Are non-Christian religions acceptable?

[AndrewAxland]

It makes me shiver to think of all the unfortunate parents who suffered undue anguish that probably lasted a lifetime.

When I was living in Poland, one summer, my best friend there decided to take a “vacation” in the town I was living in, his hometown. To visit it as tourists might.

We explored around and encountered lots of things that he did not know even existed there. The thing that made the greatest impression was something we found exploring the woods by the Catholic cemetery. In a clearing in the middle of the woods was a small plot of makeshift graves with home-made headstones that turned out to be for children that had died without being baptized, mostly from the end of the war to the early sixties. At that time, they were not allowed to be buried in the Catholic cemetery. The families buried them in this improvised plot nearby.

What was most heart-wrenching was that many of the little graves were still maintained, some with candles and flowers on them, forty or more years after the deaths of the children buried there.

That was fourteen years ago, and I’m confident that if I were to revisit the place, I would still find that some of these graves have not been forgotten. The loss of a child is not something that a parent forgets for the rest of their lives.

 

[Pup7]

Oh my dear God.

That is horrible. Just horrible. I had never thought about that before.

My next rosary will be for those poor parents.

 

[Wannano]

Oh my dear God.

That is horrible. Just horrible. I had never thought about that before.

My next rosary will be for those poor parents.

I am a non-Catholic, and as such, I struggle with how to ask questions that I have without stirring the pot. However, looking at this particular situation where something was taught and practiced even though it was not doctrine causes me to ask ,…“what other things have been taught and practiced that are not doctrine but are practiced as such”?

 

[SnowRose]

Agree, Wannano.
I’m in the same situation of hesitating to honestly ask in order not to be inflammatory.
There seems to be a mushy borderland between practices, tradition, taught theory, Tradition and Dogma, and from the outside looking in, it seems full of alligators.

 

[Pup7]

At the risk of getting my hand slapped, I think a lot of that has changed over the last 20 years or so as transparency has increased. I can’t cite the sorts of things you all are asking about (and I honestly think they are fair questions), but I think the Church of 2018 is not the same Church that was around in 1998.

And it’s definitely not the same Church my father was raised in through the 1930s and 1940s.

I don’t know enough history to elaborate and I wish I did.

 

[Damian]

You can worship a barbarous deity without being a barbarous person yourself. You are not a deity, you are a human being who must share this world with other people.

“ And he said to them: Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned. ” Mark 16:15-16

This is your deity condemning people, not you. This is not your job to condemn people, but your deity’s responsibility.

“ If any man come to you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him, God speed you. For he that saith unto him, God speed you, communicateth with his wicked works. ” 2 John 1:10-11

Well looks like your deity is telling you to be the neighbor to grow higher hedges around and not answer the door when you come knocking. How much to money to I need to put in your cup so that I can have a nice quiet subway ride home?

“ But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven. ” Mat 10:33

Okay that’s jesus, the failed carpenter, position on this. Not yours. So let your deity and it’s alternate form be a jerk to everyone else. That’s not your job.

These verses contain words directly from our Lord confirming that those who deny Jesus, don’t believe in the Gospels, and who do not get baptized are condemned.

Your deity is the one condemning us, not you. You are not a deity. You can worship your deity all your want and let us deal with your deity in the relationship we will have with your deity, not you. Our relationship with your deity is none of your concern or business, so butt out. If we’re not right with your deity, then it’s on it to let us know that, not you. I don’t want you to mess up the message or to get half of it right and then say, “Crap hang on…” go back and talk with your deity again, then come back with the next line and keep this up because it isn’t speaking to us now and is pouting.

 

[Wannano]

At the risk of getting my hand slapped, I think a lot of that has changed over the last 20 years or so as transparency has increased. I can’t cite the sorts of things you all are asking about (and I honestly think they are fair questions), but I think the Church of 2018 is not the same Church that was around in 1998.

And it’s definitely not the same Church my father was raised in through the 1930s and 1940s.

I don’t know enough history to elaborate and I wish I did.

I appreciate your candid honesty. Many Catholics insist the Church has never changed.

 

[AlNg]

In a clearing in the middle of the woods was a small plot of makeshift graves with home-made headstones that turned out to be for children that had died without being baptized, mostly from the end of the war to the early sixties. At that time, they were not allowed to be buried in the Catholic cemetery. The families buried them in this improvised plot nearby.

I thought that limbo was never an official teaching of the Catholic Church? If it was only an unproven speculative hypothesis, why did the Catholic church refuse to bury unbaptized infants in a Catholic ceremony?

 

[Pup7]

It wasn’t dogma but it was definitely believed in by many.

*Yes, I corrected myself, and I blame it on a lack of coffee at the time. I knew what I meant, but expressed it poorly.

