Bob Sungenis makes an error

Bob Sungenis, on his web site was asked whether water baptism was absolutley necessary for salvation. His response was that all we know is that water baptism saves, the rest we should leave to God --well Mr. Sungenis that is wrong–we know from the council of trent that one be Justified by the desire for baptism (justification=state of Grace) and again, I have said this many other times before, the Holy Office in dealig with Leonard feeney stated that," Faith that leads to salvation, NEED NOT ALWAYS BE EXPLICIT." The letter also quotes the council of Trent 's decree on justification about the “desire for baptism.” The Holy Office’s interpretation is a little more reliable then you or me or even Bob Sungenis. The other problem is that in an earlier question Bob says that baptim of desire is an infallible teaching of the Church.(which I agree with, at the very least it is infallible by virtue of the ordinary magisterium–constant teaching) Which is it BOBBy?? Are you trying to be the “all star apologist.?”

Are you trying to kiss up to those so called traditionalists?? Tell those feenyites to go shove it!!! (excuse me) THEY ARE WRONG!!! PLAIN AND SIMPLE!!! DONT CAVE IN TO THEM–WOW I BETTER STOP BEFORE THEY REPRIMAND ME, BUT YOU ALL GET THE POINT.

If you could explain how his two statements contradicted each other, that would be greatly helpful before you sling accusations at him.
Unless you want to defame me as well, since I am one of those “Feenyite Traditionalists”. I guess I should go shove it now? Really, there’s no need to be so rude. Why can’t you say “Sungenis made an error, and here’s why…”, without getting into all this? Frankly, I don’t find your behavior very Christ-like.

mARINEBOY, the only dead set guaranteed way on that journey is water baptism, Baptism of desire is so subjective and known to God alone that, please tell me how ‘Bobs’ statement is actually dead set wrong. If baptism of desire is so wonderfully obvious , then there is no need for water baptism is there.

obviously you two didnt read my post–Sungeni’ earlier in his answer to a question said that baptism of desire was infallible—now it appears as if he is saying he doesnt know—also if ur a feeneyite ur in error at best and a heretic at worst–Trent said one can be in the state of grace by baptism or its desire–STATE OF GRACE–and the Holy office’s letter, in dealing with feeney, said faith can be implicit–and refers to the council of Trent’s “desire”----your interpretation over the Holy Office’s???(go back and read the letter) hmm I think not!!! so wake up people!!!

I say this tongue in cheek because you mentioned the Council of Trent which I have found is a mistake within these forums. So please take this comment for what it is, sarcasm for the sake of making a point about the truths of the church not changing with the times.

[quote=marineboy]Bob Sungenis, on his web site was asked whether water baptism was absolutley necessary for salvation. His response was that all we know is that water baptism saves, the rest we should leave to God --well Mr. Sungenis that is wrong–we know from the council of trent that one be Justified by the desire for baptism (justification=state of Grace) and again, I have said this many other times before, the Holy Office in dealig with Leonard feeney stated that," Faith that leads to salvation, NEED NOT ALWAYS BE EXPLICIT." The letter also quotes the council of Trent 's decree on justification about the “desire for baptism.” The Holy Office’s interpretation is a little more reliable then you or me or even Bob Sungenis. The other problem is that in an earlier question Bob says that baptim of desire is an infallible teaching of the Church.(which I agree with, at the very least it is infallible by virtue of the ordinary magisterium–constant teaching) Which is it BOBBy?? Are you trying to be the “all star apologist.?”
[/quote]

Well the council of trent made that decree because some group people back then were saying the opposite. What was the position in 1969 (and as of today)?

