Fate of Eastern Catholic Churches if Orthodox are Reconciled

[John_oxios]

I thought limbo was a valid theory since it was taught in the Baltimore catechism.

It was a teaching tool,

ewtn.com/library/CATECHSM/NCOFCC.HTM

Catechisms and the Catechism

The Catechism with which we are, perhaps, most familiar in pre- Vatican Council days, is known as the Baltimore Catechism. This catechism was collaborated on by the Bishops of the United States in the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, which took place in 1884. It was put together and finally issued in 1885 by Cardinal Gibbons who, at the time, was the head of the American hierarchy. It took the American Bishops from 1829 to 1885 to put together the Baltimore Catechism, which in turn, derived from what was called the Roman Catechism or the Catechism of the Council of Trent. This document, similar to the Catechism of the Catholic Church which came out on June 22, 1994, was issued in 1565 by Pope Saint Pius V, and was to be the basis of various national catechisms and textbooks.
The Baltimore Catechism was set out in a question-and-answer format, and while its focus and emphasis was not necessarily that which contemporary pedagogues would appreciate, or for that matter, some theologians, liturgists, Scripture scholars and others,** it did have the great advantage of being a more or less complete skeletal outline of the Catholic Faith**. Although it was often presented in books that lacked illustrations and were dry-both in the graphic presentation of the material and in the way it was presented-the Baltimore Catechism should not be faulted since it also had many advantages, and it certainly formed and trained many generations of Catholics in our country in a correct knowledge of our holy religion.

The Baltimore Catechism, which was issued in 1885, was revised by a committee of American Bishops in 1941, and** it was set out in a formula that geared it to various educational levels.** It also was, at that time, permitted to be a basis for other catechetical presentations in the United States, and, consequently, enjoyed a more vigorous revival in the decades immediately preceding the Second Vatican Council.

 

[John_oxios]

I thought limbo was a valid theory since it was taught in the Baltimore catechism.

Hello Sid,
One more time, but read what it says all the way through:

  [baltimore-catechism.com/lesson14.htm](http://www.baltimore-catechism.com/lesson14.htm)

Q. 632. Where will persons go who – such as infants – have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism?

A. Persons, such as infants, who have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism, cannot enter heaven; but it is the common belief they will go to some place similar to Limbo, where they will be free from suffering, though deprived of the happiness of heaven.

Fr. John Hardon THE QUESTION AND ANSWER CATECHISM

WHAT IS THE FATE OF UNBAPTIZED INFANTS? The fate of the unbaptized
infants is left to the mercy of God. It is generally taught that the souls of those who depart this life with original sin on their souls, but without actual sin, go to limbo.

WHAT IS LIMBO? According to St. Thomas, limbo is a place of perfect
natural happiness but without the supernatural vision jof God to which we
have no natural right.

• Fr. John Hardon’s MODERN CATHOLIC DICTIONARY

INFANTS, UNBAPTIZED. The common teaching of the Catholic Church is that
unbaptized infants who die do not enjoy the beatific vision but enter into
a state of perfect natural happiness, commonly called limbo.

Rev. Francis Spirago THE CATECHISM EXPLAINED

If baptism by water is impossible, it may be replaced by the baptism of
desire, or by the baptism of blood, as in the case of those who suffer
martyrdom for the faith of Christ.

The Emperor Valentinian II was on the way to Milan to be baptized when he
was assassinated; St. Ambrose said of him that his desire had been the
means of his cleansing. The patriarchs, prophets and holy men of the Old
Testament had the baptism of desire; their love of God was ardent, and
they wished to do all that He commands. God accepts the will for the deed;
in this He manifests His super-abundant loving kindness. But all the
temporal penalties of sin are not remitted by the baptism of desire.
Martyrdom for Christ’s sake is the baptism of blood. This the holy
innocents received, and the Church commemorates them as saints. All
unbaptized persons who suffer martyrdom for the Christian faith, for some
act of Christian virtue, or the fulfilment of a Christian duty, also
received the baptism of blood. Witness St. John Baptist; or St.
Emerentiana, who while yet a catechumen, was found by the pagans praying
at St. Agnes’ tomb, and was put ton death by them. The Church does not
pray for the unbaptized who suffer death for Christ; for He Himself says,
“He that shall lose his life for Me, shall find it.” (Matt. x. 39).

‘CATECHISM OF THE COUNSEL OF TRENT’

BAPTISM OF INFANTS SHOULD NOT BE DELAYED

The faithful are earnestly to be exhorted to take care that their children
be brought to the church, as soon as it can be done with safety, to
receive solemn Baptism. Since infant children have no other means of
salvation except Baptism, we may easily understand how grievously those
persons sin who permit them to remain without the grace of the Sacrament
longer than necessity may require, particularly at an age so tender as to
be exposed to numberless dangers of death.

