Questo articolo è disponibile anche in: Italian English Spanish Portuguese

Dear Father Angelo,

I hope you.are well I write to you after reading an undoubtedly heretical article I came across and that really upset me for the solid doctrinal basis his topics are based on. The author of the article clearly wants to claim the invalidity of the Baptisms of “blood” and “desire”, and the absolute impossibility of salvation for noncatholics, disagreeing with the constitution “Lumen Gentium” of the Vatican Council II and inevitably resulting in a delusional sedevacantism. 

I attach to a page where I quoted some of the numerous papal and conciliar pronouncements that the author supports in his thesis: “About the validity of the baptisms of “desire” and of “blood “.

Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Session 7, Canon 2, about the Sacrament of the Saint Baptism, 1547, ex-cathedra: “If someone claimed that the true natural water is not necessary for the Baptism and then will give a metaphorical meaning to the words of Jesus Christ our Lord: ‘no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit’ (John 3,5). (DS 1615; edited by the translator).

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, session 11, 04/02/1442, ex-cathedra: “as for children, given the often-prominent risk of death, because they can be helped only with the sacrament of the baptism that frees them from the devil’s domination and makes them adoptive children of God,the Church warns that the baptism doesn’t have to be delayed for 40 80 days, according to some traditions, but must be administrated as soon as possible, making sure that in case of immediate risk of death, they are baptized right away by a layman or a woman as well, if there is no priest” (DS 1349; edited by the translator).

Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Session 5, about the Original Sin, ex-cathedra: “ Through a man the sin came into the world and through the sin death…so that in them may through regeneration be washed away what they have contracted through generation: ‘No one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit’ (John 3,5)” (DS 1515; edited by the translator).

Conclusion: the Sacrament of Baptism, administered through water, is necessary to be saved; the Baptisms of “blood” and “desire” don’t guarantee eternal life.

I am sorry for the time I’m taking you away. I deeply thank you 

Matteo


Priest’s answer

Dear Matteo,

1.first of all allow me to make a premise. The statements you quoted are not from the popes you mentioned, but from the councils of Trent and Florence. Therefore it’s wrong to claim that these are statements pronounced ex-cathedra from the Pope. Nevertheless, these are affirmations from the extraordinary magisterium of the Church expressed during the ecumenical Council. That’s why they have to be considered as infallible. However, it has to be observed that the words used in the Council of Florence: “the Church warns that the baptism doesn’t have to be delayed for 40-80 days, according to some traditions, but must be administered as soon as possible” aren’t dogmatic. They are disciplinary instructions.

2. Since there are two matters that are discussed in the article you read, I answer you in two parts. The first one engages the perception the Church has about the baptism of desire and the baptism of blood denied by the author you read. The second one is about the necessity of belonging to the Church in order to be saved. The documents of the magisterium you quoted seem to be incontrovertible, but they are not. In this email I answer you to the first conclusion.

3. In fact the text from the Council of Trent, that is about the absolute necessity of natural water, is by no means against the baptism of desire and of blood. This is not the intention of the magisterial statement. Speaking of the sacrament of  Baptism, the council of Trent wants to determine the matter by saying that natural water is needed. The intention of this Council is not denying the validity of the baptism of desire and of blood at all. In that case, it should have said it clearly so as not to create misunderstandings. But in this case it would have been in conflict with what it’s claimed in the same council about the baptism of desire. 

4. Here it is what the Council of Trent says about the baptism of desire: “The justification of the sinner is the passage from the status where the man is son of the first Adam to the status of grace and adoption of sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ our savior; this passage, after the announcement of the Gospel, cannot happen without the washing of regeneration or without its desire, as it is written: “no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit (John 3,5; www.biblegateway.com)” (DS 1524; edited by the translator). The same thing goes for the sacrament of repentance: “It must be taught then that the christian’s repentance after falling is different from the baptismal one and not only consists of fleeing from sins and detesting them, that is to say with a humiliated and contrite heart, but also in the sacramental confession of them, at least in the desire and to do at their time, and in the absolution of the priest” (DS 1543; edited by the translator).

