F
fbl9
Guest
Temporary.If i am not mistaken those in Limbo will be released on the last day.
- Status
P
Pug
Guest
Purgatory = temporary
Limbo for infants who die without baptism = billed by *most *people who hold to Limbo as permanent
Limbo of the Fathers (the limbo where the righteous dead had awaited the passion, death, resurrection of our Lord to come open the gates of heaven) = temporary
G
Gregory_I
Guest
First to TOmmy: “ALways be prepared to give an answer for the faith that is within you; but do this with gentleness and respect.” 1 Peter. Come on you keep me on my toes, you think you don’t need to sharpen up? 
Is limbo temporary or permanent?
Well, the dogma which is the superstructure upon which the theological speculation known as limbo is built, indicates and explicitly affirms that those who die in original sin alone descend to hell, where they are punished, but differently than those who die in mortal sin.
Now, if we consider that the punishment for original sin alone is the deprivation of the vision of God, as taught by Pope Innocent III, and if we also consider that God will not torment a person who has not commited any actual sin with the torment of hellfire, then we are left to conclude that those who die in original sin alone (Unbaptized infants and the unbaptized mentally handicapped), then we must conclude that infants suffer in a very unique and singular way. So some theologians have seemed to remove limbo frome hell, where it logically belongs, and place it as a third state between heaven and hell.
THis has the effect of producing confusion in the minds of the Limbo antagonists: At the ressurection, how do we determine their eternal fate? Are they in heaven or hell?
TO avoid this, I say what the early Scholastics said about the fate of unbaptized children, and I place Limbo, not as a third place between heaven and hell, but as a part of hell itself. Just as heaven has “many mansions” which are indicative of degrees of glory, it would seem fitting that hell has “Many caves” which are degrees of damnation. Infants would exist IN hell, but at its borders, in the city limits. Nevertheless, they are in hell. But they do not suffer hellfire, they suffer the loss of the vision of God.
And it is right and just that they do, because they are GUILTY of original sin: THey are implicated in the guilt of Adam’s disobedience and suffer the consequences: THey are Deprived of sanctifying grace, which is an ABSOLUTE necessity to attain eternal beatitude, they are born in slavery to sin, which separates a person from God, they are Guilty of the sin of Adam and have lost the original justice, they are slaves to death and the devil, and they are justly condemned and the wrath of GOd abides upon them. THis is dogmatically and infallibly taught by the COuncil of Trent. It has to be believed in order to not be a cafeteria Catholic.
As such, there is no place for them in heaven.
Heaven is the Beatific vision of GOd, eternal beatitude: THere is no room in heaven for a halfway house: Either you are with God, or you are a slave to sin, death and the devil. This is perfectly logical, because GOd is ALL Good, and to be in heaven is to be in his presence:
THerefore, to place limbo in heaven is a SERIOUS mistake, because it implies that somehow human souls that are under the penalty of Sin can exist in Gods DIRECT PRESENCE without having to be purified of Sin.
If that is the case, then it completely unravels any need for purgatory, the basis of which is the belief that that which is impure cannot stand in the presence of God.
So if the souls in Purgatory, who are baptized and Just and have sanctifying grace, and have been forgiven of their sins and are out of danger of the fire of hell cannot stand before GOd, How are you gonna put an unbaptized infant who is subject to the slavery of sin, the GUilt of Original sin, the Wrath of God, and is considered a slave to the devil, lhaving lost original justice in Adam, in the presence of God?
If unbaptized Infants go to heaven, then there is no purgatory.
THen the question is, do they go to purgatory?
How can they without sanctifying grace? THe only means of bestowing it is through the Sacrament of Baptism, and infants cannot excercise the will, therefore they cannot be saved by a desire for Baptism.
TO say: Well, they WOULD have desired it if they only knew about it…
Well, everyone in HELL would have desired it if they only knew also! Is everyone in hell gonna be saved then because they WOULD have if they had oNLY KNOWN?
As our Lord told the rich man, in the parable of Lazarus, after the rich man had asked to go see his brothers to warn them about hell: “Do they not have moses and the prophets?”
But someone may say: THat is not fair, GOd wants to save everyone, so how can he condemn innocent infants?
Infants do not see the face of God.
Does that help?
Is limbo temporary or permanent?
Well, the dogma which is the superstructure upon which the theological speculation known as limbo is built, indicates and explicitly affirms that those who die in original sin alone descend to hell, where they are punished, but differently than those who die in mortal sin.
