Children who die without baptism

[krism]

As a mom who had a son die, this is a tough subject for me. When Joshua was alive, we were Protestants, and therefore Baptism was “an outward sign of an inward conversion”. So Josh died unbaptized. He was almost two at the time. Reading everyone’s posts, I thought of another possibility for whether or not children, especially infants, who die unbaptized because of lack of opportunity or, in my case, ignorance, go to heaven. Joshua was born severely handicapped. When he died three weeks before his second birthday, he could smile. That’s all. Just smile. He was in and out of the hospital a lot. In other words, he suffered greatly when alive. Every day was a struggle for him. The Catholic Church teaches that our sufferings in this life help purge us of our sins. If I understand it correctly. That’s why we can offer up our sufferings here for souls in Purgatory. Wouldn’t his suffering while alive have had the same benefit? Don’t all children who die suffer before death in some way? I mean, after all, isn’t death a suffering. Or maybe not the actual moment of death, but dying always involves some sort of suffering, however brief, while the body shuts down. Just a thought. As for me, I know that I know that Joshua is with Jesus. When he died, I was there. I felt a hand, heavy and warm on my shoulder. I heard a voice say, “It’s all right. I’m here. Let him come with me.” There was a warm glow all around me. I was so surprised, I turned to see who had touched me and spoken to me. No one was behind me. I know Jesus was there to guide my baby home. I know it’s not logical or anything like that. But that’s what happened. And since God is God and can do whatever he likes, however he wants, I know it was real.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Note that we are born again by Spirit and water. In the main, we assume this happens at Baptism all at once.

I would say we KNOW definitively that this happens at every valid sacramental Baptism. We also know that it happens extra-sacramentally, if it be God’s will. Even Cornelius and his family and friends, who were sanctified extra-sacramentally by God before sacramental baptism, were “commanded” by Peter to be baptized sacramentally.

Acts 10:48 “***And he commanded **(Gk “*prostasso”) them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.”

Extra-sacramental sanctification is not a “door” to the other sacraments, but does sanctify and remit all sin. Cornelius, et. al., received, I believe, grace upon grace by their sacramental baptism, just as we do with all the Holy Sacraments.

I believe it is Catholic dogma that we are born again or born from above in sacramental baptism or it’s desire. Yet, we have exceptions, such as Mary (baptized in the womb at the moment of her conception, extra-sacramentally) and John the Baptist, (baptized in the womb extra-sacramentally). These are instances where in accord with God’s providence, He acts “in us, without us.” That we know of two exceptions gives us hope that there may be others, if that be God’s will. It’s certainly worth praying for.

John Paul II:

I would now like to say a special word to women who have had an abortion. The Church is aware of the many factors which may have influenced your decision, and she does not doubt that in many cases it was a painful and even shattering decision. The wound in your heart may not yet have healed. Certainly what happened was and remains terribly wrong. But do not give in to discouragement and do not lose hope. Try rather to understand what happened and face it honestly. If you have not already done so, give yourselves over with humility and trust to repentance. The Father of mercies is ready to give you his forgiveness and his peace in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. 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. (John Paul II, *Evangelium Vitae, *99).

 

[Shiann]

De Maria:

Thanks all for your comments, especially Dave, Shiann and Hoiou. I think I’ve got a better handle on the subject.

Dave, thanks very much for Father Most’s article.

I’ve got to get back to work and back to being Dad so I probably won’t participate for a week or so.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria- thank you too for the respectfull and enlightening discussion! It was a pleasure to converse with you. I certainly do not consider myself a theologian, or even an experience apologetic- but conversations like this enrich my Faith- and I learn so much.

You sound like an extemely faithfull person, and your children are lucky to have you as their father. A parent with a strong Faith can’t help but be a great parent.

God Bless you and your family.

 

[Shiann]

krism:

As a mom who had a son die, this is a tough subject for me.

First of all, I am so sorry for your loss. I have not experienced a death of a child of my own or one close to me- and I’m sure it is a very difficult experience.

When Joshua was alive, we were Protestants, and therefore Baptism was “an outward sign of an inward conversion”. So Josh died unbaptized. He was almost two at the time. Reading everyone’s posts, I thought of another possibility for whether or not children, especially infants, who die unbaptized because of lack of opportunity or, in my case, ignorance, go to heaven. Joshua was born severely handicapped. When he died three weeks before his second birthday, he could smile. That’s all. Just smile. He was in and out of the hospital a lot. In other words, he suffered greatly when alive. Every day was a struggle for him.

What a blessing he must have been to those around him.

The Catholic Church teaches that our sufferings in this life help purge us of our sins. If I understand it correctly.

That is my understanding too.