God bless,
John

 

[ron77nyc]

‘CATECHISM OF THE COUNSEL OF TRENT’

BAPTISM OF INFANTS SHOULD NOT BE DELAYED

The faithful are earnestly to be exhorted to take care that their children
be brought to the church, as soon as it can be done with safety, to
receive solemn Baptism. Since infant children have no other means of
salvation except Baptism, we may easily understand how grievously those
persons sin who permit them to remain without the grace of the Sacrament
longer than necessity may require, particularly at an age so tender as to
be exposed to numberless dangers of death.

God bless,
John

This doesn’t sound as if you can take it or leave it. Trent doesn’t say it’s a theological hypothesis. Trent says: “infant children have no other means of salvation except baptism.”

 

[John_oxios]

This doesn’t sound as if you can take it or leave it. Trent doesn’t say it’s a theological hypothesis. Trent says: “infant children have no other means of salvation except baptism.”

Hello Ron,
Just don’t pick out what suits you, We believe in a God of Mercy, there’s plenty more there to suggest what we hope for the innocent children… even your own quote from the Baltimore catechism states a common belief…an infant

What kind of God do you believe in? A punishing God? or a great and Merciful Loving God?

The Church is absolute, it can’t say baptism is not necessary under these conditions… It is necessary for Salvation period, no excuse, but it also says by no fault of their own if they were not baptized and died prior to… then we have a common belief that God has a place for those infant souls in Heaven.

If you read or look up the URL’s and read on… there’s Baptism of Desire, Baptism of Blood… and LIMBO for those who died before they received baptism through no fault of there own.

Here again:

  F r. John Hardon's MODERN CATHOLIC DICTIONARY

INFANTS, UNBAPTIZED. The common teaching of the Catholic Church is that
unbaptized infants who die do not enjoy the beatific vision but enter into
a state of perfect natural happiness, commonly called limbo.

your quote if you read it thoroughly

Q. 632. Where will persons go who – such as infants – have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism?
A. Persons, such as infants, who have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism, cannot enter heaven; but it is the common belief they will go to some place similar to Limbo, where they will be free from suffering, though deprived of the happiness of heaven.

WHAT IS THE FATE OF UNBAPTIZED INFANTS? The fate of the unbaptized
infants is left to the mercy of God. It is generally taught that the souls of those who depart this life with original sin on their souls, but without actual sin, go to limbo.

Common Belief in the hope of… not doctrine, We don’t know, we hope God has a special place.

      God bless, 
                    John

 

[ron77nyc]

Hello Ron,
Just don’t pick out what suits you, We believe in a God of Mercy, there’s plenty more there to suggest what we hope for the innocent children… even your own quote from the Baltimore catechism states a common belief…an infant

What kind of God do you believe in? A punishing God? or a great and Merciful Loving God?

I believe in a God who is all-knowing and all-merciful. He would not separate a child from Himself and the child’s family because the child didn’t make it to the baptismal font in a timely manner. Painting a picture of a multitude of infants lost in limbo is not a comforting thought to a family who has lost a child in an unexpected event. God knows those who belong to Him. Jesus has promised to not lose any that the Father has given Him. It would be better for parents to know that.

 

[sidbrown]

A. Persons, such as infants, who have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism, cannot enter heaven; …

My Baltimore catechism 3rd edition, says something slightly different from this. Anyway, your quote specifically says that unbaptised infants cannot enter heaven.
The rest of the sentence which you have painted in red, speculates on where they will go since they cannot enter heaven. Regardless of whether they go to limbo or not, it is asserted that unbaptised infants cannot enter heaven.

 

[Hesychios]

My Baltimore catechism 3rd edition, says something slightly different from this. Anyway, your quote specifically says that unbaptised infants cannot enter heaven.
The rest of the sentence which you have painted in red, speculates on where they will go since they cannot enter heaven. Regardless of whether they go to limbo or not, it is asserted that unbaptised infants cannot enter heaven.

That’s what happens when the love of logic and an appreciation of the beauty of an orderly man-made systematic theology with every ‘hair’ in place obscures the Law of God written on ones heart.

 

[John_oxios]

My Baltimore catechism 3rd edition, says something slightly different from this. Anyway, your quote specifically says that unbaptised infants cannot enter heaven.
The rest of the sentence which you have painted in red, speculates on where they will go since they cannot enter heaven. Regardless of whether they go to limbo or not, it is asserted that unbaptised infants cannot enter heaven.

Your point?

 

[John_oxios]

This doesn’t sound as if you can take it or leave it. Trent doesn’t say it’s a theological hypothesis. Trent says: “infant children have no other means of salvation except baptism.”

