Don John of Austria Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 This is a topic that keeps coming up so I would like to know where everybody stands on the issue. Feel free to post your reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don John of Austria Posted December 19, 2004 Author Share Posted December 19, 2004 I don't know wherethe extra choice dot came from, please don't check it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 (edited) Baptism is necessary. However, there exists a theory that the desire of the parents is enough for the children to be Baptized, it may hold true if anyone wants their Baptism. Edited December 19, 2004 by qfnol31 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don John of Austria Posted December 19, 2004 Author Share Posted December 19, 2004 (edited) Thats a silly theory with regards abortion, how can you desire a lump of flesh to be baptized( not saying the unborn are a lump of flesh but that is what women will tell you who murder there children) I mean come on there killing the child. Further Third party Baptism of desire is verging on either heresy or just plain silliness, I desire that eveyone in the world be baptized, sincerly I do, and that desire will not save those who are not. Edited December 19, 2004 by Don John of Austria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Adam Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 We are confined to the sacraments, God is not. Because of the Lord's will that all should be saved, we hope and pray, through his infinite mercy, that there is means by which those who die without baptism, especially infants, may be saved, or in any case, avoid the full wrath of hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 To enter into the beatific vision one must be in a state of deifying grace, but it does not of necessity follow that aborted children will suffer damnation in hell, because they may receive some type of consolation from God in a lesser state of happiness. As Blessed Pius IX said, "God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, [i]His supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments[/i]." [Blessed Pope Pius IX, [u]Quanto Conficiamur Moerore[/u], 10 August 1863] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 This may be really far out, but is it possible for Jesus to appear to the child just before death? It has the full capacity for rationality from the moment of conception... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 [quote name='qfnol31' date='Dec 19 2004, 10:54 AM'] This may be really far out, but is it possible for Jesus to appear to the child just before death? It has the full capacity for rationality from the moment of conception... [/quote] Such speculation goes beyond anything that has been revealed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don John of Austria Posted December 19, 2004 Author Share Posted December 19, 2004 [quote]His supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments[/quote] Sounds like a arguement for limbo to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 [quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Dec 19 2004, 10:56 AM'] Sounds like a arguement for limbo to me. [/quote] I am amenable to the concept of an intermediate state of existence analogous to the Scholastic concept of "limbus puerorum," but I don't care for the terminology used by the medieval theologians in order to support this idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don John of Austria Posted December 19, 2004 Author Share Posted December 19, 2004 Out of curiosity what of the Scholastic terminology do you find distastful? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aluigi Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 i think it carries a connotation of being part of hell hell (though it is part of like sheol, "hell" just not in the modern conception of the word) i think that it is a state of natural hapiness, which is what i voted for, but i'm not sure if eternal necessarily fits. last time Jesus came he freed the souls from purgatory, it stands to reason he very well could do it again and set everything in order close up all loose ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted December 19, 2004 Share Posted December 19, 2004 [quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Dec 19 2004, 11:11 AM'] Out of curiosity what of the Scholastic terminology do you find distastful? [/quote] The distinction between a [i]natural[/i] and a [i]supernatural[/i] end is foreign to the Eastern Catholic theological tradition. Man has no natural end, for his true and only end is God. Thus, if there is an intermediate state of existence, it is in some sense a supernatural participation in God's uncreated energies. Those who die without receiving baptism, but who have not committed any actual sins, would still experience, at least in some sense, God's intimacy; however, that experience would be of a lesser quality than the one given to those who die in a state of deifying grace, for only those who have been uncreated by grace can receive the full vision of God in unapproachable light, and become God in God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don John of Austria Posted December 19, 2004 Author Share Posted December 19, 2004 (edited) I forgot you where an Eastern Catholic, you see the distinction between Natural and Supernatural, seems almost essential to me, but I understand your Idea that one cannot be happy without some measure of experiancing God, I don'tthink that any scholatic would have said that there was no connection with God in Limbo, just not a supernatural connection. It is the God in God term that bothers me, we are never God in God, God is and eternally will be seperate and distinct from His creation. Edited December 19, 2004 by Don John of Austria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don John of Austria Posted December 19, 2004 Author Share Posted December 19, 2004 Come on guys 62 views and only 6 votes, whats up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now