Baptism of Desire and Theological Principles by Fr. Cekada
(12-30-2011, 07:06 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote:
(12-30-2011, 06:25 PM)Jenn Wrote:
(12-30-2011, 01:51 PM)Scriptorium Wrote: What is not being understood is that the canon of Trent is not being denied. That is de fide plainly. What is being asserted is that Trent never intended to close the way for something like Baptism of Desire.

If Trent stated plainly that actual water is necessary for Baptism, then by default that closes the way for any other form of Baptism. You cannot say that you aren't denying Trent and then in the next breath deny what Trent is saying. If you say that actual water is not necessary for Baptism, then by default you are denying Trent. Either it says actual water or it doesn't. Clearly, it does. Additionally, since the Holy Ghost prevents an infallible statement from containing error, we cannot make assumptions about what Trent "intended". If we're going to make assumptions about what Trent intended, then we are also making assumptions about what the Holy Ghost intended. If Trent said actual water, and the Holy Ghost protects infallible statements from error, then we can only come to one conclusion: actual water is necessary.

From Fr. Cekada:

"I would then follow with a raft of material from other post-Tridentine theologians, and then perhaps throw in something from the Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique about the specific heresies (Luther’s teaching that beer or milk could be used to confer the sacrament of baptism; Calvin’s, that 'water' in John 3:5 was only a metaphor for the Holy Ghost) that canon 2 was formulated to condemn."

http://www.traditionalmass.org/articles/...&catname=2

This is confirmed by other magisterial teachings of the Church, namely that neither saliva (Denz. 412) nor beer (n. 447) are acceptable "matter" for the Sacrament of Baptism.  That natural water alone is acceptable, see also: Denz. 430, 449, 482, 542, 574a, 696, 858 and canon 737, sec. I of the 1917 CIC (Systematic Index of Dogmatic and Moral Matters, p. 37).

In other words, the context in which the anathema was given is key.

In the process of condemning beer, milk and saliva by stating that natural water alone is acceptable, what makes anyone think water alone means water or desire?
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Baptism of Desire and Theological Principles by Fr. Cekada - by Stubborn - 12-31-2011, 05:40 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)