Can infants be sanctified in the womb?

[bear06]

As usual, I look at the victim, not just the predator.

So, I guess that means you’ll be joining me in praying that God allows these poor little souls so experience the beatific vision? Cool.

What in the world was he ingesting?

We’re red meat lovers!

 

[TNT]

bear06:

Hey T, while I appreciate your kind words, I think it would be hard to prove that Theodred is a liberal. You might want to check out the posts of the person you are accusing of being a “raving disoriented liberal”. I only went through a few of his posts but he practices meatless Fridays and refuses to partake in Communion under both species. Hardly seems like a lib. Remember you used to think I was a raving, disoriented liberal and now you just think I’m raving and disoriented

“now you just think I’m raving and disoriented …”
You just do it to raise hackles. I told you long ago that I had figured you out…A Secret Trad, double agent, spy…

 

[TNT]

bear06:

So, I guess that means you’ll be joining me in praying that God allows these poor little souls to experience the beatific vision? Cool.

We’re red meat lovers!

The question more accurately is death after birth vs death before birth, not after baptism.
According to JPII, we pray TO them, as he says, NOT for them.
Now go give hubby some dessert and ask him to skip the baptism part.

ps.
Close to me… a Trad! As in “We’re red RAW meat lovers!” Pasture only. Texas pasture, open range.
(neo)Conservatives still cook it.

 

[TNT]

bear06:

Your argument doesn’t hold water. Let’s look at murder in general. Has that stopped because people are faced with the fact that someone’s soul may not be in a disposition to die. The fact is, that souls not being denied the beatific vision would be a good thing and I will continue to pray that God’s mercy will extend here. I will also continue to pray that the Pope knows that a dispensation does exist for these poor souls lost to abortion, miscarriage, etc. There is no justification for murder. Look at the Holy Innocents. Because they were martyred and went to heaven, does this excuse those responsible for their deaths?

"Has that stopped because people are faced with the fact that someone’s soul may not be in a disposition to die."
Murder is an offense against the society as well as the individual. Society punishes to the extreme on murder because it is the ultimate crime. Implicit in that is that humans are more than animals from a spiritual standpoint. Implicit in that is also their soul’s disposition. But, no capital punishment discourse today.
“***God’s mercy will extend here” ***
God is perfected in mercy and justice.
The point was, where does it extend with certitude? Just to the UNborn, or the already-born who die in infancy without baptism? Does this “mercy” stop at birth? If so, Why?
“***pray that the Pope knows that a dispensation does exist for these poor souls” ***

The point was, he already did give certitude ! That’s the whole concern here.
Remember:

Let’s put this to the test: **
If a woman was planning an abortion, would JPII, or anyone else (after he couldn’t change her mind) say :
"I would now like to say a special word to women who* WILL HAVE*** an abortion.… You will come to understand that nothing is definitively lost and you will also be able to ask forgiveness (catholic definition of a prayer ie petition) from your child, who is CERTAIN TO BE living in the Lord" (99).

Any normal person sees CONSEQUENCES which is the above insertions into JPII’s proposal.

They are instructed to pray to them, He never mentions praying to God FOR them.
So, you are to pray TO them that they forgive the abortioning parent.

 

[bear06]

The point was, where does it extend with certitude? Just to the UNborn, or the already-born who die in infancy without baptism? Does this “mercy” stop at birth?

This has been MY point all along. Where is the certitude? How can you say that you know that there are no dispensations for these souls as there are for others? How is it that you know for sure that there is no non-sacramental baptism present with these little ones? Once again, I will continue to pray that this is the case and that the Pope’s got some insight that YOU don’t know about.

BTW, your focus seems to be on the aborted but you must also look at the miscarried to whom there, in most cases, is nobody committing evil against the little one.

So T, so let’s cut to the chase, again. Are you saying that the Pope is teaching heresy? That is, do you think he is teaching, in Evangelium Vitae something that is contrary to the some teaching that we are bound to in the Council of Florence?