[quote=marineboy]obviously you two didnt read my post–Sungeni’ earlier in his answer to a question said that baptism of desire was infallible—now it appears as if he is saying he doesnt know—also if ur a feeneyite ur in error at best and a heretic at worst–Trent said one can be in the state of grace by baptism or its desire–STATE OF GRACE–and the Holy office’s letter, in dealing with feeney, said faith can be implicit–and refers to the council of Trent’s “desire”----your interpretation over the Holy Office’s???(go back and read the letter) hmm I think not!!! so wake up people!!!
[/quote]

It “appears” as if he is saying he doesn’t know- do you think Sungenis is so stupid that he accidentally contradicts himself over whether the decree on baptism of desire was infallible? Good grief, man. I read your post- I don’t know if you did. “His response was that all we know is that water baptism saves, the rest we should leave to God”

Yeah, you know why? Because the Church has never formally defined whether baptism of desire must be vocalized, or if it can be implicit. If it can be implicit, then we cannot tell who receives a baptism of desire, and thus we leave it to God.

By the way, I noticed your comment on the “question” thread: “hey no offense but that’s a stupid question”

Call the question stupid, without stating your reason for doing so? Please, let’s grow up.

well genius I never called Sungenis stupid–or even implied it–I just pointed out the facT that in an earlier answer on his web site, he said baptism of desire is infallible. Now he seems to say he doesnt know. the church has said that you can be in the state of grace with the “desire for baptism.” The holy office, I say this again, dealing with Feeney mentions implicit faith and salvation, and references the council of Trent on this --hello?? Also I did go back and explain why the other question was stupid!!! it is stupid because it implies that God would ask someone to do something unjust—ITS IMPOSSIBLE—AND ITS OBVUIOUS THAT GOD CANT DO THAT—

lighten up you guys… afterall, marine means water, so the guy should know what he is harp(oon)ing about.

sorry… just some early-in-the-day attempt at humor/sarcasm

Seriously, though, Sungenis probably forgets more than we all “know”. And since no one is right all the time, maybe his 90++% irks other people, It does have that effect on some apologists at this site/CA. Makes for good reading, though.

sungenis doesnt irk me I was just pointing out his apparent contradiction–one answer he says Baptism of desire is infallible the other he seems to say he doesnt know.–that irks me!!!

Per Sungenis site:

“Baptism of Desire is an infallible teaching of the Council of Trent. According to Trent it procures Justification in the same way that the laver of water procures Justification. This means that someone can be Justified, and enter heaven, without receiving the actual water of Baptism. This is why the Council put the word “or” between Baptism of Desire and the laver of water, not “and.” Those who try to circumvent this teaching by saying that Baptism of Desire only “justifies” but does not provide “salvation,” are introducing a distinction the Church has never made between justification and salvation. Unfortunately, the Council did not delineate to whom the Baptism of Desire should be applied, and neither has the Church since then. Some say it refers only to catechumens, but this has never been stated by any official Church dogma, although it is certainly true that catechumens would have the first priority. Since Trent left the question open to whom the Baptism of Desire can be applied, then we must also leave it open. Consequently, it is only for the Church to decide, if she so chooses, as to when Baptism of Desire is applicable. Until then, we leave the determining as to who is saved and not saved totally in the hands of God, for that is His exclusive realm, not ours. If not, then we may find ourselves in the unenviable position of keeping out of the kingdom those God may want, and thus find ourselves on the outside looking in (Matthew 23:13)”

Robert Sungenis
Catholic Apologetics Intl.

Come now,
We step all over ourselves trying to make orthodoxy out of things that the Vatican says. This one is not that difficult.

  1. We know with certitude who (especially those we witness) that have received water Baptism, especially infants and those on whom the Church has a Certificate of Baptism…

  2. We have NO certitude (personal knowledge) who has received Baptism of Desire.

Therefore, only God knows. The very point of Sungenis. We leave it up to God. You cannot declare a person as having a Baptism of Desire as it only gives its effect at death. Period.
This being the case, any declaration of receipt of Baptism of Desire is SUBJECTIVE, not objective and becomes speculation.
That is why Baptism of Desire does not open the Sacrament of Holy Communion to a person.