5. Some years after the end of the council of Trent the Roman Catechism was published, also called Catechism of the council of Trent. Here is what can be read: “It has always been the Church’s tradition not to admit adults to baptism soon; but to postpone it for a certain amount of time; this doesn’t mean for them the danger of losing eternal life. In case of sudden danger, in fact, the adult unable to receive the baptism of water can obtain the grace and salvation through desire and the intention of receiving the sacrament, along with the repentance of their own sins “ (Roman Catechism, 178; edited by the translator).

6. Even before the council of Trent, we have a nice witness by Saint Ambrose about the death of the Emperor Valentinian II, murdered in 392 before being able to receive the baptism. This is what Saint Ambrose said in that circumstance: “On my part I lost the one I was about to generate in the Gospel, but he didn’t lose the grace he asked for…what do we have in our favor if not the grace and desire, nisi voluntas, nisi petitio? Well, now he manifested, even if it’s not much, the intention (hoc voti habuit) of making himself instructed before going to Italy and manifested the intention of making himself baptized by me…Will he not have the grace he desired, he asked for? If he asks for it then he certainly will get it. That’s why it is written: “But the righteous man, though he died early, will be at rest (Wisdom 4,7; www.thebiblegateway.com) (Latin Patrology, volume 16, col. 1368 and 1374; edited by the translator).

7. About the baptism of blood: it is a doctrine always considered true by the Church. In the cannon 101 of Hippolytus (we’re in the III century) it can be read: “The catechumen that is captured, led to the martyrdom and killed before receiving the baptism, may he be buried with the other martyrs, he is in fact baptized with his own blood “. But even more than Hippolytus’ sentence it is valid what Our Lord said: “Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it” (Matthew 10,39; www.thebiblegateway.com).

8. Saint Thomas claims that we talk about a triple baptism: the baptism of blood, water and spirit (desire). He says about the latter: “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. Of this it is written (Is. 4:4): “If the Lord shall wash away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall wash away the blood of Jerusalem out of the midst thereof, by the spirit of judgment, and by the spirit of burning.” Thus, therefore, each of these other Baptisms is called Baptism, forasmuch as it takes the place of Baptism. Wherefore Augustine says: “The Blessed Cyprian argues with considerable reason from the thief to whom, though not baptized, it was said: ‘Today shalt thou be with Me in Paradise’ that suffering can take the place of Baptism. Having weighed this in my mind again and again, I perceive that not only can suffering for the name of Christ supply for what was lacking in Baptism, but even faith and conversion of heart, if perchance on account of the stress of the times the celebration of the mystery of Baptism is not practicable.” (De bapt. Contra Donat. 4,22)” (Summa Theologiae, III, 66, 11; Index — Aquinas 101 (thomistic institute.org).

9. About the baptism of blood Saint Thomas says that it’s even better than the others: “The shedding of blood for Christ’s sake, and the inward operation of the Holy Ghost, are called baptisms, insofar as they produce the effect of the Baptism of Water. Now the Baptism of Water derives its efficacy from Christ’s Passion and from the Holy Ghost, as already stated. These two causes act in each of these three Baptisms; most excellently, however, in the Baptism of Blood. For Christ’s Passion acts in the Baptism of Water by way of a figurative representation; in the Baptism of the Spirit or of Repentance, by way of desire. but in the Baptism of Blood, by way of imitating the (Divine) act. In like manner, too, the power of the Holy Ghost acts in the Baptism of Water through a certain hidden power. in the Baptism of Repentance by moving the heart; but in the Baptism of Blood by the highest degree of fervor of dilection and love, according to Jn. 15:13: “Greater love than this no man hath that a man lay down his life for his friends.” (Ib., 12).

10. The author’s conclusion you read is therefore wrong and different from the constant Church’s teaching. Not to mention the imprecisions the texts have been provided.

I bless you, wish you all the best and remember you in the prayer.

Father Angelo