(Three-fold Baptism)
Baptism of Desire, Baptism of Blood, and Baptism of Water (the three-fold Baptism) is a Catholic doctrine taught since the earliest days of the Catholic Church, yet so many people today seriously misunderstand it. Misunderstanding any doctrine of the Church can easily lead to heresy. Read below for an explanation of why Catholics MUST believe this doctrine.
The Magisterium of the Church
In order to understand Baptism of Desire and Blood, Catholics must first understand what the Magisterium of the Church is, which is defined as "the Church's divinely appointed authority to teach the truths of religion". In other words, Our Lord gave His Church the authority to teach the faithful about what is expected of them. The Magisterium of Catholic Church teaches the faithful in two ways;
1) Solemn Magisterium: Defined as Church teaching “which is exercised only rarely by formal and authentic definitions of councils or Popes. Its matter comprises dogmatic definitions of ecumenical councils or Popes teaching "ex cathedra" (Definition from “A Catholic Dictionary”, 1951)
Examples of the Solemn Magisterium would be decisions of any General Councils of the Church, or certain papal encyclicals, such as that defining the Dogma of the Assumption in 1950. Note that it is only in extraordinary circumstances that the Catholic Church teaches in this manner, which historically has been to combat heresy. For this reason it is sometimes referred to as the “extraordinary magisterium”. For examples of the Solemn Magisterium, here is a list of all solemn teaching during the first 7 centuries of the Catholic Church:
· Council of Nicaea I (325): condemned the heresy of Arius, and defined the Divinity of the Son of God and the Nicene Creed.
· Council of Constantinople I (381): condemned the heresy of Macedonius, and defined the Divinity of the Holy Ghost, confirmed and extended the Nicene Creed.
· Council of Ephesus (431): condemned the heresy of Nestorius, and defined that there was one person in Christ, and defended the Divine Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
· Council of Chalcedon (451): condemned the heresy of Eutyches (Monophysitism); declared Christ had two natures, human and divine.
· Council of Constantinople II (553): condemned, as savoring of Nestorianism, the so-called Three Chapters, the erroneous books of Theodore of Mopsuestia and the teaching of Theodoret of Cyrrhus and Ibas of Edessa.
· Council of Constantinople III (680-681): declared against the Monothelites, who taught one will in Christ, by defining that Christ had two wills, human and divine.
Here we can clearly see that in the first 7 centuries of the Church, the Solemn Magisterium was not used often, and very little was solemnly defined. So at least 7 generations of Catholics lived and died during this time with very little solemn teaching by the Church. This is because the majority of what Catholics believe comes from the Ordinary Magisterium of the Church (see next).
2) Ordinary Magisterium: this second form of Church teaching is “continually exercised by the Church especially in her universal practices connected with faith and morals, in the unanimous consent of the Fathers and theologians, in the decisions of the Roman Congregations concerning faith and morals, in the common sense of the Faithful, and various historical documents, in which the faith is declared.” (Definition from “A Catholic Dictionary”, 1951) The Ordinary Magisterium (also referred to as the Universal Ordinary Magisterium) is where the majority of Catholic beliefs are taught and learned; through unanimous teaching by preaching, by any written means, the approval of catechisms, the approval of textbooks for use in seminaries, etc.
Some examples of the Ordinary Magisterium would be that of Guardian Angels, or the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary (before 1950). While neither were solemnly defined by the Church (before 1950), they were always universally taught and believed, and it would be considered heresy to deny them.
For example, Arius was considered a heretic before his condemnation at the Council of Nicaea in 325, because the Divinity of Christ (which he denied) was part of the teaching of the Ordinary Magisterium before that Council. The same applies to Nestorius regarding his denial of the Divine Maternity of the Blessed Virgin, where he was later declared a heretic at the Council of Ephesus.
In a nutshell, the most frequent reason why the Solemn Magisterium is used is in order to confirm a doctrine which already belongs to the Ordinary Magisterium, but which has come under attack, usually by heretics.
The Dogma of Infallibility
It is a dogma of the Catholic Church that the Church is divinely kept from the possibility of error in her definitive teaching on faith and morals. Definition of “Infallibility” from “A Catholic Dictionary”, 1951: This infallibility resides (a) in the pope personally and alone (see below); (b) In an oecumenical council (q.v.) subject to papal confirmation (these infallibilities are distinct but correlative); and (c) In the bishops of the Church dispersed throughout the world: this is the ordinary magisterium, is now in practice and confined to the maintenance of the definitive decisions of (a) and (b).
