Prolife Saint?

[CatholicSam]

Nope there hasn’t been. With God all things are possible Though your confidence has no basis it is noble!

Actually her confidence has a very strong basis. If Holy Mother Church says that there is no need to baptise unborn babies, then that means that they are not in danger of eternally losing their souls if they die before death.

 

[Potato1]

Actually her confidence has a very strong basis. If Holy Mother Church says that there is no need to baptise unborn babies, then that means that they are not in danger of eternally losing their souls if they die before death.

??? I thought we had reached a consesus on this. The Church does not say that these babies are in heaven. Pope B16 has stated that we are to pray for and hope for these souls. Hope and certainty are not synonyms. Please provide Church teaching on this. The Chuch has not declared them anywhere…

And all this business of well MY GOD does not do that is rediculous snotty catty and mean. He is Our God and if you are so presumptuous as to say what He can and Cannot do on your pathetic understanding of Cosmic Justice and mercy then you are either egotistical or ignorant of faith. (not to you Catholic sam but to others who use the “My God would never”… Oh well is your God the one who preaches about the wide door and narrow door, the one who smited whole cities and in fact the world once… teh God that loves but continuously preaches about the weeds and wheat, sheep and goats.
the greatet trick of the devil is to convince you that hell and he do not exsist. the greatest trick of your ego is to go against the Bible, faith and Church doctorine just to come up with what “you feel god will do” Shame… A previous poster isinuated that some people may want some babies to go to hell. FIND ME ONE!

 

[dkoinzan]

Potato 1

Have you ever heald a dead child? Let me please explain. Please don’t be cruel with your words once I am done.

After buring my unbaptised preborn children, I prayed my heart out before the statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary. She is the Mother of Sorrows and surely she would understand mine. I begged her to go to Her Son and ask him for Hope for me. Hours upon Hours I prayed. I offered all my agony over their deaths up to Jesus to shower graces down.

One late night after my prayers, I picked up a book about Marian Prayers and opened the book to the page on Our Lady Of Hope. I discovered that night that I was born on the Feast Day of Our Lady of Hope. I then ask Mary for an image of Our Lady of Hope. She arranged for me to recieve one.

The way you present yourself is not very charitable. If your child died tomarrow would you not believe your child would get a chance at heaven? All of us are at God’s Mercy, but the Church teaches that we are made to love and serve him in this life and in the next. The Church teaches that God chooses who goes to heaven Not the Church. It also says that God can do the humanly impossible. It teaches that God performs miracles. It teaches that God is a Just God. It says He has Divine Mercy. The rules on Cannonizing Saints have Changed and altered. Could you possibly be wrong?

 

[CatholicSam]

??? I thought we had reached a consesus on this. The Church does not say that these babies are in heaven. Pope B16 has stated that we are to pray for and hope for these souls. Hope and certainty are not synonyms. Please provide Church teaching on this. The Chuch has not declared them anywhere…

Let’s try this again

1. The Church is responsible for getting her flock to Heaven.
2. The Church has deemed it unnecessary to provide for unborn baptism (not to be confused with infant baptism–I’m talking about babies in the womb, not out of the womb).
3. If unborn babies who died without baptism had the chance of going to Hell (since Limbo has been done away with, the only places for them to go are Heaven and Hell), the Church would be neglecting her primary duty of getting her flock to Heaven by not providing for their baptism beforehand.
4. There is no risk of unborn babies who die to go to Hell.

The kind of hope B16 is speaking about is not the kind of hope we use in our vernacular day to day and the kind you’ll see in the dictionary. He doesn’t mean it like “I hope I get a bicycle for Christmas.” According to the CCC, hope is “the confident expectation of divine blessing and the beatific vision of God.” So B16 is actually saying that we are confident (AKA “sure”) that the babies who die in the womb are in Heaven.

Potato1, this is the Family Life forum. If you want to argue this further, I suggest you take it to the Philosophy subforum of CAF: forums.catholic-questions.org/forumdisplay.php?f=118 or even Ask an Apologist.

 

[shannyk]

Hi Everyone

I first read this thread yesterday, and it has been marinating in my mind. I have a zillion theological points I could make here, but I think that is for another forum. I just want to respond with a few thoughts, but forgive me as I have not read the entire thread so I could just be saying what has already been said…

and BTW, I say these things as someone who has had 2 second trimester miscarriages, so I do ‘know’ where everyone is coming from.

So here are my thoughts…

Pro-life saint…every single saint is a pro-life saint, and any and all would be suitable to pray to on behalf of an unbaptised baby.

