Baptism of Desire: Avoiding the Red Herrings on a Nearby Thread
(01-29-2012, 11:51 PM)yablabo Wrote: St. Thomas Aquinas did not teach baptism of desire, as you've proven by quoting him.  He did teach three baptisms, one which was the Sacrament, two which were contained in the Sacrament (baptism of repentance and blood).

:LOL:

Okay, obviously you don't understand the words involved.  St. Thomas didn't teach Baptism of Desire, but he did.  Who's contradicting themselves now?  :LOL:
Reply
(01-30-2012, 03:13 AM)moneil Wrote:
(01-29-2012, 11:51 PM)yablabo Wrote: Pope St. Pius X never taught "baptism of desire" that I know of.  Though, to my recollection, the Bishop of Mantua does have a teaching of "baptism of desire" attributed to him, though his Catechism of Christian Doctrine isn't in print in its entirety any longer in order to be certain that he actually did teach "baptism of desire."

-- Nicole

The Catechism of Saint Pius X http://www.cin.org/users/james/ebooks/ma...pindex.htm

Quote:17 Q: Can the absence of Baptism be supplied in any other way?
A: The absence of Baptism can be supplied by martyrdom, which is called Baptism of Blood, or by an act of perfect love of God, or of contrition, along with the desire, at least implicit, of Baptism, and this is called Baptism of Desire.

+1 for reality.
Reply
(01-29-2012, 03:47 PM)Gregory I Wrote: Plus, EVERY ONE of those theologians contradicts themselves. THey will ALSO teach Baptism of Water is obligatory on all and absolutely necessary for salvation.

Which is the position called Baptism of Desire.  :LOL:
Reply
Do those who deny the theological possibility of the salvific efficacy of a desire for baptism animated by perfect charity understand that this "baptism of desire" is not equal to the sacrament of baptism--that it doesn't imprint an indelible mark on the soul? It confers the sacramental effects of justification outside of the sacramental sign proper to the sacrament, as St. Thomas teaches.
Reply
(01-30-2012, 03:26 AM)INPEFESS Wrote: Do those who deny the theological possibility of the salvific efficacy of a desire for baptism animated by perfect charity understand that this "baptism of desire" is not equal to the sacrament of baptism--that it doesn't imprint an indelible mark on the soul? It confers the sacramental effects of justification outside of the sacramental sign proper to the sacrament, as St. Thomas teaches.

INPEFESS, they don't think "or" means "or" when the Council of Trent uses the word.  You'll have to go more basic than that to communicate with this mindset.
Reply
(01-30-2012, 03:35 AM)Parmandur Wrote:
(01-30-2012, 03:26 AM)INPEFESS Wrote: Do those who deny the theological possibility of the salvific efficacy of a desire for baptism animated by perfect charity understand that this "baptism of desire" is not equal to the sacrament of baptism--that it doesn't imprint an indelible mark on the soul? It confers the sacramental effects of justification outside of the sacramental sign proper to the sacrament, as St. Thomas teaches.

INPEFESS, they don't think "or" means "or" when the Council of Trent uses the word.  You'll have to go more basic than that to communicate with this mindset.

Yes, I am aware that they render the Latin word "aut" as "and."

Yet, they should be very careful in doing this. It should be interpreted exactly as what it says:
BULL OF OUR MOST HOLY LORD PIUS IV., BY PROVIDENCE OF GOD, POPE, TOUCHING THE CONFIRMATION OF THE OECUMENICAL (AND) GENERAL COUNCIL OF TRENT Wrote:Furthermore, in order to avoid the perversion and confusion which might arise, if each one were allowed, as he might think fit, to publish his own commentaries and interpretations on the decrees of the Council ; We, by apostolic authority, forbid all men, as well ecclesiastics, of whatsoever order, condition, and rank they may be, as also laymen, with whatsoever honor and power invested ; prelates, to wit, under pain of being interdicted from entering the church, and all others whomsoever they be, under pain of excommunication incurred by the fact, to presume, without our authority to publish, in any form, any commentaries, glosses, annotations, scholia, or any kind of interpretation whatsoever of the decrees of the said Council ; or to settle anything in regard thereof, under any plea whatsoever, even under pretext of greater corroboration of the decrees, or the more perfect execution thereof, or under any other colour whatsoever. But if anything therein shall seem to any one to have been expressed and ordained in an obscure manner, and it shall appear to stand in need on that account of an interpretation or decision, let him Go up to the place which the Lord hath chosen; to wit, to the Apostolic See, the mistress of all the faithful, whose authority the holy Synod also has so reverently acknowledged. For, if any difficulties and controversies shall arise in regard of the said decrees, We reserve them to be by Us cleared up and decided, even as the holy Synod has Itself in like manner decreed ; being prepared, as that Synod has justly expressed Its confidence in regard to Us, to provide for the necessities of all the provinces, in such manner as shall seem to Us most suitable; declaring that whatsoever may be attempted to the contrary in this matter, whether wittingly or unwittingly, by any one, by what authority soever, is, notwithstanding, null and void.
Reply
(01-30-2012, 03:26 AM)INPEFESS Wrote: Do those who deny the theological possibility of the salvific efficacy of a desire for baptism animated by perfect charity understand that this "baptism of desire" is not equal to the sacrament of baptism--that it doesn't imprint an indelible mark on the soul? It confers the sacramental effects of justification outside of the sacramental sign proper to the sacrament, as St. Thomas teaches.

Theologically, everything is possible because with God, nothing is impossible, however, the Church teaches as de fide that: Baptism by water (Baptismus fluminis) is, since the promulgation of the Gospel, necessary for all men without exception, for salvation. (De fide.)

Where does BOD fit in with the above de fide teaching?
Reply
(01-30-2012, 03:35 AM)Parmandur Wrote:
(01-30-2012, 03:26 AM)INPEFESS Wrote: Do those who deny the theological possibility of the salvific efficacy of a desire for baptism animated by perfect charity understand that this "baptism of desire" is not equal to the sacrament of baptism--that it doesn't imprint an indelible mark on the soul? It confers the sacramental effects of justification outside of the sacramental sign proper to the sacrament, as St. Thomas teaches.

INPEFESS, they don't think "or" means "or" when the Council of Trent uses the word.  You'll have to go more basic than that to communicate with this mindset.

:LOL:
Reply
Does God command impossibilities?

Yea or Nay?
Reply
A posse ad esse non valet illatio:  Unless you have a credible example of a saint venerated by Holy Mother Church who has found salvation via baptismus flaminis or by the mere vow of baptism, then you cannot make a valid inference of the actuality of such being salvific by the mere possibility.

-- Nicole
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)