Rev. Anthony R. Lusvardi, S.J. is an American Jesuit priest who teaches sacramental theology at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome. He holds a B.A. in English and philosophy from the University of Notre Dame, an M.A. in Applied Philosophy from Loyola University Chicago, an M.T.S. from Boston College, and an S.T.L. and S.T.D. from the Pontifical Atheneum of St. Anselm.
Father Lusvardi is the author of Baptism of Desire and Christian Salvation, recently published by Catholic University of America Press. In it, he argues for the need for sacramental baptism in the Catholic Church for salvation against contemporary efforts to water it down.
He recently spoke with Catholic World Report about the book and his research into baptism.
CWR: Why did you choose baptism as the topic for your doctoral research and book?
Fr. Lusvardi: In my pastoral work as a young Jesuit on the Rosebud Indian Reservation, I loved teaching the baptismal preparation courses for young families and those converting to the faith. But I’ve also noted that, in modern Catholicism, the question of “mission” can be particularly fraught. Talking about “converting people” seems like bad form to many Catholics these days, but how to square that attitude with what we see in the Acts of the Apostles, for example, is hard to do.
A lot of the unease with evangelization—and therefore confusion about the Church’s mission—has to do with the salvation of non-Christians. For a sacramental theologian, the question of whether the sacraments are necessary is pretty fundamental.
When I considered doctoral studies, I knew about the concept of “baptism of desire” and thought it might be a way to explore all these issues. Once I began to research the topic, I realized everybody agreed that it was important, but nobody had ever done a thorough, critical study of the issue. When you’re looking for a dissertation topic, that’s the jackpot!
CWR: What is the source of the belief that we cannot go to heaven without sacramental baptism?
Fr. Lusvardi:Belief in the necessity of baptism for salvation seems to have been affirmed pretty much universally by the ancient Church from as far back as we have evidence. Belief in baptism’s necessity is reflected in the New Testament itself, fairly directly in passages like John 3:5—“unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God”—and Mark 16:16, and indirectly in a number of other passages. And it’s attested to in the earliest non-Biblical sources as well.
CWR: What is “baptism of desire” and where do we get that idea?
Fr. Lusvardi:Baptism of desire is the doctrine that someone who desires to be baptized but is prevented from doing so by circumstances outside his or her control can still be saved. I think it’s best thought of as a corollary of the necessity of baptism, rather than an exception to the rule.
CWR: Your book contends that baptism of desire is enough to get “hard cases” to heaven. Are you suggesting that such cases are limited and should not be exaggerated? If so, what do you count as hard cases and why?
Fr. Lusvardi: The classic case is a catechumen who dies unexpectedly before baptism. It’s just such a case that prompted St. Ambrose to articulate the idea of baptism of desire for the first time in AD 392. Other hard cases that the early Church faced—just as we do today—are those who died before hearing the Gospel and children both born and unborn who die before baptism.
When it comes to specific cases, there is always going to be some uncertainty because our desires aren’t visible. So you can have pretty strong evidence of a desire if someone enrolls in the catechumenate and says “I want to be baptized” but not absolute certainty. I discuss some of the grounds we might have for believing that someone might implicitly desire baptism in the book, and, while I think baptism of desire is in principle accessible to everyone, I’d say, yes, those cases seem limited.
CWR: In contrast, could you suggest what cases today would not qualify as a baptism of desire, even though some theologians might wish to count them as such?
Fr. Lusvardi: I talk about desires that are too weak or generic to imply baptism. If someone explicitly rejects baptism, I don’t think you can take their freedom seriously and still call that a baptism of desire. I also think it’s important that we avoid hypothesizing alternatives to baptism. An implicit desire for baptism is not the same as an alternative to the sacrament.
Popular ideas about salvation treat it as a reward for being a good person, but leading an ethical life is not the same as immersion in the paschal mystery. Salvation means more than just “being a good person” or “following your conscience.”
CWR: The jacket of your book states that theologians of the past two centuries have “treated with unease if not ignored altogether” the traditional Catholic belief in the need for sacramental baptism. Can you give us an example of that?
