St. Alphonsus dei Liguori: On Baptism
There have been controversies in the USA since the time before Father Leonard Feeney, S.J., about the necessity of baptism. I present here my translation of part of St. Alphonsus's tract on Baptism, which clearly shows why that which Father Feeney opposed was itself erroneous (namely that Baptism was not necessary for salvation), and therefore was justly opposed, but also how Father Feeney opposed it (namely by denying the efficacy of Baptism of Desire and Baptism of Blood), was erroneous, for each neglected each corresponding part of the whole truth of Baptism.
Translated from
CHAPTER I of
TRACT II : ON BAPTISM AND CONFIRMATION
in Vol. III of the Critical Latin Edition of the Saint's
Theologia Moralis
Edited by Rev. Leonard Gaudè, C.S.S.R.
95. — "Here one does not deal with Baptism of blood, that is martyrdom; nor with (Baptism) of breath [flamen] or spirit, that is contrition with the intention to receive [votum] and/or [vel] a desire for Baptism: because these are not Sacraments; — but with Baptism of running water [flumen], which is defined: An exterior ablution of the body, accomplished under a prescribed form of words".
Therefore Baptism from the Greek word, which signifies ablution or [sive] immersion into water, is distinguished into Bapstism of running water [flumen], of breath [flamen], and of blood. — Below we will speak of Baptism of running water; which with strong probability with St. Thomas, the Salamancans, the Master of the Sentances [i.e. Peter Lombard], Soto, Vasquez, etc., was instituted before the Passion of Christ the Lord, at the time when Christ was baptised by John.
96. — However Bapstism of breath [flamen] is the perfect conversion to God by means of contrition and/or [vel] the love [amor] of God above all things with an explicit and/or [vel] implicit intention to receive [votum] the true Baptism of running water: in place of which it supplies, in accord with Trent, as regards the remission of fault, not however as regards the character that must be impressed [impremendum]. It is called of breath [flaminis], because it is accomplished by means of a impulse of the Holy Spirit, who is called by the name Breath [flamen]. — Thus Viva, the Salamancans with Suarez, Vasquez, Valentia; Croix and others.
However it is de fide that by means of baptism of breath [flamen] men are also saved: from the chapter Apostolicam, de presb. non bapt.; and from Trent, where it is said that no one can be saved without the laver of regeneration or [aut] the intention to receive [votum] it. — See Petrocorens.
97. — But Baptism of blood is the effusion of blood, or a death endured [tolerata] on behalf of the Faith or on behalf of any Christian virtue; as St. Thomas, Viva; Croix with Aversa, Gobat, etc. teach. — Here however baptism is equivalent [aequibaratur] to true Baptism; because almost ex opere operato according to the likeness of Baptism it remits fault and punishment. Almost is said; because matyrdom does not operate so strictly as a Sacrament, but from from a certain privilege, on account of [its] imitation of the Passion of Christ; as Bellarmine, Suarex, Sotus, Cajetan, etc., as quoted by Croix, say; and at great length [fuse] Petrocorens.
Accordingly martydom benefits [prodest] even infants, just as [dum] the Church venerates [colit] the Holy Innocents as true martyrs. On this point Suarez teaches well with others, as quoted in Croix, that the opposite [opinion] is at least temarious. — However in adults there is required the acceptance of matyrdom, at least habitually, from a supernatural motive; as Coninck, Cajetan, Suarez, Bonacina, and Croix [teach]; against Viva, who does not require any acceptance.
However it is patent that martyrdom is not a Sacrament; because martyrdom is not an action instituted by Christ. And accordingly neither also was the bapstism of John a Sacrament, which did not sanctify a man, but only preprated [him] for the comming of Christ. — Viva.
98. — Nevertheless Question 1. Whether, so that martydom may remit fault and punishment, there is required in the sinner contrition, and/or [vel] the love [dilectio] of God above all things; or whether attrition suffices? — It is certain that for the remission of fault some penance is required: from Trent.
