Author Topic: Which Sacraments are Necessary Unto Salvation? (Read 6204 times)

Cantarella · « **Reply #30 on:** July 30, 2014, 01:06:42 PM »

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Who was the very first person to use the words "Baptism of Desire"?

That is a question that demands an answer.

The Council of Trent adds the description of "of the desire thereof" and some people are saying that this means there's a Baptism of Desire in addition to the Baptism of Water. When and who started bandying about this term?

The sentence "or the desire thereof" would mean that a Catholic who has access to the sacraments or is in a location separated from the sacraments must have a desire for the sacraments. A Catholic should, in his heart, have a desire for the sacraments.

How does a non-Catholic on some unvisited Pacific Island out there in the Pacific Ocean desire the sacraments? Especially in the 1600's and not in todays highly connected world with TV, radio and the internet?

If the Council of Trent fathers intended to delineate a "Baptism of Desire" which would be separated from, but equal to, the other sacraments, well, they would have dedicated a complete docuмent for such a momentous event.

So, when, where and by who did the term "Baptism of Desire" become such common parlance in the Catholic Church?

Think of the Devil smoltering in Hell with the stench of sulfur everywhere. He's moaning to himself, "I don't care if some lost soul renounces Christ out of allegiance to me or if he remounces Christ for lust, or whether it's for great wealth or through deceptive lingo or just out of laziness, all I care is that the soul renounces Christ and I collect him as mine."

Here is the history of the BOD theory (for catechumens ONLY) in a nutshell:

It begins with St Ambrose's speech on Valentinian in which there was a misinterpretation favorable to BOD. However, there is a following note of rectification that states that John 3:5 is to be taken literally.

Followed by:

- St Augustine quote favoring BOD, but then he himself rectifies his position in his writings for the donatists.

- There is an overwhelming concession of the fathers on necessity of church and water baptism.

- Theology of the new world in 1492. There is some BOD favorable opinion in dealing with native catechumens.

- Peace of Westphalia 1648 - Catholic monarchs start watering down dogma for co-existing with the protestant nations -> Reformation -> From political acceptance on BOD, personal acceptance followed. There is an assault of sacramentality as only vehicle of sanctifying grace

-> HERE COMES TRENT IN RESPONSE TO THE PROTESTANT HERESY

- Pope Pius IX 1848, there is misunderstanding on "invincible ignorance" in his allocution. The invincible ignorant is not guilty of heresy, only original and actual sins. There is an important distinction between torments for actual sins and the absence of God which is the result of Original Sin

- Here comes modern troubles! : Insertion by Cardinal Gibbons on questions of Baptism in the Catechism of Baltimore 1884 which follows the heresy of Americanism -> The speculation on BOD is erected into Church "official" teaching. Generations were raised thinking on this erroneous and fallible Baltimore Catechism as dogma.

----------

For almost 500 hundred years, since Protestanstism, the enemies of the Church have turn the theological opinion of BOD into a denial of EESN. These enemies have been trying to tear down Holy Mother Church by reducing her to the level of "just another church" and the destructive tool they have used is called "desire".

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #31 on:** July 30, 2014, 01:08:07 PM »

Is the following correct or not:

Quote

Since the unity of the social group is effected by the grace of God's calling, the adherence of any individual member, and, for that matter, of all the members, to the assembly itself is something ultimately due to a freely given and supernatural favor granted by God. There is absolutely no created intellectual nature, actual or possible, which could give its possessor the right to belong to this social unit. In other words, membership in this blessed company is not something which necessarily goes with membership in the human race or with the condition of an intellectual creature. Those who are privileged to belong to this assembly owe their blessing to the direct, supernatural, and gratuitous favor of God. Fenton

Ad Jesum per Mariam · « **Reply #32 on:** July 30, 2014, 03:43:02 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Trent lumps the Sacraments together but then explicitly states that not all the Sacraments are necessary for all, e.g. some of them (such as Penance) are conditionally necessary, i.e. making it clear that what applies to one Sacrament does not necessarily apply to the others. Trent goes out of its way to emphasize how different Penance is from Baptism. Baptism, by way of the character, is the gateway to all the other Sacraments. Quite a few Church Fathers taught that the "seal" (character) was an essential part of the grace of Baptism, and I hold to that also. It's the seal which conforms the soul to the likeness of Christ and makes us recognized by the Father as His sons. Without being conformed into sons of the Father through this character, we can never enter into the life of the Holy Trinity and therefore see God as He is (from within the Holy Trinity) in the beatific vision.