About the Church being ‘serious’ about pro-life; making an unbaptised baby a saint. Well, the thing is, the Church doesn’t ‘make’ saints for causes. God makes saints, the Church canonizes them. As for being serious about pro-life, the Church has been consistently that, nothing less.

Limbo. Limbo has not been ‘done away with’ as some have said. Limbo is not now, nor has it ever been a doctrine. Limbo is a theological theory soundly based on scripture and tradition. However, as our understanding of God changes, theories change and evolve. What the Pope has said, is that the issue of what happens to unbaptised babies after death is still up for theological ‘debate’, and that we have every reason to hope for their salvation. Basically, it’s a case of we don’t know, but we can have Faith, and the kind of Hope that Catholic Sam pointed out.

With Hope in God’s Mercy, and and Army of Saints and the Blessed Mother, there is no need to worry

 

[shannyk]

Oops! One more thought…

Every Saint was once an un-baptised pre-born baby. They are all representative of a person with an immortal soul from conception until death. We have to think of their lives as a continuum, from conception. We tend to focus on what they did in their lifetime, but their lifetime also included a time in the womb before birth. I think it would be fitting to pray to any of them as pre-born persons on behalf of unborn children.

And, think especially of Mary, who was uniquely saved from sin from her own conception. How fitting to ask her as a pre-born child to intercede for those unbaptised and not born alive.

 

[wanner47]

Another clarification regarding Limbo –

The theory of Limbo has not been “done away with;” in fact, Catholics are free to believe in Limbo if they so choose. However, it’s true that the Church (and Pope Benedict XVI in particular) have chosen to place a greater emphasis on the hope and trust in the mercy of God when it comes to the fate of unbaptized babies (both born and unborn).

As Karl Keating says in this article:

Where does that leave us? In limbo, so to speak. A Catholic may accept limbo, or he may reject it. He is not a better or worse Catholic for doing one or the other. But he does need to think through the problem—where do unbaptized infants go, and how does his solution, whatever it may be, square with God’s justice and mercy (both together, not just one taken separately)?

As for me, I believe that God can work outside of the sacraments, so I tend to hope that He does so in the case of unborn babies who die prior to birth. Given that my husband and I had every intention to get our baby baptized, I hope and trust that God recognized our intention and thus granted our baby a Baptism of Desire prior to his/her death, thus enabling him/her to go straight to Heaven. With this hope in mind, I regularly ask Noel to pray for our family.

 

[CatholicSam]

Another clarification regarding Limbo –

The theory of Limbo has not been “done away with;” in fact, Catholics are free to believe in Limbo if they so choose. However, it’s true that the Church (and Pope Benedict XVI in particular) have chosen to place a greater emphasis on the hope and trust in the mercy of God when it comes to the fate of unbaptized babies (both born and unborn).

As Karl Keating says in this article:

Wanner, that is no longer correct. If you notice, that article was written in 2001, and recently (2007) Pope Benedict XVI has stated that the theory of Limbo is incorrect.

cathnews.com/news/704/108.php

Isn’t that wonderful news? So now the official Church teaching is that unbaptised babies who die *can *go to Heaven! (I also want to clarify that Limbo was never an official Church teaching to begin with).

 

[wanner47]

Perhaps I didn’t make myself clear.

The document about Limbo (which can be found here) published by the ITC did not completely throw out Limbo. It does not have the authority to do so, according to Jimmy Akin:

In fact, the International Theological Commission is not an organ of the magisterium but an advisory body. Its documents, even when their publication is approved by the pope, do not have magisterial force. What the pope did in this case was allow an advisory document to become public. That’s not the same thing as changing Church teaching.

What the document did do is this:

t casts doubt on the doctrine of limbo without claiming anything certain regarding the fate of infants dying without baptism, instead encouraging an attitude of hope regarding their salvation. (Id.)

“Casting doubt” upon a doctrine is not the same as “throwing it out completely.” But Catholics are still allowed to believe in Limbo if they choose; it wouldn’t be a heresy to do so.

It’s the same with the teaching of “no salvation outside of the Catholic Church,” – although the official Catholic teaching is that we can hope there is a way for our separated bretheren to be saved, it’s still allowed to privately speculate that they are not.

 

[LilyM]

Let’s try this again

1. The Church is responsible for getting her flock to Heaven.
2. The Church has deemed it unnecessary to provide for unborn baptism (not to be confused with infant baptism–I’m talking about babies in the womb, not out of the womb).
3. If unborn babies who died without baptism had the chance of going to Hell (since Limbo has been done away with, the only places for them to go are Heaven and Hell), the Church would be neglecting her primary duty of getting her flock to Heaven by not providing for their baptism beforehand.
4. There is no risk of unborn babies who die to go to Hell.

