Clicks680
rhemes1582
7

Catholic research Baptism of Desire

A recent study shows a footnote in the 1st Roman Catholic New Testament in English Anno 1582 with respect to baptism of desire.
St. John Gospel Chapter 3 verse 5 Jesus answered, Amen, Amen, I say to thee, Unless a man be born again of water and the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

The footnote in 1st Catholic N.T. in English 1582 and reprinted in several editions up too 1792 states.
-Baptism in water necessary to salvation.- 5. Born again of water.] As no man can enter into this world nor have his life and being in the same, except he be born of his carnal parents: no more can a man enter into the life and state of grace which is in Christ, or attain to life everlasting, unless he be born and baptized of water and the Holy Ghost. Whereby we see first, this Sacrament to be called our regeneration or second birth, in respect of our natural and carnal which was before. Secondly, that this sacrament consisteth of an external element of water, and internal virtue of the Holy Spirit: Wherein it excelleth John's baptism, which had the external element, but not the spiritual grace. Thirdly, that no man can enter into the Kingdom of God, nor into the fellowship of Holy Church, without it.

Whereby, the Pelgians and Calvinists be condemned, that promise life everlasting to young children that die without baptism, and all other that think only their faith to serve, or the external element of water superfluous or not necessary: our Savior's words being plain and general. Though in this case, God which hath not bound his grace, in respect of his own freedom, to any Sacrament, may and doth accept them as baptized, which either are martyred before they could be baptized, or else depart this life with vow and desire to have that Sacrament, but by some remediless necessity could not obtain it. Lastly, it is proved that this Sacrament giveth grace ex opere operator, that is, of the work itself (which all Protestants deny) because it so breedeth our spiritual life in God, as our carnal birth giveth the life of the world.
rhemes1582 yesterday

Lionel The notes in the Rhemes 1582 New Testament state
Though in this case, God which hath not bound his grace, in respect of his own freedom, to any Sacrament, may and doth accept them as baptized, which either are martyred before they could be baptized, or else depart this life with vow and desire to have that Sacrament, but by some remediless necessity could not …More
rhemes1582 yesterday

Lionel The notes in the Rhemes 1582 New Testament state
Though in this case, God which hath not bound his grace, in respect of his own freedom, to any Sacrament, may and doth accept them as baptized, which either are martyred before they could be baptized, or else depart this life with vow and desire to have that Sacrament, but by some remediless necessity could not obtain it.

It is referring to a hypothetical case and not someone personally known.

__________________________________

Clearly these souls mentioned in the notes have not yet become visible members of the Catholic Church, because as the notes state { by some REMEDILESS necessity could NOT obtain it.

So you agree that they are not known, they are invisible ?
_________________________________

YET the same note states : Though in this case, God which hath not bound his grace, in respect of his own freedom, to any Sacrament, may and doth accept them as baptized, which either are martyred before they could be baptized,

Are they still unknown and invisible for you? They are for me.

____________________________

Lionel You claim to find the mistake when you state: ( Here is the mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member...
The Letter assumes the baptism of desire is visble and personally known. So it says not every one needs to be incorporated into the Church as a member
.)
The mistake is not in the document, The letter as I read it is not in error when compared withe the note printed 435 years ago.

The Catechism of Pope Pius X says every one needs to be a member of the Church for salvation. It does not state that being saved in invincible ignorance etc is an exception. The text of the Letter is saying the opposite.

Cantate Dominio, Council of Florence 1441 says every one needs to be a member. The Letter is saying the opposite.

O.K if every body does not need to be incorporated into the Church then the question is why?

Why? Since for the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 there are exceptions. The baptism of desire etc were exceptions .Why were they exceptions since they referred to known cases.


______________________________________
The error lies in Your argument & assumption here when you claim wrongly "


I support the Catechism of Pope Pius X and the Council of Florence 1441. The Letter which you support contradicts them both.I am not saying any thing new. The Letter has come out with a new theory based on the baptism of desire being personally known and a visible exception to the traditional teaching on exclusive salvation in the Church.

______________________________________

So it says not every one needs to be incorporated into the Church as a member" Lionel you are applying your assumption, wrongly to make this document say something it does not.

I knew you could say this so I posted the whole document for you.I did not post my interpretation. I simply highligted the heretical passage in red.
___________________________________________

The letter is in agreement with the defined requirements for baptism of desire, to be met as stated in the notes of the 1582 N.T.

Yes.As a possibility,as a theory but not as a known case.This was the wrong inference of the Letter.

