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 41283 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Plenus Venter

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1509
  • Reputation: +1235/-97
  • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • St. Robert Bellarmine didn't just teach BOD, he taught that the Council of Trent teaches BOD. Is anyone going to say that the words of the Council can't be misunderstood, and at the same time say St. Robert Bellarmine misunderstood them?  Or is anyone willing to claim they understand what the council meant better than St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Alphonsus Liguori, Suarez, Cornelius a Lapide, and many more who specifically understood the Council to be teaching BOD?

    St. Robert Bellarmine, De Baptismo, Lib. I, Cap. VI
    Yes, great quote In Principio.

    But it must be believed without doubt that true conversion supplies for Baptism of water when, not of contempt, but of necessity some die without Baptism of water.  It is expressly stated, Ezech. 18, if the wicked do penance for all his sins, I will not remember all his iniquities.  Thus also Ambrose clearly teaches in his oration on the death of Valentinian the younger:  Whom I was, he says, about to regenerate, I have lost; but he did not lose the grace which he had hoped for.  Thus also Augustine lib.4. de baptism, cap.22. & Bernard epist.77 & after them Innocent III. cap. Apostolicam, de presbytero non baptizato, whence also the Council of Trent, Session 6, Chapter 4 says that Baptism is necessary in fact or in desire.

    As you say, these giants of the Church not only teach it, but they explicitly say that Trent teaches it. It's there in black and white, but so many members of this forum prefer their own "understanding" of what Trent teaches. How is it possible? It is just incomprehensible to me, it just beggars belief.

    Offline Vanguard

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 196
    • Reputation: +128/-16
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Any soul, whoever and wherever they may be, that truly seeks God in this life, whether they be Catholic, Protestant, Jєω, Moslem... any soul that seeks God will not be confounded. The question I have is which God are they seeking? Is a Jew or Muslim going to be seeking a God with a Son named Jesus? I would think that God would enlighten them somehow if it is true that any soul that seeks the true God will not be confounded. I don’t believe in BOD. It makes no sense. 


    Online Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 11991
    • Reputation: +7530/-2267
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    The infidel, the pagan? Let it suffice to say, that if they are saved, it is only in and through the Catholic Church.
    +St Bellarmine and St Thomas would disagree.  So would Trent.  All 3 of these talk about CATECHUMENS and BOD.  Not pagans, infidels, “good willed” natives, etc.  Only Catechumens.  


    What you describe above is more like Rahner’s “anonymous Christian” nonsense and V2’s heretical lumen gentium.  

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46356
    • Reputation: +27286/-5038
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • A Protestant, is possibly/likely baptised, in which case BOD would not apply, but who can know if a Protestant is "unrepentant" when he dies? Who knows the state of any soul entering their eternity? God alone, unless by special revelation.

    Nobody denies this.  What is your point?  Pope Gregory XVI explicitly rejects this as justification for "praying for" those who showed no outwards signs of such repentance before they died.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46356
    • Reputation: +27286/-5038
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You definitively exclude the possibility of their conversion, the possibility that they died in God's grace? That is not Catholic. Admittedly, who would want to be in their shoes? But that is beside the point.

    This is both stupid and at the same time a slanderous straw man, attributing the opinion that anyone "definitively exclude(s) the possibility of their conversion" to anyone here.  Absolutely NO ONE does this, nor did the poster to whom you were responding here.

    What is this emotional drivel that you're trying to pass off as theology?

    Entire point of the teaching from Pope Gregory XVI on that other related thread is that while this is possible, unless the distinctions are explicitly made, the general act of "praying for" a departed heretic undermines the Church dogma regarding EENS.  It's incredibly unlikely, and St. Alphonsus said that the chances were miniscule, for someone who lived either outside the Church or in sin their entire lives, to experience a last moment conversion, since that's not how God's Providence normally works.  But no one holds that it's not theoretically possible for this to have happened and definitively excludes the possibility.

    Church presumes them lost, and in the external forum treats them as lost.  If we die and go to heaven, and happen to find that such a one was saved in their last moments, then glory to God.  But to try to spin this as if it's something likely or common, or to indiscriminately, without making all these distinctions, claim to be praying for them, is to express the sentiment that there is good hope of their salvation, even if they did not convert to the Catholic faith in their last moments.

    There was a decree of the Holy Office under Pope St. Pius X, in response to a question about whether Catholics could say it was possible for Confucius to have been saved, and answer was that Catholics must respond that he was damned, as all infidels are damned.

    Bottom line is that the people who speak this way, as you do, don't REALLY believe that there's no salvation outside the Church.  You pay lip service to the dogma because you have to ... after all, it's a dogma.  But that's as far as your belief in it goes.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46356
    • Reputation: +27286/-5038
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yes, great quote In Principio.

