"Perish the thought that a person Predestined to Eternal Life could be allowed to end this life without the Sacrament of the Mediator." ~ Saint Augustine, Bp. of Hippo
It's well known that St. Augustine taught Baptism of Desire during his life. It's less well appreciated that most scholars hold that toward the end of his life - probably not rejecting his earlier view outright - the Doctor of Grace and of Predestination also held that every justified catechumen would also receive Water Baptism.
Karl Rahner, looking desperately to find some support for his novel and heretical "salvation of anonymous Christians who reject Christ" theory, is himself compelled to admit, "...we have to admit...that the testimony of the Fathers, with regard to the possibility of salvation for someone outside the Church, is very weak. Certainly even the ancient Church knew that the grace of God can be found also outside the Church and even before Faith. But the view that such divine grace can lead man to his final salvation without leading him first into the visible Church, is something, at any rate, which met with very little approval in the ancient Church."
And Rahner also writes, "In fact, even St. Augustine, in his last (anti-pelagian) period, no longer maintained the possibility of a baptism by desire." https://catholicvox.blogspot.com/2018/12/bishop-barron-denies-faith.html
This last part is not necessarily true. For e.g. St. Augustine says Cornelius (a catechumen first who was later Baptized also) was filled with the Holy Spirit before Baptism (cf. Acts 10:44-48) but also that he was Baptized as well. Actually, both St. Thomas and St. Alphonsus also, Doctors famous for teaching Baptism of Desire, appeal to the example of Cornelius, to show God brings God-fearing pagans who try to observe the natural law, to the saving Grace and Truth of Jesus Christ. See ""Still we answer the Semipelagians, and say, that infidels who arrive at the use of reason, and are not converted to the Faith, cannot be excused, because though they do not receive sufficient proximate grace, still they are not deprived of remote grace, as a means of becoming converted. But what is this remote grace? St. Thomas explains it, when he says, that if anyone was brought up in the wilds, or even among brute beasts, and if he followed the law of natural reason, to desire what is good, and to avoid what is wicked, we should certainly believe either that God, by an internal inspiration, would reveal to him what he should believe, or would send someone to preach the Faith to him, as he sent Peter to Cornelius ... this grace consists in a certain instruction of the mind, and in a movement of the will, to observe the natural law; and if the infidel cooperates with this movement, observing the precepts of the law of nature, and abstaining from grievous sins, he will certainly receive, through the merits of Jesus Christ, the grace proximately sufficient to embrace the Faith, and save his soul." (The History of Heresies, Refutation 6, #11) https://exlaodicea.wordpress.com/2017/01/23/st-alphonsus-liguori-on-st-thomas-on-the-necessity-of-explicit-faith-in-the-trinity-and-the-redeemer/
Finally, St. Augustine and some other ancient authorities consider it likely that the OT Patriarchs were actually baptized in the Jordan in some way by Christ, and that they who had been detained in limbo up until then, went to Heaven immediately after that. There is the important Gospel of the converted Pharisee Nicodemus, which preserves for us important historical testimony from Pontius Pilate and other sources. "there are many who rose from the dead along with us for the proof of the resurrection of Christ. 5 For we have only three days allowed us from the dead, who arose to celebrate the passover of our Lord with our parents, and to bear our testimony for Christ the Lord, and we have been baptized in the holy river of Jordan." https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/lbob/lbob10.htm Thoughts and Comments?
