CathInfo.com

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/currenterrors/bapdesire.htm

I've been reading up on BoD for a while. I found this quite interesting and helpful. Kind of a long read, but it is worth it.

I believe the only reason this is such a contested issue on this forum is because people today are pretty much saying that everyone can get into heaven as long as they are good. You guys are over correcting this issue.

It is heretical to say that anyone can be saved, even outside of the Church. It is also, however, heretical to deny BoD.

I know I've had this debate before, but I just found this article and thought y'alls might benefit from reading it.

Viva Cristo Rey

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/currenterrors/bapdesire.htm

I've been reading up on BoD for a while. I found this quite interesting and helpful. Kind of a long read, but it is worth it.

You should not read things like that, by that I mean things that blatantly contradict the very words of Our Lord. You should not be using those words against the words of Our Lord, and if you don't think that is what is being done, if you've convinced yourself that nothing of the sort is happening, then you're fooling yourself.

The litmus test of a BOD is so simple that it's almost inconceivable anyone believes in a BOD at all, since all any a BODer needs to do, is to simply use the Divine Revelation, which are the words of Our Lord in John 3:5, to prove there is a BOD, or to prove that a BOD does not contradict this Divine Revelation.   

"One Lord, one faith, one baptism."
[Ephesians 4:5]

One. Not three. Not grace separated from the Sacrament. One baptism of water and the Holy Ghost. (John 3:5)

See how simple that is compared to the contrived reasoning of BOD adherents?

Baptism of desire is not the sacrament of baptism and yet applying the term “baptism” to the baptism of blood and baptism of desire has been a practice of the Church for centuries. Even if it is not a baptism in the strict sense, it nevertheless is a baptism in the analogical sense. Just as receiving the Eucharist by making a spiritual “Communion” is not a true Communion, but given the name “Spiritual Communion” in the analogical sense. In both cases, no one is denying the primary term. On the same point, St. Albert the Great says that the baptism of blood and the baptism of desire can only be called baptism when water baptism is lacking.[7]

In this sense, "Baptisms of desire" and "Baptism of blood" are not sacraments, but simply fulfil the requirements when the sacrament cannot be received due to extraordinary circuмstances. Thus, one speaks metaphorically of "different Baptisms" yet they all obtain the same sanctifying grace. In fact, Our Lord Himself spoke of different Baptisms during His public ministry. There was "the Baptism wherewith I am to be baptized" (Lk. 12:50), referring to a Baptism of blood, which was His crucifixion. Describing the descent of the Holy Ghost on Pentecost, he says "For John indeed baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost, not many days hence"

^^
These are not my words, but this issue is described in the article.