A serious question, even if I am playing with fire [What is the ultimate fate of the aborted fetuses?]

[CathBoy1]

@camoderator please do lock this thread.

 

[RhodesianSon]

Either way… it’s not what the Church teaches, per se.

The church doesn’t say definitively because we don’t know. Either way, abortion should be fought as . . . a . … terrible and irredeemably evil . . . act.

 

[ThomasMT]

Except… the Church doesn’t stop there:

Our conclusion is that the many factors that we have considered above give serious theological and liturgical grounds for hope that unbaptised infants who die will be saved and enjoy the Beatific Vision. We emphasise that these are reasons for prayerful hope , rather than grounds for sure knowledge. There is much that simply has not been revealed to us (cf. Jn 16:12).

From the International Theological Commission’s document The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without being Baptized, as found on the Vatican website.

Actually it does. Adding condolence in the form of hope doesnt really change the underlying position.

 

[Nononony]

LOL!

Yes, you’re right: it’ll likely be very unpopular.

How would you square it with St Paul’s teaching in the Bible? He writes, “it is appointed that human beings die once, and after this the judgment” (Heb 9:27).

So, how can you assert that he (and the Bible!) are mistaken, and that reincarnation is really what happens?

I can’t square it. I have no arguments that will convince you, no evidence that goes beyond personal revelation, nothing to persuade you with, and it also isn’t my goal to persuade you! You know what they say about faith being blind? That’s what it is. I was born fervently believing it. And despite many decades of being told otherwise, I still believe it. It’s actually caused me quite a bit of pain over my life. I’ve been told over and over that I have a problem with pride and authority and that has’t fixed my issue with pride or authority. Anyway, I’m not trying to argue, honestly. Like I told someone else in this thread, I come here to learn, (I love to learn) but sometimes I can’t keep my mouth shut when I know I should. I continuously work on keeping my mouth shut, but today I totally failed.

 

[Gorgias]

The church doesn’t say definitively because we don’t know.

No, but it doesn’t teach Limbo, as such.

Actually it does.

I guess if you can read a document on the Vatican website and respond “no, the Church doesn’t teach this”, then there’s not really anywhere we can go with that denial, eh?

Adding condolence in the form of hope doesnt really change the underlying position.

“Hope” isn’t “condolence”. I’m sorry you feel that way.

(See what I just did there? I gave you hope. )

 

[RhodesianSon]

No, but it doesn’t teach Limbo, as such.

I don’t personally believe in Limbo. I think the souls of children who die unbaptized go to hell. I hope they don’t, but I think that’s the reality.

 

[Jeanne_S]

Yep,I agree re your assumptions.

 

[ThomasMT]

You are a better theologian than a comedian
In any case, it seems to serve the same purpose, without adding much to the discussion. After all, we can always hope about a lot of things.

 

[AdamP88]

By the way, the (glorius) conquistadors confiscated the newborns from the local heathens, baptized them(!) and immediately killed them, because it was their deeply held belief that the baptized babies WILL get to heaven, and they wanted to HELP them to get there. The church - back then - did not object this practice.

I am 100% sure that the Church never sanctioned anything like this. Many atrocities were committed by colonial invaders that were not approved by the Church.