 

[AndrewAxland]

It had nothing to do with limbo, per se. It had to do with only baptized Catholics being allowed to be buried in a Catholic cemetery.

 

[Wannano]

There seems to be a misunderstanding over the motivations of those who advocated for the existence of Limbo. The teaching was intended to emphasize God’s mercy and relieve the anguish of parents, not torment them. Keep in mind that for centuries, the most commonly held belief was that unbaptized children were all damned, as taught by St. Augustine and other Church Fathers. St. Augustine:

“Wherefore whosoever tells us that any man can be made alive in the resurrection of the dead otherwise than in Christ, he is to be detested as a pestilent enemy to the common faith. Likewise, whosoever says that those children who depart out of this life without partaking of that sacrament [of Baptism] shall be made alive in Christ, certainly contradicts the apostolic declaration, and condemns the universal Church…”

Furthermore, the Second Council of Lyons and the infallible ecumenical Council of Florence taught that, “…the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.” (Sixth Session of the Council of Florence)

St. Thomas Aquinas and other medieval theologians acknowledged the Church’s traditional teaching; however, they did not believe that God would allow unbaptized children to suffer in Hell for all eternity. So what was their solution? That there exists a region similar to the Limbo of the Fathers (which is also referred to as “Hell” in Scripture), but where the only “pain” is deprivation of the Beatific Vision. This region of Hell they referred to as the Limbo of the Infants, where unbaptized infants would be free from all pains of the senses and enjoy, though not the perfect supernatural happiness found in heaven, at least perfect natural happiness. Belief in Limbo, therefore, was a great consolation to the parents of deceased and unbaptized infants in those times.
[/quote]

I have appreciation for what you presented here. It makes sense that if the CC no longer believed what it once did that they formulated something that was a consolation to the parents who lost unbaptized babies.

Respectfully, what I cannot come to grips with is the teaching that the Church has never erred in its Teaching when it seems obvious to the contrary. Whether we term it as hypothesis, dogma or any other term, where and how does the Holy Spirit get credit for keeping the Church in all truth when differing teaching so affects the lives of people?

 

[BoomBoomMancini]

I realize I’m late to the party, but it depends on what “acceptable” means.

Should you convert and practice a non-Christian religion? Absolutely not. Should you harass non-Christians or try to deprive them of their rights? Absolutely not.

 

[deMontfort]

Well, the impetus for this thread was that the thread starter was upset that Vatican II said we’re not allowed to say anymore that all Protestants are automatically going to hell.

 

[Agathon]

Pup7:

At the risk of getting my hand slapped, I think a lot of that has changed over the last 20 years or so as transparency has increased. I can’t cite the sorts of things you all are asking about (and I honestly think they are fair questions), but I think the Church of 2018 is not the same Church that was around in 1998.

And it’s definitely not the same Church my father was raised in through the 1930s and 1940s.

I don’t know enough history to elaborate and I wish I did.

I appreciate your candid honesty. Many Catholics insist the Church has never changed.

How the Church operates has changed, not the Church itself.

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

Pup7:

At the risk of getting my hand slapped, I think a lot of that has changed over the last 20 years or so as transparency has increased. I can’t cite the sorts of things you all are asking about (and I honestly think they are fair questions), but I think the Church of 2018 is not the same Church that was around in 1998.

And it’s definitely not the same Church my father was raised in through the 1930s and 1940s.

I don’t know enough history to elaborate and I wish I did.

I appreciate your candid honesty. Many Catholics insist the Church has never changed.

How the Church operates has changed, not the Church itself.

Looking on, that is not so easy to understand.

 

[goodcatholic]

Yes. They are part of the truth. Fragments of it. They can lead you to the whole truth which is Jesus Christ. Then if you want to upgrade to elite level, choose Catholicism over the more sola scriptura options.

 

[Servant31]

Well said Pup I completely agree. I think you can disagree and stand strong with your convictions but still will the good of others.

 

[AlNg]

It had nothing to do with limbo, per se. It had to do with only baptized Catholics being allowed to be buried in a Catholic cemetery.

Was it an example of Christian charity to deny burial to an unbaptized baby of Catholic parents?

 

[AndrewAxland]

Was it an example of Christian charity to deny burial to an unbaptized baby of Catholic parents?

Quite the opposite. But it was unfortunately the norm until recently.

 

[Servant31]

Hello Wanno, and Snow. As a Catholic my whole life, not always actively practicing sadly, I would encourage you to ask if you did have questions. Truthfully it’s an Internet forum so be prepared for incoming, just don’t take it personally. I’ve learned a lot and even though I went to Catholic school for fourteen years or so, after my reversion I had many questions and minor misunderstandings (a few major ones too lol). I had some struggles living out certain doctrines but I found that if I dug for the answers, most of the time, it made much more sense when I got some clarification or some context. Hope that helps.