J
Juxtaposer
Guest
Was the idea of limbo phased out due to the dogmatization of baptism by desire?
- Status
J
jimmy
Guest
Aquinas was alive in the 12th century, so that goes back pretty far. Here is the link to the article.
ccel.org/a/aquinas/summa/TP/TP068.html#TPQ68A2THEP1
ccel.org/a/aquinas/summa/TP/TP068.html#TPQ68A2THEP1
J
Juxtaposer
Guest
What about what was said at the council of Florence? It went something like…
“no one is saved, even if he pours out his blood in the name of Christ, unless he is in the bosem of the Catholic Church.”
That really seems to go against baptism by desire.
J
jimmy
Guest
Limbo was never an important idea. It was the belief of some of the people in history. There was never a point where I would have had to believe it.
J
jimmy
Guest
Can you give me the exact quote so I know what you are speaking of.
J
Juxtaposer
Guest
Sure. It can be found here: ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/FLORENCE.HTM#5
It firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the catholic church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the catholic church.
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
I don’t know if you really want to get everyone started on EENS. In response to the questions about limbo, however, I do think Vatican II’s great softening of earlier approaches to the doctrine of no salvation outside the church have caused limbo to fade out of belief because people tend to worry far less than before about the unbaptized.
J
Juxtaposer
Guest
Andreas Hofer:
Why don’t people worry abou the unbaptized anymore? How did Vatican II change that?
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
Stress has been laid quite heavily upon baptism of desire as well as the possibility that the unbaptized, even non-Christians, can be saved regardless. Karl Rahner was one of the leading thinkers behind this liberalization with his notion of the *anonymer Christ *(anonymous Christian). According to this view, the unbaptized who nevertheless cooperate with whatever grace has been offered them can be saved through this diminished yet real union with Christ, whose Body is the Church (thus, they are still saved within the Church). This has led the Church to talk differently now about the “necessity” of baptism. While it is still necessary for those who have the opportunity to receive it, people tend nowadays to hope in what for lack of a better term might be called mitigating circumstances for unbelievers. For instance, maybe the missionary whom you encountered was, while preaching sound doctrine, a real jerk. This doesn’t really seem like you got a fair presentation of Christianity, and thus not a real opportunity, so we hope it won’t get held against you if you don’t accept it. In a nutshell, that hope is the modern tendency, rather than the older tendency to worry because of the stress on strict necessity of baptism.
That’s mostly just my reading of the modern Catholic psyche, so if anyone thinks it’s wrong or that I misrepresented baptismal theology, feel free to correct me.
That’s mostly just my reading of the modern Catholic psyche, so if anyone thinks it’s wrong or that I misrepresented baptismal theology, feel free to correct me.
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
Wow. That’s all one sentence.
When Jesus prevented his disciples from rebuking those who were not “with them” for performing signs and miracles in Jesus’ name, saying “whoever is not against us is for us,” it seems a bit harsh to think that someone “for Jesus” would suffer the fires. You’d think Jesus would want those people rebuked so they could properly join the church. I hope I either don’t understand this teaching or that it has been changed.
Alan
J
Juxtaposer
Guest
It couldn’t have changed since Florence was an infallible council, right?
J
jimmy
Guest
First of all, any baptised person is part of the church. The heretics are those who leave the church.
You will not be saved by sacrificing yourself or by any heretical church. If you deny the church you will not be saved.
J
Juxtaposer
Guest
Being in the bosom of the Catholic Church sounds like having a much closer relation to Her than your references suggest. Basically what the above qoutes are saying is that anyone who has true faith is in the Catholic Church.
J
jimmy
Guest
Here are some quotes from some of the eastern doctors of the church to backup the view of no salvation outside the church.
**
**
, Doctor, (died A.D. 397): “And He [Christ] affirms that they act with devilish spirit who divide the Church of God, so that he includes the heretics and schismatics of all times, to whom He denies forgiveness, for every other sin is concerned with single persons, this is a sin against all.” (Concerning Repentance) **
. Our Lord makes it perfectly clear that every assembly of heretics and schismatics belongs not to God, but to the unclean spirit." (Explanation of Luke)
people, or the heretics, or at least the Pharisees, who, rejoicing in an abundance of words, and a kind of hereditary pride of eloquence, have overstepped the simplicity of true faith, and gained to themselves useless treasures." (cf. Catena Aurea by Saint Thomas Aquinas, Lk. 6:24)
." Therefore where Peter is, there is the Church; where the Church is, there is no death but only eternal life. And therefore Christ added: “And the gates of hell shall not prevail, and I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.”" (On Psalm XL)
**
, Doctor, (died A.D. 407): “We know that salvation belongs to the Church alone, and that no one can partake of Christ nor be saved outside the Catholic Church and the Catholic Faith.” (De Capto Eutropia) **
J
jimmy
Guest
Here is an article that goes over baptism of desire. This is like a refutation of Father Feeneys teachings.