In other words, ordinary teaching continually occurs throughout the Church century after century, and the decisions of Popes and Councils (solemn teaching) confine the ordinary teaching. Both solemn and ordinary teaching of the Church are considered infallible by this definition. The infallibility of both Solemn and Ordinary Magisterium was solemnly defined by the First Vatican Council (1870) when it stated the following: "All those things are to be believed by divine and Catholic faith which are contained in the written Word of God or in Tradition, and which are proposed by the Church, either in solemn judgment or in its ordinary and universal teaching office, as divinely revealed truths which must be believed."
In other words, both forms of the Magisterium of the Church (Solemn or Ordinary) are infallible and must be believed, according to this General Council. So if a teaching in the Church is universal, and allowed to propagate without condemnation from the Solemn Magisterium, it is considered infallible by the First Vatican Council.
Examples of Church Teaching on Baptism of Desire, Blood and Water
· Cyprian Epistle LXXII (3rd Century): "Let men of this kind, who are aiders and favourers of heretics, know therefore, first, that those catechumens hold the sound faith and truth of the Church, and advance from the divine camp to do battle with the devil, with a full and sincere acknowledgment of God the Father, and of Christ, and of the Holy Ghost; then, that they certainly are not deprived of the sacrament of baptism who are baptized with the most glorious and greatest baptism of blood".
· Church Father Cyprian (3rd Century): The Epistles of Cyprian, Epistle LXXII: TO JUBAIANUS, CONCERNING THE BAPTISM OF HERETICS. Let men of this kind, who are aiders and favourers of heretics, know therefore, first, that those catechumens hold the sound faith and truth of the Church, and advance from the divine camp to do battle with the devil, with a full and sincere acknowledgment of God the Father, and of Christ, and of the Holy Ghost; then, that they certainly are not deprived of the sacrament of baptism who are baptized with the most glorious and greatest baptism of blood, concerning which the Lord also said, that He had "another baptism to be baptized with."
· Church Father Tertullian (3rd Century): Enchiridion Patristicum under "de baptisme”: "In truth we also have a second laver which is the same as the first, namely that of blood, concerning which Our Lord said, "And I have a baptism wherewith I am to be baptized' (Luke 12:50) after He had already been baptized; for He came by water and blood as John wrote, that He might be baptized by water and glorified by blood, likewise too that He might make us called by water and chosen by blood; He poured forth these two baptisms from the wound dug in His side so that those who believed in His blood might be cleansed by water and those who were cleansed by water might bear His blood; this is the baptism which takes the place of the laver which has not been received and restores what was lost."
· St. Cyril of Jerusalem (4th Century): Enchiridion Patristicum, (811): "If anyone does not receive baptism, he does not have salvation, excepting only martyrs who gain the kingdom even without water."
· St. John Chrystostome writes of Baptism of Blood (4th Century): Panegyric on St. Lucianus, "Do not be surprised that I should equate martyrdom with baptism; for here too the spirit blows with much fruitfulness, and a marvellous and astonishing remission of sins and cleansing of the soul is effected; and just as those who are baptized by water, so, too, those who suffer martyrdom are cleansed with their own blood."
· St. Ambrose, a Doctor of the Church, writes on Baptism of Desire (4th Century): From his writing "De obitu Valentiniani consolatio": "But I hear that you are distressed because he did not receive the sacrament of baptism. Tell me, what attribute do we have besides our will, our intention? Yet, a short time ago he had this desire that before he came to Italy he should be initiated [baptized], and he indicated that he wanted to be baptized as soon as possible by myself. Did he not, therefore, have that grace which he desired? Did he not have what he asked for? Undoubtedly because he asked for it he received it."
· St. Thomas Aquinas (Summa Theologica – 13th century): “Consequently, just as some are baptized with the Baptism of desire, through their desire of baptism, before being baptized in the Baptism of water; so likewise some eat this sacrament spiritually ere they receive it sacramentally.” (Summa Theologica; Whether there are two ways to be distinguished of eating Christ's body?)
