Does Pius XII’s speech to midwives prove
baptism of desire? No.
By. Bro. Peter Dimond, O.S.B.
PIUS XII’S SPEECH TO MIDWIVES
OBJECTION- Pope Pius XII taught that an adult can be saved without Baptism in his
speech to Midwives, Oct. 29, 1951. This
proves baptism of desire.
“In
the present economy there is no other way of communicating [sanctifying grace]
to the child who has not yet the use of reason [other than Baptism]. But,
nevertheless, the state of grace at the moment of death is absolutely necessary
for salvation. Without it, it is not possible to attain supernatural happiness,
the beatific vision of God. An act of love can suffice [i.e., Baptism of
Desire] for an adult to obtain sanctifying grace and supply for the absence of
Baptism; for the unborn child or for the newly born, this way is not
open...."[1]
--Pope Pius XII, Address to
Midwives, Oct. 29, 1951
ANSWER- No, this a speech to Italian midwives; a
speech to Italian midwives is not infallible. It is less authoritative, in fact, than Pope
Pius XI’s encyclical Ad Salutem. In his encyclical of 1930, in discussing
those who “beg for baptism” and die before being regenerated [i.e. baptized],
Pope Pius XI makes his own the words of St. Augustine which declare that “utter
ruin” is their lot. In other words, no
man who begs for baptism can be saved by his desire without the waters of
regeneration.
Pope
Pius XI, Ad Salutem (#44), April 20,
1930: “Some bishops and priests were at a loss as to what course to pursue in
the midst of so many crushing disasters.
One of them asked Augustine his opinion: ‘Surely we know [Augustine
said] that when such perils reach their crest and no escape is possible, people
of both sexes of all ages are wont to flock to the Church. Some
beg for baptism, some for reconciliation, some for the performance of
penance, all for consolation and the sacraments to be made available and
administered. In such a crisis, if
ministers be lacking, utter ruin is
the lot of those who leave this world unregenerated or unshriven.’”[2]
A pope is infallible only
when speaking from the Chair of Peter or reiterating what the Church has always
taught in her ordinary and universal Magisterium.
Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, 1870,
Session 4, Chap. 4:
“…the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex
cathedra [from the Chair of Peter], that is, when carrying out the duty
of the pastor and teacher of all Christians in accord with his supreme
apostolic authority he explains a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the
universal Church... operates with that infallibility with which the
divine Redeemer wished that His Church be instructed in defining doctrine on
faith and morals; and so such definitions of the Roman Pontiff from himself,
but not from the consensus of the Church, are unalterable.”[3]
Pius XII’s speech to
midwives doesn’t bind Catholics.
Further, his speech to the Italian midwives is not more authoritative
than Pope St. Siricius’s letter to Himerius in 385, in which that pope strongly
declares that the man who begs for regeneration and dies without it will not be
saved.
Pope St.
Siricius, Letter to Himerius, 385:
“As we maintain
that the observance of the holy Paschal time should in no way be relaxed, in
the same way we desire that infants who, on account of their age, cannot yet
speak, or those who, in any necessity, are in want of the water of holy baptism, be succored with all possible speed,
for fear that, if those who leave this world should be deprived of the life
of the Kingdom for having been refused the source of salvation which they
desired, this may lead to the ruin of our souls. If those
threatened with shipwreck, or the attack of enemies, or the uncertainties of a
siege, or those put in a hopeless condition due to some bodily sickness, ask
for what in their faith is their only help, let them receive at the
very moment of their request the reward of regeneration they beg for. Enough of past mistakes! From now on, let all the priests observe the
aforesaid rule if they do not want to be separated from the solid apostolic rock
on which Christ has built his universal Church.”[4]
The fact that popes can make
mistakes in their fallible capacity is proven throughout Church history. Pope John IV wrongly attempted to defend the
heretical words of Pope Honorius, which were condemned by the III Council of
Constantinople.