However to the question Vigandt, Concina, Viva, with [St. Robert] Bellarmine, Cajetan, Palaus, Lessius, etc., as quoted in Croix, respond that attrition is sufficient for martyrdom, just as it is sufficient for Baptism. For they say that this privilege martyrdom obtains from privilige [ex privilegio], as we have said, because of [its] imitation of the Passion of Christ.
Nevertheless it is more probable that contrition and/or [vel] love [dilectio] of God above all things is required; as St. Bonaventure, [Bl. John Duns] Scotus, Canus, Laymann, etc., as quoted in Croix, and Petrocorens teach: on the basis of St. Thomas, where he says: The effusion of blood is not equivalent [non habet rationem] to Baptism, if it is without charity. And it is proved on the basis of the Apostle in 1 Cor. 13:3: If I have given my body thus to be burned, and have not charity, it benefits [prodest] me nothing. Nor does the undergoing of matyrdom always imply [importat] that one has perfect charity; though one could who wants to rather die than to commit a new sin, on account of the fear of Hell. — Otherwise, the adversaries [of this opinion] themselves advert, that it is always necessary that the sinner before martyrdom undertakes contrition and/or [vel] confession, lest he be exposed to the danger of damnation.
99. — Question 2. When does martyrdom confer grace, whether at the instant of death, or of the lethal wound?
It is probable with Suarez, Bonacina, Discastillo, etc., with Viva, that it confers grace when the martyr accpet the lethal wound or [aut] torture, though afterwards he may miraculously not die. And thus Blessed John [the Apostle] was a true martyr, having been immersed in a cask of boiling oil; and the Queen of Martyrs, the Blessed Virgin Mary, standing at the foot of the Cross of Jesus. — The reason, because then death was already accepted in causa.
100. — Note I. Concerning those who die out of charity in submission to destructive men, the Roman Martyrology says: Which as martyrs a religious . . . faith is accustomed to venerate. And that they are true martyrs do twelve academies, thirteen cardinals, and more than thirty authors hold, against Hurtado and others. — See Croix.
101. — Note II. It is illicit, without Divine inspiration [instinctu] and/or [vel] without the danger of scandal, to dare force onself into martyrdom; as commonly teach St. Thomas, Navarro, Sanchez, Discastillus, etc., with Croix. Not only because this would be a certain tempting of God; but also because man is not the lord of his own life. See what is said in Vol. 3, n. 32..
On this Layman says, and Gobat as quoted in Croix, that one would sin, who on Friday, by abstaining from meat, manifested himself Catholic to the danger of his life. Because in that case the ecclesiastical precept of abstaining from meat ceases, and the natural precept, which is stronger, urges one to save his own life.
...
138. — As a complement to this point, Question 1. What are the effects of the Sacrament of Baptism?
I respond: the first effect is the remission of all [omnis] original sin, and [all] actual sin comitted before Baptism; as is had in the Roman Catechism and Trent: God hates nothing in those reborn. Nevertheless there remains in them the fomes of sin, which is not a sin; and if the grace of Christ withstands it, it will benefit [him] unto a crown [of glory]. — The second effect is the condonation of all punishment due for sins. This in the catechism, on the basis of Trent, where: So that nothing may hinder them from entering Heaven. See the Salamancans. — The third [effect] is the largess of divine grace, by which we are made sons of God and heirs of Heaven; as [is said] on the basis of Trent. — The fourth [effect], the impression of the character [of Baptism]. — The fifth [effect], that the baptised is made a member of the Church, and is subjected to Her authority.
139. — Question 2. Which disposition is required in the recipient of Baptism?
I respond. In infants Christ and the Church supply their will. And it is certain on the basis of Trent, where children are said to be baptised in the only faith of the Church, although by their own act they do not believe.
In adults however there is required an intention at least habitual, that is habitual [habitata] and not withdrawn [retractata]. The Salamancans, with Bonacina, Palaus, Coninck and common others. See what is said in n. 81, v. Certum.
From this one infers 1°. That Baptism is validly confered, even if it is received through grave fear. Not so, however, if it is received through mere force, by a soul entirely refusing it. — Suarez, Bonacina, Palaus, with the Salamancans, on the basis of the IV [Council of] Toledo.