Now, if we consider that the punishment for original sin alone is the deprivation of the vision of God, as taught by Pope Innocent III, and if we also consider that God will not torment a person who has not commited any actual sin with the torment of hellfire, then we are left to conclude that those who die in original sin alone (Unbaptized infants and the unbaptized mentally handicapped), then we must conclude that infants suffer in a very unique and singular way. So some theologians have seemed to remove limbo frome hell, where it logically belongs, and place it as a third state between heaven and hell.
THis has the effect of producing confusion in the minds of the Limbo antagonists: At the ressurection, how do we determine their eternal fate? Are they in heaven or hell?
TO avoid this, I say what the early Scholastics said about the fate of unbaptized children, and I place Limbo, not as a third place between heaven and hell, but as a part of hell itself. Just as heaven has “many mansions” which are indicative of degrees of glory, it would seem fitting that hell has “Many caves” which are degrees of damnation. Infants would exist IN hell, but at its borders, in the city limits. Nevertheless, they are in hell. But they do not suffer hellfire, they suffer the loss of the vision of God.
And it is right and just that they do, because they are GUILTY of original sin: THey are implicated in the guilt of Adam’s disobedience and suffer the consequences: THey are Deprived of sanctifying grace, which is an ABSOLUTE necessity to attain eternal beatitude, they are born in slavery to sin, which separates a person from God, they are Guilty of the sin of Adam and have lost the original justice, they are slaves to death and the devil, and they are justly condemned and the wrath of GOd abides upon them. THis is dogmatically and infallibly taught by the COuncil of Trent. It has to be believed in order to not be a cafeteria Catholic.
As such, there is no place for them in heaven.
Heaven is the Beatific vision of GOd, eternal beatitude: THere is no room in heaven for a halfway house: Either you are with God, or you are a slave to sin, death and the devil. This is perfectly logical, because GOd is ALL Good, and to be in heaven is to be in his presence:
THerefore, to place limbo in heaven is a SERIOUS mistake, because it implies that somehow human souls that are under the penalty of Sin can exist in Gods DIRECT PRESENCE without having to be purified of Sin.
If that is the case, then it completely unravels any need for purgatory, the basis of which is the belief that that which is impure cannot stand in the presence of God.
So if the souls in Purgatory, who are baptized and Just and have sanctifying grace, and have been forgiven of their sins and are out of danger of the fire of hell cannot stand before GOd, How are you gonna put an unbaptized infant who is subject to the slavery of sin, the GUilt of Original sin, the Wrath of God, and is considered a slave to the devil, lhaving lost original justice in Adam, in the presence of God?
If unbaptized Infants go to heaven, then there is no purgatory.
THen the question is, do they go to purgatory?
How can they without sanctifying grace? THe only means of bestowing it is through the Sacrament of Baptism, and infants cannot excercise the will, therefore they cannot be saved by a desire for Baptism.
TO say: Well, they WOULD have desired it if they only knew about it…
Well, everyone in HELL would have desired it if they only knew also! Is everyone in hell gonna be saved then because they WOULD have if they had oNLY KNOWN?
As our Lord told the rich man, in the parable of Lazarus, after the rich man had asked to go see his brothers to warn them about hell: “Do they not have moses and the prophets?”
But someone may say: THat is not fair, GOd wants to save everyone, so how can he condemn innocent infants?
- God does not ACTUALLY save everyone, so how can we say he should save infants? He saves the elect.
- Infants ar enot innocent, if you haven’t noticed yet. THerefore, their end is just.
Infants do not see the face of God.
Does that help?
S
StTommyMore
Guest
Yet you don’t answer anyone else’s questions. How interesting.First to TOmmy: “ALways be prepared to give an answer for the faith that is within you; but do this with gentleness and respect.” 1 Peter. Come on you keep me on my toes, you think you don’t need to sharpen up?
H
Hadrianus
Guest
27 pages is an impressive number for a question which most theologians down through the centuries have covered in a couple of paragraphs.
The fact is that we have nothing in Revelation (Scripture or Tradition) which suggests that unbaptized infants enjoy the beatific vision. We can speculate, but that is all we can do, all the time being aware of the fact that the theological tradition is against the idea, apart from Cajetan’s notion that the faith of the parents could supply for the lack of baptism; which is itself pure speculation.