· St. Catherine of Sienna (14th Century): Dialogue of St. Catherine: Baptisms: "I wished thee to see the secret of the Heart, showing it to thee open, so that you mightest see how much more I loved than I could show thee by finite pain. I poured from it Blood and Water, to show thee the baptism of water which is received in virtue of the Blood. I also showed the baptism of love in two ways, first in those who are baptized in their blood shed for Me which has virtue through My Blood, even if they have not been able to have Holy Baptism, and also those who are baptized in fire, not being able to have Holy Baptism, but desiring it with the affection of love. There is no baptism of desire without the Blood, because Blood is steeped in and kneaded with the fire of Divine charity, because through love was it shed. There is yet another way by which the soul receives the baptism of Blood, speaking, as it were, under a figure, and this way the Divine charity provided, knowing the infirmity and fragility of an, through which he offends, not that he is obliged, through his fragility and infirmity, to commit sin, unless he wish to do so; by falling, as he will, into the guild of mortal sin, by which he loses the grace which he drew from Holy Baptism in virtue of the Blood, it was necessary to leave a continual baptism of blood. This the Divine charity provided in the Sacrament of Holy Confession, the soul receiving the Baptism of blood, with contrition of heart, confessing, when able, to My ministers, who hold the keys of the Blood, sprinkling It, in absolution, upon the face of the soul. But if the soul is unable to confess, contrition of heart is sufficient for this baptism, the hand of My clemency giving you the fruit of this precious Blood... Thou seest then that these Baptisms, which you should all receive until the last moment, are continual, and though My works, that is the pains of the Cross were finite, the fruit of them which you receive in Baptism, through Me, are infinite..."
· Council of Trent (16th century): Decree on Justification (Session 6, Chapter 4): 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.
· Catechism of the Council of Trent (16th century): "....should any unforeseen accident deprive adults of baptism, their intention of receiving it, and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness." [section on baptism]
· St. Alphonsus Ligouri (Moral Theology Manual - 18th century): Bk. 6, no. 95., Concerning Baptism: "baptism of desire is perfect conversion to God by contrition or love of God above all things accompanied by an explicit or implicit desire for true baptism of water, the place of which it takes as to the remission of guilt, but not as to the impression of the [baptismal] character or as to the removal of all debt of punishment. It is called "of wind" ["flaminis"] because it takes place by the impulse of the Holy Ghost who is called a wind ["flamen"]. Now it is "de fide" that men are also saved by Baptism of desire, by virtue of the Canon Apostolicam, "de presbytero non baptizato" and of the Council of Trent"
· Pope Pius IX (19th century): Encyclical of Pope Pius IX, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore 1863: “There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments.”
· Baltimore Cathechism (starting in the 19th century): Q. 653. Is Baptism of desire or of blood sufficient to produce the effects of Baptism of water? A. Baptism of desire or of blood is sufficient to produce the effects of the Baptism of water, if it is impossible to receive the Baptism of water.
· St. Pope Pius X (early 20th century): Catechism of Christian Doctrine, para. 132, "A person outside the Church by his own fault, and who dies without perfect contrition, will not be saved. But he who finds himself outside without fault of his own, and who lives a good life, can be saved by the love called charity, which unites unto God, and in a spiritual way also to the Church, that is, to the soul of the Church."
· St. Pope Pius X (early 20th century): Catechism of St. Pius X: 17 Q: Can the absence of Baptism be supplied in any other way? A: The absence of Baptism can be supplied by martyrdom, which is called Baptism of Blood, or by an act of perfect love of God, or of contrition, along with the desire, at least implicit, of Baptism, and this is called Baptism of Desire.
· Catholic Encyclopedia (~1913): X. SUBSTITUTES FOR THE SACRAMENT: “The Fathers and theologians frequently divide baptism into three kinds: the baptism of water (aquæ or fluminis), the baptism of desire (flaminis), and the baptism of blood (sanguinis). However, only the first is a real sacrament. The latter two are denominated baptism only analogically, inasmuch as they supply the principal effect of baptism, namely, the grace which remits sins. It is the teaching of the Catholic Church that when the baptism of water becomes a physical or moral impossibility, eternal life may be obtained by the baptism of desire or the baptism of blood.”
· Catholic Encyclopedia (~1913): The Baptism of Desire: “This doctrine is set forth clearly by the Council of Trent. In the fourteenth session (cap. iv) the council teaches that contrition is sometimes perfected by charity, and reconciles man to God, before the Sacrament of Penance is received. In the fourth chapter of the sixth session, in speaking of the necessity of baptism, it says that men can not obtain original justice "except by the washing of regeneration or its desire" (voto).
· Canon Law (1917): “Baptism, the door and foundation of the Sacraments, in fact or at least in desire necessary unto salvation for all, is not validly conferred except through the ablution of true and natural water with the prescribed form of words.” (Canon 737). “Those who have died without baptism are not to be given ecclesiastical burial. Catechumens who die without baptism through no fault of their own are to be counted among the baptized.” (Canon 1239)
· A Catholic Dictionary (~1931): Baptism, The Sacrament of: "Baptism by water, blood, or desire is necessary to salvation".
