Limbo Babies documentary

[tafan]

Anyone in authority propagating something outside of Authentic Catholic Teaching, is in grave error. Discussion and speculation should not be mistaken for teaching.

This is vague, are you saying a Bishop cannot teach anything that has not been defined as infallible? What do you mean “outside the authentic catholic traching”. ? Every American bishop for decades used the Baltimore Catechism as the primary teaching resource for the youth. I souls say it certainly “propagated” the teaching of Limbo. Are you saying all of those Bishops were in grave error?

 

[Ignatius]

Are you saying all the priests and Bishops in Ireland, over many many years, were in grave error? It seems the document linked above by Trishie recognises that the church DID in fact teach about Limbo.

No, if you actually read the document it clearly states that limbo was a theory, meaning a theological speculation. As such, it is unsuitable for doctrinal teaching. Anyone teaching it as more than a theological speculation was in grave error, whether Irish, American, Bishop, Priest, Nun or anyone else. No one should be passing off theological speculation theories as authentic teachings. Limbo was and is a theological speculation theory and not within the area of authentic Catholic doctrine.

This is a perfect example of how some people are going to insist on propagating this error as those in the past insisted on acting like limbo was more than some theologians favorite theory. It doesn’t matter how often they are corrected, they go right on stating the same falsehood as if no one had informed them of the truth of the matter.

 

[atheistgirl]

It doesn’t matter how often they are corrected, they go right on stating the same falsehood as if no one had informed them of the truth of the matter.

That’s interesting - because in the case of Ireland at least, it would seem the entire country was taught this - from the Primate, to the local Bishops, priests etc.

Im not disputing the official stance of the church is it was always a theological speculation. However, it does seem worth asking how this ‘‘speculation’’ became ‘‘teaching’’ in everything from the penny catechism of the time, and taught by everyone from the top down. Leading to such appalling suffering by those desperate families already suffering appalling grief. Only to be told their child could not be buried in consecrated grounds. It just seems to have piled misery and despair onto grief, and all for nothing as this was never, as you say, the official teaching of the church. So how did the entire clergy, on an entire country, get it so very wrong?

Sarah x

 

[Ignatius]

That’s interesting - because in the case of Ireland at least, it would seem the entire country was taught this - from the Primate, to the local Bishops, priests etc.

Im not disputing the official stance of the church is it was always a theological speculation. However, it does seem worth asking how this ‘‘speculation’’ became ‘‘teaching’’ in everything from the penny catechism of the time, and taught by everyone from the top down.

So how did the entire clergy, on an entire country, get it so very wrong?

Sarah x

This is a perfect example of how some people are going to insist on propagating this error as those in the past insisted on acting like limbo was more than some theologians favorite theory dispite the fact that The Church that they were supposed to represent did not teach that. It doesn’t matter how often they are corrected, they go right on stating the same falsehood as if no one had informed them of the truth of the matter.

There were far more agregious errors taught in the past by more than on little country. Half of the countries (or kingdoms) at the time followed the heresies of Arius and Marcion; that was clearly far more than the few counties of Ireland and the error was far more serious.

 

[atheistgirl]

This is a perfect example of how some people are going to insist on propagating this error …

I said very clearly the official stance of the church was it was always a theological speculation. So how am I propagating ‘‘this error’’?

What I asked, and wasnt answered, was despite the fact it was only a theological speculation, HOW was it that this was taught as though it were fact by the clergy of an entire country, with the devestating consequences this had on the families concerned.

Sarah x

 

[Ignatius]

Ignatius;8634220:

This is a perfect example of how some people are going to insist on propagating this error as those in the past insisted on acting like limbo was more than some theologians favorite theory dispite the fact that The Church that they were supposed to represent did not teach that. It doesn’t matter how often they are corrected, they go right on stating the same falsehood as if no one had informed them of the truth of the matter.

There were far more agregious errors taught in the past by more than on little country. Half of the countries (or kingdoms) at the time followed the heresies of Arius and Marcion; that was clearly far more than the few counties of Ireland and the error was far more serious.

I said very clearly the official stance of the church was it was always a theological speculation. So how am I propagating ‘‘this error’’?

What I asked, and wasnt answered, was despite the fact it was only a theological speculation, HOW was it that this was taught as though it were fact by the clergy of an entire country, with the devestating consequences this had on the families concerned.

Sarah x

Well Sarah, I ams refering to your statement, to wit:
"the entire country was taught this - from the Primate, to the local Bishops, priests etc. " clearly is attempting to promote the error that this was Catholic teaching, which is false because it is emphatically not the Catholic teaching.

Here is your actual statement from post #43
athiestgirl:

the entire country was taught this - from the Primate, to the local Bishops, priests etc.

Your contention that “the entire country was taught this - from the Primate, to the local Bishops, priests etc.” is quite false.

If you content that your statement is not a falsehood, then I’m going to have to ask you to provide documentary evidence of each and every “the entire country was taught this - from the Primate, to the local Bishops, priests, etc” promoting this theological speculation as official dogmatic Church teaching.

Otherwise, I’m going to have to ask you why you are making these false accusations.