Grace is a supernatural gift, and is required for the beatific vision. If God confers it on the nonrational unbaptized who cannot make an act of faith we have no way of knowing it. This is really all we can say on this question, after this point it becomes a bit like debating the existence of life on other planets. We just have no answer.
The fact is that we have nothing in Revelation (Scripture or Tradition) which suggests that unbaptized infants enjoy the beatific vision. We can speculate, but that is all we can do, all the time being aware of the fact that the theological tradition is against the idea, apart from Cajetan’s notion that the faith of the parents could supply for the lack of baptism; which is itself pure speculation.
Grace is a supernatural gift, and is required for the beatific vision. If God confers it on the nonrational unbaptized who cannot make an act of faith we have no way of knowing it. This is really all we can say on this question, after this point it becomes a bit like debating the existence of life on other planets. We just have no answer.
G
Gregory_I
Guest
Actually Hadrianus, I feel it’s a bit more certain than that. THe council of FLorence defined that all those who die in original sin alone descend to hell where they are punished, but differently than those in mortal sin.
Now how many types of people can die in original sin alone? 2.
Unbaptized infants.
Unbaptized Mentally handicapped.
THerefore since dogmas are given to apply to real life situations, we should believe it applies to them.
H
Hadrianus
Guest
PS to Gregory I : As to location, I think you are correct. Limbo must be the border of hell. Heaven by definition involves the beatific vision. On the other hand, there is no necessity of believing that those not guilty of any actual sin, nor possessed of reason would endure any suffering.
F
fbl9
Guest
kkkk
F
fbl9
Guest
I stand corrected as usual. see above posts for the correct answer.
I
Indyann
Guest
You should have stayed with this post, as it is true that nobody knows. We are to trust unbaptized infants and aborted infants to the mercy of God. Just as the CCC states.First to TOmmy: “ALways be prepared to give an answer for the faith that is within you; but do this with gentleness and respect.” 1 Peter. Come on you keep me on my toes, you think you don’t need to sharpen up?
Is limbo temporary or permanent?
Well, the dogma which is the superstructure upon which the theological speculation known as limbo is built, indicates and explicitly affirms that those who die in original sin alone descend to hell, where they are punished, but differently than those who die in mortal sin.
Now, if we consider that the punishment for original sin alone is the deprivation of the vision of God, as taught by Pope Innocent III, and if we also consider that God will not torment a person who has not commited any actual sin with the torment of hellfire, then we are left to conclude that those who die in original sin alone (Unbaptized infants and the unbaptized mentally handicapped), then we must conclude that infants suffer in a very unique and singular way. So some theologians have seemed to remove limbo frome hell, where it logically belongs, and place it as a third state between heaven and hell.
THis has the effect of producing confusion in the minds of the Limbo antagonists: At the ressurection, how do we determine their eternal fate? Are they in heaven or hell?
TO avoid this, I say what the early Scholastics said about the fate of unbaptized children, and I place Limbo, not as a third place between heaven and hell, but as a part of hell itself. Just as heaven has “many mansions” which are indicative of degrees of glory, it would seem fitting that hell has “Many caves” which are degrees of damnation. Infants would exist IN hell, but at its borders, in the city limits. Nevertheless, they are in hell. But they do not suffer hellfire, they suffer the loss of the vision of God.
And it is right and just that they do, because they are GUILTY of original sin: THey are implicated in the guilt of Adam’s disobedience and suffer the consequences: THey are Deprived of sanctifying grace, which is an ABSOLUTE necessity to attain eternal beatitude, they are born in slavery to sin, which separates a person from God, they are Guilty of the sin of Adam and have lost the original justice, they are slaves to death and the devil, and they are justly condemned and the wrath of GOd abides upon them. THis is dogmatically and infallibly taught by the COuncil of Trent. It has to be believed in order to not be a cafeteria Catholic.
As such, there is no place for them in heaven.
Heaven is the Beatific vision of GOd, eternal beatitude: THere is no room in heaven for a halfway house: Either you are with God, or you are a slave to sin, death and the devil. This is perfectly logical, because GOd is ALL Good, and to be in heaven is to be in his presence:
THerefore, to place limbo in heaven is a SERIOUS mistake, because it implies that somehow human souls that are under the penalty of Sin can exist in Gods DIRECT PRESENCE without having to be purified of Sin.
