Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8

Author Topic: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles  (Read 6031 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 12141
  • Reputation: +7668/-2344
  • Gender: Male
Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
« Reply #60 on: February 24, 2020, 08:51:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Yes I mentioned implicit desire below.  


    Quote
    2.  Implicit Desire - what exactly does this mean?  Is this St Alphonsus' implicit desire?  Or Rahner's "anonymous catholic" version?  It's not precise at all.  Dangerous theology.
    To further the critique above, 1) what is in the catechism is ABSOLUTELY CONTRARY to Trent, which specifically mentions Explicit Faith and desire.  2) So either the writers of the catechism believe in heretical “developments” in dogma, or they were woefully uneducated on Trent.  Either case is bad news.  3) A dogmatic council of the Church trumps a catechism any day, all day and 3x on sundays.
    .
    So all of you, pick a side.  Trent or post-Trent.  There’s quite a difference in teaching.  Unless you can show how the liberalizations of our day are in Trent, then you’re supporting doctrinal evolution, which is heresy. 
    Logged

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11464
    • Reputation: +6421/-1155
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
    « Reply #61 on: February 25, 2020, 06:52:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on February 23, 2020, 08:15:48 AM
    No, 2V, this has not been taught by the Church at all.  In fact, the Church rejected "Rewarder God" theory.  Rewarder God theorists based their novelty on a distinction, as St. Alphonsus described, that explicit belief in Jesus Christ and the Holy Trinity are required for salvation only by "necessity of precept", i.e. it's only a command that you must keep if you know about it.  But in 1703 the Holy Office rejected this and stated that explicit belief in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation are necessary "by necessity of means", in other words, regardless of your sincerity, if you do not EXPLICITLY believe these core things, you cannot have supernatural faith.  That squarely rejects Rewarder God theory.

    Remember that we're not talking about Baptism of Desire, per se.  BoD is a distraction from the core issue.  What's at issue is what is necessary to believe in order to be able to have supernatural faith.  St. Thomas Aquinas, as Dulles explains, taught that explicit belief in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation are in fact required.  Even in the early 1960s Msgr. Fenton pointed out that it was still the majority opinion.

    There have been posters here on CI who believed in BoD with whom I had zero problems.  I don't care if someone wants to believe in a Thomistic Baptism of Desire.  Who am I to denounce someone who wants to follow St. Thomas?  What I have problems with is what reduces to "Anonymous Christianity".  THIS is what allows the Modernists to expand the Church to include all manner of non-Catholics, and all the Vatican II errors derive directly from from this ecclesiology.  If I believed that people who do not have Catholic faith can be saved, then I'm going right back to the Conciliar Church and abjuring my schism.  There's no alternative.
    Lad, can you, in one post, be very specific in what all of these folks (St Thomas, St Augustine, etc) believed?  I am getting confused.  

    Also, why do you refer to the Holy Office in 1703 if things started to "develop" in the 1600's?

    I am hesitant to just go by what the Catechism of Trent says because catechisms don't always include everything about the Faith. So, Pax's requirement of picking a side (pro-Trent/anti-Trent) isn't really useful to me. 
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46679
    • Reputation: +27550/-5115
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
    « Reply #62 on: February 25, 2020, 07:22:57 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: 2Vermont on February 25, 2020, 06:52:58 AM
    Lad, can you, in one post, be very specific in what all of these folks (St Thomas, St Augustine, etc) believed?  I am getting confused.  

    Also, why do you refer to the Holy Office in 1703 if things started to "develop" in the 1600's?

    I am hesitant to just go by what the Catechism of Trent says because catechisms don't always include everything about the Faith. So, Pax's requirement of picking a side (pro-Trent/anti-Trent) isn't really useful to me.

    St. Augustine is a bit more complicated.  In his early days, he floated the notion of BoD.  But after having matured, and having battled the Pelagians and Donatists, he vehemently rejected BoD ... as he saw how it led inexorably to Pelagianism.

    https://catholicism.org/baptism-of-desire-its-origin-and-abandonment-in-the-thought-of-saint-augustine.html

    St. Thomas believed in Baptism of Desire, but he, like every Catholic until the mid 1500s, believed that people must have explicit belief in Jesus Christ and the Holy Trinity.

    St. Robert Bellarmine explicitly limited Baptism of Desire to catechumens, based on Tridentine ecclesiology.