Pope John IV, “Dominus qui dixit” to Constantius
the Emperor, Regarding Pope Honorius, 641: “…So, my aforementioned predecessor [Honorius] said concerning the
mystery of the incarnation of Christ, that there were not in Him, as in us
sinners, contrary wills of mind and flesh; and
certain ones converting this to their own meaning, suspected that He taught one
will of His divinity and humanity which is altogether contrary to the truth.”[5]
In studying papal errors
throughout history in preparation for its declaration of papal infallibility,
the theologians at Vatican I found that over 40 popes held wrong theological
views. In a notorious case of papal
error, Pope John XXII held the false view that the just of the Old Testament
don’t receive the Beatific Vision until after the General Judgment. But none of these errors were taught by popes
from the Chair of St. Peter, just like Pius XII’s speech to Italian midwives is
not a declaration from the Chair of St. Peter.
Perhaps the most
notorious case of papal error in Church history is the “Synod of the Corpse” of
897. This was where the dead body of
Pope Formosus – who by all accounts was a holy and devoted pope – was condemned
after his death by Pope Stephen VII for a number of supposed violations of
canon law.
“In late January 897 the terrible Duchess Ageltrude and her son Lambert
II who called himself emperor, entered Rome.
There very soon followed the nightmare scene graven forever upon the
historical memory of Christendom. The
decayed body of Pope Formosus was taken out of its tomb in St. Peter’s. It was dressed in pontifical robes, and under
them even the hair shirt the ascetic pope had worn in life, was put on the
corpse. It was propped upon a seat. It was charged with violations of canon law…
A deacon was assigned as canon lawyer for the defense. The ‘case’ was heard. Pope Stephen VII pronounced the corpse
guilty as charged… Its robes and
the hair shirt were stripped off again.
The three fingers of its right hand, which had been raised for
pontifical blessings, were cut off.”
This quote doesn’t
mention that after the condemnation of Formosus by Pope Stephen VII, Pope
Formosus’s body was thrown into the Tiber.
But some years later in
898, “In mid-summer Pope Stephen VII was arrested… by whom or for what reasons
we do not know… His successor, Romanus, ruled just four months. Romanus’ successor, [Pope] Theodore II,
ruled for only twenty days. But during
those twenty days he ordered that the body of [Pope] Formosus, which had
been rescued from the Tiber, be returned with all honor to its original tomb in
St. Peter’s; and he restored the Roman clergy ordained by Pope Formosus whom
Stephen VII had degraded.”[6]
So, Pope Theodore
II overturned the condemnation of Pope Formosus which was issued by Pope
Stephen VII.
In 898, Pope John IX was elected to succeed Pope Theodore II. He agreed with Pope Theodore II on the
Formosus issue, and “condemned the entire proceedings of Stephen VII against
Formosus’s body, and burned its records.”[7]
We can see that Pope John IX also agreed with Pope Theodore
II, and condemned Pope Stephen VII’s condemnation of Pope Formosus.
However, a few years
later Pope Sergius III (904-911) was elected pope. He held a different view on the Pope Formosus
issue. Pope Sergius III “went so far
as to praise the memory of Stephen VII while still condemning that of Formosus,
whom he called a ‘haughty intruder,’ and John IX, whom he called ‘a wolf.’ He once again declared Formosus’s ordinations
invalid, and many priests who had been ordained by Formosus were required to
undergo a rite of reordination.”[8]
So, to summarize: We
have Pope Stephen VII and Pope Sergius III who were in favor of the
condemnation of Pope Formosus, while Pope Theodore II and Pope John IX
condemned the condemnation of Pope Formosus. None of these decisions were promulgated as a
binding teaching on faith or morals to be believed by the universal Church
(i.e. infallibly). This should show us
all very clearly that not every decision, speech, opinion or judgment of
a pope is infallible.
Furthermore, Pope Pius
XII was a very weak pope who was the bridge to the Vatican II apostasy. It’s not a surprise that he believed in
explicit baptism of desire for adults.
That view was very widespread at the time. The thing which is of
utmost importance in this regard is not what saints, theologians or even popes
taught in their fallible capacity; it’s what God has allowed the infallible
Magisterium of the Church to define.
