Infant Damnation?

[Brother Adam]

Is it really official church teaching that all aborted and unbaptized infants go to hell?


[url="http://www.catholicism.org/pages/infant.htm"]http://www.catholicism.org/pages/infant.htm[/url]

[quote]The Fate of Unbaptized Infants
In Light of the Universal Necessity of Baptism
By Mike Malone

In reply to the question concerning the salvation of aborted infants by virtue of a vicarious "baptism of desire" on the part of their parents or by "baptism of blood" on either their part or "on the part of the Church," it can only be said that such is absolutely impossible. The Council of Trent infallibly defined the necessity of the Sacrament of Baptism, and decreed: "If anyone says Baptism is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema" (De Baptismo, Canon V). Further, the Ecumenical Council of Vienne defined that: "All the faithful must confess only one Baptism which regenerates all the baptized, just as there is one God and one faith. We believe that this Sacrament, celebrated in water and in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is necessary for children and grown-up people alike for salvation" (Denzinger 482). Thus, it is tantamount to heresy even to doubt that aborted children are lost for all eternity, because it means falling into the "private judgment"' of Protestantism or, what is worse, the subjective speculation of a perverse and humanistic "theology."

St. Augustine, in his "Epistle to Boniface" says, "For it is not written 'Unless a man be born again by the will of his parents' or by the faith of those presenting him or ministering to him,' but of water and the Holy Spirit" (Rouet de Journel: Enchiridion Patristicum: 98). The originator of this "infant-salvation" heresy was an Irish monk named Morgan, known to posterity as Pelagius -- one of St. Augustine's greatest enemies. Augustine declared: 'Let no one promise infants who have not been baptized a sort of middle place of happiness between damnation and Heaven, for this is what the Pelagian heresy promised them' (The Soul and Its Origin, Patrologiae Latinae, Migne, 44:475). St. Augusitine and many early fathers held that unbaptized infants go to Hell (the doctrine of limbo will be discussed further down). Thus, the Ecumenical Council of Florence declared: "The souls of those who die in actual mortal sin, or only in Original Sin, immediately descend into Hell" (Denz.693). This is also the explicit teaching of the Council of Lyons II (Denz. 464). The notion of "Baptism of Blood," itself a mere fallible and undefined speculation, cannot apply in this case, since aborted infants are not dying for the sake of Jesus Christ, nor the Faith, nor even for virtue. Indeed, they are dying precisely for the lack of virtue on the part of their parents, for loss of Faith on the part of their murderers, and against the precepts of Jesus Christ; and the infants involved have no will either to accept or reject this, morally or otherwise. Furthermore, the principal Ecclesia supplet ('The Church Supplies') would never function in this case, for the aborted child is not a member of the Church. The Church cannot hope to supply eternal life to those outside her membership.

The Holy Innocents, celebrated on December 28, died morally for Christ, and thus were "baptized in their own blood"; yet they did not need membership in a Church which was of a future Testament, and in which no Saint in the Old Covenant was saved (They were also all circumcized males). Under the New Law, it is defined infallibly that all must be saved in Christ; that is, in His Mystical Body, of which the aborted have no share. "Anyone who would say that even infants who pass from this life without participation in the Sacrament of Baptism shall be made alive in Christ goes counter to the preaching of the Apostle and condemns the whole Church, because it is believed without doubt that there is no other way at all in which they can be made alive in Christ' (St. Augustine, Epistle to Jerome, Journel: 166).

As for "Baptism of Desire" of the parents, this is absurd on its face; the mother does not wish her infant well, but dead. Besides, can we lose our salvation purely for someone else's sin? Yet this would be the case, for if a child could be saved by the desire of its parents, then it would follow that it could also be lost for its parents' ignorance and lack of desire.

One of Protestantism's patriarchs rejuvenated this scheme of Pelagius; his name was John Calvin. As St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori states: "Calvin says that infants born of parents who have the faith are saved, even though they should die without Baptism. But this is false: for David was born of parents who had the faith, and he confessed that he was born in sin. This was also taught by the Council of Trent in the Fifth Session, number Four: there the fathers declared that infants dying without Baptism, although born of baptized parents, are not saved, and are lost, not on account of the sin of their parents, but for the sin of Adam in whom all have sinned" (Explanation of Trent, Duffy Co., 1845, p.56). Thus, a child cannot be damned for its parents' sins, nor saved by its parents' virtues: and this is only just. The great Scriptural exegete, Father Cornelius a Lapide.known to the world of patristics, was a Flemish Jesuit named Cornieilis Van Den Steen. In his monumental Commentaria, he declared: "Calvin, in order to detract from the necessity of Baptism, maintains that the children of believers are justified in the womb simply because they are children of believers. But this is absurd and perverse, and condemned by the Church as heretical. If it be lawful to wrest this passagewith Calvin, then we may do the same with every other passage, and thus pervert; the entirety of Scripture. No commandment will survive, not even the institution of Baptism itself!" (In John III). Thus, St. Ambrose concludes: "No one is excepted: not the infant, nor the one prevented by any necessity' (Abraham, Patrol. Lat. 14:500).