    As for the Holy Office, the 1703 decision was specifically addressing those developments that had started to take place in the previous century or so.

    When it comes to BoD, for those with explicit belief in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation, for catechumens in particular, there's no issue and no need to "pick a side", as the Church has long allowed a belief in BoD.  That has never been my concern.

    BoD isn't the main issue.  What has really been the problem is those who believe that people without any knowledge of and belief in Jesus Christ and the Holy Trinity can be saved by a kind of "implicit faith."  There is zero support from the Church for this opinion, and the 1703 Holy Office decision actually rules this out.  It is this thinking, that some non-Catholics can be invisibly part of the Church, that has caused all the ecclesiological havoc that has led directly and demonstrably to Vatican II.  Karl Rahner rightly characterized the "greatest achievement" (in his eyes) of Vatican II as being the increased hope for the salvation of non-Catholics.

    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46679
    • Reputation: +27550/-5115
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
    « Reply #63 on: February 25, 2020, 07:27:08 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on February 24, 2020, 08:51:43 PM
    Yes I mentioned implicit desire below.  

    To further the critique above, 1) what is in the catechism is ABSOLUTELY CONTRARY to Trent, which specifically mentions Explicit Faith and desire.  2) So either the writers of the catechism believe in heretical “developments” in dogma, or they were woefully uneducated on Trent.  Either case is bad news.  3) A dogmatic council of the Church trumps a catechism any day, all day and 3x on sundays.
    .
    So all of you, pick a side.  Trent or post-Trent.  There’s quite a difference in teaching.  Unless you can show how the liberalizations of our day are in Trent, then you’re supporting doctrinal evolution, which is heresy.

    See, apart from the imprudence of it, I don't see any issue with the Catechism attributed to St. Pius X mentioning "implicit" desire.  It never states that those who are in that state can be saved in that state, but just that they are "on the way of salvation", i.e. moving in the direction of salvation.  It was imprudent given the climate of religious indifferentism, as was Pius IX's teaching, which he later came to regret.  He was deeply disturbed by the way people were interpreting his teaching and denounced it as an "atrocious injustice against Us."  This is precisely the same injustice that the modern interpreters, like Stan here, for instance, are committing.
    Logged

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11464
    • Reputation: +6421/-1155
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
    « Reply #64 on: February 25, 2020, 07:41:33 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on February 25, 2020, 07:27:08 AM
    See, apart from the imprudence of it, I don't see any issue with the Catechism attributed to St. Pius X mentioning "implicit" desire.  It never states that those who are in that state can be saved in that state, but just that they are "on the way of salvation", i.e. moving in the direction of salvation.  It was imprudent given the climate of religious indifferentism, as was Pius IX's teaching, which he later came to regret.  He was deeply disturbed by the way people were interpreting his teaching and denounced it as an "atrocious injustice against Us."  This is precisely the same injustice that the modern interpreters, like Stan here, for instance, are committing.
    I went back to see what the Baltimore Catechism stated just to see how it compared.  Unless I missed it, it never mentions "implicit" desire.  It specifically speaks of an "ardent wish" when there is no possibility of water baptism.  I think what is interesting is that when seen through a different lens, that catechism is not teaching implicit BOD either.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46679
    • Reputation: +27550/-5115
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
    « Reply #65 on: February 25, 2020, 07:54:27 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: 2Vermont on February 25, 2020, 07:41:33 AM
    I went back to see what the Baltimore Catechism stated just to see how it compared.  Unless I missed it, it never mentions "implicit" desire.  It specifically speaks of an "ardent wish" when there is no possibility of water baptism.  I think what is interesting is that when seen through a different lens, that catechism is not teaching implicit BOD either.

    No, it's not.  I think the reference to implicit desire comes from the Catechism (attributed to) St. Pius X.  Now, there's no proof that this is the original Catechism.  Struthio uncovered a very early version written in St. Pius X's own hand that makes no mention of a BoD, so who knows when or by whom that particular passage was inserted.  Secondly, it doesn't actually say that people can be saved in that state, but just says they are "on the way/path".  In fact, to read it as saying they can be saved in that state would make the passage heretical.

    Quote
     If [a man] is outside the Church ... [if certain conditions apply, then] ... he is on the way of salvation.

