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

Author Topic: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended  (Read 1220 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeanJohnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15064
  • Reputation: +9980/-3161
  • Gender: Male
Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
« on: October 08, 2019, 01:36:59 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
  • Excerpted from this excellent article on Samuel's website: https://tradidi.com/the-necessity-of-baptism/

    The Necessity of Baptism
    by Rev. John P. Murphy, D.D., Ph.D.

    Categories: Doctrine
    Topics: Baptism
    Source: The Teaching Of The Catholic Church ­— A Summary Of Catholic Doctrine — Volume II

    Nihil Obstat: Edvardus Can. Mahoney, S.T.D., Censor Deputatus

    Imprimatur: E. Morrogh Bernard, Vicarius Generalis

    Westmonasterii: Die X IVNII MCMXLVII (1947)


    "The desire is explicit, for example, in a catechumen who is instructed in all the essential truths of faith, who is actually preparing to be baptised, and is well disposed in every way. If, however, a catechumen were well instructed, and yet his baptism had to be postponed because he was unwilling to give up something grievously sinful in his life, we could not say that he had baptism of desire, as it is evident that he has not charity.

    It is implicit in anyone who makes an act of the love of God, and, through invincible ignorance, does not know of the necessity of sacramental baptism. This might happen in a country like England to people who are not baptised. They might easily know sufficient of the truths of faith to make an act of the love of God, and yet be in ignorance of the true necessity of baptism, which they would not, therefore, explicitly desire.

    Might it not also happen to heathens who had never heard of Christ? It might, if we suppose that these heathens have in some way obtained the necessary minimum knowledge of Revelation, and are capable of a salutary faith and hope in God. For it is very important to understand that when we speak of charity, we do not mean just any kind of love of God above all else, such as the natural love of a creature for its Creator. Charity is essentially a love of friendship (Our Blessed Lord does not call us servants, but friends), which implies an intimate communication with God, such as is only possible in a supernatural order. The existence of this supernatural order can only be known through Revelation. Charity, therefore, cannot exist without at least the knowledge of the principal truth of Revelation, which St Paul describes for us in his Epistle to the Hebrews, when he says: “He that cometh to God must believe that he is, and is a rewarder of them that seek him.” How heathens have in some way received or can in some way receive this minimum knowledge of revealed truth it would be outside the scope of this essay to enquire.20

    That charity infallibly justifies man, obtaining remission of all sin and infusion of grace, is evident from the words of Christ: “He that loveth me shall be loved of my Father; and I will love him and will manifest myself to him”21 Again: “If any one love me he will keep my word. And my Father will love him: and we will come to him and will make our abode with him”22 And again, when the lawyer answered Christ’s question, saying “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind” our Blessed Lord rejoined: “This do, and thou shalt live.”23 No portion of the Sacred Scriptures makes it clearer to us that this charity is the love of friendship than the writings of St John, who tells us once directly, and in numerous passages equivalently, that charity is of God, and every one that loveth is born of God.24

    In these passages of the Sacred Scriptures there is not, as is evident, the least suggestion that there should be any explicit knowledge of the need of the Sacrament of Baptism. In patristic times we find abundant proof of the sufficiency of charity where the desire of baptism is explicit. We may quote, as an example, the famous funeral oration of St Ambrose over the Emperor Valentinian, who died as a catechumen. He says that he had heard people expressing regret that the Emperor was not baptised. He points out that the Emperor had the intention of being baptised, and had asked him, St Ambrose, to baptise him. Will he not then receive the grace which he desired and obtain what he asked for? Did he not court unpopularity on the very day before his death, by putting Christ before men on the question of the pagan temples? If he had the spirit of Christ, did he not receive the Grace of Christ? If the martyrs are cleansed in their blood, then so is he in his good-will and piety.25

    Could we say that the Fathers recognised charity as equivalent to baptism where the desire for baptism was only implicit? They did not develop this point for us, with the exception of St Augustine, who may be said to have defended the sufficiency of charity without any explicit reference to baptism. In discussing the question of the salvation of the Penitent Thief, he is not altogether satisfied with St Cyprian’s contention that he died a martyr, but seems more disposed to attribute his salvation to his faith and the conversion of his heart. It is true that St Augustine afterwards expresses uncertainty about the whole question of the Penitent Thief; but, quite independently of this question, he recognises faith and the conversion of the heart as a means of justification;26 basing his argument on the text of St Paul: “For with the heart, we believe unto justice; but with the mouth, confession is made unto salvation.”27

    The development of this point after St Augustine was but slow, yet always inclining towards the acceptance of charity with the implicit desire as sufficient. Today it is the opinion of all theologians. It is, of course, always understood that charity with the explicit desire exists only if there is the intention of receiving the Sacrament when possible; and that charity with the implicit desire exists only when the ignorance of the Sacrament and of its necessity is invincible and therefore inculpable.

    How does charity compare with the Sacrament of Baptism? It is something less. For, though it is sufficient for justification, it does not give the Character which comes from the Sacrament, and it does not necessarily remit all debt of temporal punishment. We say it does not necessarily remit all debt of temporal punishment; but we do not deny that an act of charity might be so perfect as to secure this end as well."

    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41891
    • Reputation: +23940/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
    « Reply #1 on: October 08, 2019, 01:59:02 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • More proof that the BoDer agenda is nothing less than the rejection and undermining of EENS.

    This article is full of falsehoods.

    Anyone who truly seeks the truth on this matter should read the article below:
    https://catholicism.org/baptism-of-desire-its-origin-and-abandonment-in-the-thought-of-saint-augustine.html


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
    « Reply #2 on: October 08, 2019, 02:22:37 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    This article is full of falsehoods.
    Lol.

