity and perfect contrition, however, have the power to confer sanctifying grace.
18. FR. ARTHUR VERMEERSCH, S.J., Theologiae Moralis (Vol. III), Tractatus II,1948:
The Baptism of spirit (flaminis) is an act of perfect charity or contrition, in so far as it contains at least a tacit desire of the Sacrament. Therefore it can be had only in adults. It does not imprint a character; …but it takes away all mortal sin together with the sentence of eternal penalty, according to: “He who loves me, is loved by my Father” (John 14:21).
19. FR. LUDOVICO BILLOT, S.J., De Ecclesiae Sacmmentis (Vol. I); Quaestio LXVI; Thesis XXIV – 1931:
Baptism of spirit (flaminis), which is also called of repentance or of desire, is nothing else than an act of charity or perfect contrition including a desire of the Sacrament, according to what has been said above, namely that the heart of everyone is moved by the Holy Ghost to believe, and to love God, and to be sorry for his sins.
20. FR. ALOYSIA SABETTI, S.J., FR. TIMOTHEO BARRETT, S.J., Compendium Theologiae Moralis, Tractatus XII [De Baptismo, Chapter I, 1926:
Baptism, the gate and foundation of the Sacraments, in fact or at least in desire, is necessary for all unto salvation…
From the Baptism of water, which is called of river (Baptismus fluminis), is from Baptism of the Spirit (Baptismus flaminis) and Baptism of Blood, by which Baptism properly speaking can be supplied, if this be impossible. The first one is a full conversion to God through perfect contrition or charity, in so far as it contains an either explicit or at least implicit will to receive Baptism of water… Baptism of Spirit (flaminis) and Baptism of Blood are called Baptism of desire (in voto).
21. FR. EDUARDUS GENICOT, S.]., Theologiae Moralis Institutiones (Vol. II),Tractatus XII, 1902
Baptism of the Spirit (flaminis) consists in an act of perfect charity or contrition, with which there is always an infusion of sanctifying grace connected…
Both are called “of desire” (in voto)…; perfect charity, because it has always connected the desire, at least the implicit one, of receiving this sacrament, absolutely necessary for salvation.

Stubborn · « **Reply #26 on:** March 16, 2023, 07:20:06 AM »

Quote from: Plenus Venter on March 16, 2023, 07:01:43 AM

Council of Trent, Session VI, January 13, 1547, Decree on Justification:

"...By which words a description of the justification of the impious is indicated - as being a translation of that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam to the state of grace and of the adoption of the sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, Our Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected without the laver of regeneration or the desire thereof, as it is written: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God".

Surely this affirms BOD and does not condemn it. The obvious sense of the words is not 'without the laver of regeneration and the desire', as you want to make it say, but one or the other, the laver of regeneration or the desire of the laver of regeneration. Otherwise, the Council would be saying that the baptism of a baby is not effected until it is old enough to also have the desire. Surely you can see that.

No, by adding a meaning to that which it clearly does not say, you are playing with the words. The word is "or" and it means "or," it means only "or."

It is because justification cannot be effected without the laver of regeneration, that neither can justification be effected with the desire for the laver of regeneration. This is the meaning of "or." Justification cannot be effect without the sacrament or the desire for the sacrament means what it says. They confirm this by ending with "as it is written John 3:5."

Trent says no sacrament = no justification. They do not then immediately contradict themselves with the following 4 words "or the desire thereof."

Plenus Venter · « **Reply #27 on:** March 16, 2023, 07:38:42 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn on March 16, 2023, 07:20:06 AM

No, by adding a meaning to that which it clearly does not say, you are playing with the words. The word is "or" and it means "or," it means only "or."

It is because justification cannot be effected without the laver of regeneration, that neither can justification be effected with the desire for the laver of regeneration. This is the meaning of "or." Justification cannot be effect without the sacrament or the desire for the sacrament means what it says. They confirm this by ending with "as it is written John 3:5."

Trent says no sacrament = no justification. They do not then immediately contradict themselves with the following 4 words "or the desire thereof."

You really think so little of the intellect of all those eminent saints and authors quoted, and so much of your own? Stubborn, really?

WorldsAway · « **Reply #28 on:** March 16, 2023, 07:52:28 AM »

Quote from: Plenus Venter on March 16, 2023, 07:01:43 AM

Council of Trent, Session VI, January 13, 1547, Decree on Justification:

"...By which words a description of the justification of the impious is indicated - as being a translation of that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam to the state of grace and of the adoption of the sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, Our Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected without the laver of regeneration or the desire thereof, as it is written: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God".

Surely this affirms BOD and does not condemn it. The obvious sense of the words is not 'without the laver of regeneration and the desire', as you want to make it say, but one or the other, the laver of regeneration or the desire of the laver of regeneration. Otherwise, the Council would be saying that the baptism of a baby is not effected until it is old enough to also have the desire. Surely you can see that.

Also, why would you understand 'or the desire thereof', the exact same phrase, in the Session VII Decree on The Sacraments to mean 'either, or', and not 'both' as you do here? The reason you understood it to mean 'either, or' for that decree, is because that is the obvious sense, which you didn't even think to challenge for that particular statement, because it was not necessary to take it in the less obvious sense in order to preserve the doctrine you have a preconceived notion about.

One cannot be justified with the "laver of regeneration" alone, but must also have the desire for it. Do you agree?

Stubborn · « **Reply #29 on:** March 16, 2023, 08:22:43 AM »

Quote from: Plenus Venter on March 16, 2023, 07:38:42 AM

You really think so little of the intellect of all those eminent saints and authors quoted, and so much of your own? Stubborn, really?

Just reading what is written. I believe it is written that way to be understood that way.
But your question begs the question: Do you really think so little of the intellect of all those eminent fathers and popes and saints and authors of Trent? Plenus Veenter, really?

Author Topic: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire (Read 41294 times)

DecemRationis

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire

Pax Vobis

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire

DecemRationis

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire

gemmarose

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire

Stubborn

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire

Ladislaus

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire

Plenus Venter

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire

Plenus Venter

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire

Stubborn

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire

Plenus Venter

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire

Plenus Venter

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire

Stubborn

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire

Plenus Venter

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire

WorldsAway

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire

Stubborn

Re: The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not teach Baptism of Desire