Catechisms are simply "presentations" of Church doctrine that has previously been defined.

A catechism is an explanation of Christian doctrine, not a "presentation" of definitions.

Question is, "If a true martyr for the Catholic faith who desires Baptism explicitly dies without receiving that Sacrament, will that person go to Heaven?"  I believe that all of the Fathers taught, unanimously, that such an individual will go to Heaven.

Now you are talking about baptism of blood, before you were only talking about baptism of desire.

1) You say "I believe that all of the Fathers taught, unanimously, that such an individual (BOB) will go to Heaven.

I disagree. There were 500+ Fathers and I doubt you can produce a clear quote or two.

Like Ladislaus said before:

Ladislaus said: ... There are about 8 Fathers who can be cited as referring to BoB, but several of them are not using the term as being a replacement for Baptism but as a second Baptism, and 2 of these actually in the same sentence reject BoD by saying that BOB is the ONLY exception to not having water Baptism.  And the other ones can be traced back to following St. Cyprian (who regrettably espoused material heresy regarding Baptism in the same work in which he talks about BOB).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jehanne said :"If a true martyr for the Catholic faith who desires Baptism explicitly dies without receiving that Sacrament, will that person go to Heaven?"

That is a ridiculous question, no one dies "by accident" without the sacrament of baptism. To think such a thing is possible would make one a determinist. You'll find that all "examples" of BOB occurred surrounded by Catholics. God would really have to be inept if he could not have them baptized. No, you will find that BOB is just a vehicle used by the Heroin BODers to teach salvation for those who have no explicit desire to be Catholics.

Quote from: Lover of Truth

http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/13Jun/jun3ftt.htm

No Salvation Outside the Church
 
"Tough luck, dude, if you were not baptized with water!"  

 

The title says it all "Tough luck, dude, if you were not baptized with water!"  

The Heroin BODer is a determinist, he believes that God has no control over the events in our lives. Therefore, they see the clear dogmas on EENS and the sacrament of baptism, and they say it is uncharitable to "interpret" them as they are written, that people who believe thus are saying ""Tough luck, dude, if you were not baptized with water!"  

That is the bottom line, the Heroin BODer is a determinist, being determinists believe that:

- someone is born by pure chance in a place far away.
Answer: No one is born by chance in a place other than EXACTLY where God's providence put them.

- they believe that they saved themselves by learning the faith, but that their neighbor did not have the same teachers/opportunity.
Answer - The Heroin BODer did practically NOTHING to get their "knowledge", it ALL came from God's Grace. Even their accepting God's Grace came from God. When they go to their final judgement, they will then know that all  they did was maybe lean 1/10 of 1 degree toward God, and He did the rest. God provides the same to all persons. But the Heroin BODer does not believe that. They believe that there are people who by chance (determinist) may be lost.

- the Heroin BODer, as a determinist, believes that the Holy Ghost would make all the clear dogmatic decrees on EENS and the Sacrament of Baptism, and NEVER ONCE teaching any form of baptism of desire infallibly, while at the same time EVERY SINGLE clear dogmatic decree does not mean what they say. In other words, they believe that God from before he created the world, thought of this "system" of teaching infallible something which does  not mean what it says. AFTERALL, the Heroin BODer believes that  someone can be saved who has no belief in Christ and the Trinity, nor has any explicit desire to be baptized, or to be a Catholic. Only a determinist could come up with such a "god", a god who has no control over the events  of life, a god who's grace is useless.


see see http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=29140&f=9&min=0&num=5

Quote from: bowler

"Before all decision to create the world, the infinite knowledge of God presents to Him all the graces, and different series of graces, which He can prepare for each soul, along with the consent or refusal which would follow in each circuмstance, and that in millions of possible combinations ... Thus, for each man in particular there are in the thought of God, limitless possible histories, some histories of virtue and salvation, others of crime and damnation; and God will be free in choosing such a world, such a series of graces, and in determining the future history and final destiny of each soul. And this is precisely what He does when among all possible worlds, by an absolutely free act, he decides to realize the actual world with all the circuмstances of its historic evolutions, with all the graces which in fact have been and will be distributed until the end of the world, and consequently with all the elect and all the reprobate who God foresaw would be in it if de facto He created it." [The Catholic Encyclopedia Appleton, 1909, on Augustine, pg 97]


In other words before a man is conceived, God in his infinite knowledge has already put that person through the test with millions of possible combinations and possible histories, some histories of virtue and salvation, others of crime and damnation;along with the consent or refusal which would follow in each circuмstance (of millions of possible combinations!!!) and God will be free in determining which future history and final destiny He assigns each soul.