If that is the case, then it completely unravels any need for purgatory, the basis of which is the belief that that which is impure cannot stand in the presence of God.
So if the souls in Purgatory, who are baptized and Just and have sanctifying grace, and have been forgiven of their sins and are out of danger of the fire of hell cannot stand before GOd, How are you gonna put an unbaptized infant who is subject to the slavery of sin, the GUilt of Original sin, the Wrath of God, and is considered a slave to the devil, lhaving lost original justice in Adam, in the presence of God?
If unbaptized Infants go to heaven, then there is no purgatory.
THen the question is, do they go to purgatory?
How can they without sanctifying grace? THe only means of bestowing it is through the Sacrament of Baptism, and infants cannot excercise the will, therefore they cannot be saved by a desire for Baptism.
TO say: Well, they WOULD have desired it if they only knew about it…
Well, everyone in HELL would have desired it if they only knew also! Is everyone in hell gonna be saved then because they WOULD have if they had oNLY KNOWN?
As our Lord told the rich man, in the parable of Lazarus, after the rich man had asked to go see his brothers to warn them about hell: “Do they not have moses and the prophets?”
But someone may say: THat is not fair, GOd wants to save everyone, so how can he condemn innocent infants?
No.
- God does not ACTUALLY save everyone, so how can we say he should save infants? He saves the elect.
- Infants ar enot innocent, if you haven’t noticed yet. THerefore, their end is just.
Infants do not see the face of God.
Does that help?
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=5803868#post5803868
It always amuses me when a recent zealous convert, tries to “outdo” the theologians who wrote the Catechism of the Catholic Church. You had it right the first time. NOBODY KNOWS! God IS silent.
G
Gregory_I
Guest
DId you read what you quoted?
THe Church is the voice of GOd on earth.
THe Church has decreed that those who die in original sin alone descend to hell where they are punished, but differently than those who die in mortal sin.
Unbaptized infants die in original sin alone.
THerefore they are the direct subject of this Dogmatic definition.
No one knows what infants positively suffer, true.
BUT: THe church and all the theologians are unanimous in saying they at LEAST suffer the loss of the vision of God.
It’s not that I am under the delusion that I can convince the world.
I am not a really recent convert: 7 years now.
I am tired of listening to theology that is ever more divergent from the traditional Greats: Augustine and Aquinas.
I
Indyann
Guest
So in seven years, you have learned more than the learned men who authored the CCC.
OK, carry on Pope Gregory I. You have declared yourself the ultimate authority. But, how did you do such a 360 in just 3 years? Your post of 3 years ago was quite correct and in line with what the Church teaches. What made you decide that the Church and the Magesterium are now incorrect?
G
Gregory_I
Guest
I never decided that. I just decided to listen to the CHurch throughout the ages: Not just the theologians coming out of who knows what liberal seminary in the past 40 years. It has been 1600 years since Augustine. In that time, it is only in the past 50 years that theologians have started to say that they believe unbaptized infants go to heaven.
1550 years of a common teaching, or 50 years of a novel one?
There was never any question what unbaptized infants di NOT experience: THey did not experience the vision of GOd.
THe Theory and speculation pertains ONLY to what the unbaptized infant DOES suffer.
But they at LEAST suffer the loss of the vision of GOd. THis is a universal belief across the board from St. AUgustine to Vatican II.
What is the constant teaching of the church?
1550 years of a common teaching, or 50 years of a novel one?
There was never any question what unbaptized infants di NOT experience: THey did not experience the vision of GOd.
THe Theory and speculation pertains ONLY to what the unbaptized infant DOES suffer.
But they at LEAST suffer the loss of the vision of GOd. THis is a universal belief across the board from St. AUgustine to Vatican II.
What is the constant teaching of the church?
I
Indyann
Guest
The constant teaching of the Church is that we are to abide by the teachings from the Magesterium. And that is that nobody KNOWS! God is silent, as you said in your post.
G
Gregory_I
Guest
When the Church declares a dogma, is God speaking through the Church?
You seem to be thinking that this issue has never entered the magisterial teaching of the church: It has.
Listen to the CHurch’s teaching throughout the ages: Let’s start with the Magisterium:
The Infallible Teaching of the Catholic Church
“The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with original sin only… immediately descend into Hell, yet to be punished with different punishments.”
-Pope Gregory X, Second Council of Lyons, 1274, ex cathedra
“…the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.”
-Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Laetentur Caeli, July 6, 1439
“The Roman Church teaches… that the souls of those who depart in mortal sin or with only original sin descend immediately to hell, nevertheless to be punished with different punishments and in disparate locations…”
-Pope John XXII, Nequaquam Sine Dolore, 1321 AD
Pope St. Innocent I Endorsing the view of Augustine: "“The idea that infants can be granted the rewards of eternal life without even the grace of baptism is utterly foolish.”
-Pope Saint Innocent I, Letter to the Bishops of the Church, 417 AD (NOtice its a letter to bishops meaning its a magisterial document)
"[Those dying with only original sin on their souls will suffer] no other pain, whether from material fire or from the worm of conscience, except the pain of being deprived forever of the vision of God."-Pope Innocent III (1160-1216), Corp. Juris, Decret. l. III, tit. xlii, c. iii – Majores
Sounds definitive to me. Not unsure at all.
“Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, since no help can be brought to them by another remedy than through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are snatched **from the domination of the devil **and adopted among the sons of God, [the sacrosanct Roman Church] advises that holy baptism ought not to be deferred for forty or eighty days, … but it should be conferred as soon as it can be done conveniently…”
-Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, February 4, 1442
“If any one denies, that infants, newly born from their mothers’ wombs, even though they be sprung from baptized parents, are to be baptized; or says that they are baptized indeed for the remission of sins, but that they derive nothing of original sin from Adam, which has need of being expiated by the laver of regeneration for the obtaining life everlasting,–whence it follows as a consequence, that in them the form of baptism, for the remission of sins, is understood to be not true, but false, --let him be anathema. For that which the apostle has said, By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death, and so death passed upon all men in whom all have sinned, is not to be understood otherwise than as the Catholic Church spread everywhere hath always understood it. For, by reason of this rule of faith, from a tradition of the apostles, even infants, who could not as yet commit any sin of themselves, are for this cause truly baptized for the remission of sins, that in them that may be cleansed away by regeneration, which they have contracted by generation. For, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”-Council of Trent, Session 5, Part 4
Notice the Council applies the words of Our Lord regarding sacramental water Baptism to infants.
“The faithful are earnestly to be exhorted to take care that their children be brought to the church, as soon as it can be done with safety, to receive solemn Baptism. Since infant children have no other means of salvation except Baptism, we may easily understand how grievously those persons sin who permit them to remain without the grace of the Sacrament longer than necessity may require, particularly at an age so tender as to be exposed to numberless dangers of death.”
-Catechism of the Council of Trent; Issued by Pope Saint Pius V in 1547 AD. Meaning this is the Catechism that was and is still binding on all up to 1991 when Pope JPII released the CCC.
“Noticing that frequently by various Apostolic Constitutions the audacity and daring of most profligate men, who know no restraint, of sinning with license against the commandment “do not kill” was repressed; We who are placed by the Lord in the supreme throne of justice, being counseled by a most just reason, are in part renewing old laws and in part extending them in order to restrain with just punishment the monstrous and atrocious brutality of those who have no fear to kill most cruelly fetuses still hiding in the maternal viscera. Who will not detest such an abhorrent and evil act, by which are lost not only the bodies but also the SOULS?”
-Pope Sixtus V, Apostolic Constitution Effraenatam (against abortionists), 29 October 1588
An Apostolic Constitution has greater weight than encyclical and rests between dogma and encyclical in terms of weight. It is a magisterial document as well, meaning that the Pope is declaring in the magisterial teaching no doubt that the souls of aborted infants do not have the vision of God.
He doesn’t sound unsure to me.
You seem to be thinking that this issue has never entered the magisterial teaching of the church: It has.
Listen to the CHurch’s teaching throughout the ages: Let’s start with the Magisterium:
The Infallible Teaching of the Catholic Church
“The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with original sin only… immediately descend into Hell, yet to be punished with different punishments.”
-Pope Gregory X, Second Council of Lyons, 1274, ex cathedra
“…the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.”
-Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Laetentur Caeli, July 6, 1439
“The Roman Church teaches… that the souls of those who depart in mortal sin or with only original sin descend immediately to hell, nevertheless to be punished with different punishments and in disparate locations…”
-Pope John XXII, Nequaquam Sine Dolore, 1321 AD
Pope St. Innocent I Endorsing the view of Augustine: "“The idea that infants can be granted the rewards of eternal life without even the grace of baptism is utterly foolish.”
