The opinion, therefore, of St. Thomas is very just, that children who die in infancy have neither the pain of sense, nor the pain of loss; not the pain of sense, he says, " because pain of sense corresponds to conversion to creatures; and in original sin there is not conversion to creatures" (as the fault is not our own); “and therefore pain of sense is not due to original sin;” because original sin does not imply an act.’ .Objectors oppose to this the teaching of. St. Augustine, who in some places shows that his opinion was that children are condemned even to the pain of sense. But in another place he declares that he was very much confused about this point. These are his words: " When I come to the punishment of infants,- I find myself (believe me) in great straits; nor can I at all find anything to say." ?
And in another place he writes, that it may be said that such children receive neither reward nor punishment: " Nor need we fear that it is impossible there should be a middle sentence between reward and punishment; since their life was midway between sin and good works. “’ This was directly affirmed by St. Gregory Nazianzen: “Children will be sentenced by the just judge neither to the glory of Heaven nor to punishment.”’ St. Gregory of Nyssa was of the same .opinion: " The premature death of children shows that they who have thus ceased to live will not be in pain and unhappiness.” And as far as relates to the pain of loss, although these children are excluded from glory, nevertheless St. Thomas, who had reflected most deeply on this point, teaches that no one feels pain for the want of that good of which he is not capable; so that as no man grieves that he cannot fly, or no private person that he is not be emperor, so these children feel no pain at being deprived of the glory of which they were never capable; since they could never pretend to it either by the principles of nature, or by their own merits.
St. Thomas adds, in another place, a further reason, which is, that the supernatural knowledge of glory comes only by means of actual faith, which transcends all natural knowledge; so that children can never feel pain for the privation of that glory, of which they never had a supernatural knowledge. He further says, in the former passage, that such children will not only not grieve for the loss of eternal happiness, but will, moreover, have pleasure in their natural gifts; and will even in some way enjoy God, so far as is implied in natural knowledge, and in natural love: “Rather will they rejoice in this, that they will participate much in the divine goodness, and in natural perfections.” 2 And he immediately adds, that although they will be separated from God, as regards the union of glory, nevertheless " they will be united with him by participation of natural gifts; and so will even be able to rejoice in him with a natural knowledge and love."
After reading this opinion of a Church Father if he is not convinced to have his children Baptized tomorrow! You will not convince him.
What can I tell my husband about the teachings of the Church on this subject that might help change his mind? And if there’s anyone out there who’s gone through a similar situation, I’d be grateful for some help and advice.