Trent dogmatically teaches that those without the character of Baptism are not subject to the Holy Father, and the Church teaches dogmatically that those not subject to the Holy Father cannot be saved.

Because a certain sacrament might not be necessary at a given time for a given individual, in no way means that the way they can be received is different. Using an example of food, water, and medicine, I can either have them delivered to my home or go and pick them up. Now even though an individual may only require one of these things, the ways he can receive them stands. And if that weren't enough the Council explicitly refers to each one of them (Baptism, Penance and Holy Communion), saying that each is necessary in fact or desire. Your other statement is proven false from the plain fact that Catechumens who desire baptism immediately, generally must wait. This they do in submission to the Holy Father among other things.

If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.The Council of Trent-The Seventh Session-Canon IV

BAPTISM:

By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a translation, from 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.The Council of Trent-The Sixth Session-Chapter IV

PENANCE:

As regards those who, by sin, have fallen from the received grace of Justification, they may be again justified, when, God exciting them, through the sacrament of Penance they shall have attained to the recovery, by the merit of Christ, of the grace lost: for this manner of Justification is of the fallen the reparation: which the holy Fathers have aptly called a second plank after the shipwreck of grace lost. For, on behalf of those who fall into sins after baptism, Christ Jesus instituted the sacrament of Penance, when He said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost, whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. Whence it is to be taught, that the penitence of a Christian, after his fall, is very different from that at (his) baptism; and that therein are included not only a cessation from sins, and a detestation thereof, or, a contrite and humble heart, but also the sacramental confession of the said sins,-at least in desire, and to be made in its season,-and sacerdotal absolution; and likewise satisfaction by fasts, alms, prayers, and the other pious exercises of a spiritual life; not indeed for the eternal punishment,-which is, together with the guilt, remitted, either by the sacrament, or by the desire of the sacrament,-but for the temporal punishment, which, as the sacred writings teach, is not always wholly remitted, as is done in baptism, to those who, ungrateful to the grace of God which they have received, have grieved the Holy Spirit, and have not feared to violate the temple of God. Concerning which penitence it is written; Be mindful whence thou art fallen; do penance, and do the first works. And again; The sorrow that is according to [Page 42] God worketh penance steadfast unto salvation. And again; Do penance, and bring forth fruits worthy of penance. The Council of Trent-The Sixth Session-CHAPTER XIV.

HOLY COMMUNION:

Now as to the use of this holy sacrament, our Fathers have rightly and wisely distinguished three ways of receiving it. For they have taught that some receive it sacramentally only, to wit sinners: others spiritually only, those to wit who eating in desire that heavenly bread which is set before them, are, by a lively faith which worketh by charity, made sensible of the fruit and usefulness thereof: whereas the third (class) receive it both sacramentally and spiritually, and these are they who so prove and prepare themselves beforehand, as to approach to this divine table clothed with the wedding garment. The Council of Trent-The Thirteenth Session-CHAPTER VIII.