    But it must be believed without doubt that true conversion supplies for Baptism of water when, not of contempt, but of necessity some die without Baptism of water.  It is expressly stated, Ezech. 18, if the wicked do penance for all his sins, I will not remember all his iniquities.  Thus also Ambrose clearly teaches in his oration on the death of Valentinian the younger:  Whom I was, he says, about to regenerate, I have lost; but he did not lose the grace which he had hoped for.  Thus also Augustine lib.4. de baptism, cap.22. & Bernard epist.77 & after them Innocent III. cap. Apostolicam, de presbytero non baptizato, whence also the Council of Trent, Session 6, Chapter 4 says that Baptism is necessary in fact or in desire.

    As you say, these giants of the Church not only teach it, but they explicitly say that Trent teaches it. It's there in black and white, but so many members of this forum prefer their own "understanding" of what Trent teaches. How is it possible? It is just incomprehensible to me, it just beggars belief.


    We believe that St. Robert Bellarmine was wrong on this point, and so did St. Peter Canisius, who authored one of the most famous and papally-approved Catechisms in Church history, actually cited the Council of Trent as REJECTING Baptism of Desire.  But you won't see any of St. Peter's citations quoted by the BoDers, since they fitler out anything that doesn't line up with their agenda.  St. Peter Canisius was present at Trent and was considered one of the top theologians in the Church.

    You've made up your mind ahead of time and proclaim "Great Quote" when something agrees with your predetermined conclusion, but then filter out anything to the contrary.

    St. Robert Bellarmine was mixed up here.  Desire can supply for Baptism, he says.  Supply how?  Baptism has two effects, the remission of sin and the conferral of the Baptismal character.  So it doesn't fully supply for Baptism.  None of this is clearly elaborated, and the part of St. Robert's opinon that is almost never cited by BoDers is where he gives his reasoning that Catechumens can be saved in this manner (note, no one else, because he strongly believed in the Church being a visible society, some later would argue that this was to a fault), the part that's never cited is where St. Robert gives his reasoning as that "it would seem too harsh" to exclude Catechumens from the possibility of salvation ... so emotional theology, which is what St. Augustine clearly states gave rise to BoD theory in the first place.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46356
    • Reputation: +27286/-5038
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • +St Bellarmine and St Thomas would disagree.  So would Trent.  All 3 of these talk about CATECHUMENS and BOD.  Not pagans, infidels, “good willed” natives, etc.  Only Catechumens. 


    What you describe above is more like Rahner’s “anonymous Christian” nonsense and V2’s heretical lumen gentium. 

    Yep, most Trads hold to "Anonymous Catholic" soteriology.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14648
    • Reputation: +6032/-903
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • A Protestant, is possibly/likely baptised, in which case BOD would not apply, but who can know if a Protestant is "unrepentant" when he dies? Who knows the state of any soul entering their eternity? God alone, unless by special revelation.

    Cromwell, being a Puritan, was also almost certainly baptised.

    Stalin and Hitler were born Catholics and surely received the sacrament of baptism. You definitively exclude the possibility of their conversion, the possibility that they died in God's grace? That is not Catholic. Admittedly, who would want to be in their shoes? But that is beside the point.

    The infidel, the pagan? Let it suffice to say, that if they are saved, it is only in and through the Catholic Church. Imagine some pygmy in a rainforest in deepest darkest Africa isolated from all civilization, let alone Christianity. Did God create this soul? Does He have an infinite love for them? Does he not desire the salvation of that soul that He created infinitely? Will He not give them the means to attain the end for which He created them, and which He Himself infinitely desires? Given that the Church teaches BOD, obviously God does save souls without the ordinary means of sacramental baptism. Now if a soul like this, in invincible ignorance, seeks and desires God and wants with all his heart to know and love and obey Him, will God not take this desire, just like He takes BOD, for the reality of Charity and take that soul to rejoice with Him in the blessedness of Heaven? No one is saying it is not rare. No one is denying EENS. God's mercy is infinite. That does not deny His Justice. Any soul, whoever and wherever they may be, that truly seeks God in this life, whether they be Catholic, Protestant, Jєω, Moslem... any soul that seeks God will not be confounded. You judge the exterior. God judges the interior. God looks at the heart.
    You perfectly exemplify where a BOD ultimately *always* leads, namely, to even ignorant infidels and pygmies in heaven. Never mind Scripture teaches that to not believe in Christ is a sin, and that to die in that sin condemns them to hell.