An article about St. Augustine's views on the subject: https://catholicism.org/baptism-of-desire-its-origin-and-abandonment-in-the-thought-of-saint-augustine.html
Quote from: Brian KellyGo Ye, Preach the Gospel to Every Creature, and Baptize
I wish to preface the following with an affirmation of the extreme importance of this issue in that the conversion of non-Christians to the Catholic Faith, in our day, is no longer considered a mission necessary for their salvation. The mandate of our Savior to "Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned" (Mark 16:15-16), has been supplanted by a new gospel of salvation by sincerity through invincible ignorance. It is my intention to restore at least an appreciation for the zeal of the holy missionaries that went forth to convert the nations to Christ and to baptize the pagans and infidels who accepted the good news that is the Gospel. These missionaries, whose exemplar since the sixteenth century is Saint Francis Xavier, were not distracted by any speculation about a baptism of desire. Xavier baptized several hundred thousand pagans with his own hand. Biographers write that there were so many catechumens waiting to be baptized that assistants had to help him to lift his arm to perform the rite. Saint Francis Xavier never wrote a word about baptism of desire. Rather, he wrote these words from the Far East hoping to reach students aspiring for degrees: "How I would like to go to the universities of Paris and the Sorbonne and address many men who are richer in learning than in zeal, to let them know the great number of souls who, because of their neglect, are deprived of grace and are apt to go to hell. There are millions of nonbelievers who would become Christian if there were missionaries." Was this missioner, considered the greatest after Saint Paul, misinformed? ... Among traditional Catholics who oppose the doctrinal cause of Saint Benedict Center, the vast majority maintain that their opposition is over Father Feeney's rejection of baptism of desire. This has not always been the case, but it has become so more in the past twenty to thirty years. Prior to that, it was the defined doctrine itself, No salvation outside the Church, which disturbed those whom Brother Francis, in his treatise, The Dogma of Faith Defended, called "right-wing liberals." These are the theologians who believed in the infallible authority of the Church, but were embarrassed over the literal sense of the doctrine. "God is all-merciful," they stressed, "most men, surely, will be saved."
Before I present the theological points that follow, which may appear in some places overly-academic, I want to stress what Father Feeney and Brother Francis repeatedly emphasized: God is in charge. He is all-powerful and all merciful. It is He, through His Son, the Word, who "enlightens all men that come into this world" (John 1:19) and who "will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:4). This is His holy will and, with this paternal will, sufficient grace is given to all men to be saved ... The Catholic Church does not proclaim the exclusive salvation of one race or one class of people, but invites every man to the great joy of being united with Christ in the communion of saints.
The Catholic truth is not a sad story for which we need to apologize; it is a proclamation of the greatest good news that could ever be told. No matter how sternly its message is phrased, it is still the one and only hope in the world. Only love and security can afford to be severe. When we say that outside the Church there is no salvation, we are also and at the same time announcing that inside the Church there is salvation. The world already knows the sad part of our story, because the world finds no salvation in the world. The Church does not have to tell the unbelievers that they are in sin and in despair; they know that in the depth of their hearts. What is new to the world in the Christian story is that, through Mary, the gates of heaven are opened, and that we are invited to become brothers of Jesus in the Eternal Kingdom of God. This is not a story which can be told with the subdued and hesitant voice of sentimental theology ...
Saint Augustine taught, as is clear from this article's epigram, that the providence of God would see to it that a justified catechumen would be baptized before death. God alone, in any event, knows which of those, with a votum for baptism and perfect contrition, He has justified. The Church can only assume, as the arm of Christ, the Principal Agent in baptism, that all are in need of receiving the sacramentin order to not only have all sin forgiven and abolished, but to be a member of the Church, the Body of Christ. Anticipating the rejoinder that no one is lost who dies in the state of grace, let me just affirm that I agree. Not only that I agree, but that I submit to this truth as I would a dogma of Faith. The Church, however, allows the faithful the freedom to believe that the providence of God will see to it that every person dying in the state of grace will also be baptized. This preserves the literal sense of Christ's teaching in John 3:5: "Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" and His apostolic mandate to preach and baptize all nations in Mark 16: 15-16.
Quote from: Xavier on January 28, 2019, 12:28:38 AM
Karl Rahner, looking desperately to find some support for his novel and heretical "salvation of anonymous Christians who reject Christ" theory, is himself compelled to admit, "...we have to admit...that the testimony of the Fathers, with regard to the possibility of salvation for someone outside the Church, is very weak. Certainly even the ancient Church knew that the grace of God can be found also outside the Church and even before Faith. But the view that such divine grace can lead man to his final salvation without leading him first into the visible Church, is something, at any rate, which met with very little approval in the ancient Church."
Too bad that Rahner's position is held by vast majority of Traditional Catholic priests who believe that people who die ignorant of Christ can be saved, which concedes the main argument to Rahner. This is what Archbishop Lefebvre believed (he went as far as to say that people can be saved "in false religions, but not by these religions"), this is what Bishop Sanborn, Bishop Fellay, Fr Schmidberger (who wrote that "it is clear that the followers of other religions can be saved under certain conditions") and many others believe. It is no different from Rahner's Anonymous Christianity.