Well, if it was only a possibility, a hypothetical case then please tell me how could this imaginary case be an explicit exception to all needing to be incorporated into the Church as members for example in 2017?
As a layman , husband and father and confirmed Catholic I agree with the notes published in this example of the 1st Roman Catholic New Testament with respect to the Baptism of desire..
You've missed the point.The baptism of desire is not an issue for me. I am not using the St.Benedict Center,U.S apologetics.
I accept the baptism of desire but for me it refers to invisible cases in 2016.
I am not …
More
As a layman , husband and father and confirmed Catholic I agree with the notes published in this example of the 1st Roman Catholic New Testament with respect to the Baptism of desire..
You've missed the point.The baptism of desire is not an issue for me. I am not using the St.Benedict Center,U.S apologetics.
I accept the baptism of desire but for me it refers to invisible cases in 2016.
I am not offering a new theology or theory. I am only making a simple observation.
The baptism of desire refers to invisible cases in 2016.
It refers to unknown cases in 2016.

______________________________________
I also conform to the teaching of the Catholic Church fathers on the same subject.
The Church Fathers who mentioned the baptism of desire did not state that it refers to personally known cases of persons saved without the baptism of water.
This had to be inferred by the liberal theologians over the last hundred years or so.
This is you inference. It is not mine.
We both are Catholics.
It's the inference of Cardinal Ratzinger. It was not the inference of St. Thomas Aquinas.
It is the inference of the Jesuits today. It was not the inference of the Jesuits in the 16th century.
All claim to be Catholics.
rhemes1582
Lionel The notes in the Rhemes 1582 New Testament state
Though in this case, God which hath not bound his grace, in respect of his own freedom, to any Sacrament, may and doth accept them as baptized, which either are martyred before they could be baptized, or else depart this life with vow and desire to have that Sacrament, but by some remediless necessity could not obtain it.

Clearly these soul…More
Lionel The notes in the Rhemes 1582 New Testament state
Though in this case, God which hath not bound his grace, in respect of his own freedom, to any Sacrament, may and doth accept them as baptized, which either are martyred before they could be baptized, or else depart this life with vow and desire to have that Sacrament, but by some remediless necessity could not obtain it.

Clearly these souls mentioned in the notes have not yet become visible members of the Catholic Church, because as the notes state { by some REMEDILESS necessity could NOT obtain it. YET the same note states : Though in this case, God which hath not bound his grace, in respect of his own freedom, to any Sacrament, may and doth accept them as baptized, which either are martyred before they could be baptized,
Lionel You claim to find the mistake when you state: ( Here is the mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member...
The Letter assumes the baptism of desire is visble and personally known. So it says not every one needs to be incorporated into the Church as a member
.)
The mistake is not in the document, The letter as I read it is not in error when compared withe the note printed 435 years ago.
The error lies in Your argument & assumption here when you claim wrongly "
So it says not every one needs to be incorporated into the Church as a member" Lionel you are applying your assumption, wrongly to make this document say something it does not.
The letter is in agreement with the defined requirements for baptism of desire, to be met as stated in the notes of the 1582 N.T.
rhemes1582
As a layman , husband and father and confirmed Catholic I agree with the notes published in this example of the 1st Roman Catholic New Testament with respect to the Baptism of desire.
I also conform to the teaching of the Catholic Church fathers on the same subject.
Here is the mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member...
The Letter assumes the baptism of desire is visble and personally known. So it says not every one needs to be incorporated into the Church as a member.
Is the baptism of desire also visible for you as …
More
Here is the mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member...
The Letter assumes the baptism of desire is visble and personally known. So it says not every one needs to be incorporated into the Church as a member.
Is the baptism of desire also visible for you as it was for the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 ?
It is not for me.


LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE

From the Headquarters of the Holy Office, Aug. 8, 1949.
Your Excellency:
This Supreme Sacred Congregation has followed very attentively the rise and the course of the grave controversy stirred up by certain associates of "St. Benedict Center" and "Boston College" in regard to the interpretation of that axiom: "Outside the Church there is no salvation."
After having examined all the documents that are necessary or useful in this matter, among them information from your Chancery, as well as appeals and reports in which the associates of "St. Benedict Center" explain their opinions and complaints, and also many other documents pertinent to the controversy, officially collected, the same Sacred Congregation is convinced that the unfortunate controversy arose from the fact that the axiom, "outside the Church there is no salvation," was not correctly understood and weighed, and that the same controversy was rendered more bitter by serious disturbance of discipline arising from the fact that some of the associates of the institutions mentioned above refused reverence and obedience to legitimate authorities.
Accordingly, the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Cardinals of this Supreme Congregation, in a plenary session held on Wednesday, July 27, 1949, decreed, and the august Pontiff in an audience on the following Thursday, July 28, 1949, deigned to give his approval, that the following explanations pertinent to the doctrine, and also that invitations and exhortations relevant to discipline be given:
We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those things which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or Tradition, and are proposed by the Church to be believed as divinely revealed, not only through solemn judgment but also through the ordinary and universal teaching office (<Denzinger>, n. 1792).
Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.
However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church.
Now, in the first place, the Church teaches that in this matter there is question of a most strict command of Jesus Christ. For He explicitly enjoined on His apostles to teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever He Himself had commanded (Matt. 28: 19-20).
Now, among the commandments of Christ, that one holds not the least place by which we are commanded to be incorporated by baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself in a visible manner governs the Church on earth.
Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.
Not only did the Savior command that all nations should enter the Church, but He also decreed the Church to be a means of salvation without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory.
In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the sacrament of regeneration and in reference to the sacrament of penance (<Denzinger>, nn. 797, 807).

