I do not claim to have any authority, but remarked I previously rejected BOD, to show that I really do understand where others are coming from. I have studied the issue extensively.
Below I write not as my own thoughts, but the thoughts of the Church.
.........
The errors surrounding baptism of desire and of blood are many. For one thing, those who reject it are very unphilosophical. I recall reading that the Eastern Schismatics in rejecting the Immaculate Conception are quite unphilosophical, because they believe it is possible that the Son of God would dwell in a womb that was even for a moment the slave of the devil through original sin. Indeed, in defining dogmas, the Church takes reason into account.
The philosophy that BOD rejecters deny, is this: that God regards any desire, whether sinful or virtuous, the same as though the deed itself were committed.
This is why sins of thought and desire can be grave sins, on account of the evil that is thought of or desired. For instance, the desire to murder is the same as committing it, in God's eyes. Basic catechesis will show us this.
Remember when Our Lord spoke of adultery being committed in the heart of one who looked upon a woman with lust? He regards the desire as though the deed were actually committed.
It is the same with baptism of desire and of blood.
When a person is legitimately prevented from receiving the sacrament, they are not deprived of it, but receive it
in desire. This is the same for the sacrament of Penance (perfect contrition), and the Sacrament of the Eucharist (spiritual communion).
St. Thomas Aquinas explains that the sacrament of baptism is not only received by one who has baptism of desire, but it is received in desire:
Secondly, the sacrament of Baptism may be wanting to anyone in reality but not in desire: for instance, when a man wishes to be baptized, but by some ill-chance he is forestalled by death before receiving Baptism. And such a man can obtain salvation without being actually baptized, on account of his desire for Baptism, which desire is the outcome of "faith that worketh by charity," whereby God, Whose power is not tied to visible sacraments, sanctifies man inwardly. Hence Ambrose says of Valentinian, who died while yet a catechumen: "I lost him whom I was to regenerate: but he did not lose the grace he prayed for."(Summa, Third Part, Question 68, Article 2).
The reason I choose to quote St. Thomas Aquinas, is because he has been the most universally praised in the Church for his sound theology and philosophy. Moreover, it is not a small thing that his Summa was consulted during the Council of Trent, and placed on the altar next to the Scriptures.
Excerpts from "The Authority of St. Thomas"
https://archive.org/details/AuthorityOfSt.ThomasRamirezJacobusM.O.P/mode/2upSt. Pius V, who declared him a Doctor of the Universal Church, recognized in Thomas "the most brilliant light of the Church," whose works are:the most certain rule of Christian doctrine by which he enlightened the Apostolic Church in answering conclusively numberless errors..., which illumination has often been evident in the past and recently stood forth prominently in the decrees of the Council of Trent. He also said of Aquinas that "his theological doctrine, accepted by the Catholic Church, outshines every other as being safer and more secure." — p. 23Pope Leo XIII:This is the greatest glory of Thomas, altogether his own and shared with no other Catholic Doctor, that the Fathers of Trent, in order to proceed in an orderly fashion during the conclave, desired to have opened upon the altar together with the Scriptures and the decrees of the Supreme Pontiffs, the Summa of St. Thomas Aquinas whence they could draw counsel, reasons and answers. — p. 26Before people start attacking him for rejecting the Immaculate Conception, this does not in any way take away from his merit as a theologian or a philosopher, because he was using sound philosophy and theology, and drew an erroneous conclusion simply because he excluded the possibility of God performing a miracle, which the Immaculate Conception truly was. In fact, many of his thoughts on the matter were actually used by the Church to come to the conclusion that indeed, Our Lady was immaculate. Moreover, being a humble religious, he relied on the theological authorities that he knew of to support his argument.
Please see p. 35-38 of this book which explains this further: https://archive.org/details/threegreatestpra00thom_0/page/34/mode/2up
One of the other errors of those who reject BOD, is that they think the doctors of the Church and the magisterium contradict one another. It is almost as though they wish to see a contradiction. I do not deny that some saints have erred, but it is extremely rash to toss out St. Thomas Aquinas so lightly, and also St. Alphonsus Liguori, since both are more prominent theologians than the rest.