There has been some confusion on the issue, because there remains some questions yet to be clarified, which will be definitively settled in the future. However, it's false that His Excellency Bp. Fellay believes non-Christians can be saved as non-Christians, H.E. made this clear recently in response to a recent document from the Vatican. "And quite recently you have a document published by Cardinal Koch on relations with the Jews (Document of the Pontifical Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews, December 10, 2015). It is a terrible document, completely heretical, which claims that the Jews can be saved without coming through Our Lord (par. 36). Exactly the opposite of what Sacred Scripture teaches us, along with the first pope himself, Saint Peter, who says this to the Jews: "There is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). In other words, there is no other means of being saved except through Our Lord. And here Cardinal Koch thinks that you can make a statement saying the contrary. But, he tells us in black and white (in the Preface): "This is not doctrinal teaching."
But then what game are they playing? They teach without teaching. This causes confusion everywhere. It is a new attitude. Until now it was clear to every Catholic that when Rome speaks: Roma locuta est, causa finita est. Rome speaks, Rome teaches, and that's the end of the discussion. And here they are telling us that, no, "it is intended to be a starting point for further theological thought." In many of his Encyclicals, John Paul II even spoke about "meditations." It is no longer a teaching, it is a "meditation." http://sspx.org/en/can-pastoral-council-be-debatable Similarly, Fr. Laisney said one who is saved by BoD should have the Catholic Faith. So, that is one thing.
The other is that Pope Benedict XVI has clearly been deeply conflicted on the issue, and although His Holiness did not quite come around completely (and for deniers of EENS as traditionally understood, just think how much stronger Mother Church would be in the world if the Roman authorities believed and taught EENS as the Council of Florence does - indeed, liberal ecumenism that seeks to promise salvation without the Church and a modernist dialog that does not want to convert non-Christians would be impossible; not you, of course, Arvinger, I know you believe in the necessity of explicit faith, which is great) to the traditional views of either St. Augustine, St. Thomas or St. Alphonsus, at least he came very close: "After the [Second Vatican] Council, this conviction was definitely abandoned. The result was a two-sided, deep crisis. Without this attentiveness to the salvation, the Faith loses its foundation ... Pope Benedict asks the piercing question that arose after this palpable change of attitude of the Church: "Why should you try to convince the people to accept the Christian faith when they can be saved even without it?"
As to the other consequences of this new attitude in the Church, Catholics themselves, in Benedict's eyes, are less attached to their Faith: If there are those who can save their souls with other means, "why should the Christian be bound to the necessity of the Christian Faith and its morality?" asked the pope. And he concludes: "But if Faith and Salvation are not any more interdependent, even Faith becomes less motivating." Pope Benedict also refutes both the idea of the "anonymous Christian" as developed by Karl Rahner, as well as the indifferentist idea that all religions are equally valuable and helpful to attain eternal life."https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-emeritus-benedict-says-church-is-now-facing-a-two-sided-deep-crisis It may be better to work for Rome to come out of this confusion than to say there is no Pope because of certain erroneous statements in recent Popes. In doctrinal discussions with the SSPX, Rome is willing to recognize a few points have not been properly presented. It remains for SSPX and others to show them where Tradition lies.
Sorry, but the official Magisterium of the Church disagrees with you. And as you say, Roma locuta est, causa finita est.
Quote from: CatechismOfTheCatholicChurch
VI. The Necessity of Baptism
1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.59 He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.60 Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.61 The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.
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.
1260 "Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery."62 Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.
1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,"63 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P3M.HTM
And lest anyone attempt to argue this isn't really "Magisterial", let's listen to John Paul II himself:
Quote3. The Doctrinal Value of the Text
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved 25 June last and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority, is a statement of the Church's faith and of catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition and the Church's Magisterium. I declare it to be a sure norm for teaching the faith and thus a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion. May it serve the renewal to which the Holy Spirit ceaselessly calls the Church of God, the Body of Christ, on her pilgrimage to the undiminished light of the Kingdom!