Summary
Above we have examples of Church teaching on the three-fold Baptism spanning 1800+ years of the Catholic Church, examples from the early Church Fathers, Saints, Doctors of the Church, Popes, General Councils, papal encyclicals, Canon Law, catechisms, and other references, all openly and unanimously teaching the faithful the doctrine of Baptism of Desire and Blood. This includes both solemn and ordinary teaching. Yet we do not see the Church condemn a single one of these sources or their writings on the subject throughout the entire history of the Church. It is a universal and unanimous doctrine.
To take one example, there have been over 70 Popes since Baptism of Desire was written about in the Summa Theologica in the 13th century, yet neither the Summa Theologica nor the writing on Baptism of Desire in the Summa Theologica were ever condemned by those 70+ Popes. The same thought can be applied to the other examples above; this doctrine has been allowed to propagate century after century. The fact is, Baptism of Desire, Blood and Water are CLEARLY a unanimous teaching of the Magisterium of the Church (both Solemn and Ordinary), and therefore we MUST believe them.
Common Arguments
1. The Council of Trent did not speak about Baptism of Desire. Some have argued that the Council of Trent did not speak of Baptism of Desire, so as to try and remove the only example of solemn teaching on the subject, leaving all other examples above as ordinary teaching. It clearly did speak of Baptism of Desire as several Saints openly state it did, but regardless, this argument is in vain as we can clearly see from the definitions of the Magisterium that it does not matter; both forms of Church teaching are infallible, according to the solemn teaching of the First Vatican Council.
2. Baptism and Desire and/or Blood were never solemnly defined. The Council of Trent clearly refers to Baptism of Desire in the example above, yet there are some that attempt to argue the meaning of what the Council of Trent meant. For those that try to argue whether or not this doctrine was solemnly defined, it is irrelevant, since the Ordinary Magisterium of the Church (also infallible) has taught this doctrine throughout the history of the Church, without a single condemnation from the Solemn Magisterium.
3. Church Fathers, Saints, and the other examples above are “not infallible”. This argument is also in vain as we can clearly see from the definitions of the Magisterium that when a teaching of the Church is unanimous, it is part of the Ordinary Magisterium of the Church, which is itself infallible, according to the solemn teaching of the First Vatican Council. Certainly, when a theologian speaks or writes on a doctrine, that in itself is not an infallible statement; it is when that doctrine is unanimously taught elsewhere in the Church without condemnation that it becomes part of the infallible Ordinary Magisterium. Furthermore, to say any of the sources above are “not infallible” on the subject is to directly imply that the source(s) have been in error for all the years or centuries that the writing has been taught or allowed to propagate, even without a single condemnation from the Solemn Magisterium. This is to say that the Catholic Church can propagate error and heresy, which is a denial of the dogma of the Infallibility of the Church. It is blasphemy to say the One, Holy, Universal, and Apostolic Catholic Church can introduce anything harmful to the faithful. Church teaching on the subject: Pope Pius VI in Auctorem Fidei, 1794, condemns: ''the Church, governed by the Holy Spirit, could impose a disciplinary law that would be not only useless and more burdensome for the faithful than Christian liberty allows, but also dangerous and harmful" (again, this was condemned). Also, Pope Gregory XVI in Quo Graviora (1833) states, "The Church is the pillar and foundation of truth, all of which truth is taught by the Holy Spirit. Should the church be able to order, yield to, or permit those things which tend toward the destruction of souls and the disgrace and detriment of the sacrament instituted by Christ?”
4. No one knows what is part of the Ordinary Magisterium.
If the examples above are NOT part of the Ordinary Magisterium, then we ask the reader to please provide better examples of something that IS part of the Ordinary Magisterium. Certainly an excellent example of the Ordinary Magisterium above would be the teaching on Baptism of Desire in the Summa Theologica; which is one of the most trusted Catholic references next to Scripture itself, a book that was placed on the altar next to the Bible itself during the Council of Trent, and openly used throughout the Catholic Church for some 750 years! Note that if even ONE of the examples above is part of the Ordinary Magisterium, it is infallible according to the First Vatican Council, and we must believe it!
If the Church has openly taught the three-fold Baptism throughout it’s entire history, and never declared it to be heresy, why are lay people doing so today?
Questions/comments to info@rosarychapel.net
<-TO HOME PAGE <-TO ARTICLES MAIN PAGE