catholicism.org/pages/summary.htm#bapblood
catholicism.org/pages/summary.htm#bapblood
J
jimmy
Guest
That quote that you are refering to does not have the intention to discredit baptism of blood because that was not the intention of the statement. It was a statement to the Coptic church stating what the Roman church believed. The Catholic Church believe in no salvation outside the church. As some of the fathers I quoted say, you do not necisarily have to be baptised by water for salvation, the desire to be is enough. Like the quote from Ambrose talking about the man who died unbaptised but did not lose the grace he prayed for. You can not be saved just for martyrdom though. You must have the faith or have the desire to have the truth atleast.
The Catholic Church teaches that anyone can perform a baptism as long as it is done in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They also teach that anyone who is baptised according to this formula is part of the universal church. It is in the council of Florence. This is what it says in session 8
The non Catholics are part of the universal church, the difference is that they do not recieve the fullness of the truth and the fullness of Gods grace.
T
Teresa9
Guest
Dear friend
God’s laws are God’s laws, they are there to be kept, obeyed adhered to and observed with a heart of love and a spirit that is strong. The law is not greater than love because God is love, it is His law of love. God’s law is to protect and free us, not a slavish servant before God but a friend who loves his/her Creator and Father and wishes to live in His love.
It is not a formula, it is a law of love from our Heavenly Father whom loves us and wishes us to be happy in this life and in the next, to live with Him here on earth and in heaven.
’Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven’
God Bless you and much love and peace to you
Teresa
God’s laws are God’s laws, they are there to be kept, obeyed adhered to and observed with a heart of love and a spirit that is strong. The law is not greater than love because God is love, it is His law of love. God’s law is to protect and free us, not a slavish servant before God but a friend who loves his/her Creator and Father and wishes to live in His love.
It is not a formula, it is a law of love from our Heavenly Father whom loves us and wishes us to be happy in this life and in the next, to live with Him here on earth and in heaven.
’Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven’
God Bless you and much love and peace to you
Teresa
D
davidv
Guest
No councils are in totality infallible, since councils often deal with more than concerns of faith and morals. Only those statements clearly “defined” as such, are infallible.
F
Fidelis
Guest
To get back to your original question, Jux, the reason the Church seems to put such a fine point on things is that it has had a LONG time to think about these things. You can imagine that in the span of 2000 years, the Church has faced almost every doctrinal heresy, sacramental and liturgical loopholing, practical under-emphasis/over-emphasis, and garden variety “what if” scenario one can imagine. Definitions, clarifications, parameters and rules come about because someone, somewhere and somehow in the past 2000 years has fallen into error, presumed to propagate it as truth, and has caused confusion and distress to the faithful. It is interesting to note that the Eastern Church, which is much less “rational” than the West has historically been the place where most of the great heresies of early Church history had arisen.
The reason you may notice it so much and percieve it as dogmatism is because you are in a period of inquiry and you are asking the questions. In truth, most of this has no effect on the lives of the average (or even the above average) Catholic. Catholics can come to know, love and serve the Lord without ever opening up a Catechism (and many saints known and unknown are examples of this), but if the need for in-depth or more precise definition arises, or simply if the inquiring mind wants or needs to know, the trail has been blazed by many feet before us. Doctrine is important because truth matters, but try not to get distracted by the minutiae at the expense of following God’s will for your life. As Thomas a’ Kempis says in The Imitation of Christ, It is better to feel contrition than to know how to define it.
N
ncgolf
Guest
If only a formula could be applied it would be so easy. In reality that’s what most people want. We do well with 12 step programs, and self help guides but the Catholic Church is no 12 step program. In scripture the Pharisees followed the letter of the law to the nth degree but yet Jesus rebuked them. That shows that there is no formula to be followed.
The Catholic faith does have rigid and inflexible standards but only because God knows we will be drawn closer by the structure. The Catholic Church has had these for a couple thousand years and they have changed little if at all and we still we have a hard time with them. The Catholic Church is about learning the faith … and then applying it to everthing we do. The Church is about trying to make each one of us a livinig saint … the goal of the Church is sanctity. Anyone sanctified, even in this life, knows something of heaven.
The Catholic faith does have rigid and inflexible standards but only because God knows we will be drawn closer by the structure. The Catholic Church has had these for a couple thousand years and they have changed little if at all and we still we have a hard time with them. The Catholic Church is about learning the faith … and then applying it to everthing we do. The Church is about trying to make each one of us a livinig saint … the goal of the Church is sanctity. Anyone sanctified, even in this life, knows something of heaven.
- Status