Latest Threads
newest posts



Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Apologetics
 

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forums, the largest Catholic Community on the Web.

Here you can join over 400,000 members from around the world discussing all things Catholic. Membership is open to all, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who seek the Truth with Charity.

To gain full access, you must register for a FREE account. Registered members are able to:
  • Submit questions about the faith to experts from Catholic Answers
  • Participate in all forum discussions
  • Communicate privately with Catholics from around the world
  • Plus join a prayer group, read with the Book Club, and much more.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. So join our community today!

Have a question about registration or your account log-in? Just contact our Support Hotline.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search Thread Display
  #1  
Old Dec 22, '04, 7:58 am
marineboy marineboy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: November 8, 2004
Posts: 228
Default council of trent: no baptism of desire

one of the earlier post by jgc, who at the end says he is father john hardon makes a mistake and says that the council of trent defined baptism of desire...the council of trent did not .... baptism of desire is an implicit desire to follow God to the best of one's ability...the council, in its decree on justification, states"...since the promulgation of the gospel justification cannot occur without the laver of regeneration or its desire." this would not be baptism of desire.. this would be desire for baptism which is an explicit desire to recieve baptism.. (catechumens) so to say trent defined baptism of desire is false......i do believe in baptism of desire but i want to be clear that trent didnt define it...
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old Dec 22, '04, 8:02 am
DominvsVobiscvm DominvsVobiscvm is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 17, 2004
Posts: 1,211
Religion: Catholic
Send a message via AIM to DominvsVobiscvm Send a message via Yahoo to DominvsVobiscvm
Default Re: council of trent: no baptism of desire

Write coherently, please.

Quote:
since the promulgation of the gospel justification cannot occur without the laver of regeneration or its desire
What part of this don't you understand?

The Church's Tradition holds that this desire can be explicit or implicit. Since this is not contradicted by Trent, what's the problem?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old Dec 22, '04, 8:05 am
marineboy marineboy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: November 8, 2004
Posts: 228
Default Re: council of trent: no baptism of desire

the normal understanding of the word desire is explicit... so u take the normal meaning of the word... its a desire for baptism not baptism of desire
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old Dec 22, '04, 8:15 am
JGC JGC is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: July 27, 2004
Posts: 875
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: council of trent: no baptism of desire

Quote:
Originally Posted by marineboy
one of the earlier post by jgc, who at the end says he is father john hardon

Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.
Servant of God (1914-2000)
http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ481.HTM
__________________
We have seen the true light!
We have found the true faith!
We worship the undivided trinity:
This has been our salvation!






Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old Dec 22, '04, 8:22 am
mercygate mercygate is offline
Forum Elder
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: June 21, 2004
Posts: 15,423
Religion: Catholic via Canterbury
Default Re: council of trent: no baptism of desire

Quote:
Originally Posted by marineboy
the normal understanding of the word desire is explicit... so u take the normal meaning of the word... its a desire for baptism not baptism of desire
In 'normal understanding' "baptism of desire" and "desire of baptism" are equivalent.

Latin anyone?

"Quae quidem translatio post evangelium promulgatum sine lavacro regenerationis aut eius voto fieri non potest, sicut scriptum est: Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua et Spiirtu Sancto, non potest introire in regnum Dei." John. 3:5

. . . without the washing of regeneration or [without the] desire of it [i.e., the washing of regeneration]. . .

Feel better now?
__________________
There are countless millions of Christians who will not accept anything, even Christ, from the Catholic Church. (Frank Sheed)
Tiber Swim Team - Class of 01
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old Dec 22, '04, 8:23 am
mlchance mlchance is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: August 20, 2004
Posts: 5,539
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: council of trent: no baptism of desire

Quote:
Originally Posted by marineboy
its a desire for baptism not baptism of desire


Objection 1. It seems that no man can be saved without Baptism. For our Lord said (John 3:5): "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." But those alone are saved who enter God's kingdom. Therefore none can be saved without Baptism, by which a man is born again of water and the Holy Ghost.

Objection 2. Further, in the book De Eccl. Dogm. xli, it is written: "We believe that no catechumen, though he die in his good works, will have eternal life, except he suffer martyrdom, which contains all the sacramental virtue of Baptism." But if it were possible for anyone to be saved without Baptism, this would be the case specially with catechumens who are credited with good works, for they seem to have the "faith that worketh by charity" (Gal. 5:6). Therefore it seems that none can be saved without Baptism.

Objection 3. Further, as stated above (1; 65, 4), the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation. Now that is necessary "without which something cannot be" (Metaph. v). Therefore it seems that none can obtain salvation without Baptism.