That’s why we can offer up our sufferings here for souls in Purgatory. Wouldn’t his suffering while alive have had the same benefit? Don’t all children who die suffer before death in some way? I mean, after all, isn’t death a suffering. Or maybe not the actual moment of death, but dying always involves some sort of suffering, however brief, while the body shuts down. Just a thought. As for me, I know that I know that Joshua is with Jesus. When he died, I was there. I felt a hand, heavy and warm on my shoulder. I heard a voice say, “It’s all right. I’m here. Let him come with me.” There was a warm glow all around me. I was so surprised, I turned to see who had touched me and spoken to me. No one was behind me. I know Jesus was there to guide my baby home. I know it’s not logical or anything like that. But that’s what happened. And since God is God and can do whatever he likes, however he wants, I know it was real.

It is my Hope and Faith that you are correct. I can not imagine my loving and merciful God not welcoming any and ALL children to Him, whatever their ailment- or whoever their parents were.

I will say a prayer for Joshua today wherever he might be.

God Bless you.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

I have not addressed several lingering ends, for the general public:
I trust De Maria will have time to think things over and come back to the topic when the time is appropriate.

The flesh avails not. What we will inherit is a spiritual body.

John 6 64 It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.

Corinthians 15 44 It is sown a natural body, it shall rise a spiritual body. If there be a natural body, there is also a spiritual body, as it is written:

So the soul, freed of the encumbrance of the material body, is freed and not diminished. It is with the Spiritualized body that it is glorified.

I answered this once, especially John 7 64, but apparently my answer is inadequate, so:

A spiritual body may have physical abilities, and hence properties:
Jesus ate and drank after the resurrection.

The passage of corinthians refers to the resurrection of the just.
A little farther down it says:

Corruption cannot inherit incorruption, nor flesh and blood enter the kingdom of heaven.

My point before was that those who do not enter the glory of heaven are corrupt – which is to say that they have an earthly body still in the resurrection. There may be some different properties about the resurrected bodies of those in hell, but their spiritual body is not the same as those of the just.

Let me make the point: The spiritual body is like Jesus in its Glory, Those in hell do not inherit this body.

Consider Isaiah xxvi:9-21

 

[Huiou_Theou]

I have not addressed several lingering ends, for the general public:
I trust De Maria will have time to think things over and come back to the topic when the time is appropriate.

The flesh avails not. What we will inherit is a spiritual body.

John 6 64 It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.

Corinthians 15 44 It is sown a natural body, it shall rise a spiritual body. If there be a natural body, there is also a spiritual body, as it is written:

So the soul, freed of the encumbrance of the material body, is freed and not diminished. It is with the spiritualized body that it is glorified.

I answered this once, especially John 7 64, but apparently my answer is inadequate, so:

A spiritual body may have physical abilities, and hence properties:
Jesus ate and drank after the resurrection.

The passage of corinthians refers to the resurrection of the just.
A little farther down it says:

Corruption cannot inherit incorruption, nor flesh and blood enter the kingdom of heaven.

My point before was that those who do not enter the glory of heaven are corrupt – which is to say that they have an earthly body still in the resurrection. There may be some different properties about the resurrected bodies of those in hell, but their body is synonimous with the meaning of death.
Our own bodies, as they are now (not at the resurrection), have the characteristics of death in them.

Let me make the point: The spiritual body is like Jesus in its Glory, Those in hell do not inherit this body.

Consider Isaiah xxvi:9-21

Philippians 3

There are two bodies, the body of corruption (Adam), and the body of glory (Jesus Christ). If we have died with christ, we rise with his body – a ‘spiritual’ body-- not otherwise.

I see alot of St. Thomas – pass the asprin.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

– continued –

But when we die, we are like the angels are we not? (Matt 22:30)

And Aquinas seems to say that the Soul is hindered by the material senses:

We are like the angels in some ways – eg. no more procreating.
But that does not mean we have all their abilities.

Yes, Aquinas, …

The more perfect things are immaterial because material things are less like the perfection of God.
The simple answer is that St. Thomas sees that knowledge of non-material things is of more value, and he sees it in degrees.
In the passage given, St. Thomas is focused on the eyes.
Compare that against the ear – why is the ear less capable than the eye? etc.

It doesn’t follow that a spirit without a resurrected body, or its natural body, is in any way enhanced.

Aquinas says that it is fitting that God should become incarnate because God is good. Since God is good all the time, whether Adam sins or not, then it is fitting that God should become incarnate even if Adam doesn’t sin, isn’t it?
stjamescatholic.org/summa/TP/TP001.html

Read St. Thomas’ third (3) debate.
I agree with Agustine at the moment, especially since St. Thomas fails to cite his other sources in the link, and I can’t see what the argument is. Augustine, who is citied I agree with on this question.

God became incarnate in order to overcome sin in the most appropriate way. To become incarnate as a PERSON, required the son to empty himself. That is not appropriate, in my eyes, except as an act of redemptive love.

Any other incarnation would be merely the divinization (adoption as sons) of a human. That is likely impossible because of the difference between man and God before Jesus became man.

Read also question #5 of St. Thomas,