Fr. Lusvardi: I devote a lot of attention to Karl Rahner because of his great influence. I like to say that his idea of “baptism of desire” involves neither baptism nor desire! He empties the concept of meaning, and I don’t think he gives a compelling answer to how the sacraments are even helpful for salvation.
What I think might surprise people, however, is that Rahner is not unique and is in many ways the heir to a way of thinking about the sacraments that came out of a particular kind of nineteenth- and twentieth-century scholasticism that saw the sacraments more as legal formalities than a unique participation in the humanity and saving action of Jesus.
CWR: Do you believe that most people who reject Catholic baptism do not understand it, or do you think it’s more because they reject the moral life it calls them to live?
Fr. Lusvardi: All of us are different in how we make decisions and what motivates us. I don’t think a theory of baptism of desire can rely on people having either perfect motives for desiring the sacrament or entirely nefarious motives for rejecting it. The complexity of our motives is part of why there will always be an element of uncertainty when speaking of desire.
CWR: Catholics recognize the sacramental validity of Protestant baptisms performed according to the traditional Trinitarian formula. Can someone go to heaven who has been baptized validly outside of the Catholic Church more easily than someone not baptized at all? Why or why not?
Fr. Lusvardi: “Easily” is maybe not the way I’d put it, but I do think baptism by its very nature implies full union with the Body of Christ, the Church. We can put up barriers to that through sin—including, I suppose, things like heresy and schism—but then we have to take into account other moral considerations, like personal culpability and mitigating factors. A lot of people are Protestant because they were raised that way, not because they actively reject the truth of Catholicism. So I think, yes, their baptism certainly puts them on the road to salvation.
CWR: As a Jesuit seminarian, you taught high school confirmation classes at a Hispanic parish in Chicago and worked on a Lakota Sioux Indian reservation in South Dakota. What did you learn about baptism from those experiences?
Fr. Lusvardi: Baptism is and remains an astonishing, life-changing sacrament, but in contemporary Catholicism we’ve gotten into the bad habit of treating it like a formality. I think the process of conversion that is outlined in the Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults is a step in the right direction. We no longer live in a culture that will naturally form people as Christians, so we again need—as they had in the early Church—a process of conversion that is anchored by the sacrament.
CWR: As a theology professor at the Gregorian University, what’s the most important thing you try to teach your seminarians about sacramental baptism?
Fr. Lusvardi: What Paul says about baptism in Romans 6: Baptism means participating in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus.
CWR: What was your biggest consolation in researching this topic?
Fr. Lusvardi: Working my way through theological history, I came into contact with some of the best minds that have ever existed and very ordinary Christians dealing with real problems. For example, reading some of the inscriptions on ancient gravestones, which give us evidence about when children were baptized back then, was quite poignant. I could imagine what Christian parents who had lost a child were going through 1500 years ago.
It is also humbling to find oneself working on the same problems with Ambrose, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and Robert Bellarmine. I found myself asking them for help along the way.
Robert Bellarmine is actually buried in the church—Sant’Ignazio—across the street from the Jesuit residence where I was living, and when I’d get stuck, I’d head across the street to talk things over with my confrere.
CWR: What was your biggest desolation?
Fr. Lusvardi: We’d all like to believe in progress and imagine that we are somehow better off theologically than in the past, that today’s theology is sharper and more enlightened than in previous centuries. Unfortunately, as my research progressed, I realized that the evidence does not support that narrative. I had to come to terms with that.
There’s been some great research over the past two centuries, but it’s mixed in with what John Henry Newman would have called “corruptions” of doctrine and what I might call sloppy thinking. In the late twentieth century, theologians were particularly prone to bending the historical evidence to fit preordained conclusions. I might like those conclusions, but a theologian has to be faithful to revelation. On the plus side, realizing that the discussion is ongoing means we can recognize and correct some of our mistakes and put Catholic theology on a more solid footing.
CWR: What might surprise people about your book?