    Think about this for a second.  If saying that someone is "on the way of salvation means that he can be saved, this statement is objectively heretical.  It says that someone "outside the Church" can be saved.  I, for one, opt to believe that this is not heretical, and so I will interpret it in the non-heretical way ... which, as Catholics, we have an obligation to do.
    Logged

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11464
    • Reputation: +6421/-1155
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
    « Reply #66 on: February 25, 2020, 07:58:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on February 25, 2020, 07:54:27 AM
    No, it's not.  I think the reference to implicit desire comes from the Catechism (attributed to) St. Pius X.  Now, there's no proof that this is the original Catechism.  Struthio uncovered a very early version written in St. Pius X's own hand that makes no mention of a BoD, so who knows when or by whom that particular passage was inserted.  Secondly, it doesn't actually say that people can be saved in that state, but just says they are "on the way/path".  In fact, to read it as saying they can be saved in that state would make the passage heretical.

    Think about this for a second.  If saying that someone is "on the way of salvation means that he can be saved, this statement is objectively heretical.  It says that someone "outside the Church" can be saved.  I, for one, opt to believe that this is not heretical, and so I will interpret it in the non-heretical way ... which, as Catholics, we have an obligation to do.
    I see the phrase you are speaking of, and yes, it does not say they are saved.  I was just looking up the Baltimore Catechism to see if there was something similar, and after reading through everything that speaks of "desire", I do not think one can state that it teaches one is saved by implicit BOD either.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12141
    • Reputation: +7668/-2344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
    « Reply #67 on: February 25, 2020, 09:08:30 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    See, apart from the imprudence of it, I don't see any issue with the Catechism attributed to St. Pius X mentioning "implicit" desire. 
    It may not have been imprudent at the time, but it's problematic now.  Where is "implicit desire" defined?  It's not.  So it's subjective theology.  Can't turn back the clock, so what are you gonna do?

    Quote
    It never states that those who are in that state can be saved in that state, but just that they are "on the way of salvation", i.e. moving in the direction of salvation.
    Again, nowadays, with the muddled thinking of most catholics on this issue, I can easily see someone saying that "Well, all of us are "on the way" to salvation because no one is saved until they die, right?  Of course this applies to catholics and non-catholics because the Church doesn't tell us who is and isn't in hell."
    .
    Again, can't turn back the clock, but I agree, on its face, this is not heretical.  Anyone who is of good-will can see that "on the way to salvation" meant "on the way to joining the Church" ...which is what should've been said, to be more precise.
    Logged

    Offline Parasitic Eww

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 105
    • Reputation: +45/-71
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
    « Reply #68 on: February 25, 2020, 02:59:57 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • The written decrees of the Council of Trent explains that "baptism of desire" takes effect at the pouring of the water - at the sacrament itself.


    Priest:  "N., do you wish to be baptized?"

    N. (or the Godparents for an infant):  "I do"


    The catechumen has to indicate the will or wish to be baptized, then the sacrament's form and matter follow. That will / wish to be baptized is the **DESIRE** which is necessary for the sacrament to be effected as long as the proper form and matter follow. It's not what the modernists have erringly or, at worst, insidiously, interpreted "desire" from the Trent Catechism and subsequent writings to mean.

    2Vermont, you have been thoroughly lectured on this matter. Don't balk at truth by remaining obstinate in your modernist views of "BOD".
    Logged

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11464
    • Reputation: +6421/-1155
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
    « Reply #69 on: February 25, 2020, 03:27:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Parasitic Eww on February 25, 2020, 02:59:57 PM
    The written decrees of the Council of Trent explains that "baptism of desire" takes effect at the pouring of the water - at the sacrament itself.


    Priest:  "N., do you wish to be baptized?"

    N. (or the Godparents for an infant):  "I do"


    The catechumen has to indicate the will or wish to be baptized, then the sacrament's form and matter follow. That will / wish to be baptized is the **DESIRE** which is necessary for the sacrament to be effected as long as the proper form and matter follow. It's not what the modernists have erringly or, at worst, insidiously, interpreted "desire" from the Trent Catechism and subsequent writings to mean.