On the contrary, Augustine says (Super Levit. lxxxiv) that "some have received the invisible sanctification without visible sacraments, and to their profit; but though it is possible to have the visible sanctification, consisting in a visible sacrament, without the invisible sanctification, it will be to no profit." Since, therefore, the sacrament of Baptism pertains to the visible sanctification, it seems that a man can obtain salvation without the sacrament of Baptism, by means of the invisible sanctification.

I answer that, The sacrament or Baptism may be wanting to someone in two ways. First, both in reality and in desire; as is the case with those who neither are baptized, nor wished to be baptized: which clearly indicates contempt of the sacrament, in regard to those who have the use of the free-will. Consequently those to whom Baptism is wanting thus, cannot obtain salvation: since neither sacramentally nor mentally are they incorporated in Christ, through Whom alone can salvation be obtained.

Secondly, the sacrament of Baptism may be wanting to anyone in reality but not in desire: for instance, when a man wishes to be baptized, but by some ill-chance he is forestalled by death before receiving Baptism. And such a man can obtain salvation without being actually baptized, on account of his desire for Baptism, which desire is the outcome of "faith that worketh by charity," whereby God, Whose power is not tied to visible sacraments, sanctifies man inwardly. Hence Ambrose says of Valentinian, who died while yet a catechumen: "I lost him whom I was to regenerate: but he did not lose the grace he prayed for."

Reply to Objection 1. As it is written (1 Kgs. 16:7), "man seeth those things that appear, but the Lord beholdeth the heart." Now a man who desires to be "born again of water and the Holy Ghost" by Baptism, is regenerated in heart though not in body. thus the Apostle says (Rm. 2:29) that "the circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not of men but of God."

Reply to Objection 2. No man obtains eternal life unless he be free from all guilt and debt of punishment. Now this plenary absolution is given when a man receives Baptism, or suffers martyrdom: for which reason is it stated that martyrdom "contains all the sacramental virtue of Baptism," i.e. as to the full deliverance from guilt and punishment. Suppose, therefore, a catechumen to have the desire for Baptism (else he could not be said to die in his good works, which cannot be without "faith that worketh by charity"), such a one, were he to die, would not forthwith come to eternal life, but would suffer punishment for his past sins, "but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire" as is stated 1 Cor. 3:15.

Reply to Objection 3. The sacrament of Baptism is said to be necessary for salvation in so far as man cannot be saved without, at least, Baptism of desire; "which, with God, counts for the deed" (Augustine, Enarr. in Ps. 57).

-- Mark L. Chance, quoting Saint Thomas Aquinas
__________________
Tiber Swim Team - Class of '05
Two errors: to exclude reason, and to exclude all but reason. - Blaise Pascal.
-----
Help throw the bums out. Don't vote for a single incumbent in 2016.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old Dec 22, '04, 8:24 am
Dan-Man916 Dan-Man916 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2004
Posts: 1,311
Religion: Catholic
Send a message via AIM to Dan-Man916
Default Re: council of trent: no baptism of desire

Here is part of what the Catholic Encyclopedia at my parish says:

New Catholic Encyclopedia

Vol 12, Copyright 1967

Reprinted 17 volumes

1981 Jack Heraty & Assoc. Inc, Palatine IL




Under the heading:
SALVATION, NECESSITY OF THE CHURCH FOR

With the discovery of America, the whole problem of salvation through the Church once more confronted theologians in its concrete reality. If outside the Christian faith there is no salvation, what had been the fate of the peoples living in the Western Hemisphere? The positions taken by the reformers and Catholic theologians in this regard were diametrically opposed. The attitude of the reformers was one of pessimism. Luther held that explicit faith in Christ was absolutely necessary for salvation, and that therefore all pagans who had been excluded from the benefit of the Church's preaching were the object of God's reprobation and predestined to hell. The Catholic position was more optimistic. Some theologians, in the lack of a better solution, suggested that the doctrine on *Limbo might be applied to adults who had lived all their lives according to the precepts of natural law and died invincibly ignorant of the Church.



The official position in this regard, however, was elaborated in the Council of Trent. Defining the doctrine on grace, the Council insisted on its necessity and priority in the order of *justification and salvation; but it asserted that the infidel, under the influence of actual grace, can make a progressive preparation for faith and thus God will eventually lead him to justification and salvation. A question, however, still remained to be answered: how can an infidel, even with the help of grace, make an act of faith if he is ignorant of revelation and has not been reached by the preaching of the Church? .Here Suarez's opinion became generally accepted, stating that implicit faith (fides in voto) in Christ and the Trinity would suffice wherever the gospel has not yet been divulged.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old Dec 22, '04, 8:26 am
mlchance mlchance is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: August 20, 2004
Posts: 5,539
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: council of trent: no baptism of desire

And, since Thomas Aquinas isn't the be all and end all of Catholic doctrine, we can always turn to the Catechism:

1258 The Church has always held the firm conviction that those who suffer death for the sake of the faith without having received Baptism are baptized by their death for and with Christ. This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament.