Fr. Lusvardi: Because I dive deeply into history, I challenge some standard narratives. Some things people might think of as modern problems—for example, a tendency to minimalize the importance of religious rituals—have roots in medieval scholasticism. It’s not a liberal or a conservative analysis; there’s something in there to upset everyone!
My main challenge to modern theologians is to start putting the sacraments back at the center of our theological reasoning.
CWR: If you could suggest one prayer to strengthen people’s faith in the necessity of sacramental baptism, what would it be and why?
Fr. Lusvardi: The baptismal liturgy is magnificent, starting with the opening dialogue for acceptance into the order of catechumens. “What do you ask of God’s Church? Faith. What does faith offer you? Eternal life.”
The prayers over the water, the litany of the saints, the profession of faith, the explanatory rites—the riches of the baptismal liturgy are astonishing.
CWR: What’s your favorite Scripture passage about baptism and why?
Fr. Lusvardi: I already mentioned Romans 6. I’d add the baptism of Jesus. The meaning of our baptism is revealed in his, especially in the Father’s words, “You are my beloved Son.” Before baptism, we are God’s creatures, but in baptism we come to share in the sonship of Jesus. We become, by adoption, the sons and daughters of God. And this gives us our most important, most fundamental identity. You can find an answer to almost any spiritual problem by returning to that gift of adoption as God’s son or daughter, or at least you can begin to find an answer there.
CWR: What do you hope people take away from your work on this topic?
Fr. Lusvardi: What happens in the sacraments is irreducible and unique because they are a participation in the utterly singular action of Jesus. So it’s always an error to try to invent substitutes for them. The mission to evangelize is as urgent today as it was for the apostles.
CWR: Any final thoughts?
Fr. Lusvardi: The book is scholarly, but I try to keep it accessible because I think it is important not just for specialists, but also pastors. For example, I propose what I think is a much more solid answer to the question of the salvation of babies dying before baptism than what the tradition has been able to give thus far.
(Editor’s note: This interview was edited for style and length.)
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
“Salvation means more than just “being a good person” or “following your conscience.”
In my mind, besides becoming a participant in the Sacred Mysteries, Baptism initiates us into a life lived in Truth. We believe what we know to be Truth as revealed in Scripture, Tradition and in what the Church formally teaches. Believing the Truth, we then strive to live the Truth faithfully. Living the Truth then presumes that, because we love our neighbor, we want to share the Truth with them.
The “Truth” is NOT something of our own creation. And “Truth” cannot be fudged by a group of the baptized who assemble in Rome and try to foist their perverted notions of truth onto the rest of us Catholics.
On another matter related to Baptism, I wholeheartedly agree with the notion of a Baptism of Desire for Catechumens – the implication being that Catechumens, if they die before receiving the Sacrament, are presumed to die in God’s grace. For this reason, I have some serious questions about infant Baptism. I wonder whether, instead, it wouldn’t be better for parents to present their child to the Church and have the child enrolled formally as a Catechumen. Then, the parents will be involved in a parish catechumenate program that guides the parents in instructing their child in the teachings of the faith. This could easily be done in monthly sessions. Then, when the child reaches the “age of reason”, they could then be formally Baptized, receive the Eucharist and the anointing with the Holy Chrism in Confirmation. With a seven-year preparation in the faith by the parents, the Church could be more certain that the child has been well-prepared to make the decision to enter fully into the mysteries. As it stands now, we have lots of baptized Catholics running around with no faith to speak of who have never received the other Sacraments of Initiation. Currently, some of those parents who do bother to have their infant baptized are just performing a cultural, not a religious act, the parents themselves do not practice the faith, or have the child baptized under pressure from other family members. I say, make Baptism something much more consequential than as it’s now being practiced. And, again, treat children under seven as Catechumens and thus “saved” if they die before receiving the Sacrament of Baptism. The Sacraments of Initiation should be momentous occasions in the life of the Church.
Wait! Fr. Lusvardi’s confere Fr. Leonard Feeney an S.J. until he got kicked out had the same argument and was ostracized and considered a heretic back in 1939. Does Fr. Lusvardi even know about him?
His point about the centrality of the Sacraments is an excellent point, which is a true reading of St. Thomas Aquinas.
