A CI member expressed the natural frustration of someone who first comes into contact with the almost innumerable ramblings of like 10 threads started by Lover of Truth.

Therefore, I shall teach here the issue of Baptism of desire simply explained.

Below is my response to his comment in another thread.

Quote from: 2Vermont

And now I'm really out of these so-called discussions.

 There is no need to "get out" these "so-called" discusions. It sounds like you are frustrated with all of the information coming at you. Are you not learning something that you didn't know before?

The problem is that you have to discern truth from obfuscations. You'll find that people who don't know the subject will keep harping on the same points, the little that they know and always stick to that, never learning anything new. This is a sign if ignorance. On the point of Baptism of desire, it is very simple:


Find a person who limits his belief in BOD to a catechumen or a martyr for the Faith, and you have someone with common sense. That person can have the confidence that he is supported by St. Thomas and many other Saints and Doctors after the time of St. Thomas. (I've only known one person who only restricted his belief in BOD to these examples. There should be many more out there, but there just isn't. I think it is because it BOD of the catechumen and BOB are like a harmless drug that leads to stronger drugs, belief in anything you desire.)

Find a person who believes in John 3:15  and the dogmas on EENS and baptism as they are written, literally that is, and you have a person with the support of the Fathers, doctors and saints that came before St. Thomas. And you can read the dogmas as they were intended to be read, as the final word.

Or you can go with the BOD Hypocrites and go against all the Fathers, Doctors, Saints and the Athanasian Creed. In other words become a fool.

A CI member expressed the natural frustration of someone who first comes into contact with the almost innumerable ramblings of like 10 threads started by Lover of Truth.

And you haven't posted innumerable ramblings? C'mon now bowler.

Bowler,

You posted a great quote, which the modernists, both "traditional", neo-con, and liberal, hardly ever reference:

“But concerning them that remain in the sleep of sin: Oh! what good reason they have to lament, groan, weep and say: woe the day! for they are in the most lamentable of cases; yet they have no reason to grieve or complain, save about themselves, who despised, yea rebelled against, the light; who were untractable to invitations, and obstinate against inspirations; so that it is their own malice alone they must ever curse and reproach, since they themselves are the sole authors of their ruin, the sole workers of their damnation. So the Japanese complaining to the Blessed Francis Xavier their Apostle, that God Who had had so much care of other nations, seemed to have forgotten their predecessors, not having given them the knowledge of Himself, for want of which they must have been lost: the man of God answered them that the divine natural law was engraven in the hearts of all mortals, and that if their forerunners had observed it, the light of heaven would without doubt have illuminated them, as on the contrary, having violated it, they deserved damnation. An apostolic answer of an apostolic man, and resembling the reason given by the great Apostle of the loss of the ancient Gentiles, whom he calls inexcusable, for that having known good they followed evil; for it is in a word that which he inculcates in the first chapter of his Epistle to the Romans. Misery upon misery to those who do not acknowledge that their misery comes from their malice.”

http://catholicism.org/doctrinalsummary.html

Folks on this board like to quote (or, rather, paraphrase), what Pope Pius IX taught, ignoring a very critical phrase:

And here, beloved Sons and Venerable Brethren, it is necessary once more to mention and censure the serious error into which some Catholics have unfortunately fallen. For they are of the opinion that men who live in errors, estranged from the true faith and from Catholic unity, can attain eternal life. This is in direct opposition to Catholic teaching. We all know that those who are afflicted with invincible ignorance with regard to our holy religion, if they carefully keep the precepts of the natural law that have been written by God in the hearts of all men, if they are prepared to obey God, and if they lead a virtuous and dutiful life, can attain eternal life by the power of divine light and grace. For God, Who reads comprehensively in every detail the minds and souls, the thoughts and habits of all men, will not permit, in accordance with his infinite goodness and mercy, anyone who is not guilty of a voluntary fault to suffer eternal torments (suppliciis). However, also well-known is the Catholic dogma that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church, and that those who obstinately oppose the authority and definitions of the Church, and who stubbornly remain separated from the unity of the Church and from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff (to whom the Saviour has entrusted the care of His vineyard), cannot attain salvation. (Quanto conficiamur, 7-8)

Virtually all non-Catholics (and, indeed, most "Catholics") do not keep the precepts of the natural law.  Nearly all accept artificial contraception, which even the modern Catechism of the Catholic Church declares to be "intrinsically evil":

2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil:

Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sɛҳuąƖity.

Virtually all non-Catholics (and, most Catholics) are perfectly "okay" with artificial contraception, therefore, the graces of the Holy Spirit cannot be in their hearts, and they do not love the One and Triune God with perfect charity, even with implicit faith (per the 1949 Holy Office Letter), and therefore, they can not and will not be saved.

If Pope Pius XII were, in fact, an anti-Pope, then that would, of course, nullify the 1949 Holy Office Letter.  As others have already pointed out, Pope Pius XII, in many respects, set the foundation for Vatican II.

A CI member expressed the natural frustration of someone who first comes into contact with the almost innumerable ramblings of like 10 threads started by Lover of Truth.

Therefore, I shall teach here the issue of Baptism of desire simply explained.

Below is my response to his comment in another thread.

Quote from: 2Vermont

And now I'm really out of these so-called discussions.

 There is no need to "get out" these "so-called" discusions. It sounds like you are frustrated with all of the information coming at you. Are you not learning something that you didn't know before?

The problem is that you have to discern truth from obfuscations. You'll find that people who don't know the subject will keep harping on the same points, the little that they know and always stick to that, never learning anything new. This is a sign if ignorance. On the point of Baptism of desire, it is very simple:

Only Three Choices

-Find a person who limits his belief in BOD to a catechumen or a martyr for the Faith, and you have someone with common sense. That person can have the confidence that he is supported by St. Thomas and many other Saints and Doctors after the time of St. Thomas. (I've only known one person who only restricted his belief in BOD to these examples. There should be many more out there, but there just isn't. I think it is because it BOD of the catechumen and BOB are like a harmless drug that leads to stronger drugs, belief in anything you desire.)

-Find a person who believes in John 3:15  and the dogmas on EENS and baptism as they are written, literally that is, and you have a person with the support of the Fathers, doctors and saints that came before St. Thomas. And you can read the dogmas as they were intended to be read, as the final word.

-Or you can go with the BOD Hypocrites (and believe that any unbaptized person can be saved even if they have no explicit desire to be a Catholic, or be martyred for the faith, nor belief in Christ and the Trinity) and thus go against ALL the Fathers, Doctors, Saints and the Athanasian Creed. In other words become a fool.