CathInfo.com

Bad news Catholic Martyr.

Even ST. AUGUSTINE teaches baptism of desire.  So now tell me it's an "Americanist" heresy.

On Baptism, Against the Donatists, Book IV, Chapter 22:

That the place of baptism is sometimes supplied by martyrdom is supported by an argument by no means trivial, which the blessed Cyprian adduces  from the thief, to whom, though he was not baptized, it was yet said, "Today shall you be with me in Paradise." Luke 23:43 On considering which, again and again, I find that not only martyrdom for the sake of Christ may supply what was wanting of baptism, but also faith and conversion of heart, if recourse may not be had to the celebration of the mystery of baptism for want of time.  For neither was that thief crucified for the name of Christ, but as the reward of his own deeds; nor did he suffer because he believed, but he believed while suffering. It was shown, therefore, in the case of that thief, how great is the power, even without the visible sacrament of baptism, of what the apostle says, "With the heart man believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." Romans 10:10 But the want is supplied invisibly only when the administration of baptism is prevented, not by contempt for religion, but by the necessity of the moment.

Oh, and lookie here, he even mentions the Good Thief, which I've been mocked for time and time again as if it were insignificant.

We've all been wrong but the test of a man is when he can admit it.  You can go against St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Robert Bellarmine and St. Pius X all you want, but it will be a lonely battle.  One I will no longer even bother to listen to.  Your mind is twisted, and you are seeing black and white and white as black.  FORCE yourself to health.  Learn from your betters -- not me, but the men I've cited.

We've all been wrong but the test of a man is when he can admit it.  You can go against St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Robert Bellarmine and St. Pius X all you want, but it will be a lonely battle.

I have noticed that you do not acknowledged my responses to your objections when I give them to you.

I have already explained to you that the catechism of Pius X was in fact not written by him, yet you keep mentioning it as though it is an ex cathedra decree by him.  It clearly is not.

For starters, he gave it's approval and stated it would be obligatory in the Diocese of Rome, and merely encouraged it to be used throughout the rest of Italy.  Hardly something he intended to bind on all the faithful.

Furthermore, you do not know if it was later altered, and considering the assault from Pius X on Modernism, I highly doubt that baptism of desire was contained in the draft that he approved.

Will you refuse to acknowledge these responses?  The fact is that the dogmatic decrees are abundantly clear and unambiguous, not to mention binding, and irreformable of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church.  This means that they are absolute truths fallen from heaven.

The definitions themselves are absolutely true.