One infers 2°. That Baptism conferred on one who is sleeping or madness who when sane had asked for it beforehand. Palaus, Henriquez, etc., with the Salamancans. — Nevertheless Suarez adverts well to the same, that to licitly minister Baptism at that time, there is required some necessity, namely if the madness is judged to be perpetual, and/or [vel] if the man is probable danger of death. And then it is sufficient if he manifested [praestituerit] beforehand sufficient evidences of wanting Baptism. — In doubt, however, regarding the request, Baptism must be conferred conditionally. The Salamancans with Bonacina, Henriquez, etc. (See what is said in n. 81, v. Utrum).
There is also required in the adult, to licitly receive Baptism, faith and penance. — As regards faith, there is required that one understand [sciat] the Sacrament (at least Bapstism, Eucharist and Penance), the precepts of the Decalogue, at least in a crass manner, and the Lord's Prayer; beyond those four that have been decreed [scitu] necessary, that is the existence of God, that God is a rewarder [of those who seek Him], the Trinity, and the the Incarnation and Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ. In a pressing danger of death, however, it suffices to know these for last [truths]; as Sanchez and Soto well explain, with the Salamancans.
As regards the requisite penance, however, that contrition is required Navarrus and others hold. But Gonet, Suarez, Canus; and the Salamancans with Valentia, Soto, Henriquez, Granado and very many others, hold as more true that attrition suffices, which may exist without [quin sit] informed charity: And that the divine St. Thomas expressely teaches, where he teaches that not unsuitably does (a man) approach Baptism, who has on his conscience a mortal sin. At any rate if contrition would be required, he could not approach with a mortal sin on his conscience; for the saintly Doctor taught otherwise, that, however small is the grief be, so long as it sufficient for the definition [rationem] of contrition, it deleats every fault. Therefore is one would approach with however small a contrition, he indeed would approach without sin. But more clearly did he express it, where he said: To this that a man would prepare himself to lay hold of grace in Baptism, faith is demanded beforehand, but not charity: because a preceeding attrition suffices, even if it is not contrition. I do not know that the adversaries [of this opinion] can say in reply to this, if the want to say that St. Thomas held something other than our opinion.
But whether in the one receiving Baptism there is required any inchoate charity? — See what is to be said concerning Penance, in n. 437.
Translated from
CHAPTER I of
TRACT II : ON BAPTISM AND CONFIRMATION
in Vol. III of the Critical Latin Edition of the Saint's
Theologia Moralis
Edited by Rev. Leonard Gaudè, C.S.S.R.
95. — "Here one does not deal with Baptism of blood, that is martyrdom; nor with (Baptism) of breath [flamen] or spirit, that is contrition with the intention to receive [votum] and/or [vel] a desire for Baptism: because these are not Sacraments; — but with Baptism of running water [flumen], which is defined: An exterior ablution of the body, accomplished under a prescribed form of words".
Therefore Baptism from the Greek word, which signifies ablution or [sive] immersion into water, is distinguished into Bapstism of running water [flumen], of breath [flamen], and of blood. — Below we will speak of Baptism of running water; which with strong probability with St. Thomas, the Salamancans, the Master of the Sentances [i.e. Peter Lombard], Soto, Vasquez, etc., was instituted before the Passion of Christ the Lord, at the time when Christ was baptised by John.
96. — However Bapstism of breath [flamen] is the perfect conversion to God by means of contrition and/or [vel] the love [amor] of God above all things with an explicit and/or [vel] implicit intention to receive [votum] the true Baptism of running water: in place of which it supplies, in accord with Trent, as regards the remission of fault, not however as regards the character that must be impressed [impremendum]. It is called of breath [flaminis], because it is accomplished by means of a impulse of the Holy Spirit, who is called by the name Breath [flamen]. — Thus Viva, the Salamancans with Suarez, Vasquez, Valentia; Croix and others.
However it is de fide that by means of baptism of breath [flamen] men are also saved: from the chapter Apostolicam, de presb. non bapt.; and from Trent, where it is said that no one can be saved without the laver of regeneration or [aut] the intention to receive [votum] it. — See Petrocorens.