The kind of hope B16 is speaking about is not the kind of hope we use in our vernacular day to day and the kind you’ll see in the dictionary. He doesn’t mean it like “I hope I get a bicycle for Christmas.” According to the CCC, hope is “the confident expectation of divine blessing and the beatific vision of God.” So B16 is actually saying that we are confident (AKA “sure”) that the babies who die in the womb are in Heaven.

Potato1, this is the Family Life forum. If you want to argue this further, I suggest you take it to the Philosophy subforum of CAF: forums.catholic-questions.org/forumdisplay.php?f=118 or even Ask an Apologist.

Really? So if I regularly confess and do what I can to avoid mortal sin to the best of my knowledge, then I can be SURE (since that’s what confident means) of my salvation?

What about St Paul working out his salvation ‘fear and trembling’ then? He should’ve been sure of his salvation if anyone is - no room for fear and trembling there then, surely!

The point is even with the CCC definition, hope is NEVER to be confused with surety.

And if you construe any definition of ‘hope’ so as to negate St Paul’s fear and trembling, then you have misinterpreted, since such ‘hope’ would almost certainly cross the line into presumption.

Everyone on either extreme - those who are certain that unbaptised babies all automatically go to heaven and those who seem to be equally certain that none of them can possibly go to heaven, needs to understand the Church’s teachings better, since both positions are equally wrong.

 

[shannyk]

Everyone on either extreme - those who are certain that unbaptised babies all automatically go to heaven and those who seem to be equally certain that none of them can possibly go to heaven, needs to understand the Church’s teachings better, since both positions are equally wrong.

I’m not sure how anyone can be ‘sure’ of anything other than God’s abundant Love and Mercy. We tend to want everything to be defined, documented, and concrete. It’s not that simple. God reveals bits and pieces of things in His own time, by his own judgement. Many things of our Faith are mysteries that we are called to humbly accept. This is one of them.

 

[LilyM]

I’m not sure how anyone can be ‘sure’ of anything other than God’s abundant Love and Mercy. We tend to want everything to be defined, documented, and concrete. It’s not that simple. God reveals bits and pieces of things in His own time, by his own judgement. Many things of our Faith are mysteries that we are called to humbly accept. This is one of them.

We can be sure of God’s perfect justice as well - never let us think that His love and mercy override it. And giving certain souls automatic entree into heaven because by the free will of their parents they were aborted, for example, doesn’t seem in any way to resemble perfect justice.

My own opinion is that such souls are probably given what’s called a supernatural infusion of grace - sufficient to allow them on their own terms to choose or reject God, and then they are judged by Him accordingly.

 

[CatholicSam]

Perhaps I didn’t make myself clear.

No, you made yourself perfectly clear. Just had some outdated material and facts is all.

Well, I must say that if in the AAA forum I was given the response that unborn babies are not in need of baptism, that pretty much tells me all I need to know right there. Other people can squabble over semantics all they want (not you, Wanner).

 

[wanner47]

No, you made yourself perfectly clear. Just had some outdated material and facts is all.

Well, I must say that if in the AAA forum I was given the response that unborn babies are not in need of baptism, that pretty much tells me all I need to know right there. Other people can squabble over semantics all they want (not you, Wanner).

The supplemental material I provided didn’t change the facts of the “outdated” article at all.

And Michelle Arnold didn’t say that “unborn babies don’t need baptism.” She said,

Now that the Church better understands that God is not bound by the sacraments and that he can bestow outside of the sacraments sanctifying grace to those who are innocently incapable of receiving it in any other way, there is no need to try and stretch how baptism may validly be conferred.

Unborn babies who die before birth, or born babies that die shortly after birth, still need baptism; however, after their death it is not within our capability to confer it – it’s God’s. They still need baptism, but at that point it’s out of our human hands and left entirely up to God as to how He chooses to confer baptism.

 

[CatholicSam]

Unborn babies who die before birth, or born babies that die shortly after birth, still need baptism; however, after their death it is not within our capability to confer it – it’s God’s. They still need baptism, but at that point it’s out of our human hands and left entirely up to God as to how He chooses to confer baptism.

Excellently put! What I meant by unborn babies not needing baptism is that they don’t need another human being to pour water on them and say the specific words.

Although this isn’t a teaching of the Church, I can just imagine that the whole Heavenly Court is there present for the baptisms of the unborn babies! :heaven:

 

[dkoinzan]

Girls can we use the term Preborn not unborn baby. Unborn is a prodeath term. I was not looking for an absolute confidence that all get to go into heaven so much as a chance for all, even the preborn unbaptised. (I nearly wrote unborn )

I prayed and pondered this all day. Above all I am confident in the teaching that, “With God all things are possible!”