Hi Ron,
Yes, but none the less, God protects the innocent, the poor, the downtrodden in his Divine Providence. We the Church believe God has a special place for those who die, i.e. infants aborted, who through no fault of their own were not Baptized.
How about those who know not what they do? Jesus prayed, “Father forgive them”

It seems you are hard of heart,

What are we discussing here? That Limbo is a doctrine or just a common belief?
(or do you find a contradiction of the faith in that?)

that a place like Purgatory does or can’t exist?

That Baptism is essential for Salvation? there’s no doubt in that.]

If your Roman Catholic, the Church teaches Both, One’s Doctrine the other a common belief.

If you have a problem with that discuss it with your pastor, he may be able to express it in terms you may better understand, or can come to terms with.

"

Clearly the person who accepts the Church as an infallible guide will believe whatever the Church teaches."
Saint Thomas Aquinas

Do you have children?  Let's find some understanding and compassion for those whose children have passed before being baptized.

How would you feel as a (Let’s say) devout Catholic, and parent, and through no fault ( or even negligence on part) an infant passes, The shame and guilt placed upon them for not having acted in time to save their child in eternity?

C’mon doesn’t the faith of the parents add or help? Prayers of the family?
God hears, God listens, God forgives And what the Church ordains here is ordained in the heavens.

The Jews got stuck in the letter of the law, and forgot the spiritual, they forgot that God wants mercy.

Jesus Christ to Peter:

Mat 16:19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Jesus Christ to His Disciples who form His Church:

              Mat 18:18	Truly, I say to you, **whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, **and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

19 Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven.

20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them."

Where two or three are gathered in his name is not literally two or three persons,
to the Jews of Jesus time it was the religious who gathered and the Torah between them, for question or problem within the community.

a. If two of you agree on earth: There is real power in agreement in prayer and in the presence of Jesus. This is exactly what the unrepentant ones miss out on.

i. In the ancient Greek, agree is literally “to symphonize.” Jesus wants us to complement each other like a great orchestra.

c. Where two or three are gathered together in My name: Gathering in the name of Jesus means gathering according to His character and will, and gathering in a manner Jesus would endorse. This is when Jesus is really present (I am there in the midst of them).

Disciples must share Jesus’ heart and care for individuals.

God bless,
John

 

[John_oxios]

My Baltimore catechism 3rd edition, says something slightly different from this. Anyway, your quote specifically says that unbaptised infants cannot enter heaven.
The rest of the sentence which you have painted in red, speculates on where they will go since they cannot enter heaven. Regardless of whether they go to limbo or not, it is asserted that unbaptised infants cannot enter heaven.

Hi Sid,

         Again a statement not backed with anything, it's like pulling teeth from you.

What exactly does your 3rd edition Baltimore catechism say? that’s different?

Let’s go over Ron’s reference

Q. 632. Where will persons go who – such as infants – have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism?
A. Persons, such as infants, who have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism, cannot enter heaven; but it is the common belief they will go to some place similar to Limbo, where they will be free from suffering, though deprived of the happiness of heaven.

"**Free of Suffering ** though deprived of the happiness of heaven "

We don’t believe they deserve or went to hell, hell was made for the fallen angels not man.

Sanctification and Salvation are a process… infants who die unbaptized, have had no opportunity , to receive any of the sacraments of grace, they are born into christian homes.

** Jesus to a gentile, however a man of great faith;**

Mat 8:10 When Jesus heard him, he marveled, and said to those who followed him, "Truly, I say to you, not even in Israel have I found such faith…

13 …And to the centurion Jesus said, “Go; be it done for you as you have believed.” And the servant was healed at that very moment"

Rom 10:6 But the righteousness based on faith says, Do not say in your heart, "Who will ascend into heaven?" (that is, to bring Christ down)

Act 16:30 and brought them out and said, “Men, what must I do to be saved?”

Act 16:31 And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household."

We believe though baptism is essential, that through our faith and the faith of the Church, that God, through Jesus Christ comforts our lost ones. We can’t say they are in heaven, we can’t believe their in hell, but we have hope they are not suffering. The Jews as well as Paul believe in layers of heaven,

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created** the heavens** and the earth
Paul is taken up to the third level,

2Cr 12:2] I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or whether out of the body I do not know,** God knows—such a one was caught up to the third heaven.**
3] And I know such a man—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows—

     4]	 how he was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.

and whose to say when the New heavens comes what they will be like;

2Pe 3:13 But according to his promise we wait for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.

For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; and the former shall not be remembered or come to mind. (Isaiah 65:17)

Certain Jewish traditions pictured ** heaven as a mountain with seven tiers or layers.** According to some accounts, King Solomon’s throne, which had six steps leading to the throne itself, provided the model for the structure of heaven.