The General of the Dominican Order, Thomas de Vio Gaetani, better known as Cajetan, revived this 'vicarious baptism of desire' contemporarily with Calvin. Happily, this error was ordered expunged from his works by the Pope. In his decree against the Synod of Pistoia in 1794, Pius VI alludes to "that place of the lower regions which the faithful generally designate as the limbo of the children" in which the souls of those dying "with the sole guilt of original sin" go. Nevertheless, the view which the Holy Father adopts in no way holds either for a parental or infantile 'baptism of desire' nor for the rewards of the Beatific Vision for unbaptized souls (Denzinger 1526). This limbo of the children amounts to merely the 'highest place' in the abode of Hell, as explained by St. Vincent Ferrer in his sermon preached on the Octave of the Epiphany (Sermons, London: Blackfriars, 1954, p. 82-83). For, as one sainted pontiff declared: "If anyone says that, because the Lord said 'In My Father's house are many mansions,' it might be understood that in the Kingdom of Heaven there will be some middle place, or some place anywhere, where the blessed infants live who departed from this life without Baptism, without which they cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven which is life eternal: Let him be anathema. For when the Lord says 'Unless one be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he shall not enter into the Kingdom of God,' what Catholic will doubt that one who has not deserved to be a co-heir with Christ will be a partner of the Devil?" (Pope Zosimus at the Council of Carthage XVI, Canon 3, Denzinger, 30th edition, p.45, note 2).

0 my God, I give Thee infinite thanks on behalf of myself, all creatures, and especially my particular friends, for the gift of life, and the capacity to know and love Thee. I thank Thee for having preserved our existence and allowed us to be born alive to receive Holy Baptism. If we had died before being delivered from Original Sin by the grace of Holy Baptism, which has been the misfortune of many souls, we would never have seen Thy divine face, and we would have been deprived of Thy holy love forever. May the angels and saints bless Thee forever for this most special favor Thou hast accorded us!

--St.John Eudes [/quote]

[DojoGrant]

I'm not all that up on Fr. Feeney, but I think his teachings were condemned? Someone who knows more about it can surely answer your question, but this is not an official Church site, so keep that in mind.

[Livin_the_MASS]

Brother Adam this was talked about on another thread under Limbo, I would have to dig it up but it is around.

[Livin_the_MASS]

I believe those innocent babies die in a batism of their own blood. If this is about abortion?

God is not bound to His Sacraments. "With God all things are possiable"

[cmotherofpirl]

The fate of all people is up to the Mercy of God.
We are bound by Sacraments, God is not.

Father Feeney and his opinons should be avoided, he is not in good standing with the Church.

Edited May 23, 2004 by cmotherofpirl

[hopeful1]

i don't believe that is an official church teaching. but i just looked this up in "Did Adam and Eve Have Belly Buttons?", and this is what it had to say on the subject:


Q: If a baby was aborted or never baptised, will it go to heaven?

A: We don't know for sure. The CCC says the following: " As regards to children who have died w/o baptism, the church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does funeral rites for them. Indeed the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: 'Let the children come to me, do not hinder them' (Mk. 10:14), allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died w/o baptism' (CCC # 1260)


hope this helps

Edited May 23, 2004 by hopeful1

[Quietfire]

Bro Adams,

This may be one of those things that the Church cannot clarify at this time, because it has not been revealed as such.

One could hope that babies that are aborted would be among those celebrated on Dec. 28 with The Holy Innocents. Since this is something that has been going on.Those babies were murdered.
Babies that are aborted are murdered.

Although I realize it is for different reasons.
But still, they were denied the opportunity to recieve baptism, through no fault of their own. They were....innocent.

Edited May 23, 2004 by Quietfire

[phishphan47]

When Christ was crucified, there were two men, one on either side, of whom we can be relatively certain were not baptized Christians; yet to the one on his right, Jesus says "today you will be with me in paradise."

