Will few men be saved?

[tonyrey]

-Aquinas, Question 82, reply to article 4, emphasis is mine.

All of us are created guilty, bottom line. Further, the council of Carthage asserted, specifically against Pelagius, that “without God’s grace it is not merely more difficult, but absolutely impossible to perform good works” (proposition 5). We are born guilty, totally deprived of justice, totally unable to do anything meritorious and deserving of everlasting punishment. It is very clear from the historical record that “orthodoxy” has always held this position. Why would Augustine rage so savagely against Pelagius if he didn’t hold the opposing position? What do you think that quote from the 1993 catechism means? Read Aquinas’ reply to objection 2, article 1, question 82:

(emphasis mine).

Aquinas directly contradicts the 1993 Catechism here (if you read it as saying, essentially “no one is actually individually guilty of original sin”).

Further, read Article 9, Question 68 “Should Infants Be Baptized?”

newadvent.org/summa/4068.htm#article9

Aquinas is very clear:

(emphasis mine)

The grim chorus of doom screeches in unison throughout the history of “orthodoxy,” available for all to see: we’re all hopeless, doomed sinners just for having been born. God justly thirsts for our everlasting punishment unless we receive the miraculous sacrament of baptism. Since a minority of human beings are baptized, and an even smaller number believe all the right things and avoid all serious sin, it is absolutely reasonable, given the truth of Roman Catholicism, to conclude that a huge majority of human beings are tormented for eternity.

St Thomas was **not **infallible and never claimed to be.

Again, how is this “good news?”

This is the Good News:

420 The victory that Christ won over sin has given us greater blessings than those which sin had taken from us: “where sin increased, grace abounded all the more” (Rom 5:20).

421 Christians believe that “the world has been established and kept in being by the Creator’s love; has fallen into slavery to sin but** has been set free by Christ, crucified and risen to break the power of the evil one. .** .” (GS 2 # 2).

1030 All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.

1058 The Church prays that** no one** should be lost: “Lord, let me never be parted from you.” If it is true that no one can save himself, it is also true that God “desires all men to be saved” (⇒ 1 Tim 2:4), and that for him “all things are possible” (Mt 19:26).

 

[tonyrey]

For unbaptized Infants we have reasons to hope rather than certainty:The conclusion of this study is that there are theological and liturgical reasons to hope that infants who die without baptism may be saved and brought into eternal happiness, even if there is not an explicit teaching on this question found in Revelation. However, none of the considerations proposed in this text to motivate a new approach to the question may be used to negate the necessity of baptism, nor to delay the conferral of the sacrament. Rather, there are reasons to hope that God will save these infants precisely because it was not possible to do for them that what would have been most desirable— to baptize them in the faith of the Church and incorporate them visibly into the Body of Christ.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html

Where men fail God succeeds…

 

[Aloysium]

Catechism of the Catholic Church

ARTICLE 5
“HE DESCENDED INTO HELL. ON THE THIRD DAY HE ROSE AGAIN”

631 Jesus “descended into the lower parts of the earth. He who descended is he who also ascended far above all the heavens.” The Apostles’ Creed confesses in the same article Christ’s descent into hell and his Resurrection from the dead on the third day, because in his Passover it was precisely out of the depths of death that he made life spring forth:
Christ, that Morning Star, who came back from the dead, and shed his peaceful light on all mankind, your Son who lives and reigns for ever and ever. Amen.

632 The frequent New Testament affirmations that Jesus was “raised from the dead” presuppose that the crucified one sojourned in the realm of the dead prior to his resurrection. This was the first meaning given in the apostolic preaching to Christ’s descent into hell: that Jesus, like all men, experienced death and in his soul joined the others in the realm of the dead. But he descended there as Savior, proclaiming the Good News to the spirits imprisoned there.

633 Scripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, “hell” - Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek - because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God. Such is the case for all the dead, whether evil or righteous, while they await the Redeemer: which does not mean that their lot is identical, as Jesus shows through the parable of the poor man Lazarus who was received into “Abraham’s bosom”: “It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Savior in Abraham’s bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell.” Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him.

634 “The gospel was preached even to the dead.” The descent into hell brings the Gospel message of salvation to complete fulfilment. This is the last phase of Jesus’ messianic mission, a phase which is condensed in time but vast in its real significance: the spread of Christ’s redemptive work to all men of all times and all places, for all who are saved have been made sharers in the redemption.

635 Christ went down into the depths of death so that “the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.” Jesus, “the Author of life”, by dying destroyed “him who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and [delivered] all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong bondage.” Henceforth the risen Christ holds “the keys of Death and Hades”, so that “at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth.”