Whose to say, that God doesn’t have a tier/layer/place for unbaptized infants?

again it is our hope, God has!

Rachel weeps for her children who are no more,
Jer 31:15 Thus says the LORD: “A voice is heard in Ramah, lamentation and bitter weeping. Rachel is weeping for her children; she refuses to be comforted for her children, because they are not.”

How much more do the heavens cry out for her lost children!

God bless,
John

 

[sidbrown]

Hi Sid,

         Again a statement not backed with anything, it's like pulling teeth from you.

What exactly does your 3rd edition Baltimore catechism say? that’s different?

Let’s go over Ron’s reference

Q. 632. Where will persons go who – such as infants – have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism?
A. Persons, such as infants, who have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism, cannot enter heaven; but it is the common belief they will go to some place similar to Limbo, where they will be free from suffering, though deprived of the happiness of heaven.

"**Free of Suffering ** though deprived of the happiness of heaven "

We don’t believe they deserve or went to hell, hell was made for the fallen angels not man.

Sanctification and Salvation are a process… infants who die unbaptized, have had no opportunity , to receive any of the sacraments of grace, they are born into christian homes.

** Jesus to a gentile, however a man of great faith;**

Mat 8:10 When Jesus heard him, he marveled, and said to those who followed him, "Truly, I say to you, not even in Israel have I found such faith…

13 …And to the centurion Jesus said, “Go; be it done for you as you have believed.” And the servant was healed at that very moment"

Rom 10:6 But the righteousness based on faith says, Do not say in your heart, "Who will ascend into heaven?" (that is, to bring Christ down)

Act 16:30 and brought them out and said, “Men, what must I do to be saved?”

Act 16:31 And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

We believe though baptism is essential, that through our faith and the faith of the Church, that God, through Jesus Christ comforts our lost ones. We can’t say they are in heaven, we can’t believe their in hell, but we have hope they are not suffering. The Jews as well as Paul believe in layers of heaven,

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created** the heavens** and the earth
Paul is taken up to the third level,

2Cr 12:2] I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or whether out of the body I do not know,** God knows—such a one was caught up to the third heaven**.
3] And I know such a man—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows—

     4]	 how he was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.

and whose to say when the New heavens comes what they will be like;

2Pe 3:13 But according to his promise we wait for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.

For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; and the former shall not be remembered or come to mind. (Isaiah 65:17)

Certain Jewish traditions pictured ** heaven as a mountain with seven tiers or layers.** According to some accounts, King Solomon’s throne, which had six steps leading to the throne itself, provided the model for the structure of heaven.

Whose to say, that God doesn’t have a tier/layer/place for unbaptized infants?

again it is our hope, God has!

Rachel weeps for her children who are no more,
Jer 31:15 Thus says the LORD: “A voice is heard in Ramah, lamentation and bitter weeping. Rachel is weeping for her children; she refuses to be comforted for her children, because they are not.”

How much more do the heavens cry out for her lost children!

God bless,
John

It is stated right in your quote from Q. 632 that unbaptised infants cannot enter heaven. That was my point. This is what was taught before Vatican II.

 

[ron77nyc]

Exactly------that was my point. They cannot enter heaven. Here are the questions again.

What kind of comfort is it to know that your child is eternally separated from God and family?

Hi Ron,
who said anything about eternally separated? Is that what you believe?

baltimore-catechism.com/lesson14.htm
Q. 632. Where will persons go who – such as infants – have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism?
A. Persons, such as infants, who have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism, cannot enter heaven; but it is the common belief they will go to some place similar to Limbo, where they will be free from suffering, though deprived of the happiness of heaven.

 

[John_oxios]

It is stated right in your quote from Q. 632 that unbaptised infants cannot enter heaven. That was my point. This is what was taught before Vatican II.

annnddddd? limbo was around long before that, Dante’s Inferno written around 1300 includes it, nobody said or has said unbaptized babies are in heaven.

 

[John_oxios]

Exactly------that was my point. They cannot enter heaven. Here are the questions again.

Originally Posted by ron77nyc
What kind of comfort is it to know that your child is eternally separated from God and family?
Quote:
Originally Posted by John oxios
Hi Ron,
who said anything about eternally separated? Is that what you believe?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ron77nyc
baltimore-catechism.com/lesson14.htm

Would you accept different degrees of separation?

Being totally separated form God, and knowing you’ll never be in His Presence, that’s is how hell is described.

I do not understand what you’re trying to prove or your point ?

I’m not saying or have said, nor has the Church said unbaptized infants are in heaven.

we started this out on the existence of Purgatory, which is a doctrine of the Church, to a common belief of Limbo… nobody has said LIMBO Is in heaven.