 

[atheistgirl]

Well Sarah, I ams refering to your statement, to wit:
"the entire country was taught this - from the Primate, to the local Bishops, priests etc. " clearly is attempting to promote the error that this was Catholic teaching, which is false because it is emphatically not the Catholic teaching…

Im not attempting to promote any error.

The four minute mark in the video, that priest, who sits on the vaticans theological commission, confirms it was taught!

The experiences of the families and mothers confirms it was taught.

The fact it was written up in the penny catechism of the time confirms it was taught.

The hundreds of unmarked graves scattered throughout the land, and the anguish inflicted on the grieving parents, confirms it was taught.

My question is why, if it should not have been taught, and was only speculation, did the bishops of the countries concerned not speak to the priests and tell them to stop telling these parents their babies were in limbo and couldnt go to heaven as they were not baptised, as this is only speculation.

It seems to me, because the Bishops held the exact same view, and taught the same.

Regardless if the official line is it was always just a speculation.

Sarah x

 

[Ignatius]

Ignatius;8642256:

Well Sarah, I am refering to your statement, to wit:
"the entire country was taught this - from the Primate, to the local Bishops, priests etc. " clearly is attempting to promote the error that this was Catholic teaching, which is false because it is emphatically not the Catholic teaching.

Your contention that “the entire country was taught this - from the Primate, to the local Bishops, priests etc.” is quite false. quote]

Im not attempting to promote any error.

Ah, but you are promoting the error that “the entire country was taught this - from the Primate, to the local Bishops, priests etc.”

You have not yet provided evidence to prove that, in your own words " the entire country was taught this."

The priest is talking about things taught in the context of discussion and speculation which should not be mistaken for Authentic dogmatic teaching.

The video only proves that the BBC reporting has, as it’s usual usual practice, taken a snipit out of context in order to further propagate a false notion. I have not seen actual truth come out of the BBC in longer than I can remember. If you are searching for the actual truth, get as far away from the BBC as possible.

The bottom line is that Anyone in authority propagating something outside of Authentic Catholic Teaching, is in grave error.

 

[Ignatius]

why then were thousands of babies denied proper burial in consecrated ground

That is an interesting allegation, but only allegation. To start with, you’ll need to provide detailed, primary evidence of this. Let’s start with the numbers, you say thousands. Exactly how many thousands? 10,000, 100, 10000, 1,000,000?

 

[atheistgirl]

That is an interesting allegation, but only allegation. To start with, you’ll need to provide detailed, primary evidence of this. Let’s start with the numbers, you say thousands. Exactly how many thousands? 10,000, 100, 10000, 1,000,000?

It seems from your responses you simply wish to deny the rather obvious fact that parents were denied christian burials for their stillborn children by bishops and priests, across the land due to their teaching of Limbo. You continuously repeat it was never offical teaching. We got that. It never was official. Fine. But it was taught non the less. It’s in the penny catchism taught to all children in the schools at that time. Generations of catholics in Ireland and Britain grew up believing this and had it confirmed, or at least never correct, by the priests they dealt with; those same priests, working under bishops, who denied a christian burial to these children.

We should spare a bit more thought for the pain and anguish inflicted on these parents, and perhaps a bit less trying to deny the obvious and painful reality of their experience.

I’m done now with this.

 

[Ignatius]

It seems from your responses you simply wish to deny the rather obvious fact that parents were denied christian burials for their stillborn children by bishops and priests, across the land due to their teaching of Limbo. You continuously repeat it was never offical teaching. We got that. It never was official. Fine. But it was taught non the less.

There were many who taught the Arian, Marcionist, Pelegian, and all of the other heresies as well, The point is those are not Catholic Teaching. Anyone propagating such ideas outside of authentic Catholic teaching is in error. The Church opposes such errors.

Many have and continue to teach things in opposition to the teaching of The Church.

Surely you Do not believe that The Church should punish those who dissent from authentic Church teaching and instead teach these falsehoods!

 

[CapitalT]

I just wanted to point out that the uncharitable tone of this thread and ask those Catholics to respect that there are non-Catholic seekers who frequent these forums. Debate is good, but it must be charitable.

As for the “Hope of Salvation” text (vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html), it does imply by its language and nature that non-infallible Church teaching is being “reconsidered”:

“This may be a providential moment for its reconsideration”

“Only when seen in light of the historical development of theology over the course of time until Vatican II does this specific question find its proper context within Catholic doctrine. Only in this way - and observing the principle of the hierarchy of truths mentioned in the Decree of the Second Vatican Council Unitatis redintegratio (#11) – the topic can be reconsidered explicitly under the global horizon of the faith of the Church.”

“The necessary reconsideration of the theological issues cannot ignore the tragic consequences of original sin.”

I don’t know the authority level of this document. But it seems that 1) Catholic dogma has never held as infallible the theological notion of limbo for infants, 2) Limbo for infants has been a fallible teaching of the Church, and 3) the theory has been “reconsidered,” not eliminated, which seems to be a Church development guided by the Holy Spirit, right?

Is it wrong to say the Church has ever had a fallible teaching that has been developed and “reconsidered”? (That’s a legitimate question–I am a new Catholic.) Please help us understand, rather than simply state we are propagating grave error. That is clearly not the intention. We are faithful to the Church.