[quote]The Council of Trent infallibly defined the necessity of the Sacrament of Baptism, and decreed: "If anyone says Baptism is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema" (De Baptismo, Canon V)[/quote]
[url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Necessity_of_Baptism.asp"]Baptism is NOT optional[/url]. So it is for [url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Infant_Baptism.asp"]children [/url]too. The Church is clear on that. Never has been; never will be. However, the Church is ALSO clear on the fact that, though we are limited to the sacrements as the [b]normative[/b] means of the reception of grace, yet God is not.

God is perfectly just and merciful. He wills the salvation of all...If He wills it, he MUST give ALL the opportunity.

If I, having just had a conversion of heart, ran down to the church to be baptized but on the way was struck and killed, I'm out? That doesn't even seem reasonable.

God judges the heart and gives us what we need, so long as we're willing to recieve it.

Now, if we just "haven't got around" to getting baptized, then we're going to be more culpable for our action, and God will most likely judge us on this matter, though to the degree we cannot say for certain. This treats it as though it were optional. To not have the opportunity does not treat it as optional.

Ultimately, we leave judgement up to God, but we accept the fact that he can work in ways we cannot.

[Brother Adam]

Thank you to those who gave an appropriate response.

[amarkich]

In response to a few erroneous posts which I presume out of ignorance, Father Feeney died in full communion with the Church, and his teachings have [i]never[/i] been condemned (since they are simply those of several infallible Councils). I posted a long post explaining all of this, but it was closed. If you are interested please refer to the Debate Table's previous posts. I believe the primary title is "Father Feeney". His name is in the post somewhere. If you would like more information I would be glad to find the post myself and even to add additional information if you desire. God bless.

[Guest AloysiusGhost]

several infallible councils FALLIBLY interpreted by YOU support Fr. Feeney.

Pax Amorque Christi

[Guest AloysiusGhost]

[quote]Father Feeney died in full communion with the Church, and his teachings have never been condemned[/quote]
not so:
[url="http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/desire.html"]The Case Against Father Feeney[/url]
[quote]On August 8, 1949, the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office issued the Protocol , specifically condemning the doctrines of "the Cambridge group" as presented in From the Housetops, vol. 3. Father Feeney charged the Protocol was invalid, since it had not yet been published in the official . The irony of this criticism is that according to John Cardinal Wright in a March 1976 article in , His Holiness Pope Pius XII personally wished to supervise and, indeed, make the official English translation which would be sent to the Archbishop of Boston for promulgation in the battle zone." Wright admits being struck by Pius' concern for the matter: "I shall never forget how painstaking, precise and scholarly was the Chief Shepherd of Christendom as he labored on a document to restore peace to a relatively small corner of the Christian World" (John Cardinal Wright, "Pope Pius XII: A Personal Reminiscence," , English Edition, March 11, 1976, p. 3, quoted in Pepper, p. 34). Eventually, after repeatedly refusing several summons to Rome, he was excommunicated for persistent disobedience to legitimate Church authority by the authority of the Holy See on February 13, 1953, the decree of which was subsequently published in the His followers maintain to this day that his excommunication was invalid, and, while a clever canonist might very well be able to make a claim that the case was at least poorly handled, there is little doubt that as far as Pope Pius XII was concerned, Father Feeney was, in fact, .[/quote]

[quote]THE SUPREME SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE HOLY OFFICE


>From the Headquarters of the Holy Office


August 8, 1949


Protocol Number 122/49.


Your Excellency:


This Supreme Sacred Congregation has followed very attentively the rise and the course of the grave controversy stirred up by certain associates of "St. Benedict Center" and "Boston College" in regard to the interpretation of that axiom: "Outside Church there is no salvation."


After having examined all the documents that are necessary or useful in this matter, among them information from your Chancery, as well as appeals and reports in which the associates of "St. Benedict Center" explain their Opinions and complaints and also many other documents pertinent to the controversy, officially collected, same Sacred Congregation is convinced that the unfortunate controversy arose from, the fact that the axiom: "outside the Church there is no salvation," was not correctly understood and weighed, and that the same controversy was rendered more bitter by serious disturbance of discipline arising from the fact that some of the associates of the institutions mentioned above refused reverence and obedience to legitimate authorities.


Accordingly, the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Cardinals of this Supreme Congregation, in a plenary session, held on Wednesday, July 27, 1949, decreed, and the August Pontiff in an audience on the following Thursday, July 28, '949, deigned to give his approval, that the following explanations pertinent to the doctrine, and also that invitations and exhortations relevant to discipline be given:


We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those things which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or Tradition, and are propose by the Church to be believed as divinely revealed, not only through solemn judgment but also through the ordinary and universal teaching office (Denzinger, n. 1792). Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.