Can you say, what God can do? or can’t do in eternity? Nothing is impossible for God.

If you won’t believe in the Church teaching on limbo? Nor its doctrine of Purgatory, that’s where you are today… cafeteria catholic… but as Roman Catholic we are to believe till we can come to an understanding through education, prayer, meditation, and faith in Christ’s Church, but first you have to believe…
what comes first, Faith or belief? Its belief, because without belief faith cannot be.
Faith IS belief in action…

What must you do to be saved? "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ"

If you won’t believe His Church guided by the Holy Spirit, since the Pentecost, led by His witnesses though faith and the laying on of hands… well? I got a few Scriptures for you,its the Church, not the Bible

eph 3:10 that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places.

Eph 3:11 T**his was according to the eternal purpose **which he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord,

1Ti 3:15 if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.

Pillar: used as a building support, or standing alone, as for a monument:

       a person who is a **chief supporter of a society**, state, **institution, **etc.: a pillar of the community.

Bulwark: [support, buttress, mainstay]

any protection against external danger, injury, or annoyance: The new dam was a bulwark against future floods.
3.
any person or** thing giving strong support or encouragement in time** of need, danger, or doubt:

Not Sid Brown, not Ron, But the Church guided by the Holy Spirit till Christ comes again.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/sep/10091602.html

In his customary press conference aboard his Alitalia flight to Edinburgh this morning, Benedict was asked whether he hopes “to make the Church as an institution, more credible and attractive” in a country where secularism is becoming the standard. Benedict replied, “A Church that seeks to be particularly attractive is already on the wrong path.”
The Church, he said, “does not work for her own ends, she does not work to increase numbers and thus power.”

The Church “serves, not for herself, not to be a strong body, rather she serves to make the proclamation of Jesus Christ accessible, the great truths and great forces of love, reconciling love that appeared in this figure and that always comes from the presence of Jesus Christ.”

As GK Chesterton has said: "I don’t want to go to a church that changes with the culture. I want a Church that changes the culture

."

Save your opinion, believe in Christ’s Church

God bless,
John

 

[John_oxios]

This doesn’t sound as if you can take it or leave it. Trent doesn’t say it’s a theological hypothesis. Trent says: “infant children have no other means of salvation except baptism.”

Hi Ron,

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

lim·bo    
[lim-boh] Show IPA
–noun, plural -bos.
1.
Roman Catholic Theology . a region** on the border of hell or heaven,** serving as the abode after death of unbaptized infants (limbo of infants) and of the righteous who died before the coming of Christ (limbo of the fathers or limbo of the patriarchs).

World English dictionary: limbo:

  1.	( often capital ) Christianity  the supposed abode of infants dying without baptism and the just who died before Christ.

A little something pre Vatican 1 and II on Limbo:

WHAT IS LIMBO? According to St. Thomas Aquinas, "limbo is a place of perfect
natural happiness but without the supernatural vision of God to which we
have no natural right.

…that we believe the way of salvation to be open to those
only who are baptized…“As many of you as have been baptized in Christ, have put
on Christ.” Consequently it is manifest that all are bound to be baptized:
and that without Baptism there is no salvation for men.
"

Thomas Aquinas, quite possibly the smartest man that ever lived, did not have a problem with Limbo for unbaptized infants…how can you?

no natural right… but God is supra-natural,

Todays catechism:

scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c1a1.htm#1252

       VI. THE NECESSITY OF BAPTISM

1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are “reborn of water and the Spirit.” God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

1258 The Church has always held the firm conviction that those who suffer death for the sake of the faith without having received Baptism are baptized by their death for and with Christ. This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament.

1259 For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit desire to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament.

1260 “**Since Christ died for all, **and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery.” Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.

1261 ** As regards children who have died without Baptism**, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them," allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.

Excerpt from# 1257] “….Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament…”

When we hear a truth, and feel it in out gut, we must act on it. We are compelled by the Holy Spirit to be baptized… anything less is disobedience.

God bless,
John

 

[ron77nyc]

I do not understand what you’re trying to prove or your point ?..

…Save your opinion, believe in Christ’s Church

God bless,
John

The Church has said unbaptized infants cannot enter heaven and are deprived of the presence of God because only baptism removes original sin. That means they are eternally separated from God and everyone who is in heaven with God. I backed it up with a quote from the Baltimore Catechism and you said the Baltimore Catechism was inferior to the New Vatican II Catechism.

Glad to see someone break out a Baltimore Catechism, but that’s for teaching children… #632 is a teaching not necessarily doctrine… correct me if am wrong please, I’ll look into it more… however he Church doesn’t teach 'limbo ’ any longer, you rarely hear of it with the exception of Old dudes like me, from back in the sixties.