2Vermont · « **Reply #33 on:** July 30, 2014, 04:37:47 PM »

Quote from: Ad Jesum per Mariam

Quote from: Ladislaus
Trent lumps the Sacraments together but then explicitly states that not all the Sacraments are necessary for all, e.g. some of them (such as Penance) are conditionally necessary, i.e. making it clear that what applies to one Sacrament does not necessarily apply to the others. Trent goes out of its way to emphasize how different Penance is from Baptism. Baptism, by way of the character, is the gateway to all the other Sacraments. Quite a few Church Fathers taught that the "seal" (character) was an essential part of the grace of Baptism, and I hold to that also. It's the seal which conforms the soul to the likeness of Christ and makes us recognized by the Father as His sons. Without being conformed into sons of the Father through this character, we can never enter into the life of the Holy Trinity and therefore see God as He is (from within the Holy Trinity) in the beatific vision.

Trent dogmatically teaches that those without the character of Baptism are not subject to the Holy Father, and the Church teaches dogmatically that those not subject to the Holy Father cannot be saved.

Because a certain sacrament might not be necessary at a given time for a given individual, in no way means that the way they can be received is different. Using an example of food, water, and medicine, I can either have them delivered to my home or go and pick them up. Now even though an individual may only require one of these things, the ways he can receive them stands. And if that weren't enough the Council explicitly refers to each one of them (Baptism, Penance and Holy Communion), saying that each is necessary in fact or desire. Your other statement is proven false from the plain fact that Catechumens who desire baptism immediately, generally must wait. This they do in submission to the Holy Father among other things.

If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.The Council of Trent-The Seventh Session-Canon IV

BAPTISM:

By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a translation, from 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.The Council of Trent-The Sixth Session-Chapter IV

PENANCE:

As regards those who, by sin, have fallen from the received grace of Justification, they may be again justified, when, God exciting them, through the sacrament of Penance they shall have attained to the recovery, by the merit of Christ, of the grace lost: for this manner of Justification is of the fallen the reparation: which the holy Fathers have aptly called a second plank after the shipwreck of grace lost. For, on behalf of those who fall into sins after baptism, Christ Jesus instituted the sacrament of Penance, when He said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost, whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. Whence it is to be taught, that the penitence of a Christian, after his fall, is very different from that at (his) baptism; and that therein are included not only a cessation from sins, and a detestation thereof, or, a contrite and humble heart, but also the sacramental confession of the said sins,-at least in desire, and to be made in its season,-and sacerdotal absolution; and likewise satisfaction by fasts, alms, prayers, and the other pious exercises of a spiritual life; not indeed for the eternal punishment,-which is, together with the guilt, remitted, either by the sacrament, or by the desire of the sacrament,-but for the temporal punishment, which, as the sacred writings teach, is not always wholly remitted, as is done in baptism, to those who, ungrateful to the grace of God which they have received, have grieved the Holy Spirit, and have not feared to violate the temple of God. Concerning which penitence it is written; Be mindful whence thou art fallen; do penance, and do the first works. And again; The sorrow that is according to [Page 42] God worketh penance steadfast unto salvation. And again; Do penance, and bring forth fruits worthy of penance. The Council of Trent-The Sixth Session-CHAPTER XIV.

HOLY COMMUNION:

Now as to the use of this holy sacrament, our Fathers have rightly and wisely distinguished three ways of receiving it. For they have taught that some receive it sacramentally only, to wit sinners: others spiritually only, those to wit who eating in desire that heavenly bread which is set before them, are, by a lively faith which worketh by charity, made sensible of the fruit and usefulness thereof: whereas the third (class) receive it both sacramentally and spiritually, and these are they who so prove and prepare themselves beforehand, as to approach to this divine table clothed with the wedding garment. The Council of Trent-The Thirteenth Session-CHAPTER VIII.

You keep posting the same thing. Perhaps you should be banned. :dancing-banana: :wink:

Ad Jesum per Mariam · « **Reply #34 on:** July 30, 2014, 04:55:46 PM »

Quote from: Cantarella

Quote from: Ad Jesum per Mariam

As for Canon 5, no one said baptism is optional! Now if it said "water" baptism you would have a point. But the Council cannot contradict itself, therefore it didn't qualify the word Baptism with "water" in that canon. Baptism is not optional; it must be received in actuality or desire.