The approval and publication of the Catechism of the Catholic Church represent a service which the Successor of Peter wishes to offer to the Holy Catholic Church, to all the particular Churches in peace and communion with the Apostolic See: the service, that is, of supporting and confirming the faith of all the Lord Jesus' disciples (cf. Lk 22:32 as well as of strengthening the bonds of unity in the same apostolic faith. Therefore, I ask all the Church's Pastors and the Christian faithful to receive this catechism in a spirit of communion and to use it assiduously in fulfilling their mission of proclaiming the faith and calling people to the Gospel life. This catechism is given to them that it may be a sure and authentic reference text for teaching catholic doctrine and particularly for preparing local catechisms. It is also offered to all the faithful who wish to deepen their knowledge of the unfathomable riches of salvation (cf. Eph 3:8). It is meant to support ecumenical efforts that are moved by the holy desire for the unity of all Christians, showing carefully the content and wondrous harmony of the catholic faith. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, lastly, is offered to every individual who asks us to give an account of the hope that is in us (cf. 1 Pt 3:15) and who wants to know what the Catholic Church believes.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/aposcons.htm
Roma locuta est, causa finita est.
Quote1260 "Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery."
Yes, that possibility is called
rebirth by water and spirit and faith in Jesus Christ, as he himself and his Apostle Paul clearly taught, and as per Galatians 1:8, Rome and all its purple and scarlet pomp can shove its catechism up its collective behind if it contradicts the plain words and truth of the Gospel.
Quote
62 Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.
If you can point us to where in this statement are contained the words "those who die as such can be saved", please do so. Otherwise, if that were indeed your intention, kindly refrain from contending it contradicts the Gospel, the Athanasian Creed and Trent on the necessity of faith in the Trinity and Incarnation, and kindly don't try an anachronistically impose the Scholastic wordplay of "implicit" and "explicit" faith onto the
pistis of the New Testament to claim an actually non-existent faith can yet constitute just that.
St. Ambrose held that the emperor Valentinian, who was a catechumen, and who died without being Baptized, received the Baptismal grace.
I am wondering why we care what St. Augustine had to say on this issue at the end of his life in Christ vs the middle or beginning, when St. Thomas had so much more to work with on Theology in general, and held to the idea of Baptism of Desire, and such a thing has been taught consistently for hundreds of years?
I've never heard the title of "Doctor of Predestination" as applied to Augustine; defender of it, yes, but that's a broad point. "Doctor of..." would imply that his opinions on Predestination are in fact the Church's teaching on the subject, and that he is to be taken quite seriously, and would render St. Thomas, et al., moot. Yet, Augustine had no clear teaching on it (nor did St. Thomas), unless one wants to cherry-pick his works to support this or that position. So why on earth would there be the De Auxilis controversy?
Baptism w/ Water is an action on the body (water) and soul (remission of [original and/or actual] sins and the mark of baptism). Water touches the body, but the operative reality is entirely spiritual. Since the bodies of the OT Patriarchs were not baptized w/ Water, then this is a rather odd statement as to the baptism in the Jordan by Christ, and their immediate movement to Heaven. How does one baptize the immaterial w/ the material? Is it de fide that the bodies of all those whose souls were in the Limbo of the Fathers also rose and they went to Heaven body and soul?
And most importantly, why should we give a half-rotten fig about the interpretive musings of one Karl Rahner, Eth.J.?
Somebody please stop this thread before it turns out Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc. who die without faith in Jesus Christ but are "good" and "do their best" can, contrary to the Hospel, get beamed up to La La Land on death. Because that is what is always boils down to.
Quote from: Gardener on January 28, 2019, 02:27:02 PM
...
Baptism w/ Water is an action on the body (water) and soul (remission of [original and/or actual] sins and the mark of baptism). Water touches the body, but the operative reality is entirely spiritual. Since the bodies of the OT Patriarchs were not baptized w/ Water, then this is a rather odd statement as to the baptism in the Jordan by Christ, and their immediate movement to Heaven. How does one baptize the immaterial w/ the material? Is it de fide that the bodies of all those whose souls were in the Limbo of the Fathers also rose and they went to Heaven body and soul?
The SACRAMENT of baptism is not just "water touching the body", over here, and a spiritual reality, over there. The material thing does not baptize the immaterial, but Christ asks us to use it and guarantees that through it He will produce the effect of the Sacrament. It works "Ex opere operato" ('from the work worked', by the very fact of the visible sign (words and water)), although the power is derived from the Passion of Christ. For the SACRAMENT to be present, natural water must be used.