The Vatican II Catechism deviated from this traditional teaching by saying God is not bound by His own sacraments. This means there is a possibility for unbaptized children and adults to go to heaven.

The Church doesn’t want to be untruthful, we honestly don’t know what happens to unbaptized infants or Infants destroyed by abortion… but we believe in a Most merciful and loving God, who may have a place for them in the bosom of Abraham, Father of believers in God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

If we honestly don’t know what happens then everything about limbo is speculation and opinion. Why is my opinion of limbo less valid than anyone else’s opinion? Look at what has been said by prominent church leaders.

11th century: St. Anselm (1033 - 1109 CE) supported St. Augustine’s belief that "unbaptized children share in the positive sufferings of the damned [in Hell]."1

12th century: Peter Abelard (1079 - 1142) deviated from St. Augustine by rejecting material torment (poena sensus) and retained only the pain of loss (poena damni) as the eternal punishment of unbaptized infants for their original sin.

13th century: St Thomas Aquinas (1226-1274), who was the first major theologian to speculate about the existence of a place called limbo. Its name is derived from the Latin limbus which means “hem” or “edge”. There, on the edge of heaven, the unbaptised would exist in a state of what he described as “natural happiness”.

14th century: Pope John XXII’s issued an Epistle to the Armenians in 1321 CE.
Fr. Brian W. Harrison writes that the Epistle, along with two earlier ecumenical councils:

“… teach that the souls of those who die in original sin … go down without delay into Hell’ where, however, they suffer ‘different punishments’ from those who die in actual mortal sin.”

15th century: Later writers, {e.g. Griolamo Savonarola (1452 - 1498) and Ambrose Catharinus (16th century)} believed that “the souls of unbaptized children will be united to glorious bodies at the Resurrection.” 1

16th century: Cardinal Cajetan speculated that unbaptized newborns, fetuses, etc people may benefit from a “vicarious baptism of desire.” i.e. even though an actual baptism may not have occurred, it might have been desired by the parents, or the church or by someone else. A “desired baptism” which had never actually been conducted might have the same power as a real sacrament.

18th century: A group known as the Jansenists reverted to St. Augustine’s belief. They rejected the idea of Limbo in favor of eternal torture of unbaptized infants, etc. in Hell. In response, Pope Pius VI wrote Auctorem Fidei in 1794. It condemned their teaching as being “false, rash, and injurious to Catholic education” because they denied the existence of a place “which the faithful generally designate by the name of limbo for children.” Pope Pius VI implied that there are two possibilities: that unbaptized infants might spend eternity comfortably in Limbo or they might spend it being tortured in Hell. The Jansenists’ denial of the possibility of Limbo was un-Catholic.
19th century: Theologian Heinrich Klee speculated that God might enlighten the infant at the instant of death and enable them to make a decision for or against God.

20th and 21st century Catholic teachings:
1905: Pope Pius X made a definitive declaration confirming the existence of Limbo. However, this was not an infallible statement by the pope:

“Children who die without baptism go into limbo, where they do not enjoy God, but they do not suffer either, because having Original Sin, and only that, they do not deserve paradise, but neither hell or purgatory.”

1958: The Holy Office (once the Inquisition and now the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) was critical of some believers who delayed baptism because of their belief in Limbo. They concluded: “Therefore this Supreme Congregation, with the approval of the Holy Father, warns the faithful that infants are to be baptized as soon as possible…” (Acta L, 114).
1960s: The Second Vatican Council stated, in Gaudium et Spes 22: “For since Christ died for all (Rom. 8:32)…we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all [humans] the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery.”
1984: Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, then head of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, stated his personal disbelief concerning Limbo during an interview in . He said that:
“Limbo has never been a defined truth of faith. Personally, speaking as a theologian and not as head of the Congregation, I would drop something that has always been only a theological hypothesis.”

My point in all this is to say that the Catholic Church unintentionally does teach error.

 

[John_oxios]

Ron77nyc;7099828]The Church has said unbaptized infants cannot enter heaven and are deprived of the presence of God because only baptism removes original sin. That means they are eternally separated from God and everyone who is in heaven with God. I backed it up with a quote from the Baltimore Catechism and you said the Baltimore Catechism was inferior to the New Vatican II Catechism.

Hi Ron,

One's a teaching tool,madefor various levels of young catechists learning about the Church and sacraments like grades 1-8,

the New Catchism is a theological manual; and that was not what I said, that was a statement made by a Church authority!

Man ya makin’ me work on this one had over 8000 characters, 2nd time I’m chopin this down)

        Where does it say 'eternally separated'?  the Church says eternally separated?    Anything can happen after Christ 2nd coming... We all change...