97. — But Baptism of blood is the effusion of blood, or a death endured [tolerata] on behalf of the Faith or on behalf of any Christian virtue; as St. Thomas, Viva; Croix with Aversa, Gobat, etc. teach. — Here however baptism is equivalent [aequibaratur] to true Baptism; because almost ex opere operato according to the likeness of Baptism it remits fault and punishment. Almost is said; because matyrdom does not operate so strictly as a Sacrament, but from from a certain privilege, on account of [its] imitation of the Passion of Christ; as Bellarmine, Suarex, Sotus, Cajetan, etc., as quoted by Croix, say; and at great length [fuse] Petrocorens.
Accordingly martydom benefits [prodest] even infants, just as [dum] the Church venerates [colit] the Holy Innocents as true martyrs. On this point Suarez teaches well with others, as quoted in Croix, that the opposite [opinion] is at least temarious. — However in adults there is required the acceptance of matyrdom, at least habitually, from a supernatural motive; as Coninck, Cajetan, Suarez, Bonacina, and Croix [teach]; against Viva, who does not require any acceptance.
However it is patent that martyrdom is not a Sacrament; because martyrdom is not an action instituted by Christ. And accordingly neither also was the bapstism of John a Sacrament, which did not sanctify a man, but only preprated [him] for the comming of Christ. — Viva.
98. — Nevertheless Question 1. Whether, so that martydom may remit fault and punishment, there is required in the sinner contrition, and/or [vel] the love [dilectio] of God above all things; or whether attrition suffices? — It is certain that for the remission of fault some penance is required: from Trent.
However to the question Vigandt, Concina, Viva, with [St. Robert] Bellarmine, Cajetan, Palaus, Lessius, etc., as quoted in Croix, respond that attrition is sufficient for martyrdom, just as it is sufficient for Baptism. For they say that this privilege martyrdom obtains from privilige [ex privilegio], as we have said, because of [its] imitation of the Passion of Christ.
Nevertheless it is more probable that contrition and/or [vel] love [dilectio] of God above all things is required; as St. Bonaventure, [Bl. John Duns] Scotus, Canus, Laymann, etc., as quoted in Croix, and Petrocorens teach: on the basis of St. Thomas, where he says: The effusion of blood is not equivalent [non habet rationem] to Baptism, if it is without charity. And it is proved on the basis of the Apostle in 1 Cor. 13:3: If I have given my body thus to be burned, and have not charity, it benefits [prodest] me nothing. Nor does the undergoing of matyrdom always imply [importat] that one has perfect charity; though one could who wants to rather die than to commit a new sin, on account of the fear of Hell. — Otherwise, the adversaries [of this opinion] themselves advert, that it is always necessary that the sinner before martyrdom undertakes contrition and/or [vel] confession, lest he be exposed to the danger of damnation.
99. — Question 2. When does martyrdom confer grace, whether at the instant of death, or of the lethal wound?
It is probable with Suarez, Bonacina, Discastillo, etc., with Viva, that it confers grace when the martyr accpet the lethal wound or [aut] torture, though afterwards he may miraculously not die. And thus Blessed John [the Apostle] was a true martyr, having been immersed in a cask of boiling oil; and the Queen of Martyrs, the Blessed Virgin Mary, standing at the foot of the Cross of Jesus. — The reason, because then death was already accepted in causa.
100. — Note I. Concerning those who die out of charity in submission to destructive men, the Roman Martyrology says: Which as martyrs a religious . . . faith is accustomed to venerate. And that they are true martyrs do twelve academies, thirteen cardinals, and more than thirty authors hold, against Hurtado and others. — See Croix.
101. — Note II. It is illicit, without Divine inspiration [instinctu] and/or [vel] without the danger of scandal, to dare force onself into martyrdom; as commonly teach St. Thomas, Navarro, Sanchez, Discastillus, etc., with Croix. Not only because this would be a certain tempting of God; but also because man is not the lord of his own life. See what is said in Vol. 3, n. 32..