I think every Catholic theologian and every Jesuit is aware of Fr Feeney.
We read: “My main challenge to modern theologians is to start putting the sacraments back at the center of our theological reasoning.” Yes.
Yours truly recently heard a prominent cleric in a podcast comment on what laity ought to do if, say, he is concerned about the immoral and anti-doctrinal views of a high-visibility public figure and nominal Catholic? The advice: start at the bottom and write to the public figure’s bishop, suggesting that they have a talk. A talk! But, that “polemics” on Catholic websites (like this one?) only create (expose?) divisions—and render broad evangelization even more difficult.
Yes and no…one possible translation:
The infiltration, corruption and betrayal in the Church, and antics of many laity, are still best handled as mostly a parlor game between varied “theological” schools of thought. Or, in the cases of James Martin and Radcliffe, as also pitting high-visibility clerics against their own religious orders. It was said that even the Catholic Benedict should not have publicly engaged the incendiary German Kasper.
Better advice might have been to, yes, become well-informed—as by engaging with prominent Catholic websites? This, in addition to also addressing letters to responsible bishops. And, yet further, to remember the wise counsel of our first pope: “but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence” (1 Peter 3:15). This also, as attributed to St. Francis: “Preach the Gospel at all times. Use words if necessary…”
SUMMARY: So, yes, surely put the Word and “sacraments back at the center of our theological reasoning.” And, because of the high-visibility parlor game, use “words” when necessary.
Great article CWR!
‘ CWR: Catholics recognize the sacramental validity of Protestant baptisms performed according to the traditional Trinitarian formula. Can someone go to heaven who has been baptized validly outside of the Catholic Church more easily than someone not baptized at all? Why or why not? ‘
**********************************
Holy Eucharist
Baptism by desire implies a progression in Spirit and truth, to Christ in the Sacraments; not merely to some good.
Synodalism
Pope Francis is making it near impossible to serve the Church in her hierarchy which is inextricable from Sacrament; and as this unfolds it takes on a confounding all its own not resolved after he has made some pronouncement or other.
Dialoguing over ….. dissonance ….. Heresy
Positions built and accepted in their followings, not merely aired, by Barth, Rahner, Martini and some others are heretical at root and purpose, they strike at faith and Sacrament.
Very elaborate Pelagianism
While “attacking neo-Pelaginaism” there is a very well-articulated Plagianism being pressed ….. and engendered.
The religious rituals of the Church are salvific; they are not the willy-nilly actions of individuals dressed up in costumes for the delight of the flock. Baptism is necessary for salvation; all that come to Christ emulates the Savior’s own example and become baptized. We fulfill the Great Commission by inviting all to come unto Christ and be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Great article and thank you. I need to be reminded of the value and importance of these holy rituals.
Lusvardi’s effort on baptism realizes its necessity in a Church that has drifted off into less pristine brackish waters. A mix of presumptions and vague beliefs. Baptism of desire conflated beyond its plausibility resulting in the dearth of missionary effort, the unwillingness to spend life’s blood for the salvation of the alien.
We’re a Church radically different from that lived by Ignatius of Antioch. Not in doctrine, rather in our response to it. Baptism, the entree to all the sacraments has become a cultural tradition akin to a first birthday without the candle or cake. For Ignatius faith and the wearing of chains were concomitant. Ignatius, the martyr par excellence among Christ’s faithful, sought death for something worth dying for. His love for Christ, who he reminds us, gave himself for us. That fire is long gone other than the rarity. How do we reignite it? Clearly not by the Let’s all make nice Synod on Synodality.
Why Baptism with water? Why not a sincere act of faith in Christ? For reason of the Incarnation of God in the flesh and blood of Mary, the spiritual divinity assuming a body of physical matter. His presence to us is in visible form. Although that was 2000 years past. Today, we perceive his visible presence in the form of bread and wine, not merely as a spiritual presence. In his real physical presence in sacramental form. As are all sacraments.
