Can we believe in infant damnation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gregory_I
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
clmowry said:
The Catholic teaching is uncompromising on this point, that all who depart this life without baptism, be it of water, or blood, or desire, are perpetually excluded from the vision of God.
Click to expand...
Then there is no point to be debated or discussed. The Church has spoken, and we must obey. To even ask this question is Heresy, and anti-Catholic by its nature.
 
Dear brother Joe,

Permit me to explain Trent to demonstrate that it is consistent with the modern explanation that clmowry provided.
josephdaniel29 said:
2:If any one asserts, that the prevarication of Adam injured himself alone, and not his posterity; and that the holiness and justice, received of God, which he lost, he lost for himself alone, and not for us also; or that he, being defiled by the sin of disobedience, has only transfused death, and pains of the body, into the whole human race, but not sin also, which is the death of the soul;** let him be anathema**…
Click to expand...
This very excerpt provides the answer. In this Canon, “sin” is specifically defined as “the death of the soul.” In other Catholic jargon, that is otherwise known as “separation from God.” So all that this Canon is saying is that the state of being seperated from God is passed down to the descendants of Adam. The EO don’t deny this, do they?
  1. If any one denies, that infants, newly born from their mothers’ wombs, even though they be sprung from baptized parents, are to be baptized; or says that they are baptized indeed for the remission of sins, but that they derive nothing of original sin from Adam, which has need of being expiated by the laver of regeneration for the obtaining life everlasting…
Click to expand...
Remember the definition provided in the previous Canon. What newborn infants derive from Adam is simply the state of separation from God. The EO don’t deny this, do they?
  1. If any one denies, that, by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is conferred in baptism, the guilt of original sin is remitted; or even asserts that the whole of that which has the true and proper nature of sin is not taken away; but says that it is only rased, or not imputed; let him be anathema…[/INDENT]
Click to expand...
This is perhaps the most misused text by non-Catholic apologists on this matter.

The most important thing to note from this Canon is that it does not say we inherit guilt from Adam. In fact, it doesn’t talk about inheritance at all in this Canon (though the other Canons do so), does it? No. It only talks about a “guilt of original sin.”

Before I go on, let me explain the concept of “guilt” as expressed in this canon. The original Latin word for “guilt” in this Canon is reus. The Latin word that we English-speaking folks usually call “guilt” is not the Latin reus, but rather the Latin word culpa. Culpa is the word that refers to guilt associated with a specific act. A more descriptive translation would be “blame.” But, as noted, Canon 5 that you quoted above does not use the word culpa, but rather the word reus. Reus is a state of being in debt. It is not blame for a particular act.

What is this debt? Well, we first have to understand what is the cause of our inherited separation from God. The cause of this separation is the loss of Original Holiness and Original Justice. These were lost by our first parents and we have inherited this loss. We are each born with this personal state of loss. And it is this personal state of loss by which we each incur a personal debt to God. But who can pay this debt? None other than Jesus Christ!!!

So what are these canons actually saying, according to Catholic teaching, and not according to non-Catholic misconceptions?
  1. We inherit Original Sin - that is, the state of separation from God - from Adam. We do not inherit Adam’s sin.
  2. This personal state of separation incurs a personal state of debt (or “guilt”). We do not inherit guilt - muc, much less Adam’s guilt.
  3. This Original Sin is washed away by the Sacrament of Baptism, whereby we recover the Graces of Original Holiness and Original Justice lost by our first parents and thus satisfy the debt/guilt of Original Sin.
Also at least several of your fellow Catholics on this thread seem to have the impression that unbaptized infants receive “punishment” from God. What would God have to punish them for if they are not guilty of something?
Click to expand...
This idea of unbaptized infants receiving punishment has always been debated by the Church since the time of Augustine. It’s never been settled. Don’t let such things disturb you, brother. They are just opinions.

I hope that helps.

