Today's reading and the question of children going to heaven

[MacQ]

You claimed that it is due them.

There you go again, substituting words that give meanings a twist.
As I have said, I don’t think that is an intellectually honest way to discuss things.

I said nothing about being owed or being due.
God owes us nothing.

What I said was:
That it doesn’t seem just to me to judge an infant based on what his parents do.
Nor does it seem just to me that a soul can never go to heaven if it dies a physical death too soon.
Take it at face value. period.

 

[Paleocon]

There you go again, substituting words that give meanings a twist.
As I have said, I don’t think that is an intellectually honest way to discuss things.

I said nothing about being owed or being due.
God owes us nothing.

What I said was:
That it doesn’t seem just to me to judge an infant based on what his parents do.
Nor does it seem just to me that a soul can never go to heaven if it dies a physical death too soon.
Take it at face value. period.

Saying that it is unjust for a soul to be denied the possibility of Heaven, is to say that a soul has the right to a chance at Heaven. By virtue of the meaning of the word “just”.

 

[MacQ]

Saying that it is unjust for a soul to be denied the possibility of Heaven, is to say that a soul has the right to a chance at Heaven. By virtue of the meaning of the word “just”.

Maybe to you that’s what it means.
I don’t think any of us have the “right” to anything from God. Or that we are “owed” anything from God. Nonetheless, some people do go to Heaven.
But I do believe in a merciful God, and am given to the notion that He doesn’t want to deny any soul, much less that of an infant.

 

[Eternal_One]

So…a baby dies and is rewarded or punished based on what his parents chose to do.
I would have trouble squaring that notion with a merciful and loving (and just) God.

Aren’t we all punished for what our first parents did? How do you square Adam and Eve’s sin that we all bear because of them, with a merciful and loving (and just) God?

 

[Eternal_One]

Thanks everyone for their (name removed by moderator)ut.

I just did a word search for “limbo” in the Catechism and came up empty.
So - What does this tell me?
That the Church does not recognize it in any official capacity.

Therefore - for the sake of this discussion limbo has no bearing on the topic.
Jesus makes no such reference and neither does the Church in her official teaching - contained in the Catechism.

Jesus makes no mention, but infant death happened a lot in the OT, many times inflicted by God.

Where do you think the first born children who were killed in Egypt went? Or the children of evil tribes and enemies of Israel, like the Caananites, Amorites, Hittites, etc? Its almost as if God was wiping out the evil tribes and the future of these evil tribes, to prevent them from growing and spreading.

Its a usual theme in the OT that the children suffer for the sins of their parents. A negligent parent who does not baptize their child, and the child not attaining heaven because of that, seems to be perfectly reconcilable with the OT and God’s justice. There is also the reoccurring theme of children being saved by their parents’ decisions, I.e. Abraham’s heroic faith, and even though it is NT, Mary’s “yes” that brought our salvation by giving birth to the Messiah.

 

[Genesis315]

I came across this article, which seems to me a very reasonable explanation of where unbaptized dead babies (or for Protestants, those who died but were not yet within the age of reason and thus aren’t able to have a personal faith in Christ) go. What is your take on this?

sanctepater.com/2012/10/do-aborted-babies-go-to-heaven.html

As I said in the other thread where you posted this, it’s a bad article.

The Church makes no definitive judgment because that would involve judging particular souls. Likewise, God has the power to sanctify souls apart from the sacraments as the famous saying of St. Thomas Aquinas goes: God has bound salvation to the sacrament of baptism, but He himself is not bound by Sacraments.

In answer to those who said the sin of Adam was greater than the salvation of Christ since original sin affects all men, but Baptism does not reach all, such as those in the womb, St. Thomas said:
St. Thomas Aquinas:

Children while in the mother’s womb have not yet come forth into the world to live among other men. Consequently they cannot be subject to the action of man, so as to receive the sacrament, at the hands of man, unto salvation. They can, however, be subject to the action of God, in Whose sight they live, so as, by a kind of privilege, to receive the grace of sanctification; as was the case with those who were sanctified in the womb.

newadvent.org/summa/4068.htm#article11

Examples of this happening in Scripture are St. John the Baptist and the Prophet Jeremiah. We can’t say for certain that it happens other times, but we also cannot say for certain that it doesn’t.

The Church has also permitted other ideas as well. St. Bernard, for example, taught that the vicarious faith and desire of the parents or Church could suffice, just as how their vicarious faith suffices for an actual baptism of an infant.

If the soul is not cleansed of original sin, and baptism is the ordinary means of this, then the soul cannot be saved. Limbo is the state of damnation where one is deprived of the beatific vision (the consequence of original sin) but does not receive actual torments (the consequence of actual sins committed).

 

[MacQ]

As I said in the other thread where you posted this, it’s a bad article.

The Church makes no definitive judgment because that would involve judging particular souls. Likewise, God has the power to sanctify souls apart from the sacraments as the famous saying of St. Thomas Aquinas goes: God has bound salvation to the sacrament of baptism, but He himself is not bound by Sacraments.

In answer to those who said the sin of Adam was greater than the salvation of Christ since original sin affects all men, but Baptism does not reach all, such as those in the womb, St. Thomas said:

newadvent.org/summa/4068.htm#article11

Examples of this happening in Scripture are St. John the Baptist and the Prophet Jeremiah. We can’t say for certain that it happens other times, but we also cannot say for certain that it doesn’t.

The Church has also permitted other ideas as well. St. Bernard, for example, taught that the vicarious faith and desire of the parents or Church could suffice, just as how their vicarious faith suffices for an actual baptism of an infant.

If the soul is not cleansed of original sin, and baptism is the ordinary means of this, then the soul cannot be saved. Limbo is the state of damnation where one is deprived of the beatific vision (the consequence of original sin) but does not receive actual torments (the consequence of actual sins committed).