As for Canon 2. A metaphor is a word or phrase used to describe or represent something else that is tangible (a person, place, thing or action). For example referring to God as "A Mighty Fortress" would be to use a metaphor. Or he's "fishing" for something (fishing meaning looking). I do not believe that water is being used to describe something else or an action, and neither does the Church. Water means water and not anything else. It must be received in actuality or desire. Therefore Canon 2 does not apply to your argument.

As for your other argument, I believe you are implying that the grace of justification does not merit salvation. This is proven false, not only from the context of Canon IV-Session 7, but from another Canon in the Council which says clearly that those who merit the Grace of Justification, merit Eternal Life...

If any one saith, that the good works of one that is justified are in such manner the gifts of God, as that they are not also the good merits of him that is justified; or, that the said justified, by the good works which he performs through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life,-if so be, however, that he depart in grace,-and also an increase of glory; let him be anathema. The Council of Trent-Session VI-CANON XXXII

Again, the cited paragraphs are dealing with justification (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 of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Savior). Justification and Salvation are two different things. Justification does not necessarily merit the Grace of salvation. One can be justified and then damn oneself anyway.

Most importantly, "Baptism of Desire" (which is NOT de fide) CANNOT under circuмstance apply to non-Catholics. If ever possible (and this is only known to God) it would apply to pious catechumens at the point of death that already hold the Catholic Faith. The reason for this is that the Catholic Faith is the foundation for all justification.

Against Protestantism, Trent stated that Faith is not the only thing necessary for justification, but it is indeed necessary:

Quote
“But when the Apostle says that man is justified by faith and freely, these words are to be understood in that sense in which the uninterrupted unanimity of the Catholic Church has held and expressed them, namely, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and to come to the fellowship of His sons;…” (Session 6, Chapter VIII, Decree Concerning Justification).

Please read the whole Canon, Canterella. The Council does not say those who merit the grace of justification attain eternal life unless they depart in that grace. Also, I never mentioned anything about non-Catholic religions. If you believe in the possibility of eternal life for Catechumens who die without water baptism (through no fault of their own), then you believe the de fide teaching of Trent. They must also desire the Catholic faith (only) with belief in the Trinity and the Incarnation (St. Thomas Aquinas elaborates more on this) and have perfect contrition for their sins. They must desire to submit to all of Tradition (even if they do not yet understand it all). A desire for the true faith (the Catholic Faith) is the foundation for baptism of desire. This is also explained in the Council of Trent.

For which reason it is most truly said, that Faith without works is dead and profitless; and, In Christ Jesus neither circuмcision, availeth anything, nor uncircuмcision, but faith which worketh by charity. This faith, Catechumen's beg of the Church-agreeably to a tradition of the apostles-previously to the sacrament of Baptism; when they beg for the faith which bestows life everlasting, which, without hope and charity, faith cannot bestow: The Council of Trent-The Sixth Session-Chapter VII

Therefore Trent is not saying that desire of baptism merits the grace of justification without the desire for the Roman Catholic faith. Notice that the Catechumen begs for the faith, and not water baptism. One can have water baptism and not the faith. This would not merit eternal life. But if one begs for the Catholic faith and has perfect contrition for sins, then God grants him the faith and the baptism that he could not receive (through no fault of his own). Most people who desire the Catholic faith also desire water baptism. If one just happened to be unaware of water baptism, but desired the Catholic faith "only" (this person would be a candidate for implicit baptism of desire) up until the time he became aware.

Ad Jesum per Mariam · « **Reply #35 on:** July 30, 2014, 05:04:42 PM »

Quote from: 2Vermont

Quote from: Ad Jesum per Mariam
Quote from: Ladislaus
Trent lumps the Sacraments together but then explicitly states that not all the Sacraments are necessary for all, e.g. some of them (such as Penance) are conditionally necessary, i.e. making it clear that what applies to one Sacrament does not necessarily apply to the others. Trent goes out of its way to emphasize how different Penance is from Baptism. Baptism, by way of the character, is the gateway to all the other Sacraments. Quite a few Church Fathers taught that the "seal" (character) was an essential part of the grace of Baptism, and I hold to that also. It's the seal which conforms the soul to the likeness of Christ and makes us recognized by the Father as His sons. Without being conformed into sons of the Father through this character, we can never enter into the life of the Holy Trinity and therefore see God as He is (from within the Holy Trinity) in the beatific vision.