Ron, The Vatican II Catechism deviated from this traditional teaching by saying God is not bound by His own sacraments. This means there is a possibility for unbaptized children and adults to go to heaven.

Actually if you read the vatican II CCC doesn’t mention Limbo, Remember there’s Sacred Tradition 'Oral Tradition passed down by the Apostles, and tradition! tradition can change while Sacred Tradition does not change.

examples of tradition Communion in the Hand, or by mouth, kneeling no kneeling, the Mass in Latin to English etc etc…

The RCC is not a religion of the Book, it is a religion of God’s living word… it is in- it- self an organism, it lives, it breathes it grows it learns, by revelation of the Holy Spirit.

Nobody said heaven, but a type of heaven, No suffering but out of God’s beatified vision.

Are you a Sedavacanist? It didn’t deviate LIMBO its theological idea has been shortly after St. Augustines theological defense of ‘original sin’ against Pelagianism at least the Church, Aquinas wrote on it in the 1100’s

But Augustine’s idea that man is born depraved is what the reformers picked up on.
God created man and blessed them Gen 1:28, God saw everything he made and indeed it was very good [vs 31]

What God declared good, Man… but original sin has stained us. It doesn’t make us evil, but pride and selfishness set in.

I think it was Aquinas, who later changed the idea, saying all men are born with the inclination towards good. Which is the Catholic Teaching today. via Trent.

** RON77, Why is my opinion of limbo less valid than anyone else’s opinion?**

Opinion is not theory, try getting some 500 bishops in a synod to accept one opinion? It’s not going to happen, but they will and can come to a theological truth, through prayer, discussion and guidance by God.

’ Ron77’, I dunno? Where’s he in the Bible, as the manifold wisdom, the pillar the rock? I am not without my opinion, but what’s that to all the great minds and saints who have guided Christ’s Church for 2000 yrs. I am but a pebble in the Church, of the Body of Christ.

remember this is the same Body that The N.T. responsible for the scripture we read today.

your opinion? Seems more like a bias, you won’t believe in it, it’s not that big a deal. If you have had an infant that died, maybe you’d feel less hard headed.
As far as your opinion is less valid?

Yes, who sent you? By Church standards, and biblical standards you have to be sent by and with authority. What authority do you have? who sent you? What are qualifications? Have you dedicated your life to contemplation of Scripture? Prayer, fasting for spiritual strength? Divinity Education? What degrees do you have in antiquities? Hebrew? Latin? Greek?

Let’s go to holy Scripture:

Act 8:30 So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet, and asked, "Do you understand what you are reading?"

Act 8:31 And he said, “How can I, unless some one guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.

The Church is our guiding light of God’s truth… not personal opinion.

You don’t agree with Church teachings on i.e Purgatory? That’s a doctrine, and now you disagree with Vatican II?, Limbo is a theory, a common belief.

Which makes your opinion an uncommon one.

Heck, you think the O.T/ hebrew Scriptures are obsolete! That’s a Bozo no! no! that alone, makes your personal opinion 99.99% less than the guiding Body of the Church, which is guided by the Holy Spirit in all truth til Christ’s return.

God even sent Paul a human guide after a light from heaven flashed around, Jesus sends Ananias and lays his hands on him to regain physical as well as spiritual sight… in receiving the Holy Spirit, and then he was baptized. (Acts 9)

Bibically a spouse can be saved by their partners faith Correct! The Centurion who asks Jesus just to speak the word, to heal his child, By his astonishing Faith Christ healed his child.

More on next!!
God bless,
John

 

[John_oxios]

Hi Ron,

newadvent.org/cathen/09256a.htm
Pre-Augustinian tradition

There is no evidence to prove that any Greek or Latin Father before St. Augustine ever taught that original sin of itself involved any severer penalty after death than exclusion from the beatific vision, and this, by the Greek Fathers at least, was always regarded as being strictly supernatural. Explicit references to the subject are rare, but for the Greek Fathers generally the statement of St. Gregory of Nazianzus may be taken as representative:

It will happen, I believe . . . that those last mentioned [infants dying without baptism] will neither be admitted by the just judge to the glory of Heaven nor condemned to suffer punishment, since, though unsealed [by baptism], they are not wicked. .

. . For from the fact that one does not merit punishment it does not follow that one is worthy of being honored, any more than it follows that one who is not worthy of a certain honor deserves on that account to be punished.

Thus, according to Gregory, for children dying without baptism, and excluded for want of the “seal” from the “honor” or gratuitous favor of seeing God face to face, an intermediate or neutral state is admissible, which, unlike that of the personally wicked, is free from positive punishment. … **St. Ambrose explains that original sin is rather an inclination to evil than guilt in the strict sense, and that it need occasion no fear at the day of judgement; **and the Ambrosiaster teaches that the “second death,” which means condemnation to the hell of torment of the damned, is not incurred by Adam’s sin, but by our own. This was undoubtedly the general tradition before St. Augustine’s time.