    In St. Thomas' Catechetical Instruction, he knows nothing of a BOD or of a BOB, he teaches:
    "The Nature and Effects of Faith.--The first thing that is necessary for every Christian is faith, without which no one is truly called a faithful Christian.
    [1] Faith brings about four good effects. The first is that through faith the soul is united to God, and by it there is between the soul and God a union akin to marriage. "I will espouse thee in faith."
    [2] When a man is baptised the first question that is asked him is: "Do you believe in God?"
    [3] This is because Baptism is the first Sacrament of faith. Hence, the Lord said: "He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved."
    [4] Baptism without faith is of no value. Indeed, it must be known that no one is acceptable before God unless he have faith. "Without faith it is impossible to please God."[5] St. Augustine explains these words of St.Paul, "All that is not of faith is sin,"[6] in this way: "Where there is no knowledge of the eternal and unchanging Truth, virtue even in the midst of the best moral life is false."

    But BODers say the 'desire' for baptism without faith, is of such immeasurably high value that it is all but a dogmatic fact that it saves. The whole idea is altogether absurd.
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse


    Offline Plenus Venter

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1509
    • Reputation: +1235/-97
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • We believe that St. Robert Bellarmine was wrong on this point, and so did St. Peter Canisius, who authored one of the most famous and papally-approved Catechisms in Church history, actually cited the Council of Trent as REJECTING Baptism of Desire.  But you won't see any of St. Peter's citations quoted by the BoDers, since they fitler out anything that doesn't line up with their agenda.  St. Peter Canisius was present at Trent and was considered one of the top theologians in the Church.

    You've made up your mind ahead of time and proclaim "Great Quote" when something agrees with your predetermined conclusion, but then filter out anything to the contrary.

    St. Robert Bellarmine was mixed up here.  Desire can supply for Baptism, he says.  Supply how?  Baptism has two effects, the remission of sin and the conferral of the Baptismal character.  So it doesn't fully supply for Baptism.  None of this is clearly elaborated, and the part of St. Robert's opinon that is almost never cited by BoDers is where he gives his reasoning that Catechumens can be saved in this manner (note, no one else, because he strongly believed in the Church being a visible society, some later would argue that this was to a fault), the part that's never cited is where St. Robert gives his reasoning as that "it would seem too harsh" to exclude Catechumens from the possibility of salvation ... so emotional theology, which is what St. Augustine clearly states gave rise to BoD theory in the first place.
    St Peter Canisius did no such thing. You misrepresent him in the precise way you misrepresent the Council of Trent.

    It is utterly absurd to think St Robert Bellarmine, immediately after the Council of Trent, could have been mistaken in teaching BOD so explicitly, and teaching that the Council taught that very thing.

    He goes on to state emphatically: "JUST AS ALL THE THEOLOGIANS COMMONLY TEACH ON BAPTISM". Immediately after Trent. It is clear who misunderstands Trent and St Peter Canisius. 

    Before long, St Alphonsus would teach the very same doctrine after him.

    You make a mockery of the Church.

    Offline Plenus Venter

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1509
    • Reputation: +1235/-97
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • You perfectly exemplify where a BOD ultimately *always* leads, namely, to even ignorant infidels and pygmies in heaven. Never mind Scripture teaches that to not believe in Christ is a sin, and that to die in that sin condemns them to hell.

    In St. Thomas' Catechetical Instruction, he knows nothing of a BOD or of a BOB, he teaches:
    "The Nature and Effects of Faith.--The first thing that is necessary for every Christian is faith, without which no one is truly called a faithful Christian.
    [1] Faith brings about four good effects. The first is that through faith the soul is united to God, and by it there is between the soul and God a union akin to marriage. "I will espouse thee in faith."
    [2] When a man is baptised the first question that is asked him is: "Do you believe in God?"
    [3] This is because Baptism is the first Sacrament of faith. Hence, the Lord said: "He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved."
    [4] Baptism without faith is of no value. Indeed, it must be known that no one is acceptable before God unless he have faith. "Without faith it is impossible to please God."[5] St. Augustine explains these words of St.Paul, "All that is not of faith is sin,"[6] in this way: "Where there is no knowledge of the eternal and unchanging Truth, virtue even in the midst of the best moral life is false."

    But BODers say the 'desire' for baptism without faith, is of such immeasurably high value that it is all but a dogmatic fact that it saves. The whole idea is altogether absurd.
    If St Thomas knows nothing of BOD or BOB in his "Catechetical Instruction", he clearly teaches it in the Summa, did you not read my earlier post? 

    No, I do not hold that someone can have BOD without faith. But I do hold as absolutely certain that God desires every man to be saved, and that he gives every man the grace to save his soul. The conclusion is obvious. God is not limited by the ordinary means He established for salvation, He sees the heart, and the Almighty acts directly on souls. Faith usually comes by hearing, yes, that is the ordinary way, but with some, it is clearly impossible. Were they then created for damnation? Just a simple yes or no will do.