Trent dogmatically teaches that those without the character of Baptism are not subject to the Holy Father, and the Church teaches dogmatically that those not subject to the Holy Father cannot be saved.

Because a certain sacrament might not be necessary at a given time for a given individual, in no way means that the way they can be received is different. Using an example of food, water, and medicine, I can either have them delivered to my home or go and pick them up. Now even though an individual may only require one of these things, the ways he can receive them stands. And if that weren't enough the Council explicitly refers to each one of them (Baptism, Penance and Holy Communion), saying that each is necessary in fact or desire. Your other statement is proven false from the plain fact that Catechumens who desire baptism immediately, generally must wait. This they do in submission to the Holy Father among other things.

If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.The Council of Trent-The Seventh Session-Canon IV

BAPTISM:

By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a translation, from 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.The Council of Trent-The Sixth Session-Chapter IV

PENANCE:

As regards those who, by sin, have fallen from the received grace of Justification, they may be again justified, when, God exciting them, through the sacrament of Penance they shall have attained to the recovery, by the merit of Christ, of the grace lost: for this manner of Justification is of the fallen the reparation: which the holy Fathers have aptly called a second plank after the shipwreck of grace lost. For, on behalf of those who fall into sins after baptism, Christ Jesus instituted the sacrament of Penance, when He said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost, whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. Whence it is to be taught, that the penitence of a Christian, after his fall, is very different from that at (his) baptism; and that therein are included not only a cessation from sins, and a detestation thereof, or, a contrite and humble heart, but also the sacramental confession of the said sins,-at least in desire, and to be made in its season,-and sacerdotal absolution; and likewise satisfaction by fasts, alms, prayers, and the other pious exercises of a spiritual life; not indeed for the eternal punishment,-which is, together with the guilt, remitted, either by the sacrament, or by the desire of the sacrament,-but for the temporal punishment, which, as the sacred writings teach, is not always wholly remitted, as is done in baptism, to those who, ungrateful to the grace of God which they have received, have grieved the Holy Spirit, and have not feared to violate the temple of God. Concerning which penitence it is written; Be mindful whence thou art fallen; do penance, and do the first works. And again; The sorrow that is according to [Page 42] God worketh penance steadfast unto salvation. And again; Do penance, and bring forth fruits worthy of penance. The Council of Trent-The Sixth Session-CHAPTER XIV.

HOLY COMMUNION:

Now as to the use of this holy sacrament, our Fathers have rightly and wisely distinguished three ways of receiving it. For they have taught that some receive it sacramentally only, to wit sinners: others spiritually only, those to wit who eating in desire that heavenly bread which is set before them, are, by a lively faith which worketh by charity, made sensible of the fruit and usefulness thereof: whereas the third (class) receive it both sacramentally and spiritually, and these are they who so prove and prepare themselves beforehand, as to approach to this divine table clothed with the wedding garment. The Council of Trent-The Thirteenth Session-CHAPTER VIII.

You keep posting the same thing. Perhaps you should be banned. :dancing-banana: :wink:

I think I will be banning myself soon. :sign-surrender:

Stubborn · « **Reply #36 on:** July 30, 2014, 05:11:04 PM »

Quote from: Ad Jesum per Mariam

Earth to Stubborn. Am I saying (the below) or is the Church???

The Church says...

All three sacraments necessary to salvation: Without them or without the desire thereof.

Baptism: Without the laver of regeneration or the desire thereof.

Penance: Either by the sacrament, or by the desire of the sacrament.

Holy Communion: those to wit, who eating in desire.