The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.

However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.
These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943, <On the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ> (AAS, Vol. 35, an. 1943, p. 193 ff.). For in this letter the Sovereign Pontiff clearly distinguishes between those who are actually incorporated into the Church as members, and those who are united to the Church only by desire.
Discussing the members of which the Mystical Body is-composed here on earth, the same august Pontiff says: "Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed."
Toward the end of this same encyclical letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who "are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire," and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but on the other hand states that they are in a condition "in which they cannot be sure of their salvation" since "they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church" (AAS, 1. c., p. 243). With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally well in every religion (cf. Pope Pius IX, Allocution, <Singulari quadam>, in <Denzinger>, n. 1641 ff.; also Pope Pius IX in the encyclical letter, <Quanto conficiamur moerore>, in <Denzinger>, n. 1677).
But it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: "For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him" (Heb. 11:6). The Council of Trent declares (Session VI, chap. 8): "Faith is the beginning of man's salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and attain to the fellowship of His children" (Denzinger, n. 801).
From what has been said it is evident that those things which are proposed in the periodical <From the Housetops>, fascicle 3, as the genuine teaching of the Catholic Church are far from being such and are very harmful both to those within the Church and those without.
From these declarations which pertain to doctrine, certain conclusions follow which regard discipline and conduct, and which cannot be unknown to those who vigorously defend the necessity by which all are bound' of belonging to the true Church and of submitting to the authority of the Roman Pontiff and of the Bishops "whom the Holy Ghost has placed . . . to rule the Church" (Acts 20:28).
Hence, one cannot understand how the St. Benedict Center can consistently claim to be a Catholic school and wish to be accounted such, and yet not conform to the prescriptions of canons 1381 and 1382 of the Code of Canon Law, and continue to exist as a source of discord and rebellion against ecclesiastical authority and as a source of the disturbance of many consciences.
Furthermore, it is beyond understanding how a member of a religious Institute, namely Father Feeney, presents himself as a "Defender of the Faith," and at the same time does not hesitate to attack the catechetical instruction proposed by lawful authorities, and has not even feared to incur grave sanctions threatened by the sacred canons because of his serious violations of his duties as a religious, a priest, and an ordinary member of the Church.
Finally, it is in no wise to be tolerated that certain Catholics shall claim for themselves the right to publish a periodical, for the purpose of spreading theological doctrines, without the permission of competent Church authority, called the "<imprimatur,>" which is prescribed by the sacred canons.
Therefore, let them who in grave peril are ranged against the Church seriously bear in mind that after "Rome has spoken" they cannot be excused even by reasons of good faith. Certainly, their bond and duty of obedience toward the Church is much graver than that of those who as yet are related to the Church "only by an unconscious desire." Let them realize that they are children of the Church, lovingly nourished by her with the milk of doctrine and the sacraments, and hence, having heard the clear voice of their Mother, they cannot be excused from culpable ignorance, and therefore to them apply without any restriction that principle: submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.
In sending this letter, I declare my profound esteem, and remain,
Your Excellency's most devoted,
F. Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani.
A. Ottaviani, Assessor.
(Private); Holy Office, 8 Aug., 1949.
The baptism of desire is no more an issue.The issue is : is the baptism of desire an exception or relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?
For the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 it was an exception. So the Letter states not everyone needs to be incorporated into the Church, while the text of the dogma EENS says the opposite.
For me the baptism of desire refers to a hypothetical case. …More
The baptism of desire is no more an issue.The issue is : is the baptism of desire an exception or relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus?
For the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 it was an exception. So the Letter states not everyone needs to be incorporated into the Church, while the text of the dogma EENS says the opposite.
For me the baptism of desire refers to a hypothetical case. So it is not an exception or relevant to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Similarly LG 16 , LG 14 which mentions being saved in invincible ignorance or the case of the catechumen, are not explicit. So Vatican Council II is not a rupture with Tradition for me.Is it for you?
rhemes1582
With respect to baptism of desire please notice
Though in this case, God which hath not bound his grace, in respect of his own freedom, to any Sacrament, may and doth accept them as baptized, which either are martyred before they could be baptized, or else depart this life with vow and desire to have that Sacrament, but by some remediless necessity could not obtain it.