Grace on top of natural perfection

  • Thread starter Thread starter thinkandmull
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Vico said:
This is addressed by St. Thomas Aquinas in De Malo. Concupiscence as it is part of original sin does not mean consenting to the temptations of it, but feeling that temptation, which remains after baptism, but not with the lack of original justice (which makes one liable to punishment).
Click to expand...
Are you saying that Limbo of children is merciful instead of just?
 
thinkandmull said:
Are you saying that Limbo of children is merciful instead of just?
Click to expand...
I say nothing about limbo of children. Whatever we receive is both merciful and just at the same time. So, since the councils of Florence and Trent declare that those who die without baptism and for which is has not been supplied in some other way, cannot enter heaven.
 
You said that the lack of original justice makes one liable to punishment. I don’t think babies deserve to be punished because of original sin. It is justly taken away when they go to Limbo. They don’t deserve the stain
 
thinkandmull said:
You said that the lack of original justice makes one liable to punishment. I don’t think babies deserve to be punished because of original sin. It is justly taken away when they go to Limbo. They don’t deserve the stain
Click to expand...
Liable is correct – there is no personal guilt – all descendants of Adam and Eve are conceived with the stain or original sin, with two notable exceptions.

Catechism 404 (Excerpt)
It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act.
 
I don’t think everything God does includes mercy and justice. Some of the damned may get the full measure of what they deserve
 
Now you are being ambiguous to protect what your wrote earlier. Don’t be a sophist Vico
 
thinkandmull said:
Now you are being ambiguous to protect what your wrote earlier. Don’t be a sophist Vico
Click to expand...
I don’t know what a sophist is. Anyway I am not being ambiguous. I never posted that original sin was personal sin in any descendants.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top