F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
I didn’t say that.
Again Limbo is a theological speculation, one that I am not sure that I buy into.
And on that note, I am done here.
- Status
Again Limbo is a theological speculation, one that I am not sure that I buy into.
And on that note, I am done here.
S
Shin
Guest
Q. What is original sin?
A. Original sin is the sin in which we are all born, and which we contracted by the disobedience of our first parent, Adam.
Q. What evil effects has the sin of Adam brought upon us?
A. The evil effects of the sin of Adam are: The privation of grace, the loss of Paradise, together with ignorance, inclination to evil, death, and all our other miseries.
Q. How is original sin cancelled?
A. Original sin is cancelled*** by holy Baptism. ***
Q. Is Baptism necessary to salvation?
A. Baptism is absolutely necessary to salvation, for our Lord has expressly said: “Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.”
- The Catechism of Pope St. Pius X
A. The Sacraments that give sanctifying grace are Baptism and Penance; and they are called Sacraments of the dead.
Q. 594. Why are Baptism and Penance called Sacraments of the dead? A. Baptism and Penance are called Sacraments of the dead because they take away sin, which is the death of the soul, and give grace, which is its life.
Q. 620. When was baptism instituted?
A. Baptism was instituted, very probably, about the time Our Lord was baptized by St. John, and its reception was commanded when after His resurrection Our Lord said to His Apostles: “All power is given to Me in heaven and in earth. Going, therefore, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.”
Q. 621. What is Baptism?
A. Baptism is a Sacrament which cleanses us from original sin, makes us Christians, children of God, and heirs of heaven.
Q. 623. What persons are called heirs?
A. All persons who inherit or come lawfully into the possession of property or goods at the death of another, are called heirs.
Q. 624. Why, then, are we the heirs of Christ?
A. We are the heirs of Christ because at His death we came into the possession of God’s friendship, of grace, and of the right to enter heaven, provided we comply with the conditions Our Lord has laid down for the gaining of this inheritance.
Q. 638. How is Baptism given?
A. Whoever baptizes should pour water on the head of the person to be baptized, and say, while pouring the water: “I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.”
Q. 642. Is it wrong to defer the baptism of an infant?
A. It is wrong to defer the baptism of an infant, because we thereby expose the child to the danger of dying without the Sacrament.
Q. 643. Can we baptize a child against the wishes of its parents?
A. We cannot baptize a child against the wishes of its parents; and if the parents are not Catholics, they must not only consent to the baptism, but also agree to bring the child up in the Catholic religion. But if a child is surely dying, we may baptize it without either the consent or permission of its parents.
- The Baltimore Catechism
Instructions for baptizing in the case of a miscarriage.
VERY IMPORTANT READING!
We must all know how to baptize in the case of an emergency, which the sermons on baptism in the links below gives instructions on, as well as the catechisms, and old prayer books have this included all the time too. . it is a basic knowledge of being Catholic…
We must know that we are bound to baptize in the case of danger of death an adult who has expressed the slightest wish for baptism, or an infant, even if the parents are against it.
This is just the minimum of*** canon law***, which one can also look up. Frankly, anyone who is dying without baptism, and if that person can no longer communicate, I would give that person a *conditional *baptism, and so give that person the opportunity to gain that grace in His soul, as God might offer it to Him while his body is asleep but his soul might still be awake.
S
simple_soul
Guest
*Dear Shin,
This is a lot of information but I do believe it might be missing a few points. I could have misunderstood something when I was younger so maybe you could clarify for me.
Is it the water it’s self that baptizes? And, is it catholic church teaching that baptism by water is the only form that one can receive baptism?
M
Marsha_Adams
Guest
Actually, limbo was never a doctrine. It is a logical theological construct. That is, based on everything that has been revealed to us, theologically it would make sense for limbo to exist, and we have no knowledge that it does not exist therefore . . . , on the other hand God can do as He pleases.
Y
Young_Thinker
Guest
I believe in a Purgatory(so, I voted “yes”) but not in an eternal Limbo for unbaptized infants. Whether baptized or not, they can eventually go to Heaven.
L
LoyalViews
Guest
So, you’re saying the no none, not even the PROPHETS got into heaven before 33 a.d.? Are you sure? So Moses, is burning hell with the devil?Limbo has been stated as existing in an Ecumenical Council and multiple catechisms… . or to put it precisely it’s ‘the edge’ of Hell, when Hell is understood as simply being forever without the beatific vision in the afterlife.
And Limbo is understood because we are not born in sanctifying grace… but as scriptures say ‘children of wrath’, outside of the grace of God, on account of our first parents.
If you die without sanctifying grace, without baptism, you cannot go to Heaven.
No one went to Heaven at all for all of human history until 33 A.D.