On this Layman says, and Gobat as quoted in Croix, that one would sin, who on Friday, by abstaining from meat, manifested himself Catholic to the danger of his life. Because in that case the ecclesiastical precept of abstaining from meat ceases, and the natural precept, which is stronger, urges one to save his own life.
...
138. — As a complement to this point, Question 1. What are the effects of the Sacrament of Baptism?
I respond: the first effect is the remission of all [omnis] original sin, and [all] actual sin comitted before Baptism; as is had in the Roman Catechism and Trent: God hates nothing in those reborn. Nevertheless there remains in them the fomes of sin, which is not a sin; and if the grace of Christ withstands it, it will benefit [him] unto a crown [of glory]. — The second effect is the condonation of all punishment due for sins. This in the catechism, on the basis of Trent, where: So that nothing may hinder them from entering Heaven. See the Salamancans. — The third [effect] is the largess of divine grace, by which we are made sons of God and heirs of Heaven; as [is said] on the basis of Trent. — The fourth [effect], the impression of the character [of Baptism]. — The fifth [effect], that the baptised is made a member of the Church, and is subjected to Her authority.
139. — Question 2. Which disposition is required in the recipient of Baptism?
I respond. In infants Christ and the Church supply their will. And it is certain on the basis of Trent, where children are said to be baptised in the only faith of the Church, although by their own act they do not believe.
In adults however there is required an intention at least habitual, that is habitual [habitata] and not withdrawn [retractata]. The Salamancans, with Bonacina, Palaus, Coninck and common others. See what is said in n. 81, v. Certum.
From this one infers 1°. That Baptism is validly confered, even if it is received through grave fear. Not so, however, if it is received through mere force, by a soul entirely refusing it. — Suarez, Bonacina, Palaus, with the Salamancans, on the basis of the IV [Council of] Toledo.
One infers 2°. That Baptism conferred on one who is sleeping or madness who when sane had asked for it beforehand. Palaus, Henriquez, etc., with the Salamancans. — Nevertheless Suarez adverts well to the same, that to licitly minister Baptism at that time, there is required some necessity, namely if the madness is judged to be perpetual, and/or [vel] if the man is probable danger of death. And then it is sufficient if he manifested [praestituerit] beforehand sufficient evidences of wanting Baptism. — In doubt, however, regarding the request, Baptism must be conferred conditionally. The Salamancans with Bonacina, Henriquez, etc. (See what is said in n. 81, v. Utrum).
There is also required in the adult, to licitly receive Baptism, faith and penance. — As regards faith, there is required that one understand [sciat] the Sacrament (at least Bapstism, Eucharist and Penance), the precepts of the Decalogue, at least in a crass manner, and the Lord's Prayer; beyond those four that have been decreed [scitu] necessary, that is the existence of God, that God is a rewarder [of those who seek Him], the Trinity, and the the Incarnation and Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ. In a pressing danger of death, however, it suffices to know these for last [truths]; as Sanchez and Soto well explain, with the Salamancans.
As regards the requisite penance, however, that contrition is required Navarrus and others hold. But Gonet, Suarez, Canus; and the Salamancans with Valentia, Soto, Henriquez, Granado and very many others, hold as more true that attrition suffices, which may exist without [quin sit] informed charity: And that the divine St. Thomas expressely teaches, where he teaches that not unsuitably does (a man) approach Baptism, who has on his conscience a mortal sin. At any rate if contrition would be required, he could not approach with a mortal sin on his conscience; for the saintly Doctor taught otherwise, that, however small is the grief be, so long as it sufficient for the definition [rationem] of contrition, it deleats every fault. Therefore is one would approach with however small a contrition, he indeed would approach without sin. But more clearly did he express it, where he said: To this that a man would prepare himself to lay hold of grace in Baptism, faith is demanded beforehand, but not charity: because a preceeding attrition suffices, even if it is not contrition. I do not know that the adversaries [of this opinion] can say in reply to this, if the want to say that St. Thomas held something other than our opinion.
But whether in the one receiving Baptism there is required any inchoate charity? — See what is to be said concerning Penance, in n. 437.
posted by Br. Alexis Bugnolo at 9/01/2006 06:12:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home