N
NeelyAnn
Guest
Very good comments. I think it is of great importance that we accept all the teachings of the Church, even those that are unpopular in our day and uncomfortable for us to accept (such as the one being discussed from the Council of Florence). If the Church teaches it, it is true and we have to accept it. In fact, we should probably try extra hard to hold on to the dogmas that are the most difficult to accept in our day since these will be the first to go.Yes, I think that this is where the problem lies, so you have to get at ‘why are they rejecting dogmas’.
You ask questions like ‘do they not understand how to tell what dogma is’, or ‘do they simply not care’? You try to figure out the fundamental reason. Are they getting their Catholicism from popular newspapers and publications? What is going on? But generally I think these are people coming from a worldly perspective who have taken statements that can only be read in the light of tradition, in the light of the contemporary worldview morality instead. They fall for the ever so easy trap of making God fit their views coming out of the world rather than vice versa.
The concept of limbo is unpopular with people trying to please other people’s ears for obvious reasons. So obviously if it can be ignored, neglected, etc. it will be by those with any excuse however slim to do so.
To a degree so people become victims of their own lack of historical knowledge and ambiguous statements meant to please the ears a little too much perhaps, when used outside of the context of history.
You can see that people have been plainly taught the necessity of baptism, with instructions on emergency baptism for miscarriages and danger of death – but now that we are in a time of profound ignorance and lack of Faith, people feel like whatever they come up with is what it is, rather than something more educated and sometimes yes, tougher to accept at first.
I think people who have a problem with dogmas of original sin, etc. probably had poor catechesis often enough and stuck with that, and make their judgements about morality based on emotion a good deal rather than approaching moral law with the implicit acceptance of a good deal of things that at first will be hard.
People who try to educate others about these dogmas are doing an unpopular task, who wants to speak about the terrible consequences of original sin? Who wants to defend that the unbaptized babies who die are deprived of the beatific vision? Only those who realize that in fact, there is dogma proclaimed here. And so there is grave harm done by denying the dogma.
Limbo’s existence is not decided by our emotions. Original sin’s existence is not decided by our emotions. In this world, young babies suffer and die, emotionally we find this hard to accept, but this is the Creation God has given us. It does not go away because we have trouble reconciling it emotionally at first. On the contrary, only by embracing dogmas do we find the route to truly accepting and placing the harder things in life within our limited understanding.
‘Whoever says that infants are alive in Christ even when they depart this life without being baptized is really both opposing the Apostolic preaching and condemning the whole Church which runs hastily with infants to the baptismal font because it is beleived without any doubt that otherwise these infants cannot possibly be alive in Christ.’
'If you want to be a Catholic do not believe, do not say, do not teach that infants carried off by death before being baptized can obtain the remission of original sin."
St. Augustine, Father, Bishop, Doctor of the Church ‘Doctor of Grace’
A good sermon on Limbo – starts a few minutes in.
I’ll listen to the sermon you linked to this evening.
May God open the hearts of all who listen to it.