Today a great silence reigns on earth, a great silence and a great stillness. A great silence because the King is asleep. The earth trembled and is still because God has fallen asleep in the flesh and he has raised up all who have slept ever since the world began. . . He has gone to search for Adam, our first father, as for a lost sheep. Greatly desiring to visit those who live in darkness and in the shadow of death, he has gone to free from sorrow Adam in his bonds and Eve, captive with him - He who is both their God and the son of Eve. . . “I am your God, who for your sake have become your son. . . I order you, O sleeper, to awake. I did not create you to be a prisoner in hell. Rise from the dead, for I am the life of the dead.”

IN BRIEF

636 By the expression “He descended into hell”, the Apostles’ Creed confesses that Jesus did really die and through his death for us conquered death and the devil “who has the power of death” (Heb 2:14).

637 In his human soul united to his divine person, the dead Christ went down to the realm of the dead. He opened heaven’s gates for the just who had gone before him.

I can easily entertain the likelihood that none of those freed from Hell had been baptized, and yet Heaven was opened for them. However, as pointed out by Vico this does not negate the necessity of baptism.

 

[MatthewTheLess]

CCC.
The heart of the Incarnate Word

478 Jesus knew and loved us each and all during his life, his agony and his Passion, and gave himself up for each one of us: "The Son of God. . . loved me and gave himself for me."116 He has loved us all with a human heart. For this reason, the Sacred Heart of Jesus, pierced by our sins and for our salvation,117 “is quite rightly considered the chief sign and symbol of that. . . love with which the divine Redeemer continually loves the eternal Father and all human beings” without exception?

To seperate a child from gods love because it was not baptized seems to contradict “All Human Beings WITHOUT EXCEPTION!” That child may not yet have love for God, but it does not change the fact that God loves that human.

Did holy Mother Teresa look at the unbaptized children she was tending to in India and have the thought (these are the unbaptized destined to eternal punishment) I doubt it!

Mother Teresa
“I see Jesus in every human being. I say to myself, this is hungry Jesus, I must feed him. This is sick Jesus. This one has leprosy or gangrene; I must wash him and tend to him. I serve becuase I love Jesus.”

 

[Layp3rs0n]

This is why it is good to pray the rosary (I need to do it more honestly), but think about the Hail Mary. “…pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death.” At the moment of death, that last part truly kicks in. When you’re about to die, I guarantee Our Lady will beg Jesus to pull out all the stops on grace for you. It is then your final time of choosing begins.

 

[tonyrey]

CCC.
The heart of the Incarnate Word

478 Jesus knew and loved us each and all during his life, his agony and his Passion, and gave himself up for each one of us: "The Son of God. . . loved me and gave himself for me."116 He has loved us all with a human heart. For this reason, the Sacred Heart of Jesus, pierced by our sins and for our salvation,117 “is quite rightly considered the chief sign and symbol of that. . . love with which the divine Redeemer continually loves the eternal Father and all human beings” without exception?

To seperate a child from gods love because it was not baptized seems to contradict “All Human Beings WITHOUT EXCEPTION!” That child may not yet have love for God, but it does not change the fact that God loves that human.

Did holy Mother Teresa look at the unbaptized children she was tending to in India and have the thought (these are the unbaptized destined to eternal punishment) I doubt it!

Mother Teresa
“I see Jesus in every human being. I say to myself, this is hungry Jesus, I must feed him. This is sick Jesus. This one has leprosy or gangrene; I must wash him and tend to him. I serve because I love Jesus.”

Irrefutable.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

CCC.
The heart of the Incarnate Word

478 Jesus knew and loved us each and all during his life, his agony and his Passion, and gave himself up for each one of us: "The Son of God. . . loved me and gave himself for me."116 He has loved us all with a human heart. For this reason, the Sacred Heart of Jesus, pierced by our sins and for our salvation,117 “is quite rightly considered the chief sign and symbol of that. . . love with which the divine Redeemer continually loves the eternal Father and all human beings” without exception?

To seperate a child from gods love because it was not baptized seems to contradict “All Human Beings WITHOUT EXCEPTION!” That child may not yet have love for God, but it does not change the fact that God loves that human.

Did holy Mother Teresa look at the unbaptized children she was tending to in India and have the thought (these are the unbaptized destined to eternal punishment) I doubt it!

Mother Teresa
“I see Jesus in every human being. I say to myself, this is hungry Jesus, I must feed him. This is sick Jesus. This one has leprosy or gangrene; I must wash him and tend to him. I serve becuase I love Jesus.”

With respect, I am not sure how this reply is relevant. I do not recognize the authority of whatever it is you have quoted. Aquinas is held in very high esteem by the Church. He is called “the Angelic Doctor” and several pope/saints have stated that his philosophy is “the church’s own.” Further, Augustine is similarly esteemed and one of the architects of Christianity. Are they both flat out wrong about this?