    “Today [1947] it is the opinion of all theologians.”
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41891
    • Reputation: +23940/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
    « Reply #3 on: October 08, 2019, 02:24:46 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!1
  • Lol.

    “Today [1947] it is the opinion of all theologians.”

    And less than 20 years after that, Religious Liberty and the New Vatican II ecclesiology were also the "opinion of all theologians".

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41891
    • Reputation: +23940/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
    « Reply #4 on: October 08, 2019, 02:26:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Lol.

    “Today [1947] it is the opinion of all theologians.”

    It completely misrepresents the opinions of the Church Fathers.  People who want the truth should read the article in the link I posted.

    Johnson, if you believe in implicit Baptism of Desire, then you have zero theological grounds to reject Vatican II, and you are schismatic.  It's really as simple as that.


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
    « Reply #5 on: October 08, 2019, 02:38:55 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • It completely misrepresents the opinions of the Church Fathers.  People who want the truth should read the article in the link I posted.

    Johnson, if you believe in implicit Baptism of Desire, then you have zero theological grounds to reject Vatican II, and you are schismatic.  It's really as simple as that.
    ...says he who fancies his opinion superior to the unanimity of pre-conciliar theologians!
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41891
    • Reputation: +23940/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
    « Reply #6 on: October 08, 2019, 02:44:07 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • ...says he who fancies his opinion superior to the unanimity of pre-conciliar theologians!

    ...says he who fancies his opinion superior to the unanimity of conciliar theologians!

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41891
    • Reputation: +23940/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
    « Reply #7 on: October 08, 2019, 02:45:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
  • Little BabyJohnson got his little feelings hurt because several "Feeneyites" criticized him about an unrelated subject, so he now begins his vindictive spam campaign.

    :baby:



    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41891
    • Reputation: +23940/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
    « Reply #8 on: October 08, 2019, 02:46:59 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • ...says he who fancies his opinion superior to the unanimity of pre-conciliar theologians!

    Indeed, it is precisely the pervasiveness of this false new soteriology that led inexorably to the new false ecclesiology of Vatican II.  If you accept one, you have to accept both.

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
    « Reply #9 on: October 08, 2019, 02:59:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Indeed, it is precisely the pervasiveness of this false new soteriology that led inexorably to the new false ecclesiology of Vatican II.  If you accept one, you have to accept both.
    Total nonsense.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
    « Reply #10 on: October 08, 2019, 03:15:14 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • Little BabyJohnson got his little feelings hurt because several "Feeneyites" criticized him about an unrelated subject, so he now begins his vindictive spam campaign.

    :baby:
    Aww, do you have a witto poopie in yo ditey?
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."


    Online Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10309
    • Reputation: +6219/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
    « Reply #11 on: October 08, 2019, 03:18:19 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    It is implicit in anyone who makes an act of the love of God, and, through invincible ignorance, does not know of the necessity of sacramental baptism.

    That's not even what "implicit" means.  That's not what St Alphonsus meant when he said "implicit".  This is a total perversion of the English language!  A precursor of the ambiguity of V2...

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1889
    • Reputation: +500/-141
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
    « Reply #12 on: October 08, 2019, 06:08:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Honestly, my biggest takeaway here is that when this crisis ends we badly, badly need clarification on what the “universal and ordinary magisterium” really means.

    I really don’t see a great logical principle under which a consensus in 1947 would be binding but not in 1967... if the conciliar popes are popes.  It thus makes sense to me why Sedevacantists tend to think more things are definitive than R and Rs, the R and R position logically seems to lead to a much “longer view” of the ordinary magisterium than sedes.  Which would also explain why, with exception of the Dimonds, usually feeneyites are not sedes.

    I currently believe in BOD and BOB, and I think there’s some precedent for that belief, but I realize it’s possible that I’m wrong on the possibility for non catechumens. 

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8901
    • Reputation: +8675/-849
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
    « Reply #13 on: October 08, 2019, 10:34:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0


  • Sean, Fr. Murphy in 1947 is too close to the Father Feeney street fight with the emerging newChurch.

    Go back further for your citations... to the late 1800's under Pope Leo XIII.

    That's when "the Father of Vatican II", Cardinal Newman was writing and I'm sure he touched on implicit Baptisms.

    He had to be behind the Vatican review on the validity of Anglican orders (which was shot down) and he held a casual posture on the need for Anglicans to convert.
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline trad123

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2042
    • Reputation: +448/-96
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Implicit Baptism of Desire Defined and Defended
    « Reply #14 on: October 08, 2019, 11:34:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • "The desire is explicit, for example, in a catechumen who is instructed in all the essential truths of faith

    Might it not also happen to heathens who had never heard of Christ? It might, if we suppose that these heathens have in some way obtained the necessary minimum knowledge of Revelation, and are capable of a salutary faith and hope in God.


    If a heathen can have supernatural faith, hope, and charity then it can be said that he possesses all the essential truths of the faith. If salvation can be had without knowledge of the Holy Trinity and Incarnation, they're not so essential are they.

    We're not talking merely implicit Baptism. You're throwing implicit faith into the mix. That hypothetical heathen is now said to possess the Catholic faith, because the Catholic faith is necessary for salvation.


    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02033b.htm



    Quote
    Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the Catholic Faith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity.

    (. . .)

    Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting Salvation, that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

    (. . .)

     This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.
    2 Corinthians 4:3-4 

    And if our gospel be also hid, it is hid to them that are lost, In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them.