F
fix
Guest
We have a living magisterium you can ask these questions to.
- Status
S
Saint_Michael
Guest
Yeah right I couldn’t even get time with my Parish priest before deciding to leave the Church.
I say again as soon as I can find some sort of logical guide as to what is actually Catholic doctrine, maybe I’ll have an easier time when the Church wants to ditch something it’s taught in Catechisms, in papal bulls, and Bishops councils for nearly 2 millenia.
I’m out this will go no where, and is going off topic anyway.
T
tequilamac
Guest
Start here:
We believe (I believe) in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, and born of the Father before all ages. (God of God) light of light, true God of true God. Begotten not made, consubstantial to the Father, by whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven. And was incarnate of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary and was made man; was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered and was buried; and the third day rose again according to the Scriptures. And ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, and shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, of whose Kingdom there shall be no end. And (I believe) in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceeds from the Father (and the Son), who together with the Father and the Son is to be adored and glorified, who spoke by the Prophets. And one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. We confess (I confess) one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for (I look for) the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen."
Infallibility:
newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm#V
Differences in belief and summary of categories of belief:
ewtn.com/library/Theology/SUMMARY.HTM
What is Doctrine?
newadvent.org/cathen/05075b.htm
What is dogma?
newadvent.org/cathen/05089a.htm
S
Saint_Michael
Guest
Well extraordinary circumstances was not always the teaching that was later changed too. Anyway unbaptized babies and limbo are definitely within this teaching of the unbaptized not being allowed to enter Heaven no?
F
fix
Guest
Two Catholics do not have to agree. We have a magisterium.
T
tequilamac
Guest
Start here:
We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us men and our salvation, he came down from heaven:
(All bow during these three lines)
by the power of the Holy Spirit, he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered, died and was buried.
On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory, to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life: who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified:
He has spoken through est the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic, and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.
Then try as a sincere Catholic must do to properly inform his conscience unless he suffers from inculpable ignorance which does happen, to understand what an infallible teaching really is and why it is:
newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm
Then go to Google and google for papal infallibility.
As far as I know there are only two or three dogmas that meet the papal infallibility criteria:
The Immaculate Conception
newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm
Abortion.
newadvent.org/cathen/01046b.htm
and I forget what the other one is.
And then you can expand on your understanding of the concept of faith and belief here at summaries of categories of belief:
ewtn.com/library/Theology/SUMMARY.HTM
S
Saint_Michael
Guest
I liked the new advent article on “Doctrines” better, the one you edited out of this post. I’m now convinced more than ever that limbo was a doctrine I thank you.
I know very well what has been defined ex-Cathedra thanks, and it sure doesn’t encompass even a fraction fo Catholic teaching. Essentially what you’re saying to me is about as clear as mud.
Can you stop posting creeds? Creeds say nothing of Marian dogmas and a slew of other Catholic dogmas and doctrines, I know the Creeds very well thanks.
T
tequilamac
Guest
Inculpable ignorance does happen. I understand that. I’m not sure why God does that. But prayer can work as well.
Limbo has never been an an infallible doctrine, no. But it is true that inculpable ignorance may keep you from understanding the difference between doctrine and infallible doctrine and an article of faith for I refuse to believe you are simply being willful. Therefore it must be out of your control.
S
Saint_Michael
Guest
T
tequilamac
Guest
What attack? Where? Whatever man. No one attacked you here. They tried very hard to explain to you the difference between doctrine, infallible doctrine and an article of faith. I am sorry you feel attacked. That’s too bad.
More ad-hominem attacks I see…
R
rr1213
Guest
Forget about Limbo for a minute. In my post above, I ask about a related, but not identical, concept…the statement in the Baltimore Catechism relating to infants who cannot enter heaven. Forget where they go…the statement from the Catechism is about where they DON’T go. So, is this the doctrine of the Catholic Church? Is it the inerrant teaching of the Catholic Church? If so, why? If not, why? Was the Baltimore Catechism inaccurate or misleading by teaching as doctrine something that was not doctrine? Anybody know the answer to these questions?
F
fix
Guest
I do not think there is a debate about unbaptized persons, sacramentally or extra-sacramentally, not going to heaven. That seems to be Church teaching. That is one needs to be baptized, in some way, to go to heaven.
The debate is about so called speculative theology regarding limbo.
C
christianley
Guest
Perhaps it depends upon how authoritative the Baltimore Catechism was when it came out.
R
rr1213
Guest
That’s a good question. How authoritative was it? More so, less so, or just the same as the current catechism?
C
christianley
Guest
Didn’t the current catechism come from the Vatican? I don’t think that is true of the Baltimore Catechism.
E
Evan
Guest
It was composed in Baltimore, by some US Bishops. It was not vetted by Rome for use throughout the world. It was for the people in the US.
The new catchism is a worldwide endevor and reviewed by a large segment of the Ordinary Magisterium. It too is not an ecumenical document but the Holy Father, John Paul the Great, did write that it was a ‘Sure Norm’ (I think that is CCC 26 in the introduction)
So it has more authority than the bishops from Baltimore.
P
Peter_DiMitri
Guest
I think the frustration you are expressing kinda explains why you are bound up in this issue. For whatever reason, you have left the Church, and seem to be seeking confirmation of that decision by poking holes in Church belief.
I’m totally sympathetic to that, and I certainly pray that at some point you will come back. But the fact that a priest didn’t give you time should not have been any factor whatsoever in your decision to stay or leave.
Several posters have been trying to say that Infallible teaching is not changed at this point, and you have been insisting that various teachings are inconsistent with this. But the issue is about what is considered infallible and what is not. Before the claim can be made that the Church has somehow changed its doctrinal teaching, it’s necessary to establish a specific doctrine that has been overturned.
Is there evidence that Limbo was ever part of Church Doctrine? Not statements, doctrine. I realize that it may seem semantic, but words are important and we should strive for precision in our language to avoid misunderstanding.
H
havemercy
Guest
The idea of limbo has always been and will continue to be in limbo. It is not dogma, nor will it ever be.
S
Semper_Fi_1
Guest
No, they didn’t. No ecumenical council of the Catholic Church ever proclaimed not believing in the THEORY of Limbo as “anathema”. This is a requirement for an article of faith. A Pope can talk about a theory all he wants until he’s blue in the face but it doesn’t mean I, as an average lay Catholic have to believe it unless he defines it as a matter of faith and morals AND while speaking as the leader of all Christians.
The simple fact of the matter is is, is that the Catholic Church cannot state who is definitely in Hell. Limbo was a Thomist notion which assumed that all babies that did not have water baptism were unbaptized, which is most definitely not true (because we in the Catholic Faith have baptism of water, baptism of desire and baptism of blood), and we have an Augustinian Pope who never believed in the theory of Limbo. Augustinian theology goes against the very notion of Limbo and while he was still a cardinal he said he would love to see it die. We in the Catholic Church can speculate about many things but one we can NEVER be sure of is who is or who is not in Hell. Limbo was invented by some theologians who wanted the idea gone that there are babies in Hell… while it is an admirable goal, it wasn’t really necessary because these theologians were creating problems that didn’t exist. Limbo is a mere theological idea, and nothing more. There are many theological ideas in the Catholic Church, limbo being one of the more contraversial.
- Status