That’s the key (literally and figuratively – Mt. 16:18-20).
Pope Pius XII allowed the
denial of the salvation dogma to run rampant throughout his reign. He reformed the Holy Week rites (a decision
of his which many of those who love baptism of desire reject), and in the same fallible
speech to Italian midwives cited above he endorsed the birth control method of
Natural Family Planning. In his
encyclical Humani Generis, Pius XII
also said that the Magisterium doesn’t forbid investigation into a certain type
of theistic evolution, which is absurd.
Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis (#36), Aug. 12, 1950: “For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does
not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and
sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in
both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far
as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent
and living matter -- for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are
immediately created by God. However this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is,
those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with
the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that all
are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church, to whom Christ has given
the mission of interpreting authentically the Sacred Scriptures and of
defending the dogmas of faithful.”[9]
Theistic evolution holds
that creatures were living, evolving and dying
for perhaps millions of years before Adam lived and died. But Scripture and Catholic dogma teach that
through Adam’s sin death first entered
the world! Thus, theistic evolution
and Catholic teaching are incompatible.
Moreover, notice how John Paul II used Pope Pius XII’s fallible teaching
to promote evolution as true.
John Paul II, Message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences on Evolution, Oct.
22, 1996: "In his encyclical Humani Generis (1950), my predecessor
Pius XII has already affirmed that there is no conflict between evolution and
the doctrine of the faith regarding man and his vocation, provided that we
do not lose sight of certain fixed points....Today, more than a half-century
after the appearance of that encyclical, some new findings lead us toward the
recognition of evolution as more than an hypothesis. In fact it is remarkable
that this theory has had progressively greater influence on the spirit of
researchers, following a series of discoveries in different scholarly
disciplines. The convergence in the
results of these independent studies -- which was neither planned nor sought --
constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory."[10]
Thus, people shouldn’t get carried away
with something that Pius XII said in his fallible capacity. Baptism of desire advocates cannot, for a
moment, argue that Pius XII’s speech to midwives proves baptism of desire. (It should be emphasized that Pius XII is
only enunciating the position of explicit baptism of desire for adults). Pope Pius XII was simply wrong in his fallible
capacity, just like he was wrong on theistic evolution and NFP. Baptism of desire is proven false by numerous
irrefutable arguments from the infallible teaching of the Chair of St.
Peter, which baptism of desire advocates cannot even begin to respond to. And Pius XII’s own official teaching on
baptism in Mystici Corporis declares
that no unbaptized person is to be considered a member of the Church.
Pope Pius XII,
Mystici Corporis (# 22),
June 29, 1943: “Actually only those
are to be numbered among the members of the Church who have received the laver
of regeneration [water baptism] and profess the true faith.”[11]
Pope Paul III, The
Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 5 on the Sacrament of Baptism, ex
cathedra: “If anyone says that baptism [the Sacrament] is optional,
that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”[12]
www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com
[1] Quoted in John
McCarthy, Problems in Theology, Vol. I (Newman Press, 1956), p. 53.
[2][2] The Papal Encyclicals, Vol. 3
(1903-1939), p. 387.
[3] Denzinger 1839.
[4] Fr.
Jacques Dupuis, S.J. and Fr. Josef Neuner, S.J., The Christian Faith,
Sixth Revised and Enlarged Edition, Staten Island, NY: Alba House, 1996, p.
540.
[5] Denzinger 253.
[6] Warren H. Carroll, A History of Christendom, Vol. 2 (The Building of Christendom), 1987, pp.
388-399.
[7] Warren H. Carroll, A History of Christendom, Vol. 2 (The Building of Christendom), 1987, p.
389.
[8] Warren H. Carroll, A History of Christendom, Vol. 2 (The Building of Christendom), 1987, p.
390.
[9] The Papal Encyclicals, Vol. 4
(1939-1958), p. 181; Denzinger 2327.
[10] John Paul II, Message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences on Evolution, Oct.
22, 1996, available on the internet.
[11]
Denzinger 2286.
[12]
Denzinger 861; Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Vol. 2, p. 685.