Earth to AJpM,

CANON IV.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous;

Here is the canon most often misinterpreted by NSAAers. As you can hopefully see better that the first part of the canon is bolded to demonstrate the affirmation that the sacraments are necessary unto salvation.

As it is, if they stopped the canon right there, it would read:
CANON IV.-"If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; let him be anathema."

This first part of the canon is what is NSAAers completely ignore as a rule. If NSAAers ever do discover it, they misinterpret it so as to jive with their idea of superfluous sacraments - as you do.

The reality is that the first part of the canon all by itself is enough to prove that there can be no such thing as salvation without the sacrament and that, as Trent states right there, the sacrament is a necessity and whoever makes the sacrament superfluous, which is precisely what a BOD does, is, per Trent, anathema.

But Trent did not stop there, they continued on to the second part of the canon to further affirm the necessity of the sacrament as they continued:

...and [if any one saith] that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.

Now this second part of the canon decrees that without the sacraments there is no justification. That is what it says.

You cannot rightly say that "or without the desire thereof" means that one can be justified by desiring the sacrament, or in any way be justified without the sacrament, for the simple reason that the first part of the canon anathematizes anyone who says that. That is what it says.

Since the second part says that without the sacrament there is no justification, then we can be certain that without the sacrament, as we are told in the first part, there is no salvation.

The first part decrees there is no salvation without the sacrament, the second part decrees there is no justification without the sacrament. That is what it says even if all the NSAAers in the world reject what it says.

Nowhere does the canon decree the desire for the sacrament rewards salvation, even though the NSAAers wrongfully say otherwise.

Finally, if NSAAers would admit that nowhere is Trent teaching about desiring the sacraments and that throughout the sessions, that it is the sacraments themselves Trent is teaching us about, and that all the decrees, teachings and canons are to be read in light of that fact, they could never in any way, honestly say that the phrase "or the desire thereof" is defining salvation via "either or", or "either the sacraments or the desire for the sacraments" rewards salvation.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #37 on:** July 30, 2014, 08:01:01 PM »

Quote from: Ad Jesum per Mariam

Because a certain sacrament might not be necessary at a given time for a given individual, in no way means that the way they can be received is different.

Nonsense. Or do you believe in Holy Orders of desire?

Cantarella · « **Reply #38 on:** July 30, 2014, 10:01:54 PM »

Quote from: Ad Jesum per Mariam

Therefore Trent is not saying that desire of baptism merits the grace of justification without the desire for the Roman Catholic faith. Notice that the Catechumen begs for the faith, and not water baptism. One can have water baptism and not the faith. This would not merit eternal life. But if one begs for the Catholic faith and has perfect contrition for sins, then God grants him the faith and the baptism that he could not receive (through no fault of his own). Most people who desire the Catholic faith also desire water baptism. If one just happened to be unaware of water baptism, but desired the Catholic faith "only" (this person would be a candidate for implicit baptism of desire) up until the time he became aware.

See how it works:

This paragraph is not about Baptism of Desire any longer.

This paragraph is about "Faith of Desire", which is ultimately what this whole BOD promotion is about.

Quote

Notice that the Catechumen begs for the faith, and not water baptism.

The distinction is unnecessary. Water baptism is essential part of the Catholic Faith because it is the entrance to spiritual life. If the catechumen begs for the Faith and knows the basics of the Faith, he would absolutely BEG for receiving the water baptism, as established by Christ Lord Himself in John 3:5, which is the ONLY divinely revealed baptism that gets rid of original and actual sin. No soul enters Heaven with the stain of sin, original or actual.

Quote

Most people who desire the Catholic faith also desire water baptism.

No person that truly desires the Catholic Faith will oppose to be water baptized. Why would they?

