Fake catholics

[ANGELIC_PEACE]

buy here a catholic catecism book, tan books and publishers have a website that sell them cheap

 

[Joe_5859]

Hello Newbie2.I have a copy of the textbook I referred to in my earlier post. The information in my post is taken straight from it. That is where the reference to councils came from.It actually says that Limbo was defined by " several councils". A few pages have been torn out so the date is not present.The teachings about Limbo in my aunt’s case came from her parish priest in the early to mid 1950s.That source of information was very official…at least to her.God Bless. NLM

Let’s look at what it says in The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die without Baptism:

It is clear that the traditional teaching on this topic has concentrated on the theory of limbo, understood as a state which includes the souls of infants who die subject to original sin and without baptism, and who, therefore, neither merit the beatific vision, nor yet are subjected to any punishment, because they are not guilty of any personal sin. This theory, elaborated by theologians beginning in the Middle Ages, never entered into the dogmatic definitions of the Magisterium, even if that same Magisterium did at times mention the theory in its ordinary teaching up until the Second Vatican Council. It remains therefore a possible theological hypothesis. However, in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992), the theory of limbo is not mentioned. Rather, the Catechism teaches that infants who die without baptism are entrusted by the Church to the mercy of God, as is shown in the specific funeral rite for such children. The principle that God desires the salvation of all people gives rise to the hope that there is a path to salvation for infants who die without baptism (cf. CCC, 1261), and therefore also to the theological desire to find a coherent and logical connection between the diverse affirmations of the Catholic faith: the universal salvific will of God; the unicity of the mediation of Christ; the necessity of baptism for salvation; the universal action of grace in relation to the sacraments; the link between original sin and the deprivation of the beatific vision; the creation of man “in Christ”.

According to the ITC, even though the concept was referred to by the Magisterium (papal pronouncements and/or ecumenical councils), it was never part of any dogmatic definition.

I did a quick search of Denzinger’s Sources of Catholic Dogma for references to limbo. Here are the references I found:

John XXII (1316-1334)

Hell and Limbo(?)*

[From the letter "*Nequaquam sine dolore

" to the Armenians, Nov. 21, 1321]

493a It (The Roman Church) teaches. . . . . that the souls . . . . . of those who die in mortal sin, or with only original sin descend immediately into hell; however, to be punished with different penalties and in different places.

[source]

Pius VI (1775-1799)

*Errors of the Synod of Pistoia **

[Condemned in the Constitution, "*Auctorem fidei

," Aug. 28, 1794]

The Punishment of Those Who Die with Original Sin Only
[Baptism, sec. 3]

1526 26. The doctrine which rejects as a Pelagian fable, that place of the lower regions (which the faithful generally designate by the name of the limbo of children) in which the souls of those departing with the sole guilt of original sin are punished with the punishment of the condemned, exclusive of the punishment of fire, just as if, by this very fact, that these who remove the punishment of fire introduced that middle place and state free of guilt and of punishment between the kingdom of God and eternal damnation, such as that about which the Pelagians idly talk,–false, rash, injurious to Catholic schools.

[source]

Those are the only references to limbo in Denzinger’s Sources of Catholic Dogma. The first quote doesn’t really mention limbo at all, and the second quote merely condemns the idea that limbo is a “Pelagian fable”. Condemning those who teach that limbo is a heresy is not the same thing as affirming that limbo is dogma.

 

[Bluegoat]

Those are the only references to limbo in Denzinger’s Sources of Catholic Dogma. The first quote doesn’t really mention limbo at all, and the second quote merely condemns the idea that limbo is a “Pelagian fable”. Condemning those who teach that limbo is a heresy is not the same thing as affirming that limbo is dogma.

It’s interesting that it was condemned as early as the 18th century and was still being taught in Catholic schools in the 20th century as the Catholic explanation. I wonder why? It’s not like it’s a very appealing idea.

 

[LilyM]

It’s interesting that it was condemned as early as the 18th century and was still being taught in Catholic schools in the 20th century as the Catholic explanation. I wonder why? It’s not like it’s a very appealing idea.

Well, the possibility of its truth provided an extremely strong incentive for Catholic parents to baptise their children. So it is actually an extremely appealing idea - to those who are trying to encourage parents to baptise their children, of course.

But teaching it as if it were dogma (as was sometimes wrongly done) also led to a lot of unnecessary heartbreak and despair. I remember my father, a doctor, coming home upset after a visit to a patient whose young (unbaptised) child was ill. The child died on the way to hospital without parents or Dad having thought to do an emergency baptism beforehand, as they could have done.

 

[Joe_5859]

It’s interesting that it was condemned as early as the 18th century and was still being taught in Catholic schools in the 20th century as the Catholic explanation. I wonder why? It’s not like it’s a very appealing idea.

The idea of limbo wasn’t condemned. What was condemned was the notion that limbo was a pelagian heresy. The quote from Pius VI is from a sort of “syllabus of errors.” where he lists a bunch of ideas that are condemned. I suppose I should have inserted the words “The following is condemned:”

It’s easy to misread the paragraph by itself. If you look at all the paragraphs together (Denzinger 1501-1593), you can see that Pius VI lists the error, and ends with a double dash ("–") followed by his designation of the idea (false, heretical, dangerous, schismatic, injurious, etc). He labels the idea that limbo is a “Pelagian fable” as “false, rash, injurious to Catholic schools.”

I could see someone using that quote as a defense of limbo (“See? The pope condemns those who condemn limbo!”), but I don’t think that’s accurate. Simply condemning the idea that it is a heresy is different than positively affirming that the idea is doctrine. I think it is telling that Pius VI does not designate the idea as a “heresy” but only as “false, rash, injurious to Catholic schools”. If limbo were part of Catholic dogma, then the idea that limbo is a “fable” would properly be heretical.

 

[nlm]

Well, the possibility of its truth provided an extremely strong incentive for Catholic parents to baptise their children. So it is actually an extremely appealing idea - to those who are trying to encourage parents to baptise their children, of course.

But teaching it as if it were dogma (as was sometimes wrongly done) also led to a lot of unnecessary heartbreak and despair. I remember my father, a doctor, coming home upset after a visit to a patient whose young (unbaptised) child was ill. The child died on the way to hospital without parents or Dad having thought to do an emergency baptism beforehand, as they could have done.

Hello LilyM, The story you tell about your father’s experience took me back a few years. I was a member of the nursing profession for many years. Obstetrics were part of my training.I remember reading an OBS textbook which had a chapter dealing with the spiritual needs of the mother and newborn. In it were instructions on how to baptise the unborn child of a RC mother, if there were reasons to believe it may die during the delivery. It instructed us to use a catheter to reach the unborn baby’s head by way of the birth canal. Then clean water was to be poured onto the baby’s head via the catheter while saying,I baptise you in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.I never had to do it myself but a classmate of mine did a few years after our training.

 

[John_Russell_Jr]

My dear friend

Pray, pray, pray and show her who Jesus is, in your life. And when she’s ready you be Jesus for her.

God bless you dear friend:thumbsup:

John