As I have repeatedly posted on this forum, this is the proper approach we must take in reading Catholic material:
"The first rule for interpreting an author's texts is not to interpret them in such a way as to make him contradict himself."⁃ Fr. Garrigou Lagrange, O.P, "Our Saviour and His Love for Us", p. 44, 1951
This is what all good theologians have done, and what reasonable, good-willed laymen and laywomen do as well.
Dogmatic pronouncements of the Church often require commentary. Lay people historically did not have Council texts in front of them, but relied on their catechisms and the pastoral letters of the Bishops, who expounded upon what was defined at the councils. This is one of the ways that the Holy Ghost remains present in the Church, guiding all to Him. It may not be at the same level of papal infallibility in individual cases, but Cardinal Manning is clear when he taught (explaining Vatican I) that the Church's infallibility extends to preserving the Faith and morals of the laity, and that it is impossible for both the hearing Church (laity) and the teaching Church (clergy) to err in a matter of Faith or morals for centuries.
To suppose that all the Catechisms post-Trent were wrong (including the Trent Catechism), that the Roman Martyrology was wrong (which is read in monasteries throughout the world, and has been for centuries, and has undergone many edits), is at the very least quite impious.
For instance, Bishop Joseph Fessler, Secretary General of the Vatican Council, expounded upon the definition of papal infallibility, due to how much it was being attacked in his day. Pope Pius IX highly praised his work, declaring it was the genuine understanding of papal infallibility as defined at the Council of the Vatican (1870). It was written for the laity, and this is a clear example of how the Church acts when definitions of Councils are not clear to everyone; they are of course clear in themselves, but not always so to those who read them. We must have the humility to admit this.
Moreover, in the definitions of the Church, one may compare it with the simplicity yet profound depth of the Our Father prayer. There are many commentaries from the saints, pages and pages long, explaining each phrase of the Our Father. One can do the same with definitions of Councils as well; there is much theological depth enclosed in the words given.
St. Alphonsus Liguori's moral theology has been tampered with, and it is important to use the version published by Marietti, and the Pope himself writes in this version that it is the best one to use.
Two volumes which contain all the books may be found here:
Volume 1: https://archive.org/details/theologiamoralis01inligu/page/194/mode/2up
Volume 2: https://archive.org/details/theologiamoralis02ligu/page/n9/mode/2up?view=theater
I have read the objections of the Dimond brothers concerning St. Alphonsus' supposed "error". To understand the matter better, I would recommend people to read the short treatise on purgatory written by St. Catherine of Genoa, and analyzed and translated by Cardinal Manning. He compares her teaching with the greatest theologians, and confirms her teaching is in accord with theirs. It is reconcilable with what the Council of Trent teaches as well.
https://archive.org/details/TreatiseOnPurgatory/page/n5/mode/2upPope Gregory XVI, in the Bull of Canonization of St. Alphonsus Liguori declared the following:
This passage may be read here, on p. 584:
https://archive.org/details/lifeofstalphonsu00np/page/584/mode/2upThis may not be an ex cathedra statement of the Pope, but to think that the learned men who came to this conclusion happened to miss a supposedly wretched heresy is extremely rash, and offensive to pious ears.
"An Exposition and Defence of All the Points of Faith Discussed and Defined By the Sacred Council of Trent". By St. Alphonsus Liguori, p.128-129. This is from google books.
Here we have again, that sound philosophy I was referring to above.
Thus we may rightly conclude that when the Church has defined we need the sacrament of baptism to be saved, the desire for it is included not only because the Prince of Theologians (St. Thomas Aquinas) and the father of moral theology (St. Alphonsus Liguori) taught it, knowing the Catholic Faith very well, but also from the standpoint that the good Lord regards the will for the deed, both for sin, and virtue.
CONTEXT. We must read everything in the light of sound philosophy.
And no, I reject the concept that one may be saved by invincible ignorance of the Catholic Faith.
Topic: Where is Ladislaus? (Read 1843 times)