Quote

If one just happened to be unaware of water baptism, but desired the Catholic faith "only" (this person would be a candidate for implicit baptism of desire) up until the time he became aware

If the person is unaware of water baptism but desires the Catholic Faith, we encounter the following problem:

No reasonable human being would not "desire" to have the Catholic Faith if he knew that the Catholic Faith is the ONLY way of salvation to acquire life everlasting. Everyone on earth would wish to enter the Church if they knew that outside of Her there is no possible salvation but ignorance of the Faith is never an excuse. Ignorance of the Faith suffices for damnation as clearly stated in Church dogma. If it was, this would CONTRADICT the Catholic criteria for salvation in its entirety:

Catholic dogmas for salvation require:

1) explicit faith (cannot be a heretic),
2) reception of the sacraments (member of the Church),
3) and submission to the Roman Pontiff (cannot be a schismatic)

Cantarella · « **Reply #39 on:** July 30, 2014, 10:21:19 PM »

Ignorance of the Faith is not an excuse. The heresy that non-Catholics can be saved by “invincible ignorance” was not really a problem before the year 1800, since the teaching of Catholic Tradition that no one can be saved who is ignorant of the Gospel was quite clear and kept by all. Could you imagine what had become of the "conquistadores" if they believed that the native could be saved in his ignorance?. Catholic evangelization had never happened but thanks to the growing modernism in XIX century, combined with the liberals’ hijacking of Pope Pius IX’s weak statements, the heretical theory of salvation for the invincibly ignorant exploded and became the belief of many priests and laity. After all, it is easier and nicer to live in harmony with the world.

Fr. Francisco de Vitoria, a famous 16th century Dominican theologian, puts it this way:

Quote from: Fr. Francisco de Vitoria

“When we postulate invincible ignorance on the subject of baptism or of the Christian faith, it does not follow that a person can be saved without baptism or the Christian faith. For the aborigines to whom no preaching of the faith or Christian religion has come, will be damned for mortal sins or for idolatry, but not for the sin of unbelief. As St. Thomas says, however, if they do what in them lies [in their power], accompanied by a good life according to the law of nature, it is consistent with God’s providence that he will illuminate them regarding the name of Christ.”

Christ died for all men, so all could be saved and reach Heaven. Reality is most are damned because most fail to accept God's grace. This divine grace although available to all, is only efficacious to some. Bad will and failure to cooperate with God’s grace is the reason He does not reveal the Gospel to them. They are without excuse, as St. Paul says.

Quote from: St. Paul

“For the wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and injustice of those men that detain the truth of God in injustice: Because that which is known of God is manifest in them. For God hath manifested it to them. For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable.”

ihsv · « **Reply #40 on:** July 31, 2014, 12:46:07 AM »

Just an observation: In order to make it as accessible as possible, God chose the most abundant natural resource on earth to be the matter for the sacrament of baptism: water. Furthermore, unlike the other sacraments (matrimony excluded) He arranged that anyone, be they a heretic, a child, a pagan, a man, a woman, etc., ANYONE can baptize in case of necessity.

Cantarella · « **Reply #41 on:** July 31, 2014, 01:20:48 AM »

Quote from: ihsv

Just an observation: In order to make it as accessible as possible, God chose the most abundant natural resource on earth to be the matter for the sacrament of baptism: water. Furthermore, unlike the other sacraments (matrimony excluded) He arranged that anyone, be they a heretic, a child, a pagan, a man, a woman, etc., ANYONE can baptize in case of necessity.

Wonderful observation :smile:

Ad Jesum per Mariam · « **Reply #42 on:** July 31, 2014, 08:30:48 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: Ad Jesum per Mariam

Earth to Stubborn. Am I saying (the below) or is the Church???

The Church says...

All three sacraments necessary to salvation: Without them or without the desire thereof.

Baptism: Without the laver of regeneration or the desire thereof.

Penance: Either by the sacrament, or by the desire of the sacrament.

Holy Communion: those to wit, who eating in desire.

Earth to AJpM,

CANON IV.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous;

Here is the canon most often misinterpreted by NSAAers. As you can hopefully see better that the first part of the canon is bolded to demonstrate the affirmation that the sacraments are necessary unto salvation.

