Baptism of Desire and Theological Principles by Fr. Cekada
(12-30-2011, 01:43 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: After a nuclear disaster, a small group of Christian men and women survive in an isolated part of the globe and start rebuilding their community, church and civilisation. However, after a few years, their only priest dies and they're left with no clergy. Nevertheless, the priest had trained a few young men to fulfill his role after he were gone and these men have the sincere desire in their hearts to be ordained. Their only problem is that there's no bishop around and God isn't providing one any time soon. Can they thus be ordained by desire and look after their flock? I don't see why not. It's a matter of Christian survival.
We are talking about the Churchs teaching on BOD, which is part of the Deposit of the Faith, not a ridiculous hypothetical situation where there is no bishop to ordain a man.
Your argument is not at pertainable to this discussion and is a ridiculous non-sequitor to boot.
The Church at Trent, and in many other places, taught that Baptism of Desire is efficacious to salvation.
Reply
You call it a "ridiculous non sequitur," I call it theological speculation that can bring about development of doctrine.

The principle being stated here is that the sincere desire for the reception of the sacrament suffices, hence "baptism of desire," "confession by desire," "eucharist by desire" and "marriage by desire." There's only 3 more to go and we'll have the entire order of the sacraments of the new law being able to be replaced, in certain circumstances, by the mere desire of receiving them. I don't see why not.
Reply
Perfect contrition with desire justify for baptism and penance.
For Eucharist, it is necessary inasmuch as the Church requires it at least once a year. So a person may die without it. The Eucharist is spiritual food, but the Church teaches that that food need be taken only once a year at minimum. So its necessity is also not absolute.

Therefore all these sacraments require a relative necessity of means, i.e., there are extraordinary situations in which their benefits may come, or not be necessary, in order for a soul to go to heaven.

Confirmation, Marriage, Orders, and Extreme Unction are not necessary for salvation, so no true emergency in these matters is applicable.
Reply
(12-30-2011, 02:11 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: You call it a "ridiculous non sequitur," I call it theological speculation that can bring about development of doctrine.

The principle being stated here is that the sincere desire for the reception of the sacrament suffices, hence "baptism of desire," "confession by desire," "eucharist by desire" and "marriage by desire." There's only 3 more to go and we'll have the entire order of the sacraments of the new law being able to be replaced, in certain circumstances, by the mere desire of receiving them. I don't see why not.
"Why not" is because the Church, for centuries has defined BOD as part of the Deposit of Faith, and not said word one about the things you mention, and never will.
Reply
In fairness, it should be noted that baptism of desire and baptism of blood are teachings proximate to faith, sententiae fidei proxima, that is, doctrines which are regarded by theologians generally as truths of revelation but which have not yet been finally promulgated as such by the Church.

The necessity of water Baptism itself for salvation, however, is a teaching of divine and catholic faith (de fide), that is, an immediately revealed truth. The belief due to them is based on the authority of God revealing (fides divina), and if the Church, through its teaching, vouches for the fact that a truth is contained in revelation, one's certainty is then also based on the authority of the infallible teaching authority of the church (fides catholica).
Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Ludwig Ott Wrote:"Baptism by water (baptismus fluminis) is, since the promulgation of the Gospel, necessary for all men without exception, for salvation." (De fide)

"In case of emergency, baptism by water can be replaced by baptism of desire or baptism of blood." (Sent. fidei prox.)

It's not an entirely settled matter.
Reply
(12-30-2011, 02:22 PM)Old Salt Wrote:
(12-30-2011, 02:11 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: You call it a "ridiculous non sequitur," I call it theological speculation that can bring about development of doctrine.

The principle being stated here is that the sincere desire for the reception of the sacrament suffices, hence "baptism of desire," "confession by desire," "eucharist by desire" and "marriage by desire." There's only 3 more to go and we'll have the entire order of the sacraments of the new law being able to be replaced, in certain circumstances, by the mere desire of receiving them. I don't see why not.
"Why not" is because the Church, for centuries has defined BOD as part of the Deposit of Faith, and not said word one about the things you mention, and never will.

Asking questions, even uneasy ones, about old issues is often how theology grows and develops, don't you think? Anyway, I gather you're not open to the application of the same principle ("desire thereof") to all seven sacraments.