The RC Church believe in two judgements, a ‘Particular judgement’ when you die you find out just where your going, and the ‘great Judgement’ everyone knows where your going!

here’s my opinion:
Infants who are innocent and not deserving punishment, who for no other reason other than Adam’s inherited sin are left out, can be found innocent of their own sin, Jesus came to break us of the sin of Adam… I believe God finds a way, for the innocent] Remember how we judge others is how HE in all His Glory will judge us

.

In todays society no infant child deserves to suffer, even at the hands of their parents… we’d have to cal Child protective services on God Himself.

the Church has always felt baptism is necessary as soon as possible, Scripture says ,Why Delay, or they were immediately baptized.

And as they went along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, “See, here is water! What is to prevent my being baptized?” (Acts 8)

Nothing you quote says ‘eternally’ anything…which you continually add too whatever quote you pick

Purgatory on the other hand is not!

984: Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, then head of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, stated his personal disbelief concerning Limbo during an interview in . He said that:
“Limbo has never been a defined truth of faith. Personally, speaking as a theologian and not as head of the Congregation, I would drop something that has always been only a theological hypothesis.”

** Ron, My point in all this is to say that the Catholic Church unintentionally does teach error.**

It doesn't teach error, period!  Its Infallible in matters of Faith, but it seems like your trying to find error with it.

Look up theological hypothesis, how can that be error

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0506867.htm

Many Catholics grew up thinking limbo – the place where babies who have died without baptism spend eternity in a state of “natural happiness” but not in the presence of God – was part of Catholic tradition.

Instead, it was a hypothesis – a theory held out as a possible way to balance the Christian belief in the necessity of baptism with belief in God’s mercy.

Like hypotheses in any branch of science, a** theological hypothesis can be proven wrong or be set aside when it is clear it does not help explain Catholic faith.**

The problem today with the idea of Limbo is too many infants are dying prior to Baptism, as unnecessary because of limbo, this would include aborted infants. So its discussion is on the rise.

“Many Catholics grew up thinking limbo – the place where babies who have died without baptism spend eternity in a state of “natural happiness” but not in the presence of God – was part of Catholic tradition.”

What does it say above?? Part of Catholic tradition" Small ‘t’ in tradition, not sacred Tradition but tradtion. traditions can change evolve, grow

Even Pope Benedict may one day, having to make a statement in an Encyclical, say something backing limbo? Great minds aren’t stuck in the mud, but are open to revelation.

God bless, 
             John

 

[John_oxios]

Hi Ron,

as far as jansenists? they believed like protestants that man is born depraved’,
so limbo did not suit there theology… and by the way their teachings were condemned as heresy… so why bring them up?

Jansenists adopted a formulation of Augustines theory of original sin, as Luther did… not limbo, Agustine only believed in heaven and hell.

In the later mediaeval period, some** theologians continued to hold Augustine’s view, others held that unbaptized infants suffered no pain at all**: unaware of being deprived of the beatific vision, they enjoyed a state of natural, not supernatural happiness. Starting around 1300, unbaptized infants were often said to inhabit the "limbo of infants".[23] The
C.C.C., #1261 declares: “As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: ‘Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,’[24] allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.” But the theory of Limbo, while it “never entered into the dogmatic definitions of the Magisterium …** remains … a possible theological hypothesis”**

To me Limbo or no limbo, Infants are helpless, and God helps those who can’t help themselves.
David first born by Bathsheba, was never circumcised, yet David knew that fasting would not bring the child to him, but that he would go the the child after death.

“I shall go to him, but he will not return to me” (2Sam 12:23).

It is also said, in the case of children who die in infancy, it may well be that they are spared a life of tragedy, heart break, and pain by their immediate departure."
[author unknown to me] Just an old hand note, next to 2Sam 12:23.

You can pick out particular people who have had a problem with limbo over the ages, but it doesn’t change the fact that it was a common belief among the faithful, even if it is a theological hypothesis.

God bless, 
             John

 

[John_oxios]

That’s what happens when the love of logic and an appreciation of the beauty of an orderly man-made systematic theology with every ‘hair’ in place obscures the Law of God written on ones heart.

So say you, The baltimore catchism was developed as an educational tool, mystagogue, to get back educating our up and coming youth.

Writing at different grade or reading skill levels yes they would have some difference… but essentially state the same truth.

i.e a second grade reading level, to an eight grade reading level, but to you that’s a sin?
Especially from someone who hides behind an orthodox in communion with orthodox? What does that mean. Two definitions please, one at second grade level, one at twelfth grade level, see how you manage!

God bless,
john