As it is, if they stopped the canon right there, it would read:
CANON IV.-"If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; let him be anathema."

This first part of the canon is what is NSAAers completely ignore as a rule. If NSAAers ever do discover it, they misinterpret it so as to jive with their idea of superfluous sacraments - as you do.

The reality is that the first part of the canon all by itself is enough to prove that there can be no such thing as salvation without the sacrament and that, as Trent states right there, the sacrament is a necessity and whoever makes the sacrament superfluous, which is precisely what a BOD does, is, per Trent, anathema.

But Trent did not stop there, they continued on to the second part of the canon to further affirm the necessity of the sacrament as they continued:

...and [if any one saith] that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.

Now this second part of the canon decrees that without the sacraments there is no justification. That is what it says.

You cannot rightly say that "or without the desire thereof" means that one can be justified by desiring the sacrament, or in any way be justified without the sacrament, for the simple reason that the first part of the canon anathematizes anyone who says that. That is what it says.

Since the second part says that without the sacrament there is no justification, then we can be certain that without the sacrament, as we are told in the first part, there is no salvation.

The first part decrees there is no salvation without the sacrament, the second part decrees there is no justification without the sacrament. That is what it says even if all the NSAAers in the world reject what it says.

Nowhere does the canon decree the desire for the sacrament rewards salvation, even though the NSAAers wrongfully say otherwise.

Finally, if NSAAers would admit that nowhere is Trent teaching about desiring the sacraments and that throughout the sessions, that it is the sacraments themselves Trent is teaching us about, and that all the decrees, teachings and canons are to be read in light of that fact, they could never in any way, honestly say that the phrase "or the desire thereof" is defining salvation via "either or", or "either the sacraments or the desire for the sacraments" rewards salvation.

You keep going back to the same argument. And I repeat again that the Church does not contradict herself, when she says explicitly that the Sacraments necessary for salvation can be received by desire and even goes as far as to point them out individually! What you need to receive (the necessity) and how you receive it (in actuality or desire) are two completely different things. You are completely disregarding the three explicit statements of Trent regarding each Sacrament as well as the Canon which sums up Church teaching that all 3 sacraments necessary to salvation can be received by desire in favor of your own interpretation. The Church elaborates more in her Canon Law...

Canon Law (1917): “Baptism, the door and foundation of the Sacraments, in fact or at least in desire necessary unto salvation for all, is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words.” (Canon 737). “Those who have died without baptism are not to be given ecclesiastical burial. Catechumens who die without baptism through no fault of their own are to be counted among the baptized.” (Canon 1239)

Ad Jesum per Mariam · « **Reply #43 on:** July 31, 2014, 08:49:24 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Quote from: Ad Jesum per Mariam
Because a certain sacrament might not be necessary at a given time for a given individual, in no way means that the way they can be received is different.

Nonsense. Or do you believe in Holy Orders of desire?

Nonsense. The Council of Trent specified the three Sacraments. Does the Council say Holy Orders can be received by desire??? Please post the evidence as I have for Baptism, Penance and Holy Communion. Do you believe in Matrimony of desire??? The Church is in need of that Sacrament as well. Trent was not talking about what the Church needs "as a whole". Trent was speaking of individuals. That why the canon reads "not necessary for every individual" as opposed to "not necessary for the Church."

"Without the laver of regeneration or the desire thereof" Council of Trent: Decree on Justification (Session 6, Chapter 4)

Ladislaus · « **Reply #44 on:** July 31, 2014, 08:54:10 AM »

Canon Law does not teach or define BoD but tolerates the opinion and, contrary to earlier Church practices, for pastoral reasons allows Christian burial for catechumens, based on the possibility that they might be saved. It's well established that the Church tolerates the opinion of BoD.

But the time has come for the Church to put the clamps down on the heretical application of BoD to non-Catholics. BoD has been the wedge by which all of Catholic dogma was eventually overturned by the enemies of the Church.