Continued from Forum Crash# 9999:
and Prev post:
So, in the light of his statement on belief in BOD, this is the only valid way to “interpret” what he later said.

hEY ALL read that post again–the one that quotes from BOb’s wEb site—then go baCK and look at his current answer to the question ===he doesnt say anything about baptism of desire–he says wE dont know??? like i said eARLIER it seems like sungenis is trying to appease those traditionalists or are clearly in error—IN FACT IF YOU GO BACK AND READ HIS ANSWER HE SOUNDS LIKE A REAL WIMP IN MY OPINION!!! C’MON BOBBY DONT CAVE BROTHER DONT CAVE!!! BE CONSISTENT WILL YA!!!

[quote=marineboy]HE SOUNDS LIKE A REAL WIMP IN MY OPINION!!!
[/quote]

You should be so wimpy…

Can you share some of your background with us, so we know where your opinions might be coming from? Your bio only has a N/A in the information box,

Be truthful now, I don’t want you to have to change anything down the road, and I certainly don’t want someone else to misread you and then call you wimpy

[quote=marineboy]hEY ALL read that post again–the one that quotes from BOb’s wEb site—then go baCK and look at his current answer to the question ===he doesnt say anything about baptism of desire–he says wE dont know??? like i said eARLIER it seems like sungenis is trying to appease those traditionalists or are clearly in error—IN FACT IF YOU GO BACK AND READ HIS ANSWER HE SOUNDS LIKE A REAL WIMP IN MY OPINION!!! C’MON BOBBY DONT CAVE BROTHER DONT CAVE!!! BE CONSISTENT WILL YA!!!
[/quote]

I hate to be one who corrects inadvertent missing Items, BUT
Exactly what site(s) have you put in your posts? I cannot find any. If this is so monumental to you, then just poke the web site sources, so we can all make out what you are proposing.
In lieu of that you may give us proof of someone in the last say, 150 years who was Baptized by desire.
Thanks.

WELL I DO HAVE A DEGREE(ONLY SAYING IT CAUSE YOU ASKED) IN SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY AND ONE YEAR TOWARDS MY MASTERS BUT WHO ARES–THE BOTTOM LINE IS IS THAT SUNGENIS IN ONE ANSWER SAYS THAT BAPTISM OF DESIRE IS INFALLIBLE—READ HIS NEXT ANSWER PEOPLE—HE THEN SAYS WE DONT KNOW!!! ALL WE KNOW IS THAT WATER BAPTISM SAVES AND WE LEAVE THE REST TO GOD–WELL IF BAPTISM OF DESIRE IS INFALLIBLE–THEN GUEES WHAT TO SAY “THAT’S ALL WE KNOW” IS WRONG!!! PEOPLE GET YOUR HEADS OUT FROM WHERE THE SUN DOESNT SHINE THE MAN CONTRADICTED HIMSELF-----

[quote=marineboy]WELL I DO HAVE A DEGREE(ONLY SAYING IT CAUSE YOU ASKED) IN SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY AND ONE YEAR TOWARDS MY MASTERS BUT WHO ARES–THE BOTTOM LINE IS IS THAT SUNGENIS IN ONE ANSWER SAYS THAT BAPTISM OF DESIRE IS INFALLIBLE—READ HIS NEXT ANSWER PEOPLE—HE THEN SAYS WE DONT KNOW!!! ALL WE KNOW IS THAT WATER BAPTISM SAVES AND WE LEAVE THE REST TO GOD–WELL IF BAPTISM OF DESIRE IS INFALLIBLE–THEN GUEES WHAT TO SAY “THAT’S ALL WE KNOW” IS WRONG!!! PEOPLE GET YOUR HEADS OUT FROM WHERE THE SUN DOESNT SHINE THE MAN CONTRADICTED HIMSELF-----
[/quote]

Again, we all wait with bated breath, for you to give a name of someone in the last 550 years who infallibly received Baptism of Desire.
Ready? GO.
ps. Your “systematic” may need some work. Big black letters won’t help. Try Red. That should convince’m. If not, I’m outa ideas for your “system”.