It seems the exceptions are only found in those sacraments necessary for salvation. But one wonders, if one can receive baptism, confession and the eucharist, sacraments necessary for salvation for grown-ups, by desire alone, why not the remaining four? In the hypothetical scenario I posed earlier, the ordination of those men by desire would be necessary for the survival of the Church.
Reply
"Asking questions, even uneasy ones, about old issues is often how theology grows and develops, don't you think? Anyway, I gather you're not open to the application of the same principle ("desire thereof") to all seven sacraments."

No, Rather it is dangerous to probe and ask hypothetical questions of the truth above and beyond what the Church has already defined for our assent of Faith.
Reply
(12-30-2011, 02:34 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(12-30-2011, 02:22 PM)Old Salt Wrote:
(12-30-2011, 02:11 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: You call it a "ridiculous non sequitur," I call it theological speculation that can bring about development of doctrine.

The principle being stated here is that the sincere desire for the reception of the sacrament suffices, hence "baptism of desire," "confession by desire," "eucharist by desire" and "marriage by desire." There's only 3 more to go and we'll have the entire order of the sacraments of the new law being able to be replaced, in certain circumstances, by the mere desire of receiving them. I don't see why not.
"Why not" is because the Church, for centuries has defined BOD as part of the Deposit of Faith, and not said word one about the things you mention, and never will.

Asking questions, even uneasy ones, about old issues is often how theology grows and develops, don't you think? Anyway, I gather you're not open to the application of the same principle ("desire thereof") to all seven sacraments.

It seems the exceptions are only found in those sacraments necessary for salvation. But one wonders, if one can receive baptism, confession and the eucharist, sacraments necessary for salvation for grown-ups, by desire alone, why not the remaining four? In the hypothetical scenario I posed earlier, the ordination of those men by desire would be necessary for the survival of the Church.

You ask a good question, Vetus, but it appears that the Church's theologians have not considered it.  If I'm mistaken, then I'd gladly be corrected.
Reply
(12-30-2011, 02:34 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: Asking questions, even uneasy ones, about old issues is often how theology grows and develops, don't you think? Anyway, I gather you're not open to the application of the same principle ("desire thereof") to all seven sacraments.

It seems the exceptions are only found in those sacraments necessary for salvation. But one wonders, if one can receive baptism, confession and the eucharist, sacraments necessary for salvation for grown-ups, by desire alone, why not the remaining four? In the hypothetical scenario I posed earlier, the ordination of those men by desire would be necessary for the survival of the Church.

What you say is impossible by the Faith since we are guaranteed bishops of Rome until the end of time.

And what one receives is the forgiveness/justification of the sacraments of Baptism and Penance via perfect contrition and desire. Eucharist has been ruled out as not necessary absolutely. So we are dealing really with only the first two. And really we are speaking of baptism in regard to original and mortal sin, and penance in regard to mortal sin. These are the only real emergencies presented.
Reply
Vetus Ordo Wrote:In fairness, it should be noted that baptism of desire and baptism of blood are teachings proximate to faith, sententiae fidei proxima, that is, doctrines which are regarded by theologians generally as truths of revelation but which have not yet been finally promulgated as such by the Church.

A doctrine "proximate to faith" is "all but unanimously held as revealed by God," with one example being Christ's possession of the Beatific Vision throughout His life on earth.  To deny a doctrine characterized as such is a mortal sin indirectly against faith:

http://www.the-pope.com/theolnotes.html

See also: http://iteadthomam.blogspot.com/2007/04/...logic.html

"Fidei proxima (a truth that is proximate to the faith): a truth which, according to the almost unanimous consensus of theologians, is contained in the Word of God, whether in written form (Sacred Scripture), or handed down orally (Sacred Tradition): e.g., Baptism of Desire.  The error that is opposed to this level of catholic truth is called proxima errori in fide vel haeresi vel haeresim sapiens (proximate to error in faith or proximate to heresy or savoring of heresy)."

Catholics are not free to deny doctrines which are fidei proxima without sin, one of which is the doctrine of baptism of desire (baptismus flaminis).
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)