 

[shannyk]

We can be sure of God’s perfect justice as well - never let us think that His love and mercy override it

You are separating the concepts of Love, Mercy and Justice as three seperate things, when, in coming from a perfect God,they are one in the same.

Recent Popes have also taught that God’s Mercy is ABUNDANT, not merely sufficient.

Mercy in itself, as a perfection of the infinite God, is also infinite. Also infinite therefore and inexhaustible is the Father’s readiness to receive the prodigal children who return to His home. Infinite are the readiness and power of forgiveness which flow continually from the marvelous value of the sacrifice of the Son. No human sin can prevail over this power or even limit it. On the part of man only a lack of good will can limit it, a lack of readiness to be converted and to repent, in other words persistence in obstinacy, opposing grace and truth, especially in the face of the witness of the cross and resurrection of Christ.

I think we can safely and confidently entrust any soul into God’s care without fear OR presumption, knowing that whatever he decides for their soul will be perfect in Love, Mercy, and Justice.

 

[LilyM]

You are separating the concepts of Love, Mercy and Justice as three seperate things, when, in coming from a perfect God,they are one in the same.

Recent Popes have also taught that God’s Mercy is ABUNDANT, not merely sufficient.

I think we can safely and confidently entrust any soul into God’s care without fear OR presumption, knowing that whatever he decides for their soul will be perfect in Love, Mercy, and Justice.

‘entrusting a soul to God’s care’? I do entrust my own soul and many other souls around me to God’s care, as you say.

I and they (apart from the canonised saints) can all still be damned, for His care includes His justice. Which permits people to damn themselves to Hell. More often than not as Jesus Himself made plain. And is obviously superabundantly a part of His superabundant love and mercy as well.

It’s all interwoven, sure - but if I am in any danger of overemphasising one aspect surely far better that it be the fear of damnation than the feelgood ‘I’ll be just fine’ aspect. Only an overemphasis on the latter will damn me!

I am secure that whatever He does with me and all of us will be RIGHT and JUST. The mere giving me a chance of heaven through the passion of Christ is more than loving and merciful enough - far more than I deserve. That doesn’t at all give me or any preborn soul a free ride to heaven.

You make it sound very much to the contrary. Which would indeed be presumption - if you entirely lack any fear of damnation for yourself or any other soul not canonised a saint then that IS presumption on God’s mercy.

 

[dkoinzan]

Ok, if God is a Perfect Father, how would a Perfect Father act? Would he take the most innocent among us and condemn them to hell? I think that our brain goes with our body and he takes our soul. Now our brain has an intellegence that may be somewhat different from our souls intellegence. When John lept in his Mother’s womb, his soul recognized our Lord and his Mother. What if a child’s soul can choose God? God comes to some saints draws them near to him. Why couldn’t he do that with a preborn child? Maybe with the preborn brain they don’t understand, but with their preborn soul they do understand? God gives us free will. Is it free will if he just creates you with no chance of ever making it to heaven because you weren’t baptized?

 

[LilyM]

Ok, if God is a Perfect Father, how would a Perfect Father act? Would he take the most innocent among us and condemn them to hell? I think that our brain goes with our body and he takes our soul. Now our brain has an intellegence that may be somewhat different from our souls intellegence. When John lept in his Mother’s womb, his soul recognized our Lord and his Mother. What if a child’s soul can choose God? God comes to some saints draws them near to him. Why couldn’t he do that with a preborn child? Maybe with the preborn brain they don’t understand, but with their preborn soul they do understand? God gives us free will. Is it free will if he just creates you with no chance of ever making it to heaven because you weren’t baptized?

This may sound harsh, but remember God is a perfect father whose human children COLLECTIVELY - every last soul of them - through their representatives Adam and Eve - rejected Him.

The original state of every human soul apart from Adam, Eve, Mary and Christ is the opposite of innocence, it’s original sin and rejection of God. With which we are all, every single soul among us, tainted from the moment of conception, every bit as much as Adam and Eve. That’s why Mary had to be CONCEIVED without original sin rather than BORN without it to be utterly pure.

Original sin of itself is enough to damn a soul, absent the ordinary sacrament of baptism or such extraordinary extrasacramental means as God may choose to employ that we know or do not know of.

We cannot assume that there are now, since Christ instituted the sacrament of Baptism, ANY extraordinary means at all of removing this damning taint of original sin.

And if there are, what makes you think removal of original sin means automatic entree to heaven either? Every soul while it has life must surely have the chance to reject God regardless - baptism or no, removal of original sin or no. To think otherwise makes a mockery of free will.