BUT (I think we basically agree) God Himself (the Passion of Christ) is not bound to the Sacrament and can produce the EFFECT OF THE SACRAMENT without the Sacrament itself:
Quote from: St. Thomas ST III 68 2...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."
St. Thomas says more on Baptism of Desire here:
Quote from: S.T. III 66 11As stated above (III:62:5), Baptism of Water has its efficacy from Christ's Passion, to which a man is conformed by Baptism, and also from the Holy Ghost, as first cause. Now although the effect depends on the first cause, the cause far surpasses the effect, nor does it depend on it. Consequently, a man may, without Baptism of Water, receive the sacramental effect from Christ's Passion, in so far as he is conformed to Christ by suffering for Him. Hence it is written (Apocalypse 7:14): "These are they who are come out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes and have made them white in the blood of the Lamb." In like manner a man receives the effect of Baptism by the power of the Holy Ghost, not only without Baptism of Water, but also without Baptism of Blood: forasmuch as his heart is moved by the Holy Ghost to believe in and love God and to repent of his sins: wherefore this is also called Baptism of Repentance.
HOWEVER St. Thomas also says that EXPLICIT FAITH is needed for salvation, but that God may bring the necessary teaching even by internal inspiration before death to men who follow His will as best they can (by GOD's judgement and not their own or that of any others) before they are taught:
Quote from: St. Thomas De Veritate 14. XI ad 2
https://dhspriory.org/thomas/english/QDdeVer14.htm
Granted that everyone is bound to believe something explicitly, no untenable conclusion follows even if someone is brought up in the forest or among wild beasts. For it pertains to divine providence to furnish everyone with what is necessary for salvation, provided that on his part there is no hindrance. Thus, if someone so brought up followed the direction of natural reason in seeking good and avoiding evil, we must most certainly hold that God would either reveal to him through internal inspiration what had to be believed, or would send some preacher of the faith to him as he sent Peter to Cornelius (Acts 10:20)..
St. Thomas says that man is bound to the Sacrament of Baptism but God is not: He is not (the passion of Christ is not) bound to WATER although that is the usual (and commanded and sublime) way. If GOD (NOT Rahner, NOT Archbishop Levebrve, but also NOT what we here judge here as impossible) knows that a non-Catholic has sought good and avoided evil (as GOD chooses), then GOD will provide the necessary knowledge for him to make (by his own will) an act of Catholic faith. To say that GOD must bring WATER at the end of life along with divine inspiration is to bind God to a creature. God is just and merciful and all powerful with no bounds.
Now that I've said that I will note that I think Kaesekopf forbade discussions on baptism of desire on this forum. But I'll rely on him to enforce this. I'm probably not going to say a lot more myself.
I believe that this is a good site discussing this issue: http://baptismofdesire.com/
Quote from: Non Nobis on January 28, 2019, 07:32:14 PM
Quote from: Gardener on January 28, 2019, 02:27:02 PM
...
Baptism w/ Water is an action on the body (water) and soul (remission of [original and/or actual] sins and the mark of baptism). Water touches the body, but the operative reality is entirely spiritual. Since the bodies of the OT Patriarchs were not baptized w/ Water, then this is a rather odd statement as to the baptism in the Jordan by Christ, and their immediate movement to Heaven. How does one baptize the immaterial w/ the material? Is it de fide that the bodies of all those whose souls were in the Limbo of the Fathers also rose and they went to Heaven body and soul?
The SACRAMENT of baptism is not just "water touching the body", over here, and a spiritual reality, over there. The material thing does not baptize the immaterial, but Christ asks us to use it and guarantees that through it He will produce the effect of the Sacrament. It works "Ex opere operato" ('from the work worked', by the very fact of the visible sign (words and water)), although the power is derived from the Passion of Christ. For the SACRAMENT to be present, natural water must be used.
BUT (I think we basically agree) God Himself (the Passion of Christ) is not bound to the Sacrament and can produce the EFFECT OF THE SACRAMENT without the Sacrament itself:
Quote from: St. Thomas ST III 68 2...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."