What does that have to do with anything—we know from Trent, and Bob’s own web site, that the Churches teaches it–my point was that you cant simply say(AS SLOPPY SUNGENIS DID) “all we know is that water baptism gets one to heaven”–CASUE WE KNOW THAT DESIRE FOR BAPTISM JUSTIFIES AND PUTS ONE IN THE STATE OF GRACE GENIUS!!! SO YOUR QUESTON DOESNT DEAL WITH MY ASSERTION–BUT TO ANSWER IT–WE CANT SAY FOR SURE WHO SPECIFICALLY HAS RECIEVED IT, BUT AGAN GENIUS WE KNOW IT EXISTS

[quote=marineboy]What does that have to do with anything—we know from Trent, and Bob’s own web site, that the Churches teaches it–my point was that you cant simply say(AS SLOPPY SUNGENIS DID) “all we know is that water baptism gets one to heaven”–CASUE WE KNOW THAT DESIRE FOR BAPTISM JUSTIFIES AND PUTS ONE IN THE STATE OF GRACE GENIUS!!! SO YOUR QUESTON DOESNT DEAL WITH MY ASSERTION–BUT TO ANSWER IT–WE CANT SAY FOR SURE WHO SPECIFICALLY HAS RECIEVED IT, BUT AGAN GENIUS WE KNOW IT EXISTS
[/quote]

We know it exists, so does Bob. We just cannot as you admitted, know from first hand evidence.
Here is the site .
Here is the content:
Question 26- Is Baptism Necessary for Everyone to be Saved? Dear Robert Sungenis

I have a few questions in regards to baptism and salvation? I read an ad for a book off a link from Gerry Matatics website called Catholic Treasures that seems to indicate that absolutely no-one who is not baptized can be saved! If this were true, why would millions of Catholics be invoking God’s mercy for them! My question is, in your perception, is it wrong to pray and hope for unbaptized infants who have been aborted? I have seen many pro-life sites who seem to indicated that their souls are interceding before God, and they are with God in the beatific vision! Others, believe they are in limbo, some say possibly still interceding, some say they are not, either a happy or a neutral place, but not in heaven! Someone also told me that St. Augustine believes they are in hell! I have seen you defend the possibiliity of baptism of desire if a candidate is preparing for baptism as a catechuman. So baptism of desire does exist (I respect that you are cautious about the meaning of that)

Also, since many of the old testament saints were not baptized, and they were saved in anticipation of the redemption of Christ, obviously they are exceptions (e.g St. Noah, St. Elijah, and St. Abraham. Even the Blessed Mother’s mom and dad St. Anne and St. Joachim would not have been baptized. We also don’t know if St. Joseph was baptized, and Ithe baptism of John the Baptist was not the same as the Baptism of Jesus anyway! John the Baptist was the friend of the Bridegroom (is he going to be in heaven with the Church?) Now since Vatican II there is much speculation about the salvation of those who have not heard the gospel, and had they been aware they may have accepted it. Many are praying for the tsunami victims in Asia, many who were not baptized or preparing for baptism, does that mean hoping for that God might have mercy on them is entirely futile?

           **R. Sungenis:** Our guiding rule is that Baptism is necessary for salvation. **(Notice he does not exclude ANY of the 3 specfic modes of Baptism)** Anything over and above that, we must leave in the hands of God, and not speculate. We know that God is just, and He will do the perfect thing. **I *would not say*** that it is an impossibility for someone to attain heaven who did not receive water baptism, **(Somehow, that comes across as being POSSIBLE.)** since all things are possible with God, but again, that is God's realm. He is the one doing the saving and damning, not us. Therefore **we should strive to Baptize as many people as we can in obedience to Him** **(Essentially what the CCC says)**, but then leave the destiny of the others to God's inscrutable will.

ps. Did you have a loved one die sans water baptism? Seems curious all this ranting when the question referred to “absolutely no one…”

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.