-Pope Saint Innocent I, Letter to the Bishops of the Church, 417 AD (NOtice its a letter to bishops meaning its a magisterial document)
"[Those dying with only original sin on their souls will suffer] no other pain, whether from material fire or from the worm of conscience, except the pain of being deprived forever of the vision of God."-Pope Innocent III (1160-1216), Corp. Juris, Decret. l. III, tit. xlii, c. iii – Majores
Sounds definitive to me. Not unsure at all.
“Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, since no help can be brought to them by another remedy than through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are snatched **from the domination of the devil **and adopted among the sons of God, [the sacrosanct Roman Church] advises that holy baptism ought not to be deferred for forty or eighty days, … but it should be conferred as soon as it can be done conveniently…”
-Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, February 4, 1442
“If any one denies, that infants, newly born from their mothers’ wombs, even though they be sprung from baptized parents, are to be baptized; or says that they are baptized indeed for the remission of sins, but that they derive nothing of original sin from Adam, which has need of being expiated by the laver of regeneration for the obtaining life everlasting,–whence it follows as a consequence, that in them the form of baptism, for the remission of sins, is understood to be not true, but false, --let him be anathema. For that which the apostle has said, By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death, and so death passed upon all men in whom all have sinned, is not to be understood otherwise than as the Catholic Church spread everywhere hath always understood it. For, by reason of this rule of faith, from a tradition of the apostles, even infants, who could not as yet commit any sin of themselves, are for this cause truly baptized for the remission of sins, that in them that may be cleansed away by regeneration, which they have contracted by generation. For, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”-Council of Trent, Session 5, Part 4
Notice the Council applies the words of Our Lord regarding sacramental water Baptism to infants.
“The faithful are earnestly to be exhorted to take care that their children be brought to the church, as soon as it can be done with safety, to receive solemn Baptism. Since infant children have no other means of salvation except Baptism, we may easily understand how grievously those persons sin who permit them to remain without the grace of the Sacrament longer than necessity may require, particularly at an age so tender as to be exposed to numberless dangers of death.”
-Catechism of the Council of Trent; Issued by Pope Saint Pius V in 1547 AD. Meaning this is the Catechism that was and is still binding on all up to 1991 when Pope JPII released the CCC.
“Noticing that frequently by various Apostolic Constitutions the audacity and daring of most profligate men, who know no restraint, of sinning with license against the commandment “do not kill” was repressed; We who are placed by the Lord in the supreme throne of justice, being counseled by a most just reason, are in part renewing old laws and in part extending them in order to restrain with just punishment the monstrous and atrocious brutality of those who have no fear to kill most cruelly fetuses still hiding in the maternal viscera. Who will not detest such an abhorrent and evil act, by which are lost not only the bodies but also the SOULS?”
-Pope Sixtus V, Apostolic Constitution Effraenatam (against abortionists), 29 October 1588
An Apostolic Constitution has greater weight than encyclical and rests between dogma and encyclical in terms of weight. It is a magisterial document as well, meaning that the Pope is declaring in the magisterial teaching no doubt that the souls of aborted infants do not have the vision of God.
He doesn’t sound unsure to me.
G
Gregory_I
Guest
Also, look at paragraph 1260 in the CCC. THere is no reference to any magisterial documents to back up the assertion! The CCC is chock full of references to ecumenical councils and scripture and saints to support everything it says: But when it comes to paragraph 1260 it doesn’t furnish a single reference to any magisterial text! What does that tell you? THe magisterium doesn’t set forth the Tenet that the committee drew up in Par. 1260.
Now let’s take a cursory view of the Saints teaching:
“Likewise, whoever says that those children who depart out of this life without partaking of that Sacrament (Baptism) are alive in Christ, certainly contradicts the apostolic declaration and condemns the universal Church, in which it is the practice to loose no time and run in haste to administer Baptism to infant children, because it is believed as an indubitable truth, that otherwise they cannot be made alive in Christ.”
-Saint Augustine, Father and Doctor of the Church, Epistle 167, AD 415
“If you want to be a Catholic do no believe, do no say, and do not teach that infants carried off by death before they are baptized can attain the remission of original sin.”
-Saint Augustine, Father, Doctor, and Bishop of the Church, On the Soul and its Origin Book II
“The common teaching of the scholastic theologians is the within the earth there are four inner chambers: one for the damned, another for those being purged of sin, a third for those infants who have died without receiving Baptism, and a fourth which is now empty but once held those just men who died before the passion of Christ.”