St. Thomas says more on Baptism of Desire here:
Quote from: S.T. III 66 11As stated above (III:62:5), Baptism of Water has its efficacy from Christ's Passion, to which a man is conformed by Baptism, and also from the Holy Ghost, as first cause. Now although the effect depends on the first cause, the cause far surpasses the effect, nor does it depend on it. Consequently, a man may, without Baptism of Water, receive the sacramental effect from Christ's Passion, in so far as he is conformed to Christ by suffering for Him. Hence it is written (Apocalypse 7:14): "These are they who are come out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes and have made them white in the blood of the Lamb." In like manner a man receives the effect of Baptism by the power of the Holy Ghost, not only without Baptism of Water, but also without Baptism of Blood: forasmuch as his heart is moved by the Holy Ghost to believe in and love God and to repent of his sins: wherefore this is also called Baptism of Repentance.
HOWEVER St. Thomas also says that EXPLICIT FAITH is needed for salvation, but that God may bring the necessary teaching even by internal inspiration before death to men who follow His will as best they can (by GOD's judgement and not their own or that of any others) before they are taught:
Quote from: St. Thomas De Veritate 14. XI ad 2
https://dhspriory.org/thomas/english/QDdeVer14.htm
Granted that everyone is bound to believe something explicitly, no untenable conclusion follows even if someone is brought up in the forest or among wild beasts. For it pertains to divine providence to furnish everyone with what is necessary for salvation, provided that on his part there is no hindrance. Thus, if someone so brought up followed the direction of natural reason in seeking good and avoiding evil, we must most certainly hold that God would either reveal to him through internal inspiration what had to be believed, or would send some preacher of the faith to him as he sent Peter to Cornelius (Acts 10:20)..
St. Thomas says that man is bound to the Sacrament of Baptism but God is not: He is not (the passion of Christ is not) bound to WATER although that is the usual (and commanded and sublime) way. If GOD (NOT Rahner, NOT Archbishop Levebrve, but also NOT what we here judge here as impossible) knows that a non-Catholic has sought good and avoided evil (as GOD chooses), then GOD will provide the necessary knowledge for him to make (by his own will) an act of Catholic faith. To say that GOD must bring WATER at the end of life along with divine inspiration is to bind God to a creature. God is just and merciful and all powerful with no bounds.
Now that I've said that I will note that I think Kaesekopf forbade discussions on baptism of desire on this forum. But I'll rely on him to enforce this. I'm probably not going to say a lot more myself.
I believe that this is a good site discussing this issue: http://baptismofdesire.com/
KK forbade Feeneyism, not discussing a teaching which has historical weight and the support of Sts. Thomas Aquinas, Liguori, etc. along with the Council of Trent and every Catechism of various types since at least Trent.
Sacrament: an outward sign instituted by Christ for the purpose of conferring grace.
The water is the outward portion. The grace being given is the internal aspect as having an effect on the soul; the water signifies the giving of the grace as part of the Sacrament, but water of itself does not give grace; this is different from the Transubstantiation of the Host (in case anyone wanted to go that route of argumentation). Water is material. The soul is immaterial. The idea of some sort of post-Resurrection Baptism is ridiculous and smack more of legalism than anything. The souls which were waiting for Christ in the Limbo of the Fathers were already justified. They were physically dead, and their fates sealed. So what, then, would be the purpose of Baptism? Original sin had to have already been remitted. Baptism would have been superfluous, even if possible (how would it be without bodies?)
QuoteWater is material. The soul is immaterial.
Even if true (I suppose it's a given if one subscribes to dichotomism), it smacks of a dualism that falls away in, say, an emanationist cosmology, in which water is, moreover, not merely "material". But what are you saying? What is material doesn't affect the soul? Well, I suppose all the various conflation of corporeality and materiality, along with soul, mind, spirit, subject and consciousness, sensation, feeling etc. all serve to make communication and personal thought exceedingly confusing. Yes, dichotomism is true in one sense of spirit and matter, trichotism true in another sense of transcendent spiritual subject to material soul and body, but how to communicate what is intended ...
Factual statements are dualism?
The material cannot per se touch the immaterial in the sense of what we know Baptism is when Baptism occurs in the normative sense. The water of Baptism itself does nothing because baptismal water is just water and has no power of itself as such.
The assertion raised by Xavier qua St. Augustine's theory on the post-Limbo Patriarchs absolutely necessitates the answering of how that mechanically occurs.
Quote from: Gardener on January 28, 2019, 02:27:02 PM
I've never heard the title of "Doctor of Predestination" as applied to Augustine
He was Doctor of Grace, though.
However, that's been a moot point since Trent and the counterreformational developments.