The idea of salvation outside the Church is opposed to the Doctrine of Predestination. This Doctrine means that from all eternity God has known who were His own. It is for the salvation of these, His Elect, that Providence has directed, does direct, and will always direct, the affairs of men and the events of history. Nothing, absolutely nothing, that happens, has not been taken into account by the infinite God, and woven into that tapestry in which is written the history of the salvation of His saints. Central in this providential overlordship is the Church itself, which is the sacred implement which God devised for the rescuing of His beloved ones from the damnation decreed for those who would not. (Mt. 23:37).

The Doctrine of Divine Election means that only certain individuals will be saved.  They will be saved primarily because, in the inscrutable omniscience of God, only certain individuals out of all the human family will respond to the grace of salvation. In essence, this doctrine refers to what in terms of human understanding and vision, is before and after, the past, the present, and the future, but what in God is certain knowledge and unpreventable fact, divine action and human response.

Calvin and others have made the mistake of believing that these words mean that predestination excludes human choice and dispenses from true virtue. Catholic doctrine explains simply that the foreknowledge of God precedes the giving of grace. It means, further, that, since without grace there can be no merit, and without merit no salvation, those who will be saved must be foreknown as saved by God, if they are to receive the graces necessary for salvation.

Those who say there is salvation outside the Church (no matter how they say it) do not comprehend that those who are in the Church have been brought into it by the Father, through Christ the Savior, in fulfillment of His eternal design to save them. The only reason that God does not succeed in getting others into the Church must be found in the reluctant will of those who do not enter it. 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. Nothing prevents His using the skies for his billboard, and the clouds for lettering, or the rolling thunder for the proclamation of His word. (Indeed, for believers, He does just this: "The heavens shew forth the glory of God, and the firmament declareth the work of his hands." I Ps. 18: 11. But for atheists the heavens have no message at all.) If poverty were the reason some do not believe, he could load them down with diamonds; if youth were the reason, He could make sure they grew to a hoary old age. If it were merely the want of information, put a library on their doorstep, or a dozen missionaries in their front room. Were it for a want of brains, he could give every man an I.Q. of three hundred: it would cost Him nothing.

The idea that someone died before he was able to receive Baptism, suggests that God was unable to control events, so as to give the person time to enter the Church. If time made any difference, God could and would keep any person on earth a hundred, or a thousand, or ten thousand years.

Thus, what is the meaning of this election? That from all eternity God has ordered the events of history, so that His Elect might have the grace of salvation. And how do they know of this election? By the fact that they are in the Church, through no deservingness of their own? They know of no reason why God should bestow this grace, the knowledge of the truth, and the willingness and power to believe it, upon them, while others, who seem more worthy, go without it. As regards His Elect, not only has God determined to bestow necessary grace, but also, all His actions in the world must be seen as part of His salvific plan. In a word, nothing that He does is unrelated to the salvation of His Beloved Sheep. Human history, apart from the glory of Holy Church, and the salvation of the Elect, and the punishment of the wicked, has little importance for almighty God. Yet, all these purposes are only a part of the manifestation of His glory.

Those who speak of it have the problem of reconciling the mystery of Predestination with the idea of "baptism of desire." From all eternity, almighty God has known the fate of every soul. In His Providence, He has arranged for the entrance into the Church of certain millions of persons, and has seen to it that they receive the grace of faith, the Sacrament of Baptism, the grace of repentance, the forgiveness of their sins, and all the other requisites of salvation. According to The Attenuators, in the case of "non Catholic saints," and of those who died before they might receive Baptism, God was simply unable to see to these necessaries. Untoward and unforeseen circuмstances arose which prevented His providing these other millions with the means of salvation. Theirs is a story of supreme irony, that although the God of omniscience and omnipotence mastered the history of all nations and the course of every life, angelic and human, in the case of certain ones, His timing was off by just a few days, or hours, or minutes. It was His earlier intention to make sure that they received Baptism of water; He had it all planned out; but alas! on the particular day of their demise, His schedule was so full, that He simply could not get to them; for which reason, in that it was His fault, He is bound to provide an alternative instrumentality: "baptism of desire" is his substitute for the real thing!