If anyone at all is in hell, then clearly all talk about God desiring their salvation is insincere and empty. If God is omnipotent and sovereign, then he always gets what he wants. If people are in hell, he must want them there.

What Mother Teresa claimed she believed is of little consequence. She hid her atheism for decades apparently, and died with millions of dollars in her accounts. Granted, she did much more to help the suffering than I have, and I respect that. But, if she was essentially a closet atheist for most of her life, I doubt she would dogmatically affirm the traditional Catholic understanding of original sin and its logical implications. Fortunately she wasn’t deterred from her charitable works by the philosophy of doom deep in the heart of the “gospel.”

 

[MatthewTheLess]

With respect, I am not sure how this reply is relevant. I do not recognize the authority of whatever it is you have quoted. Aquinas is held in very high esteem by the Church. He is called “the Angelic Doctor” and several pope/saints have stated that his philosophy is “the church’s own.” Further, Augustine is similarly esteemed and one of the architects of Christianity. Are they both flat out wrong about this?

If anyone at all is in hell, then clearly all talk about God desiring their salvation is insincere and empty. If God is omnipotent and sovereign, then he always gets what he wants. If people are in hell, he must want them there.

What Mother Teresa claimed she believed is of little consequence. She hid her atheism for decades apparently, and died with millions of dollars in her accounts. Granted, she did much more to help the suffering than I have, and I respect that. But, if she was essentially a closet atheist for most of her life, I doubt she would dogmatically affirm the traditional Catholic understanding of original sin and its logical implications. Fortunately she wasn’t deterred from her charitable works by the philosophy of doom deep in the heart of the “gospel.”

“What Mother Teresa claimed she believed is of little consequence. She hid her atheism for decades apparently, and died with millions of dollars in her accounts”. You are accusing Mother Teresa a humble servant of God of being unjust? I see her life in charity and love living in the spirit and a tremendous amount of good deeds. Do your deeds equal hers? Are You the authority on the subject? I think what she claimed is of much consequence and importance. What she took from the Eucharist is clearly different that what you are getting.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

I can easily entertain the likelihood that none of those freed from Hell had been baptized, and yet Heaven was opened for them. However, as pointed out by Vico this does not negate the necessity of baptism.

To me this reads like this: “God allowed many people to enter heaven without baptism, but baptism is necessary.” I don’t understand this. I think Vico is saying we should hope that God would not condemn infants because we wouldn’t condemn them. Isn’t that what it boils down to? But, it contradicts the testimony and belief of the greatest saints of the church. Is our “wisful thinking” deserving of more trust than their authority?

 

[PumpkinCookie]

“What Mother Teresa claimed she believed is of little consequence. She hid her atheism for decades apparently, and died with millions of dollars in her accounts”. You are accusing Mother Teresa a humble servant of God of being unjust? I see her life in charity and love living in the spirit and a tremendous amount of good deeds. Do your deeds equal hers? Are You the authority on the subject? I think what she claimed is of much consequence and importance. What she took from the Eucharist is clearly different that what you are getting.

I am no authority on anything my friend. However, her millions of unused funds and hidden atheism has been well documented. A casual small amount of research will yield much information. Besides, it is irelevant to the issue in my opinion. I don’t understand what you mean about the Eucharist. I have not participated in that for years and have repented in earnest for my previous idolatry (according to my conscience). Also irrelevant.

The point is: does it seem likely that God would create a universe where most of his children are tormented endlessly? The vast majority of saints say yes. If so, why is that “good news?”

 

[Aloysium]

To me this reads like this: “God allowed many people to enter heaven without baptism, but baptism is necessary.” I don’t understand this. I think Vico is saying we should hope that God would not condemn infants because we wouldn’t condemn them. Isn’t that what it boils down to? But, it contradicts the testimony and belief of the greatest saints of the church. Is our “wisful thinking” deserving of more trust than their authority?

You have been exposed to God’s message. Those who have not, cannot be expected to have chosen to be baptized. Reread what I quoted from the Catechism.

 

[Maxirad]

Check out this blog commentary by Mark Brumley

 

[Vico]

To me this reads like this: “God allowed many people to enter heaven without baptism, but baptism is necessary.” I don’t understand this. I think Vico is saying we should hope that God would not condemn infants because we wouldn’t condemn them. Isn’t that what it boils down to? But, it contradicts the testimony and belief of the greatest saints of the church. Is our “wisful thinking” deserving of more trust than their authority?

Baptism is of three kinds: water, desire, and blood. Those that were* just* were released from Hades after Jesus descended there. After the Gospel was revealed, and the *sacrament *of baptism was instituted, it was required, according to Jesus:

John 3:5 “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”

catholic.com/tracts/born-again-in-baptism

 

[tonyrey]

This is why it is good to pray the rosary (I need to do it more honestly), but think about the Hail Mary. “…pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death.” At the moment of death, that last part truly kicks in. When you’re about to die, I guarantee Our Lady will beg Jesus to pull out all the stops on grace for you. It is then your final time of choosing begins.