Blessings,
Marduk
 
I’ve never heard anyone speak of the following possibility:

If God truely does know which unbaptized infants–HAD they grown up and had the use of reason–WOULD HAVE or WOULD NOT have accepted the truth of the Catholic faith and been either baptized or desired baptism IF they had known of it–

Is it possible that some unbaptized infants would be damned and other baprtized infants would go to heaven?

In such a case God would grant the Baptism of desire to those infants who WOULD HAVE accepted the Catholic faith later in life if they had known of it

And not extend it to those who WOULD NOT have accepted later in life it had they known of it?
 
Jerry-Jet said:
I’ve never heard anyone speak of the following possibility:

If God truely does know which unbaptized infants–HAD they grown up and had the use of reason–WOULD HAVE or WOULD NOT have accepted the truth of the Catholic faith and been either baptized or desired baptism IF they had known of it–

Is it possible that some unbaptized infants would be damned and other baprtized infants would go to heaven?

In such a case God would grant the Baptism of desire to those infants who WOULD HAVE accepted the Catholic faith later in life if they had known of it

And not extend it to those who WOULD NOT have accepted later in life it had they known of it?
Click to expand...
The problem with this is that when it comes to personal sin, God only holds us responsible for the ones we actually commit, not the ones we might commit.
 
Is it possible though that God could decide which infants He would give the desire of baptism to outside of the sacraments based on His perfect knowledge of what they WOULD do?

God would not be less just if he let an infant who had not been baptized and whom He knew would not accept the truth of the catholic faith if one day he were given the chance to know it–if He let that infant go to Hell because of his original sin.

God would also not be less just if He gave the desire for baptism outside of the sacraments to infants whom He knew WOULD accept the truth of the Catholic faith and desire baptism if they were one day given the chance.

TO say that God would be LESS JUST for giving one infant a desire for baptism and not giving another infant the same desire for baptism would be like saying that God is not fair because He doesn’t give all of us “Fullness of Grace” like He gave Mary!

God can perfectly be just and give different amounts of grace to different people.

Therefore I say that it WOULD be POSSIBLE for God to allow some infants to go to Hell because they are born of original sin and wouldn’t accept the Catholic faith if they had the chance–

YET

give other infants the desire for baptism outside of the sacraments.

Don’t ge me wrong–Baptism is necessary for salvation.

Infants should be baptized.

We should hope for the salvatiion of infants that are not baptized.

It’s my view that we can’t limit God–not only can He save infants outside of the sacraments–I maintain God can also choose to give some the grace or desire for baptism and others not give that grace.

Now I’m not saying that God would do that–God will do what is right and God can do what He chooses–who can know the mind of God?

All I’m maintaining is that God can be just and either save all–save none–or save SOME infants that die without being baptized.

We should all cry tears of joy that God has given us baptism and yet tremble at the thought of ANYONE not being baptized and pray for them and hope for them.

Bottom line: don’t seek the justness of God for that is assured–seek God’s mercy.

Go forth into all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son, and the Holy Spirit!
 
clmowry said:
IThe Catholic teaching is uncompromising on this point, that all who depart this life without baptism, be it of water, or blood, or desire, are perpetually excluded from the vision of God.
Click to expand...
Please cite your source for this statement.
 
Here is what the Preacher to the Papal Household has to say about unbaptized infants.

Now, I know he is not infallible. I know it is only an opinion, however I venture to say he is more educated and more holy than most of us on here.

Therefore, why not listen to him and stop trying to reinvent the wheel? The Catechism already did that.

cantalamessa.org/en/articoloView.php?id=72
 
Wouldn’t a person who has never known about the truth of Jesus(someone from another religion) were to die unbaptised? He would be in the same position as the unbaptised baby. I think that when a human being dies(whether a baby, adult etc.) they are not bound by the physical limitations of the human body(whether it be intelligence, age strength etc.) so their soul would be able to make a choice after death. So wouldn’t God have everyone make the final choice before they die(To accept Christ and his salvation or reject him and go to hell). This way this gives people who have never heard of Christ the chance of salvation. Since the Cathecism teaches that God created us to know him, to love him and to serve him so that we can be happy with him forever, wouldn’t it be unjust to deny the unbaptised the beatific vision? This is just what I think.
 