Heaven is not our default deserved destination, but a gift we can be given, or not be given.
Since feelings aren’t Revelation or theology, feeling bad about this and deciding it doesn’t exist is a bad approach towards believing whether something exists or not, rather like feeling bad about drugs being bad for your health, so deciding they’re fine, or bad that cliffs exist so they must not, because God would not create cliffs that people fall off of.
S
surritter
Guest
Of course no one got into heaven before 33. That’s when Jesus opened the gates.
S
Shin
Guest
To the people asking me questions… please read the catechisms here.
They have the answers you desire. It is your responsibility as a Catholic to know so you should read these catechisms. They are all freely available.
I will quote a little more.
Q. What are we taught in the Fifth Article: He descended into hell; the third day He rose again from the dead?
A. The Fifth Article of the Creed teaches us that the Soul of Jesus Christ, on being separated from His Body, descended to the Limbo of the holy Fathers, and that on the third day it became united once more to His Body, never to be parted from it again.
Q. What is here meant by hell?
A. Hell here means the Limbo of the holy Fathers, that is, the place where the souls of the just were detained, in expectation of redemption through Jesus Christ.
Q. Why were not the souls of the Holy Fathers admitted into heaven before the death of Jesus Christ?
A. The souls of the holy Fathers were not admitted into heaven before the death of Jesus Christ, because heaven was closed by the sin of Adam, and it was but fitting that Jesus Christ, who reopened it by His death, should be the first to enter it.
St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, Bishop and Doctor of the Church
The ‘Limbo of the Fathers’ is called ‘Hell’ in scriptures. It is also called ‘the Paradise of the Fathers’ … ‘Abraham’s Bosom’… In other words… a place of natural happiness where the fathers awaited Christ.
The catechisms also detail ‘baptism of blood’ and ‘baptism of desire’ with their limitations – the former can occur for infants, it is believed, because they can be martyred for Christ’s sake – the latter cannot because they are not yet old enough to make rational decisions.
This is gone into in the sermon I linked to above actually… so… To people asking questions already answered by references… It is your responsibility to do some of the reading rather than asking for quotations of what you should be reading and listening to thoroughly.
They have the answers you desire. It is your responsibility as a Catholic to know so you should read these catechisms. They are all freely available.
I will quote a little more.
Q. What are we taught in the Fifth Article: He descended into hell; the third day He rose again from the dead?
A. The Fifth Article of the Creed teaches us that the Soul of Jesus Christ, on being separated from His Body, descended to the Limbo of the holy Fathers, and that on the third day it became united once more to His Body, never to be parted from it again.
Q. What is here meant by hell?
A. Hell here means the Limbo of the holy Fathers, that is, the place where the souls of the just were detained, in expectation of redemption through Jesus Christ.
Q. Why were not the souls of the Holy Fathers admitted into heaven before the death of Jesus Christ?
A. The souls of the holy Fathers were not admitted into heaven before the death of Jesus Christ, because heaven was closed by the sin of Adam, and it was but fitting that Jesus Christ, who reopened it by His death, should be the first to enter it.
- The Catechism of Pope St. Pius X
St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, Bishop and Doctor of the Church
The ‘Limbo of the Fathers’ is called ‘Hell’ in scriptures. It is also called ‘the Paradise of the Fathers’ … ‘Abraham’s Bosom’… In other words… a place of natural happiness where the fathers awaited Christ.
The catechisms also detail ‘baptism of blood’ and ‘baptism of desire’ with their limitations – the former can occur for infants, it is believed, because they can be martyred for Christ’s sake – the latter cannot because they are not yet old enough to make rational decisions.
This is gone into in the sermon I linked to above actually… so… To people asking questions already answered by references… It is your responsibility to do some of the reading rather than asking for quotations of what you should be reading and listening to thoroughly.
B
Benadam
Guest
This is the direction I’m leaning. With no personal sin ever committed, most theologians say a person is in a natural state of bliss. I think that the powers of the soul aren’t incapable of making a decision for God just because they lack experimental knowledge. God entered into the same state of human life and, I think makes it possible for unbaptized infants to say yes or no to God. In the natural bliss of having never offended God personally, it seems to me, it levels the playing field, if in that state, an unbaptized infant is given the opportunity to choose God.:twocents:
P
palmas85
Guest
Inconsistency, one the hallmarks of the modernist. At first you said Limbo does not exist. Now you say that you are not sure you buy into it. Well which is it?
But that is OK. Most if not all protestant groups do not believe in original sin and the Orthodox view, which I am starting to believe you hold, is that while man inherited the consequences of that long ago act he did not inherit the guilt associated with it. So it would seem that you adhere to a distinctly non Roman interpretation of the entire concept of original sin and by extension Limbo. It all makes sense now.