The prophets of gloom and doom believe all prayers are useless for the vast majority when we come to the end of life…

 

[tonyrey]

I am no authority on anything my friend. However, her millions of unused funds and hidden atheism has been well documented. A casual small amount of research will yield much information. Besides, it is irelevant to the issue in my opinion. I don’t understand what you mean about the Eucharist. I have not participated in that for years and have repented in earnest for my previous idolatry (according to my conscience). Also irrelevant.

The point is: does it seem likely that God would create a universe where most of his children are tormented endlessly? The vast majority of saints say yes. If so, why is that “good news?”

Please cite the statistics from a reputable source.

 

[MatthewTheLess]

I am no authority on anything my friend. However, her millions of unused funds and hidden atheism has been well documented. A casual small amount of research will yield much information. Besides, it is irelevant to the issue in my opinion. I don’t understand what you mean about the Eucharist. I have not participated in that for years and have repented in earnest for my previous idolatry (according to my conscience). Also irrelevant.

The point is: does it seem likely that God would create a universe where most of his children are tormented endlessly? The vast majority of saints say yes. If so, why is that “good news?”

“Did God create a universe where most of his children are tormented endlessly?”

My answer would be No. But you seem to be tormented by the idea of unbaptized children having the beatific vision. 2 thieves on the cross, both broke the law, both most likely unbaptized. The penitent thief hears “Amen I say to you today you will be with me in Paradise.” By no merits of his own did he attain eternal rest, other than believing. It doesn’t seem to fair well with the other thief who is in disbelief.

“Vast majority of saints say yes.”

you will have to be more specific.

The “Good News” is if you forgive others you will be forgiven. If you condemn others you will be condemned. And most justly.

 

[tonyrey]

“Did God create a universe where most of his children are tormented endlessly?”

My answer would be No. But you seem to be tormented by the idea of unbaptized children having the beatific vision. 2 thieves on the cross, both broke the law, both most likely unbaptized. The penitent thief hears “Amen I say to you today you will be with me in Paradise.” By no merits of his own did he attain eternal rest, other than believing. It doesn’t seem to fair well with the other thief who is in disbelief.

“Vast majority of saints say yes.”

you will have to be more specific.

The “Good News” is if you forgive others you will be forgiven. If you condemn others you will be condemned. And most justly.

Concise and convincing!

A warm welcome to the forum. Not too hot…

 

[tonyrey]

You have been exposed to God’s message. Those who have not, cannot be expected to have chosen to be baptized. Reread what I quoted from the Catechism.

Indeed. The Pharisees were condemned by Jesus for imposing impossible demands on poor “sinners” - as if God is a ruthless Judge rather than a loving Father - but they were confronted with revolutionary ideas without having the heritage of two thousand years of Christianity…

 

[MatthewTheLess]

Concise and convincing!

A warm welcome to the forum. Not too hot…

Thank you brother.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

“Did God create a universe where most of his children are tormented endlessly?”

My answer would be No. But you seem to be tormented by the idea of unbaptized children having the beatific vision.

No, I have no such torment. Augustine on the other hand was very adamant about this.

2 thieves on the cross, both broke the law, both most likely unbaptized. The penitent thief hears “Amen I say to you today you will be with me in Paradise.” By no merits of his own did he attain eternal rest, other than believing. It doesn’t seem to fair well with the other thief who is in disbelief.

“Vast majority of saints say yes.”

you will have to be more specific.
Read the OP.

The “Good News” is if you forgive others you will be forgiven. If you condemn others you will be condemned. And most justly.

I’m sorry, I don’t understand what you’re talking about. Upon what is “salvation” predicated?

1. Is it having the right beliefs?
2. Is it “forgiving others?”
3. Is it loving others?

If 1, infants cannot have any beliefs. The vast majority of humanity does not hold the right beliefs either.

If 2, OK that’s nice, but what does it have to do with Jesus? Why does anyone have to be a Catholic in order to forgive others?

If 3, same issue as 2 above.

Is salvation predicated upon something else? We’ve already established it isn’t predicated upon baptism (not necessary). What is the sine qua non of salvation?

I think the saints and architects of Catholicism had a much more rigorous understanding of what the essential conditions of salvation are, hence the OP. Read the quotes. Gloom and doom abounds, read Pope_St_Leo’s contribution: more doom. I submit that this is the historical and traditional “gospel.” Were they all wrong? If they were wrong about something so important, can the church be trusted? Why?

Also, yes, welcome to this forum. I see that you are a “Catholic in the making.” Consider carefully! I wish I had been given a choice! Obviously that would have been impossible, since infants are incapable of making choices.