1259
For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit desire to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament.

-- Mark L. Chance.
__________________
Tiber Swim Team - Class of '05
Two errors: to exclude reason, and to exclude all but reason. - Blaise Pascal.
-----
Help throw the bums out. Don't vote for a single incumbent in 2016.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old Dec 22, '04, 10:22 am
marineboy marineboy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: November 8, 2004
Posts: 228
Default Re: council of trent: no baptism of desire

in latin there is no understanding that baptism of desire and desire for baptism are the same...WHO TOLD U THAT??? WHOEVER DID WAS WRONG...baptism of desire is an implicit desire that is the defintion of the term---DESIRE FOR BAPTISM IS AN EXPLICIT DESIRE... U USE THE NORMAL USAGE OF THE WORD, IN THIS CASE DESIRE, UNLESS THERE IS A REASON NOT TO...the normal use of desire for something is explicit..example: u are thirsty so u desire a pepsi... so someone explicitly desires baptism... it is different than baptism of desire
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old Dec 22, '04, 10:37 am
mlchance mlchance is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: August 20, 2004
Posts: 5,539
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: council of trent: no baptism of desire

Please, again, by all that is right and decent, make an honest effort to write coherently. If it seems that people consistently don't understand you, maybe it's because you consistently can't communicate clearly.

Compare this...

Quote:
Originally Posted by marineboy
in latin there is no understanding that baptism of desire and desire for baptism are the same...WHO TOLD U THAT??? WHOEVER DID WAS WRONG...baptism of desire is an implicit desire that is the defintion of the term---DESIRE FOR BAPTISM IS AN EXPLICIT DESIRE... U USE THE NORMAL USAGE OF THE WORD, IN THIS CASE DESIRE, UNLESS THERE IS A REASON NOT TO...the normal use of desire for something is explicit..example: u are thirsty so u desire a pepsi... so someone explicitly desires baptism... it is different than baptism of desire
...with this:
Quote:
In Latin, there is no understanding that "baptism of desire" and "desire for baptism" are the same. Who told you that? Whoever did was wrong. Baptism of desire is an implicit desire. That is the definition of the term. Desire for baptism is an explicit desire. You use the normal usage of the word, in this case "desire," unless there is a reason not to. The normal use of "desire" for something is explicit. Example: You are thirsty, so you desire a Pepsi. So someone explicitly desires baptism. It is different that baptism of desire.
See the difference? Now, admittedly, the second paragraph isn't a whole lot clearer, but it is a step in the right direction.

Now, please go back and read the posts above, particularly the ones that reference the Catechism and Summa Theologiae. It has been the Church's consistent teaching that someone who dies without the sacrament of Baptism can still enter Heaven by virtue of their desire for Baptism. As Aquinas observed, quoting Augustine of Hippo: "The sacrament of Baptism is said to be necessary for salvation in so far as man cannot be saved without, at least, Baptism of desire; 'which, with God, counts for the deed' (Augustine, Enarr. in Ps. 57)."

-- Mark L. Chance.
__________________
Tiber Swim Team - Class of '05
Two errors: to exclude reason, and to exclude all but reason. - Blaise Pascal.
-----
Help throw the bums out. Don't vote for a single incumbent in 2016.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old Dec 22, '04, 10:44 am
mercygate mercygate is offline
Forum Elder
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: June 21, 2004
Posts: 15,423
Religion: Catholic via Canterbury
Default Re: council of trent: no baptism of desire

Quote:
Originally Posted by marineboy
in latin there is no understanding that baptism of desire and desire for baptism are the same...WHO TOLD U THAT??? WHOEVER DID WAS WRONG...baptism of desire is an implicit desire that is the defintion of the term---DESIRE FOR BAPTISM IS AN EXPLICIT DESIRE... U USE THE NORMAL USAGE OF THE WORD, IN THIS CASE DESIRE, UNLESS THERE IS A REASON NOT TO...the normal use of desire for something is explicit..example: u are thirsty so u desire a pepsi... so someone explicitly desires baptism... it is different than baptism of desire
How good is your Latin?
__________________
There are countless millions of Christians who will not accept anything, even Christ, from the Catholic Church. (Frank Sheed)
Tiber Swim Team - Class of 01
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old Dec 22, '04, 10:53 am
marineboy marineboy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: November 8, 2004
Posts: 228
Default Re: council of trent: no baptism of desire

well mr .chance i will try to type slower..i am not denying baptism of desire--i believe in it.. but trent was not talking about baptism of desire in its decree on justification...it was talking about an explicit desire for water baptism.. baptism of desire is implict.. baptism of desire and desire for baptism are totally different.. my latin is very good by the way
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old Dec 22, '04, 10:59 am
JKirkLVNV JKirkLVNV is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: October 17, 2004
Posts: 9,411
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: council of trent: no baptism of desire