 

[Theodred]

TNT:

In any case, if a person were to counsel with you,

would you be honest enough to tell them that a consequence of deciding to have one, is the fetus going straight “to be with the Lord” , as JPII has proposed? I doubt I’ll get an honest answer.What makes you think that Pope John Paul II was addressing anything equal to God’s forgiveness? If I harm my neighbor, justice demands that I not only seek God’s forgiveness, but that I also seek my neighbor’s forgiveness and make restitution to my neighbor. If God forgives me, and my neighbor doesn’t, its God’s forgiveness that matters in the end, but I’m still obligated by justice to seek the forgiveness of my neighbor and make restitution. If I kill my neighbor, justice would still demand that I seek my neighbor’s forgiveness. If God forgives me, and if my neighbor is anywhere except hell, you can be assured that I will be given the opportunity to seek forgiveness from the one I killed. That’s all the Holy Father said.

TNT:

Let’s put this to the test: If a womwn was planning an abortion, would JPII, or anyone else say:

"I would now like to say a special word to women who

*** WILL HAVE*** an abortion.… You will come to understand that nothing is definitively lost and you will also be able to ask forgiveness from your child, who is CERTAIN TO BE living in the Lord" (99).

Any normal person sees CONSEQUENCES which is the above insertions into JPII’s proposal.As I’ve pointed out you are drawing the wrong conclusion from the Holy Father’s words. I’m sure that the consequences of hoping that all men will be saved will be more positive than spending my time condemning other’s to hell.

TNT:

Besides I was addressing **BEAR06 who is a thinker, **

not a raving disoriented liberal who must attack the person because they can’t address the consequences of their proposals.

One flame deserves another. I’m orthodox enough to hang bells from, and any putz with half a brain could have easily figured this out by doing a search of my posts. Your attack on the Holy Father is stupid and judgmental, and nothing short of shallow dissent. You are no better than a troop of radical feminists with whom you have in common attacks on Holy Mother Church replete with selective quoting, willful misrepresentations, and barely disguised ideological agendas. I suggest you go and find a local chapter of VOTF or Call To Action… you have much more in common with those people than you do with faithful Catholics. God Bless!

 

[bear06]

Do I smell a thread being closed? When somebody calls me a liberal, I just tell them to prove it. Usually that’s enough to make them quiet!

 

[TNT]

Originally Posted by TNT
*

In any case, if a person were to counsel with you, would you be honest enough

to tell them that a consequence of deciding to have one, is the fetus going straight “to be with the Lord” , as JPII has proposed? I doubt I’ll get an honest answer.
Théodred:

What makes you think that Pope John Paul II was addressing anything equal to God’s forgiveness?

If I harm my neighbor, justice demands that I not only seek God’s forgiveness, but that I also seek my neighbor’s forgiveness and make restitution to my neighbor. If God forgives me, and my neighbor doesn’t, its God’s forgiveness that matters in the end, but I’m still obligated by justice to seek the forgiveness of my neighbor and make restitution. If I kill my neighbor, justice would still demand that I seek my neighbor’s forgiveness. If God forgives me, and if my neighbor is anywhere except hell, you can be assured that I will be given the opportunity to seek forgiveness from the one I killed. That’s all the Holy Father said.** ( NOTHING, NOTHING to do with the question, so far. And it goes downhill from here…into a sermonoid.)**

As I’ve pointed out you are drawing the wrong conclusion from the Holy Father’s words. I’m sure that the consequences of*** hoping*** that all men will be saved will be more positive than spending my time condemning other’s to hell.
( He never said ANYTHING about HOPE…only CERTITUDE. Show me, please, where he proposes only a HOPE?? Hope is for that which is not yet received, or known. He said IS. If you propose that he is only expressing a hope. PROVE it. Otherwise you are guilty of "drawing the wrong conclusion from the Holy Father’s words" see: “is living in the Lord”.** )**
putz with half a brain could have easily figured this out by doing a search of my posts (I’ll stick with this thread, thanks. Besides, you may have changed since then.). Your attack on the Holy Father is stupid and judgmental, and nothing short of shallow dissent. You are no better than a troop of radical feminists with whom you have in common attacks on Holy Mother Church replete with selective quoting, willful misrepresentations, (ready to show me where??)and barely disguised ideological agendas. I suggest you go and find a local chapter of VOTF or Call To Action… you have much more in common with those people than you do with faithful Catholics.(No judging here, right??) *I KNEW you would not give an honest answer.