    Offline Plenus Venter

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1509
    • Reputation: +1235/-97
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is both stupid and at the same time a slanderous straw man, attributing the opinion that anyone "definitively exclude(s) the possibility of their conversion" to anyone here.  Absolutely NO ONE does this, nor did the poster to whom you were responding here.

    What is this emotional drivel that you're trying to pass off as theology?

    Entire point of the teaching from Pope Gregory XVI on that other related thread is that while this is possible, unless the distinctions are explicitly made, the general act of "praying for" a departed heretic undermines the Church dogma regarding EENS.  It's incredibly unlikely, and St. Alphonsus said that the chances were miniscule, for someone who lived either outside the Church or in sin their entire lives, to experience a last moment conversion, since that's not how God's Providence normally works.  But no one holds that it's not theoretically possible for this to have happened and definitively excludes the possibility.

    Church presumes them lost, and in the external forum treats them as lost.  If we die and go to heaven, and happen to find that such a one was saved in their last moments, then glory to God.  But to try to spin this as if it's something likely or common, or to indiscriminately, without making all these distinctions, claim to be praying for them, is to express the sentiment that there is good hope of their salvation, even if they did not convert to the Catholic faith in their last moments.

    There was a decree of the Holy Office under Pope St. Pius X, in response to a question about whether Catholics could say it was possible for Confucius to have been saved, and answer was that Catholics must respond that he was damned, as all infidels are damned.

    Bottom line is that the people who speak this way, as you do, don't REALLY believe that there's no salvation outside the Church.  You pay lip service to the dogma because you have to ... after all, it's a dogma.  But that's as far as your belief in it goes.
    Just more rash judgements, misrepresentation, and personal attacks


    Offline DecemRationis

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2312
    • Reputation: +867/-144
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • If St Thomas knows nothing of BOD or BOB in his "Catechetical Instruction", he clearly teaches it in the Summa, did you not read my earlier post?

    No, I do not hold that someone can have BOD without faith. But I do hold as absolutely certain that God desires every man to be saved, and that he gives every man the grace to save his soul. The conclusion is obvious. God is not limited by the ordinary means He established for salvation, He sees the heart, and the Almighty acts directly on souls. Faith usually comes by hearing, yes, that is the ordinary way, but with some, it is clearly impossible. Were they then created for damnation? Just a simple yes or no will do.

    PV,

    St. Thomas believed that saving faith required belief in the Trinity and In
    carnation: i.e., no salvation without the lowest common denominator of the requisite Catholic faith. Do you agree with him in that regard as well?

    DR
    Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

    Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

    Offline TheRealMcCoy

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1333
    • Reputation: +954/-197
    • Gender: Female
    • The Thread Killer
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If there a specific doctrine that states that unconverted Protestants/occultists/joos/musloids/pagans MIGHT be saved at the moment of death even if there was not a single act of conversion made in their life?  

    Offline Vanguard

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 196
    • Reputation: +128/-16
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Faith is a gift from God. I think we need to ask for it. Seek and ye shall find. Knock and it shall be open to you. I think if people want the true Faith, God will provide it. I feel bad for people that are not Catholic. I pray for their conversion. 

    The Theological Virtues of faith, hope, and charity (love) are those virtues that relate directly to God. These are not acquired through human effort but, beginning with Baptism, they are infused within us as gifts from God.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14648
    • Reputation: +6032/-903
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If St Thomas knows nothing of BOD or BOB in his "Catechetical Instruction", he clearly teaches it in the Summa, did you not read my earlier post?

    No, I do not hold that someone can have BOD without faith. But I do hold as absolutely certain that God desires every man to be saved, and that he gives every man the grace to save his soul. The conclusion is obvious. God is not limited by the ordinary means He established for salvation, He sees the heart, and the Almighty acts directly on souls. Faith usually comes by hearing, yes, that is the ordinary way, but with some, it is clearly impossible. Were they then created for damnation? Just a simple yes or no will do.
    God wills all men to be saved, yes, of course. It is men who, by their own free will, will themselves into damnation. God Himself said that to *not* believe in Him is a sin; John 16:9. This is Divine Revelation, so there is no getting around it.

    Please note that God did not make nor offer any of the qualifications or exceptions/exemptions that BODers necessarily and absolutely have got to make in order to give a semblance of credence to their idea. He said those who do not believe in Him sin - period.

    Because God and the Church are one, those who do not believe Him do not believe in the Church, ergo, they remain outside of the Church until / unless they believe and are baptized otherwise they are condemned, this truth is also Divine Revelation - Mark 16:16.   

    So don't blame God for those who do not believe, in that arena, you, I, them, indeed all humans are all face the same challenge - which is why we all were created.

    If God can arrange for you to be in the Church, by the very same Providence He can arrange for anyone else who desires or is willing to enter it. There is absolutely no obstacle to the invincible God's achieving His designs, except the intractable wills of His children.
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse