Trent on Baptism

[Michael_Paul]

In an online article from This Rock regarding James White, Mr. Keating stated: “Trent taught justification is impossible “except through the laver of regeneration [water baptism] or its desire” (Decree on Justification, 4; emphasis added). Water baptism is thus not an absolute necessity since baptism of desire–even an implicit desire–can suffice.”

My question is about the “even an implicit desire–can suffice.” I’m aware of Baptism of Desire and that Trent teaches this but no where have I ever read before this that an implicit desire can suffice. Trent neither uses the word explicit nor implicit. Would anyone, especially Mr. Keating wish to comment on this? Would anyone like to give me the url of official Catholic teaching on this?

Thanks

 

[Genesis315]

From the Catechism:

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.” 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.

 

[Michael_Paul]

Genesis315:

From the Catechism:

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.” 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.

I see your point. And concur. However, I was not thinking of invincible ignorance. I was thinking of someone who knows the teaching about Baptism in the Church but choses not to be baptized because he doesn’t believe it. This person is not in invincible ignorance. Invincible means that the person cannot possibly know.

Thanks

 

[bigdawg]

From the Council of Trent, 6th Session:

"Chapter IV.
A description is introduced of the Justification of the impious, and of the Manner thereof under the law of grace.

By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God."

I am not sure what is meant by “implicit desire” since Trent chose not to use the term implicit in the above paragraph and I didn’t read the article that you mention. But, it would seem that someone who knows the teaching of the church and rejects baptism would not fall under the category of invincible ignorance and will likely have a bad day at the judgement.