However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Savior gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority' of the Church.


Now, in the first place, the Church teaches that in this matter there is question of a most strict command of Jesus Christ. For He explicitly enjoined on His apostles to teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever He Himself had commanded (Matt., 28:19-20).


Now, among the commandments of Christ, that one holds not the least place, by we are commanded to be incorporated by Baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself in a visible manner governs the Church on earth.


Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth. Not only did the Savior command that all nations should enter the Church, but also decreed the Church to he a means of salvation, without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory.


In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the Sacrament of Regeneration and in reference to the Sacrament of Penance (Denzinger, nn. 797, ~o7).


The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.


However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when person is involved in invincible ignorance, God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes will to be conformed to the will of God.


These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943, "On the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ" (AAS, Vol. 35, an. '943, p. i93ff.). For in this letter the Sovereign Pontiff clearly distinguishes between those who are actually incorporated into the Church as albers, and those who are united to the Church only by desire.


Discussing the members of which the Mystical Body is composed here on earth, same August Pontiff says: "Actually only those are to be included as members e Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed."


Toward the end of this same Encyclical Letter, when most affectionately inviting unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions who "are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire," and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but the other hand states that they are in a condition "in which they cannot be sure their salvation" since "they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church" AAS, loc. cit., 243).


With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men be saved equally well in every religion (cf. Pope Pius IX, Allocution "Singulari quadam," in Denzinger, nn. 1641, ff. also Pope Pius IX in the Encyclical Letter Quanto conficiamur moerore" in Denzinger, n. 1677).


But it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: "For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him" (Hebrew 11:6). The Council of Trent declares (Session VI, chap 8): Faith is the beginning of a man's salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and attain to the fellowship of His children" (Denzinger, n. 80l).


>From what has been said it is evident that those things which are proposed in the periodical "From the Housetops," fascicle 3, as the genuine teaching of the Catholic Church are far from being such and are very harmful both to those within the Church and those without.


>From these declarations which pertain to doctrine certain conclusions follow which regard discipline and conduct, and which cannot be unknown to those who vigorously defend the necessity by which all are bound of belonging to the true Church and of submitting to the authority of the Roman Pontiff and of the Bishops "whom the Holy Ghost has placed . . . to rule the Church" (Acts, 20:28).


Hence, one cannot understand how the St. Benedict Center can consistently claim to be a Catholic school and wish to be accounted such, and yet not conform to the prescriptions of Canons 1381 and 1382 of the Code of Canon Law, and continue to exist as a source of discord and rebellion against ecclesiastical authority and as a source of the disturbance of many consciences.


Furthermore, it is beyond understanding how a member of a religious institute, namely Father Feeney, presents himself as a "Defender of the faith," and at the same time does not hesitate to attack the catechetical instruction proposed by lawful authorities, and has not even feared to incur grave sanctions threatened by the sacred canons because of his serious violations of his duties as a religions, a priest and an ordinary member of the Church.


Finally, it is in no wise to be tolerated that certain Catholics shall claim for themselves the right to publish a periodical, for the purpose of spreading theological doctrines, without the permission of competent Church Authority; called the "imprimatur," which is prescribed by the sacred canons.


Therefore, let them who in grave peril are ranged against the Church seriously bear in mind that after "Rome has spoken" they cannot be excused even by reasons of good faith. Certainly, their bond and duty of obedience toward the Church is much graver than that of those who as yet are related to the Church "only by an unconscious desire." Let them realize that they are children of the Church, lovingly nourished by her with the milk of doctrine and the sacraments, and hence, having heard the clear voice of their Mother, they cannot be excused from culpable ignorance, and therefore to them applies without any restriction that principle: submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.


In sending this letter, I declare my profound esteem, and remain Your Excellency's most devoted


E Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani


A. Ottaviani Assessor


To His Excellency
Most Reverend Richard James Cushing
Archbishop of Boston


[/quote]

[Guest AloysiusGhost]

and the best refutation of "The Case Against Father Feeny" is itself refuted [url="http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/adam.html"]HERE[/url]

[Joseph]

[b]Straight out of the Catechism....[/b]
[quote]

1260
"Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery."63 Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.


1261
As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,"64 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.[/quote]


That does not sound like it is teaching of the Church that unbaptized infants are damned to Hell. We can only entrust them to the mercy of God. Although my personal belief is that God's mercy and love saves these babies, it does not contradict the Church's teaching.

I

Edited May 24, 2004 by Joseph

[Alexei]

https://youtu.be/qpJAzLBcD9o