-Saint Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621), Doctor of the Church
“Q. #100 - Where do infants go who die without Baptism?
A. - Infants who die without Baptism go to Limbo where they do not enjoy the sight of God, but also do no suffer. This is because having original sin, and it alone, they do not merit heaven, but neither do they merit purgatory or hell.”
-Catechism of Pope Saint Pius X, first published in 1910 AD. The Pope sounds sure to me also.
"If what We have said up to now deals with the protection and the care of natural life, it should hold all the more in regard to the supernatural life which the newly born infant receives with Baptism. In the present economy there is no other way of communicating this life to the child who has not yet the use of reason. But, nevertheless, the state of grace at the moment of death is absolutely necessary for salvation. Without it, it is not possible to attain supernatural happiness, the beatific vision of God. An act of love can suffice for an adult to obtain sanctifying grace and supply for the absence of Baptism; for the unborn child or for the newly born, this way is not open…"-Pope Pius XII, October 29 1951, Congress of the Italian Catholic Association of Midwives
And just to throw it in:
“The Church has shown by her teach and practice that she knows** no other way **apart from baptism for ensuring children’s entry into eternal happiness.”
-Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 1980 AD, with approval of Pope John Paul II
Is any of this still vague?
Now let’s take a cursory view of the Saints teaching:
“Likewise, whoever says that those children who depart out of this life without partaking of that Sacrament (Baptism) are alive in Christ, certainly contradicts the apostolic declaration and condemns the universal Church, in which it is the practice to loose no time and run in haste to administer Baptism to infant children, because it is believed as an indubitable truth, that otherwise they cannot be made alive in Christ.”
-Saint Augustine, Father and Doctor of the Church, Epistle 167, AD 415
“If you want to be a Catholic do no believe, do no say, and do not teach that infants carried off by death before they are baptized can attain the remission of original sin.”
-Saint Augustine, Father, Doctor, and Bishop of the Church, On the Soul and its Origin Book II
“The common teaching of the scholastic theologians is the within the earth there are four inner chambers: one for the damned, another for those being purged of sin, a third for those infants who have died without receiving Baptism, and a fourth which is now empty but once held those just men who died before the passion of Christ.”
-Saint Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621), Doctor of the Church
“Q. #100 - Where do infants go who die without Baptism?
A. - Infants who die without Baptism go to Limbo where they do not enjoy the sight of God, but also do no suffer. This is because having original sin, and it alone, they do not merit heaven, but neither do they merit purgatory or hell.”
-Catechism of Pope Saint Pius X, first published in 1910 AD. The Pope sounds sure to me also.
"If what We have said up to now deals with the protection and the care of natural life, it should hold all the more in regard to the supernatural life which the newly born infant receives with Baptism. In the present economy there is no other way of communicating this life to the child who has not yet the use of reason. But, nevertheless, the state of grace at the moment of death is absolutely necessary for salvation. Without it, it is not possible to attain supernatural happiness, the beatific vision of God. An act of love can suffice for an adult to obtain sanctifying grace and supply for the absence of Baptism; for the unborn child or for the newly born, this way is not open…"-Pope Pius XII, October 29 1951, Congress of the Italian Catholic Association of Midwives
And just to throw it in:
“The Church has shown by her teach and practice that she knows** no other way **apart from baptism for ensuring children’s entry into eternal happiness.”
-Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 1980 AD, with approval of Pope John Paul II
Is any of this still vague?
I
Indyann
Guest
Because, I do not read multiple loooooooong posts of cut and paste ancient documents, I will only address your last paragraph.
It is true that Baptism is the only way that the Church KNOWS of ENSURING a child’s entrance into eternal happiness. The Church in her wisdom does not prohibit us from having hope that the love and mercy of God will prevail in the absence of Baptism.
To use an old cleche, you have put God in a box.
You never answered my question. Why did you make such a dramatic turn-around from your original post on the subject?
G
Gregory_I
Guest
Because I take St. Augustine and the Magisterial teaching of the Church seriously. THere is more to the Church’s dogmatic life than Vatican II, and I choose to live that, in all of its unmitigated certainty and out of date clarity.
It’s a shame you don’t read the documents, they are MAGISTERIAL.