Indyann said:
Here is what the Preacher to the Papal Household has to say about unbaptized infants.

Now, I know he is not infallible. I know it is only an opinion, however I venture to say he is more educated and more holy than most of us on here.

Therefore, why not listen to him and stop trying to reinvent the wheel? The Catechism already did that.

cantalamessa.org/en/articoloView.php?id=72
Click to expand...
:bighanky:Thank you for that link. I appreciate it.
 
JackQ said:
Please cite your source for this statement.
Click to expand...
I’m pretty sure I read this in the catholic encyclopedia article on baptism. It might might not be word for word, but I think it’s pretty close.

Chuck
 
clmowry said:
I’m pretty sure I read this in the catholic encyclopedia article on baptism. It might might not be word for word, but I think it’s pretty close.

Chuck
Click to expand...
The Catholic Encyclopedia is not an authority. What you read was the opinion of the writer of the article.
 
mlldrl said:
I hope you people never have to face the agony of losing a child and dealing with this first hand. My daughter Mary Elizabeth died two weeks short of her due date. The cord which kept her alive for 38 weeks in the end killed her. She was to be baptized on Dec. 12 and dedicated to Our Lady. This loss has been followed by two miscarriages.

This may be only be an interesting topic for you people but it’s heart breaking for others. All of my children would have been bapized and raised to know, love, and serve Him yet He allowed them to die. If it is true that these little ones are damned the Calvin must have been right.

M
Click to expand...
I don’t believe that most Catholic theologians have postulated that unbaptized infants are condemned to eternal punishment. Many, like Augustine, believe in only the mildest eternal separation, but–as far as I know–the current position of most Catholic theologians is simply to plead ignorance trusting in the infinite mercy of Christ, who, after all, gave himself to pay the price for all of humanity.
 
choy said:
the answer there is we can’t be for certain. There’s two things here. One, jesus said that the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these (children). So how can the innocent not enter heaven. On the other hand, we also know that those who are not baptized cannot enter heaven.

So there’s really not a straight answer on this one. All we know that nothing is impossible with god.
Click to expand...
the op asked if we are free to believe it if we want. How about an asnswer?
 
God is Love! How anyone can believe this and also believe in the damnation, or even in the limbo, of infants is beyond me! All infants are good, and desire to know God. There is no bad baby or child. They desire God, and Jesus tells the little ones to “come to me” and rebukes those who try to keep them away.

I am confident that all babies are in heaven! Whether they were baptized by a human or not.

Now let’s focus on loving one another, which is what we are called to do.
 
Aggiornamento said:
God is Love! How anyone can believe this and also believe in the damnation, or even in the limbo, of infants is beyond me! All infants are good, and desire to know God. There is no bad baby or child.
Click to expand...
We could say that unconditionally except for original sin, which is the problem with your theory.
I am confident that all babies are in heaven! Whether they were baptized by a human or not.
Click to expand...
In other words, you disagree with the Church’s teaching that Baptism is necessary for salvation?
 
stuart12 said:
My own (theological) view is that of an Augustinian position, where the unbaptised infant will receive the ‘mildest’ of punishments, basically exclusion from the beatific vision.

However, if I were asked by someone who was worried about the death of an unbaptised infant, I would say that we don’t know.
Click to expand...
Why would God, who created mankind out of love, inflict any punishment on the most innocent of all his creation, who had not even the opportunity to sin?
 
TedDC said:
Why would God, who created mankind out of love, inflict any punishment on the most innocent of all his creation, who had not even the opportunity to sin?
Click to expand...
This is covered in the discussion on the previous pages.
 
josephdaniel29 said:
My friend there are lots of things you have to worry about as you work out your salvation. Whether or not your children are waiting for you in heaven is not one of them. God is love. It is completely inconceivable that He would send an unbaptized infant to hell or “limbo” and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

In Christ,
Joe
Click to expand...
Regrettably, in the harsh, strict legalism that afflicts “hardcore” Catholicism, it is entirely conceivable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top