The Diluters of the Doctrine of Exclusive Salvation do not perceive the Pelagian tenor of their position, that some may be saved outside the Church through nothing but their good will. It is exactly because this is impossible  and, more important, offensive to God, that the notion must be
 rejected. We say impossible, because no man can save himself. The fact that every man must receive Baptism and thus enter the Church means that he is dependent upon God to make it possible for him to receive the Sacrament, and further, through this Sacrament, it is Christ Who acts to purge the sinner of his sins, and ingraft him into His Mystical Body. No individual can do this by himself. He is dependent upon another to pour the water and say the words, and he is dependent upon God to provide this minister, and to make the sacramental sign effective of grace. It is thus so that none may attribute his salvation to his own doing.
 
Pride is the chief vice of man, as it was and is of the demons of Hell. It is pride more than any other fault that blinds men to the truth, that obstructs faith, and hardens their hearts to conversion from sin.

The Doctrine of Predestination is that almighty God from all eternity both knew and determined who would be saved, that is, who would allow Him to save them. He would be the cause of their salvation, and, as there is no power that can even faintly obstruct or withstand Him, there is no power which can prevent His saving whom He wishes, except, of course, the man himself.

Quote from: bowler

That is a ridiculous question, no one dies "by accident" without the sacrament of baptism. To think such a thing is possible would make one a determinist. You'll find that all "examples" of BOB occurred surrounded by Catholics. God would really have to be inept if he could not have them baptized. No, you will find that BOB is just a vehicle used by the Heroin BODers to teach salvation for those who have no explicit desire to be Catholics.

The above is your theological opinion.  You're free to hold to it, as long as you do not condemn others (especially, approved theologians) from holding contrary points of view.

I condemn as a heresy the teaching that someone can be saved who has no explicit desire to be a Catholic, nor belief in the Trinity and the Incarnation. For it goes against ALL the Fathers, Doctors, Saints, the Athanasian Creed, the Council and Catechism of Trent, in other words against everything that is the truth!

I do not condemn as a heresy the teaching of BOB nor the belief that someone can be saved without the sacrament of baptism, and who has explicit desire to be a Catholic  and believes in the Trinity and the Incarnation. In fact, I consider them harmless theories. Though of course I don't believe such a person ever existed.

God has a permissive and active will.  God permits things to happen that He does not actively will to happen.  Ergo, people die by accident.  

Hello?

Jehanne back when he would disagree with BOD was someone I could communicate with and never appeared willfully blind as others do here.  And look what happened?  That is where sincerity and humility will get you.  The TRUTH.  He got it.  He was influenced one way but did not trust his intellect more than the Church as other Feeneyites appear to do.  Pride is at the root of the heresies that those who trust their own intellect more than the Church's teaching.  Pride is blind to logic, reason, proofs, reality authoritative docuмents and infallible teaching if it goes against what they prefer to believe or prefer not to embrace.

Kudos to you Jehanne for going wherever the Truth led.  

John,

I'm sorry that I came across as being a "dogmatic Feeneyite."  I just got "booted-off" the Sacred-Heart Yahoo list that was created back in 1999 and is now run by Brad Harala and Warren Goddard.  Below is my final posting to that list (which is public, by the way, so no "private" information is being posted here):

Brad,

The language on this message board is imprecise. Are you saying that Baptism of Desire and/or Blood are formally heretical? If not, please specify the degree of theological error that you believe that a public profession of BoD/BoB entails.

By the way, I should have asked this question a long time ago.

Don

To hold that all of the Church's theological manuals (Thomas' Summa, Lombard's Book of Sentences, Ludwig Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma), major catechisms (Roman Catechism, Baltimore catechism, Catechism of Saint Pius X, etc.), and writings of Church Doctors (Saint Robert Bellarmine, Saint Alphonsus Liguori, etc.) all contain grave theological error is not Catholic, rather, such a view is anti-Catholic.  It holds that all of the Church was in error about certain Truths for centuries on end without anyone ever noticing!

Bowler, in trying to introduce the theological novelties of Father Feeney, needs to stick to theological terms such as "more probable" and "less probable" and let the Magisterium decide which is (and is not) acceptable.  Of course, given the uncertainty over the Chair's true occupant, perhaps such a discussion needs to wait!