Quote:
Originally Posted by marineboy
in latin there is no understanding that baptism of desire and desire for baptism are the same...WHO TOLD U THAT??? WHOEVER DID WAS WRONG...baptism of desire is an implicit desire that is the defintion of the term---DESIRE FOR BAPTISM IS AN EXPLICIT DESIRE... U USE THE NORMAL USAGE OF THE WORD, IN THIS CASE DESIRE, UNLESS THERE IS A REASON NOT TO...the normal use of desire for something is explicit..example: u are thirsty so u desire a pepsi... so someone explicitly desires baptism... it is different than baptism of desire
And why do you keep harping on the same thing over and over again? Why do you persist in making claims clearly at odds with the CCC and, by extension, the Pope and the Magisterium and then don't get why no one, other than some fringe rad trads, agrees with you? We know you believe that unless one is formally united with the Catholic Church, they are bound for hell. WE UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. It's against the clear teaching of the Church, BUT WE GET IT. You've been answered by some excellent apologetics and yet you keep after it. You're as bad as the fundies who come on to inform us as to why the Church is the Great Whore of Babylon. They're beating a dead horse and so are you. Both you and they should write the Holy See, they to explain to the Holy Father why he's going to Hell, and you to explain to him why THEY'RE going to Hell, because there isn't anyone on these forums who can help either of you out with this. You're wrong, you've been shown to be wrong, you've been shown to be wrong repeatedly. We can accept that you don't believe you're wrong, but really, you've crossed over into the realm of boring: the party guest that one moves away from as rapidly as possible. May I suggest that, like Popes Pius XIII and Michael I, you leave us to our reprobation?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old Dec 22, '04, 11:05 am
marineboy marineboy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: November 8, 2004
Posts: 228
Default Re: council of trent: no baptism of desire

well u obviously have not read anything i wrote..i just said two posts ago that i beleive in baptism of desire....i was jsut pointing out that that is not what trent was saying... where have i ever said in any of my threads that i beleive the teaching of the church is that only formal members go to heaven ...NO WHERE DID I EVER SAY THAT...so ur just making straw man arguments...what i have said was is that non-catholics can be saved but only if they are invincibly ignorant so before u type something like that why dont u check ur facts out...so if ur not goin to be fair in ur posts why dont u just not post at all---
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old Dec 22, '04, 11:14 am
JKirkLVNV JKirkLVNV is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: October 17, 2004
Posts: 9,411
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: council of trent: no baptism of desire

Quote:
Originally Posted by marineboy
well u obviously have not read anything i wrote..i just said two posts ago that i beleive in baptism of desire....i was jsut pointing out that that is not what trent was saying... where have i ever said in any of my threads that i beleive the teaching of the church is that only formal members go to heaven ...NO WHERE DID I EVER SAY THAT...so ur just making straw man arguments...what i have said was is that non-catholics can be saved but only if they are invincibly ignorant so before u type something like that why dont u check ur facts out...so if ur not goin to be fair in ur posts why dont u just not post at all---
Dude: Check out all of the threads you've started. They seem to have a common theme. How dumb do you think any person here is? If you don't believe that one has to be formally Catholic, you certainly have fooled most of us. And for pity's sake, for our sake, learn to type. Perhaps it would make your meaning more clear.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Apologetics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search Thread
Search Thread:

Advanced Search
Display

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump




Prayer Intentions

Most Active Groups
6460CAF Prayer Warriors Support Group
Last by: oldgraymare2
5958Let's empty Purgatory
Last by: RJB
5070Petitions Before the Blessed Sacrament
Last by: grateful_child
4615Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother
Last by: DesertSister62
4218Poems and Reflections
Last by: tonyg
4052OCD/Scrupulosity Group
Last by: Popeye14
3286For seniors and shut- ins
Last by: GLam8833
3259Catholic Vegetarians & Vegans
Last by: 4elise
2807Let's Empty Purgatory 2
Last by: RomanoAmerio
2443SOLITUDE
Last by: tuscany



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 7:42 am.

Home RSS Feeds - Home - Archive - Top

Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.