Man is a physical being, a dimension so necessary to his existence that we have the promise of the resurrection of our body from the dead, to be forever united with, whatever our end. Baptism with water pronounces the sacred more deeply within us because of its material elements. Spiritual care of the body, a moral life is manifest in what we do. Marriage, the form of which are the exchange of promises, has as its matter the man and woman. Signifying as the Apostle says a great mystery. A reference to the beatific vision.
“CWR: Catholics recognize the sacramental validity of Protestant baptisms performed according to the traditional Trinitarian formula”
Here is a problem as I see it. The Catholic Church certainly has the traditional Trinitarian formula, but several years ago it was in the news that a priest, viewing a video of his baptism, realized that the deacon baptizing him had not used the correct formula. He was re-baptized, re-confirmed and re-ordained. The similar thing occurred at a parish out west.
So, for example, the Baptists may have the correct baptism formula, but how do we know that a person presenting himself as a candidate at OCIA (RCIA), and says he was baptized in a Baptist church in the hills of Kentucky, really was baptized using the correct Trinitarian formula, by pastor Bob at this church. I would suggest that we really do not know. So, given the importance of baptism, why not at least baptize conditionally all candidates who wish to become Catholics?
Given the importance of baptism, I wish the Church would treat it was absolutely valuable for salvation in and thorough Jesus Christ. If it were not so, Jesus would not have chosen to be baptized to fulfill all righteousness – he did not choose to be baptized for the forgiveness of sins.
Crusader, you’re correct. Very often unless a candidate from a protestant church presents an authorized document from the church where the baptism was to have taken place and that indicates the use of the Trinitarian formula and the pouring of water, they would be provisionally baptized.
Protestants were mandatorally given Conditional Baptism in the sacristy before the third world war 1962-1965.
From AD33 to AD1958, no one had to defend the principle of sacramental baptism as the means to salvific life. Before the third world war* 1962-1965, and the Freemasonic Aggiornamento that followed it, Catholicism had no doubts on the necessity of baptism. Baptism by desire being a mystery too great for our comprehension, it being in the hands of the Lord. Our only certitude is His Verbal Demande that we Baptise all nations. What is there to be confused about..
I have occasionally heard of clergy – Protestant and Catholic – who have put off requests by parents who are not existing members of a congregation, and have insisted on something like a period of probation to see if the parents are willing to ‘follow up’ on the sacrament. I have always thought this a most unfortunate practice. Surely the primary consideration should be the soul of the child. If baptism cleanses from original sin, every request to a Catholic priest should be met, however feckless the parent. Of course there will, ideally, be an element of admission to a community, but that pales into insignificance beside the principal sacramental effect. Or do some Catholic priests, as well as Protestants, have doubts about original sin?
All of this means that 2/3 of the world is not saved — not one devout Jew, not one devout Muslim. Rahner fixed that. I’m sad to see it being undone.
The MYSTERY of each individual judgement is something we have to accept as Catholics; it is part of our Faith. It is the role of the Church to teach Catholic Truth and Administer the Sacraments. The call to baptise as many as possible is what God has spoken to us: it must suffise.
It’s a shame that Fr. Lusvardi’s book, “Baptism of Desire and Christian Salvation,” costs $85 on Amazon. I’d be interested in reading it, but not at that price. Perhaps he and CUA Press could make an electronic version available for a lower price?
I am no theologian. But why does the Church find baptism such a daunting issue? The Catholic deep state, baptize everyone? Can we trust any theologian, even Karl Rahner? What happens when a child dies who cannot express desire?
As I committed myself to Catholic enlightening Sacraments as a young post Confirmation altar server and lector and beyond, I began to question elements if our dogma, especially Baptism and Holy Orders. I pondered and challenged, why did an all omniscient and loving God damn to Gehenna his entire human creation with “original sin” when he knew that the vast majority over the centuries would never see a baptismal font? Can we evangelize with untrained proselytizers? Are we holy enough given the disgraceful exodus of our priests? Can we cleanse our eyes from the hypocrisy of political adoration?
I applaud the grace and insight of Father Lusvardi. But will his book encourage a movement to our 7 Sacraments?