To hold that all of the Church's theological manuals (Thomas' Summa, Lombard's Book of Sentences, Ludwig Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma), major catechisms (Roman Catechism, Baltimore catechism, Catechism of Saint Pius X, etc.), and writings of Church Doctors (Saint Robert Bellarmine, Saint Alphonsus Liguori, etc.) all contain grave theological error is not Catholic, rather, such a view is anti-Catholic.  It holds that all of the Church was in error about certain Truths for centuries on end without anyone ever noticing!

Bowler, in trying to introduce the theological novelties of Father Feeney, needs to stick to theological terms such as "more probable" and "less probable" and let the Magisterium decide which is (and is not) acceptable.  Of course, given the uncertainty over the Chair's true occupant, perhaps such a discussion needs to wait!

I accept your suggestion, however, talking in that fashion, subdued, is not for our times, for we are living in apostasy. Peoples eyes will not be opened by talking in terms of "it is more probable".

And now I have some advice for you; you need to be precise in what variety BOD you are talking about when you say things like:

"To hold that ...(Thomas' Summa, ...(Roman Catechism, ... and writings of Church Doctors (Saint Robert Bellarmine, Saint Alphonsus Liguori, etc.) all contain grave theological error is not Catholic",

For none of them taught that  a person can be saved who has no explicit desire to be a Catholic, nor belief in Christ and the Trinity.

Like I said before:

And this is what happens to all BODers, it is like drug use, they start out in disbelief and snatch on to the relatively harmless drug of baptism of desire of the catechumen, and end up in the Heroin of "someone who is not baptized, can still be saved by their conscience and "good faith", even if they have no explicit desire to be baptized, nor a desire to be a Catholic, nor belief in Christ and the Trinity".

The foundation of the addiction is as Fr. Fenton admits:  "It is inconceivable to me that, of all the billions of non-Catholics,.... none of them were in good faith in this matter and, if they were, I simply refuse to believe that hell is their eternal destiny.”

Can you give a perspective on what led to wondering if all these quotes from authoritative docuмents, encyclicals, and from Fathers, Doctors and Saints pertaining to the fact that God, has, can and does cleanse worthy souls from Original Sin apart from water had any merit?

We all accept that general revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle, which means that all of the truths of the Catholic Faith were believed from Day 1, at least implicitly.  In this respect, I think that Catholic theology is like geometry -- one begins with a set of fundamental truths, and from there, one can, over time, derive other truths, or at least understand the more fundamental truths more deeply.  In this respect, the Catholic faith is living and not dead.  This is not to say that "novelties" cannot be introduced (such as Peter Abelard's idea of the Limbo of the Children, as opposed to Saint Augustine's harsher view), but any such ideas must at least have the approbation of the Church, and certainly, the sensus fidelium of the Faithful and be in harmony with what the Magisterium taught prior to those "novelties."  In this respect, the Ordinary Magisterium is, in my opinion, independent of any particular Pope, ecuмenical Council, Doctor, Saint, or theologian of the Church; the Ordinary Magisterium simply exists, as being the revealed truths which come from the One and Triune God.  Those truths, like God Himself, are absolutely immutable, and yet, they can be understood more deeply, and so the Ordinary Magisterium itself must extend into the realm of Catholic theology and what "the theologians" taught.  Not even an ecuмenical Council, in my opinion, can "change" theological conclusions which the theologians, over the course of centuries, have arrived at a certain knowledge of.

As for the salvation of non-Catholics, the Church has always allowed such as being possible.  Dante, for instance, in his The Divine Comedy, placed two pagans in Purgatory and another two in Paradise and did so without any criticism from anyone, which is significant, as Dante made some enemies during his lifetime, both secular and theological.  Likewise, Bishop George Hay, in his book The Sincere Christian, offered the possibility of "salutary repentance" at death's door for non-Catholics.  So, while the Church has always taught that the Law of Baptism is an absolute precept (that is, a divine command), She has always held-out the hope that individuals who are at least virtuous with their observance of the natural law could, perhaps, attain Heaven, which is life eternal, all the while condemning the presumption of "good hope" for such non-Catholics.

In the End, though, what is possible is not necessarily probable.  We ought not to presume, which is, in my opinion, the fundamental error of the post-conciliar Church.