    2Vermont, you have been thoroughly lectured on this matter. Don't balk at truth by remaining obstinate in your modernist views of "BOD".
    Clearly you are not reading my posts in this thread, Croix.  It's pretty clear that I have been seriously questioning "implicit" BOD.  Is it possible you are the one being obstinate here?  ;)
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2896/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
    « Reply #70 on: February 25, 2020, 04:24:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Here is a hypothetical case:

    A feral child (man) somehow overcomes the hardships of life and survives in the wilderness. Because he was abandoned when he was very young, his knowledge of the spoken language is very limited. He is sort of like a Tarzan character. He is of good nature and when he looks at nature he realizes that there must be a God who has created him and all that he sees. God, not to be outdone in His charity, sends him a priest near the end of his life. The priest instructs him on the most important things, the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Redemption and plans to instruct him more the following day, as it does not seem that death is imminent. The priest goes to see him the next day and finds him dead.

    Could that man be saved by BOD? If so, did the individual have an implicit desire or an explicit desire for the sacrament? Obviously, a case like this is far fetched and I’m sure that it most likely never happened, but it does focus on the need for the explicit knowledge of the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Redemption and not the explicit knowledge of the sacrament of Baptism. I say that in a case like this, the person would only need to have an implicit desire for the sacrament. What do you think?

    BTW: I’m sure most of you would say that if God sent a priest to instruct him on his deathbed, He certainly would have made sure that the man received baptism. I would probably agree with you. 😀 
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1949
    • Reputation: +518/-147
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
    « Reply #71 on: February 27, 2020, 09:57:12 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on February 23, 2020, 08:18:53 AM
    You'd be surprised.  I've run into a few of those.
    That seems pelagian to me.  Though I realize you’d say the same about number two 
    Logged

    Offline Tradman

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1355
    • Reputation: +863/-287
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
    « Reply #72 on: February 28, 2020, 04:11:20 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Novus Ordo bishop denies (implicit) baptism of desire and calls it, "so-called baptism of desire".  Says it diminishes sacramental Baptism.  Starts about 12:00 in.

    Logged

    Offline Merry

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 654
    • Reputation: +386/-99
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
    « Reply #73 on: February 28, 2020, 07:57:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Yes!

    Priest:  "N., do you wish (DESIRE!) to be baptized?"

    N. (or the Godparents for an infant):  "I do"

    Without this, there is no sacrament.  You can't baptized against a person's will. 

    And the way that if you are in mortal sin but say a sincere Act of Contrition it will get you into the state of grace - PROVIDED you get to confession about it as soon as you can (otherwise the sin reverts to you) … is the same as being desirous of baptism can put you into the state of justification PROVIDED you proceed to actually get baptized with water.

    "Unless a man be born again of WATER and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven."  - Our Lord

    Q.  What  is a Sacrament?
    A.  A sacrament is an OUTWARD sign, instituted by Christ to give grace.

    Baptism of Desire is not an outward sign, nor instituted by Christ.
    Logged
    If any one saith that true and natural water is not of necessity for baptism, and on that account wrests to some sort of metaphor those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ, "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost...,"  Let Him Be Anathama.  -COUNCIL OF TRENT Sess VII Canon II “On Baptism"

    Offline In Principio

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 48
    • Reputation: +32/-3
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Who Can be Saved? By Card Avery Dulles
    « Reply #74 on: March 01, 2020, 09:18:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Parasitic Eww on February 25, 2020, 02:59:57 PM
    The written decrees of the Council of Trent explains that "baptism of desire" takes effect at the pouring of the water - at the sacrament itself.


    Priest:  "N., do you wish to be baptized?"

    N. (or the Godparents for an infant):  "I do"


    The catechumen has to indicate the will or wish to be baptized, then the sacrament's form and matter follow. That will / wish to be baptized is the **DESIRE** which is necessary for the sacrament to be effected as long as the proper form and matter follow. It's not what the modernists have erringly or, at worst, insidiously, interpreted "desire" from the Trent Catechism and subsequent writings to mean.

    2Vermont, you have been thoroughly lectured on this matter. Don't balk at truth by remaining obstinate in your modernist views of "BOD".
    St. Robert Bellarmine and St. Alphonsus Liguori teach that the Council of Trent Session 6, Chapter 4 teaches Baptism of Desire.  They were not modernists.
     
    St. Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621)
    De Baptismo, Lib. I, Cap. VI

    Quote
    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.

     
    St. Alphonsus Liguori (1696-1787)
    Theologia Moralis, Tomos Quintus

    Quote
    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.”

    Logged
     "The faithful should obey the apostolic advice not to know more than is necessary, but to know in moderation." - Pope Clement XIII, In Dominico Agro (1761) 
    Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8
    « previous next »