DO you understsand that? THe ordinary and universal teaching Authority of the CHurch has said on multiple occasions that unbaptized Children do not attain to eternal life.
That is why I do not take paragraph 1260 of the Catechism seriously. It is an aberration.
You know, everyone keeps saying I have put God in a box (Well, not everyone, there are about 5 or 6 who agree with me).
Did anybody stop to think that God has created terms and conditions for salvation for a reason?
God is not bound by the Sacraments. THe Sacraments cannot bind GOd.
But because he is a GOd of covenant, he has bound himself to them.
With Abraham, he bound himself to circumcision, and that was the ONLY way to be a Jew. YOu couldn’t desire Circumcision. YOu had to do it.
With Noah, he promised never to flood the earth again, so he CANNOT, because he WILLS it not.
With David, he promised a perpetual succession of his royal lineage, and established that the messiah would be a Davidic King, and he was and is Jesus Christ, King, Son of David and God.
With Moses, he Gave the covenant of the Law, and all of its proscriptions as a means of keeping, fulfilling and remaining in it. And he bound himself to the People he loved in all these Ocvenants and swore by himself, since there was non ehigher to swear by, that he would maintain and uphold them.
NOW IN THE NEW COVENANT, Christ Died for all men and won a superabundance of grace capable of saving the World. He instituted the sacraments as the means of remaining in and conferring this grace until the consummation of the world, and because he is the UNCHANGING God, when he set the limits, he has established, he respects them. When he has GIven Authority to the Church to Rule in his name, he means it. And the Church, ruling in his name, has declared and defined dogmas of belief, in his name, which are binding on us, in his name.
Christ said at the First Mass: “THis is the Cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant.”
I Worhsip the Triune God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob, who swore promises to his people and bound himself in solemn oaths to the ones he loved.
DId God put himself in a box then? Neither does he do so now. He has established Limits and requirements which he will not circumvent for sentimental reasons. He is Perfect Mercy and Perfect Justice.
Does that mean none can be save doutside the church? Yep. Because outside the Church is no salvation.
THat means that if GOd wants to save a pagan in Darkest Africa, he can!
But he will not do it in any way that contradicts what he has revealed: Meaning, he will make baptism Possible for them in some miraculous way, and he will put the Faith in their hearts in some miraculous way: For without Faith it is impossible to please God. But not Just any Faith Suffices, but the Catholic Faith alone. THerefore, GOd will transport a person Miraculously, Like Philip in the Book of Acts, or Send an angel to Proclaim the Truth, like Cornelius, also in the Book of Acts: Or miraculously furnish a preacher to present the sincere seeker with baptism: Also in the book of Acts. THe book of acts is a perfect example of all these ways that God provided for people to come to him: BUt in ways that dispelled their ignorance and made the Faith could have had explicit; Not in spite of their ignorance are they saved. ALl are saved as Catholics, or not at all.
R
RobbyS
Guest
Original sin is a natural aversion to grace. But Jesus has broken down that wall and all we have to do is to walk through the opening. Still we love to wander back and forth, even if we see where we are going. If we listen to the voice of truth, we came back into the house to get fed now and then. What about the blind, whose eyes have not been opened?Doesn’t the Spirit speak to them as well?
G
Gregory_I
Guest
Original sin is not just a natural aversion to grace friend. Original sin is a complete lack of grace, being born spiritually dead and justy condemned, a slave of Satan, Guilty of the original sin of Adam, having lost original justice, and under the wrath of GOd: A child of Wrath as the Scriptures say.
Do you mean the people who are ignorant? Well, if they ar einvincibly ignorant, then GOd will not hold their unbelief as a sin. But their other actions and mistakes are sins capable of being equally damning, for whoch reason they do not have any better chance of being saved: But a worse one. THat is why they need to be eveangelized with the truth of the Gospel: Christ died to save sinners, free us from the POwer of sin, death and the Devil, and make us his brothers, and Children of GOd, and co-heirs of the kingdom of Heaven.
Do you mean the people who are ignorant? Well, if they ar einvincibly ignorant, then GOd will not hold their unbelief as a sin. But their other actions and mistakes are sins capable of being equally damning, for whoch reason they do not have any better chance of being saved: But a worse one. THat is why they need to be eveangelized with the truth of the Gospel: Christ died to save sinners, free us from the POwer of sin, death and the Devil, and make us his brothers, and Children of GOd, and co-heirs of the kingdom of Heaven.
- Status