S
Shin
Guest
Hey, he said he wasn’t sure. . that’s a lot better than we started… It’s progress…
:angel1::harp::harp::harp:
:angel1::harp::harp::harp:
S
simple_soul
Guest
*Dear Shin,
I tried the link but did not see anything regarding the catechism of the catholic church in it. *
*Thank you for clarifying one of my questions. As to the other question maybe I should try to clarify. Do you know if it is the water, the desire, or the blood in and of themselves that baptize? Or, maybe a better way to ask this question is how does water, desire, or blood baptize?
S
Shin
Guest
All of the catechisms listed there are catechisms of the Catholic Church.
I think you already know the answers to your questions, do you not?
S
simple_soul
Guest
I honestly do not see any catechism lists. But, I will check again seeing that I am a computer illiterate.All of the catechisms listed there are catechisms of the Catholic Church.
Dear Shin,
I believe that it is through God’s Divine Mercy that we are baptized. But, was looking for some clarification on this belief and I was wondering what you know.
U
una_fides
Guest
Read the article. I have the utmost respect for Keating. His book “Catholicism and Fundamentalism” was one of the most instrumental in my conversion. Nevertheless, I have several qualms with this brief article of his, and I suspect he may have not yet done extensive research into the history and constant teaching on this issue.
First, I was amazed at the fact that Keating designated Limbo as a third place in neither heaven nor hell. Limbo is most certainly in hell. It is on the edge of hell, which is what the word ‘limbo’ means. I’ve seen several others, including pope Benedict, make this same unfortunate oversimplification and imprecise explanation of what the teaching of limbo consists.
Second, I’d like to respond to the following statement of his:G. K. Chesterton noted that truth is not chronologically determined. The century of a teaching’s promulgation is not an argument for or against it. An old teaching is not necessarily truer for being old, and a new teaching is not necessarily truer for being new.
This is true. Just because something is an old teaching does not make it true nor a new teaching make it false. Nevertheless, Catholics follow Tradition, which means what has been handed on. Never in the 2000 years of Church history has the Catholic Church taught that unbaptized infants can attain the beatific vision. On the contrary, for 2000 years it has taught that they cannot attain the beatific vision on account of their state of original sin, which without baptism, the Church has always taught, they cannot become children of God. Scripture teaches that we are all “by nature children of wrath” (Eph 2:3). The ones who taught that unbaptized infants could be saved and attain heaven were the Pelagians, who were excommunicated as heretics in a General Council and in the Council of Carthage (the same Council that first canonized Scripture–howbeit a local Council) this very proposition was anathematized.
So yes, just because the teaching that without baptism (at least by desire) one cannot attain the beatific vision is old that does not make it true. Nevertheless, the fact that the Church has constantly upheld this teaching and has always disfavored and has even excommunicated those who hold contrary views demonstrates that it falls under the Church’s received tradition. Thus, the argument should be broken down into “old” vs “new.” It should rather be understood as “traditional” vs “heterodox.”
U
una_fides
Guest
Keating’s last line is also significant. He states that we must accept both God’s mercy and his justice. Unfortunately, today the latter is often ignored in favor of the former. Limbo strikes a perfect balance between God’s mercy and justice. God is just and does not owe any of us heaven, and he has revealed to us that there is no other way for an infant to be cleansed from original sin except for baptism. Nevertheless, God is merciful and would not let those souls suffer in the fires of hell for sins they have not personally committed. Thus, we have limbo, the teaching that these souls are in a state of perfect bliss, perfect natural happiness, which we on earth do not even have! They neither suffer the fires of hell since they have not committed personal sin nor do they suffer the pain of loss since they never had the capacity to know God in the first place. What teaching could be a better understanding of God’s mercy and justice all the while still being faithful to the received tradition and constant teaching of the Church?
H
Hesychios
Guest
…
P
pnewton
Guest
It is God’s justice, not his mercy, that gives me pause to accept Limbo. He Himself said:
From the discourse in Ezekiel 18
Perhaps some place like Limbo exists. Maybe it is permanent, maybe not. I am not inclined to believe it likely at this point.
Y
Young_Thinker
Guest
I agree; however, that is obviously not to say that baptism is unimportant.
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
Not that it is any of your business but at this time I really do not think limbo, as stated by you and your group (won’t stoop to name calling as some other individual seem to love to do).
I have not really studied the matter nor do I care to at this time.
My main point, which you seem to continue to avoid, is that Limbo is not a dogma of the Church so we are free to believe as we wish regardless of what some anonymous user on an internet form thinks.
I await an apology for the term “modernist” if you ever wish to have a reply from me again.
- Status