The Red are the liberal ad hominim. Too many to count. Definitely no lib characteristics in that post. Stays right on the subject, without ANY deviations. **
But, I am word-terrorist innoculated.
I love it when the mask finally melts from the flames.
Let’s try the question another way, maybe you misunderstood. :banghead: **
WOULD YOU BE HONEST ENOUGH TO QUOTE JPII’S :
" nothing is definitively lost and you will also be able to ask forgiveness from your child, who*** is now (or will be) living in the Lord***" (99) "

**to a woman you are counseling to not get an abortion, and you are unsuccessful in convincing her? **
**Now, my HOPE is that you will at least try to answer. If the “flames” are too consuming, get a friend to help. See, I hope for something not yet received. It you had given an honest answer, I would no longer be able to hope, because it was already received. I call it CERTITUDE …simple. **

 

[Theodred]

TNT:

Originally Posted by TNT

***The ****Red *are the liberal ad hominim. Too many to count. Definitely no lib characteristics in that post. Stays right on the subject, without ANY deviations.
But, I am word-terrorist innoculated.
I love it when the mask finally melts from the flames.

---

Wow, you’re pretty thick. It was a reply to your original ad hominin targetted at me: “a raving disoriented liberal who must attack the person because they can’t address the consequences of their proposals.” Are you that much of a ding-dong that you can’t remember what you wrote from post to post? After making the above ad hominin, it’s laughable that you would attempt to take the moral high ground.

As for the rest of your post… it made no sense, at least in the language you are attempting to use. Please go back and reword your post so the rest of us can understand it.

 

[Theodred]

What TNT is trying to do is make the words the Holy Father address an issue and situation that they were not directed toward in order to discredit the Holy Father.

It’s basically the same tactic he used with the Council of Florence by attempting to make the Council of Florence state that all unbaptized people are condemned to hell. Obviously this is not the case, as the Council of Florence was not addressing the final destination of all people who die without baptism (OT figures were clearly not being addressed by the words of the Council of Florence).

The Holy Father was not addressing the situation of counseling a woman thinking about getting an abortion. He was addressing the situation of a woman who turned back and is seeking forgiveness for an abortion already procured. As I pointed out in post #65 she must seek forgiveness from those she has harmed and make restitution for the harm done, because justice demands this. Of course, those who are incapable of understanding this basic moral principle would be inclined to dismiss it as irrelevant, however, it’s my hope that most people here are able to understand this. The Holy Father, then, is addressing the very real possibility that the child could be with the Lord, as it should be our hope that such children will be with the Lord. That is not an assurance, for if it were then it would not be a hope.

 

[Seumas]

You will come to understand that nothing is definitively lost and you will also be able to ask forgiveness from your child, who is now living in the Lord" (99).

I’m a few months late with this (nothing unusual there), but this is so important that I thought I should state, for the record, that the official Latin text doesn’t say what the translation quoted above says. Not at all.

In the official Latin text published in Acta Apostolicae Sedis 87, the line quoted above reads:

“Infantum autem vestrum potestis Eidem Patri Eiusque misericordiae cum spe committere”

Translated (by Msgr. Wm. B. Smith):

“Moreover, you are able to entrust with hope your infant to the same Father and His mercy.”

This is in perfect harmony with the Catechism, and certainly not saying anything with certitude.

The Latin text is of course the definitive one.

God Bless,
James