Your final paragraph seems to contradict the rest of what you had to say.
I was with you up til then.
Souls indeed can be saved outside baptism. The Church teaches that.
Even for Atheists. And we’re talking about infants here…who haven’t done any sins.

 

[MacQ]

Aren’t we all punished for what our first parents did? How do you square Adam and Eve’s sin that we all bear because of them, with a merciful and loving (and just) God?

The catechism calls it “freedom put to the test”, as Adam and Eve certainly did.
I don’t see that as unmerciful or unjust.
We are given free will. What’s unmerciful or unjust about that?

 

[JRKH]

Saying that it is unjust for a soul to be denied the possibility of Heaven, is to say that a soul has the right to a chance at Heaven. By virtue of the meaning of the word “just”.

I feel the need to way in here…
A soul DOES have the “right to a chance at heaven”…by virtue of why God made us in the first place…Is not our purpose and goal to be with God forever? Is it not God’s desire that no one be lost? (Though many are by their own choice.)
Every one has a right to a chance at heaven - it is inherent in our free will - that we can choose to seek heaven or not to.
Everyone has a chance…

But you see this only speaks to those who are able to make their own choices. It does not speak to the infants…the innocents that Jesus says that we must be like.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

Aren’t we all punished for what our first parents did? How do you square Adam and Eve’s sin that we all bear because of them, with a merciful and loving (and just) God?

Jesus Death and resurrection set this right.
Do we still bear the stain of original sin? Yes…but the heavenly gates are now open and the innocent are welcomed.

Peace
James

 

[MacQ]

I feel the need to way in here…
A soul DOES have the “right to a chance at heaven”…by virtue of why God made us in the first place…Is not our purpose and goal to be with God forever? Is it not God’s desire that no one be lost? (Though many are by their own choice.)
Every one has a right to a chance at heaven - it is inherent in our free will - that we can choose to seek heaven or not to.
Everyone has a chance…

But you see this only speaks to those who are able to make their own choices. It does not speak to the infants…the innocents that Jesus says that we must be like.

Peace
James

Just so.

 

[MacQ]

Jesus Death and resurrection set this right.
Do we still bear the stain of original sin? Yes…but the heavenly gates are now open and the innocent are welcomed.

Peace
James

And once again, just so.

 

[Paleocon]

Maybe to you that’s what it means.

That’s what it means. If you want to make an argument about God’s mercy, don’t conflate it with justice.

I feel the need to way in here…
A soul DOES have the “right to a chance at heaven”…by virtue of why God made us in the first place…Is not our purpose and goal to be with God forever? Is it not God’s desire that no one be lost? (Though many are by their own choice.)
Every one has a right to a chance at heaven - it is inherent in our free will - that we can choose to seek heaven or not to.
Everyone has a chance…

But you see this only speaks to those who are able to make their own choices. It does not speak to the infants…the innocents that Jesus says that we must be like.

Peace
James

No that is gravely incorrect.

That God gives us a chance at Heaven does not make it a right on our part.

 

[Genesis315]

Your final paragraph seems to contradict the rest of what you had to say.
I was with you up til then.
Souls indeed can be saved outside baptism. The Church teaches that.
Even for Atheists. And we’re talking about infants here…who haven’t done any sins.

I don’t think it contradicts. We cannot be saved in a state of original sin. The first part of my post dealt with the fact that it is possible for God to cleanse a soul of original sin in an extraordinary way. The last part is what happens if He were not to cleanse the soul and the soul dies in original sin only.

As you say, there’s good reasons to hope that He does indeed cleanse such souls and infuse them with the theological virtues so that they may be saved, but there are also good reasons not to presume that He does (we should neither presume, nor despair). I hope that helps clarify!

 

[MacQ]

I don’t think it contradicts. We cannot be saved in a state of original sin. The first part of my post dealt with the fact that it is possible for God to cleanse a soul of original sin in an extraordinary way. The last part is what happens if He were not to cleanse the soul and the soul dies in original sin only.

As you say, there’s good reasons to hope that He does indeed cleanse such souls and infuse them with the theological virtues so that they may be saved, but there are also good reasons not to presume that He does (we should neither presume, nor despair). I hope that helps clarify!

I guess I missed the “If He were not to cleanse…” part. I read it to imply that if not cleansed through baptism, the soul cannot be saved.
But I see your point.
Thanks for clarifying.

 

[MacQ]

That’s what it means. If you want to make an argument about God’s mercy, don’t conflate it with justice.

No that is gravely incorrect.

That God gives us a chance at Heaven does not make it a right on our part.

He said we have a right to “expect”…not a right to Heaven…a chance at it.
But…we agree I think that we have no “right” to anything from God. If by “right” we mean a guaranteed endowment that can be challenged…that we are “owed”.

On the other hand, we might take that to mean that “it is reasonable to expect” God to be merciful if we believe what we’re told…that He would like us all with Him.

Now let’s talk about “Just”.
You say if we call God “just” it means we think we’re owed.
“Just” can also imply a reasonable or fair judgment. And living up to one’s promises.

Here’s an example:
Scripture tells us that Joseph upon learning Mary was pregnant, being a “just” man, decided to divorce her quietly.
Scholars tell us that if he were “just” in your sense, he would have not done it quietly, but publicly (as the law said), and had her stoned.

So in this sense, Joseph made a fair and compassionate decision instead. He was “just” in the sense that JRKH and I are using the term.

So perhaps our statements might more aptly say that if we believe in a (merciful and) just (reasonable, fairminded) God, we can reasonably expect that all (not some) have a chance to go to heaven.
**Everyone’s entry into Heaven is left to God’s mercy **in fact.