Limbo And Extra Ecclesiam

[kafka]

I do not understand how any human person at this point in Church history could think that God would allow an innocent prenatal, infant, or toddler who suffers an untimely death, without baptism of water, to die in original sin without sanctifying grace. To think and teach otherwise is to me a Catholic---theologically savage, brutal, unjust, and pharasaical. God is Just, Loving and Merciful and Omnipotent. By virtue of their untimely deaths, the innocents are united to Jesus on the Cross. God confers on them a non-formal or mystical baptism of blood before they die. They do not die in original sin and there is no third and final resting place for them. The limbo infantium is none other than an upper fringe of Purgatory where they spiritually develop, learn, and meet Jesus (and likely Mary) before being assumed into Heaven. There is no possible way a child of God whose soul was personally, intimately, immediately created by God out of nothing, as a special gift to Himself, could be eternally happy in a natural state apart from God. Because of sin, these innocents were given no chance to seek God and the state of grace, therefore God justly, mercifully, and lovingly saves them with a mystical/non-formal baptism of blood.

Jesus taught that after the general judgment there is no third and final resting place:

{25:31} But when the Son of man will have arrived in his majesty, and all the Angels with him, then he will sit upon the seat of his majesty.
{25:32} And all the nations shall be gathered together before him. And he shall separate them from one another, just as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
{25:33} And he shall station the sheep, indeed, on his right, but the goats on his left.
{25:34} Then the King shall say to those who will be on his right: ‘Come, you blessed of my Father. Possess the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
. . .
{25:41} Then he shall also say, to those who will be on his left: ‘Depart from me, you accursed ones, into the eternal fire, which was prepared for the devil and his angels.
. . .
{25:46} And these shall go into eternal punishment, but the just shall go into eternal life.”

Mary's Immaculate Conception was her non-formal mystical baptism. There is nothing she did to earn it, and she was obviously not conscious to accept it at the moment of her coneption. God simply gave it to her.

The Holy Innocents were united to Jesus on the Cross by being unjustly slaughtered by evil men.

Infants receive baptism of water as a free gift.

There is a Catholic funeral rite for children and each prayer is given an alternative for the ones who died without baptism of water.

There is a prayerful agreement among most Catholics that these prenatals, infants, and children are saved without bapstism of water which could only leave open the possibility of a baptism of blood since they are not old enough to receive a baptsim of desire. This is more or less the current sensum fidelium.

There is no definitive Magisterial teaching at the moment but it could be said to be taught by the Universal Magisterium since many Bishops teach that they are saved.

Blessed John Paul II opened a theological commission to assist the workings of the Magisterium and Pope Benedict authorized the publication of their document:
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=7529&CFID=81928869&CFTOKEN=44011378

Blessed John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae n. 99:
I would now like to say a special word to women who have had an abortion. The Church is aware of the many factors which may have influenced your decision, and she does not doubt that in many cases it was a painful and even shattering decision. The wound in your heart may not yet have healed. Certainly what happened was and remains terribly wrong. But do not give in to discouragement and do not lose hope. Try rather to understand what happened and face it honestly. If you have not already done so, give yourselves over with humility and trust to repentance. The Father of mercies is ready to give you his forgiveness and his peace in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. [b]To the same Father and his mercy you can with sure hope entrust your child. [/b]With the friendly and expert help and advice of other people, and as a result of your own painful experience, you can be among the most eloquent defenders of everyone's right to life. Through your commitment to life, whether by accepting the birth of other children or by welcoming and caring for those most in need of someone to be close to them, you will become promoters of a new way of looking at human life.

The Catechism makes a somewhat awkward statement about them, but it is something:
As regards children who have died without Baptism [of water I presume is what the author of this meant], 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 them come to me, do not hinder them’ allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without baptism [again of water].” (CCC 1261)

There are many other truths which could be implicitly drawn out from Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture to support the salvation of prenatals, infants, children who die without a formal baptism of water.

Jesus died for everyone:

{2:3} For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
{2:4} [b]who wants all men to be saved and to arrive at an acknowledgment of the truth.[/b]{2:5} For there is one God, and one mediator of God and of men, the man Christ Jesus,
{2:6} who gave himself as a redemption for all, as a testimony in its proper time.

those who choose not to die with Jesus will be condemned. The ones who were given no choice at all will be saved because God wills it and makes it happen for them in spite of the grave sins of human persons and all its consequences.

Edited May 23, 2011 by kafka

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='kafka' timestamp='1306121814' post='2244736']
I do not understand how any human person at this point in Church history could think that God would allow an innocent prenatal, infant, or toddler who suffers an untimely death, without baptism of water, to die in original sin without sanctifying grace. To think and teach otherwise is to me a Catholic---theologically savage, brutal, unjust, and pharasaical. God is Just, Loving and Merciful and Omnipotent. By virtue of their untimely deaths, the innocents are united to Jesus on the Cross. God confers on them a non-formal or mystical baptism of blood before they die. They do not die in original sin and there is no third and final resting place for them. The limbo infantium is none other than an upper fringe of Purgatory where they spiritually develop, learn, and meet Jesus (and likely Mary) before being assumed into Heaven. There is no possible way a child of God whose soul was personally, intimately, immediately created by God out of nothing, as a special gift to Himself, could be eternally happy in a natural state apart from God. Because of sin, these innocents were given no chance to seek God and the state of grace, therefore God justly, mercifully, and lovingly saves them with a mystical/non-formal baptism of blood.

Jesus taught that after the general judgment there is no third and final resting place:

{25:31} But when the Son of man will have arrived in his majesty, and all the Angels with him, then he will sit upon the seat of his majesty.
{25:32} And all the nations shall be gathered together before him. And he shall separate them from one another, just as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
{25:33} And he shall station the sheep, indeed, on his right, but the goats on his left.
{25:34} Then the King shall say to those who will be on his right: ‘Come, you blessed of my Father. Possess the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
. . .
{25:41} Then he shall also say, to those who will be on his left: ‘Depart from me, you accursed ones, into the eternal fire, which was prepared for the devil and his angels.
. . .
{25:46} And these shall go into eternal punishment, but the just shall go into eternal life.”

Mary's Immaculate Conception was her non-formal mystical baptism. There is nothing she did to earn it, and she was obviously not conscious to accept it at the moment of her coneption. God simply gave it to her.

The Holy Innocents were united to Jesus on the Cross by being unjustly slaughtered by evil men.

Infants receive baptism of water as a free gift.

There is a Catholic funeral rite for children and each prayer is given an alternative for the ones who died without baptism of water.

There is a prayerful agreement among most Catholics that these prenatals, infants, and children are saved without bapstism of water which could only leave open the possibility of a baptism of blood since they are not old enough to receive a baptsim of desire. This is more or less the current sensum fidelium.

There is no definitive Magisterial teaching at the moment but it could be said to be taught by the Universal Magisterium since many Bishops teach that they are saved.

Blessed John Paul II opened a theological commission to assist the workings of the Magisterium and Pope Benedict authorized the publication of their document:
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=7529&CFID=81928869&CFTOKEN=44011378

Blessed John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae n. 99:
I would now like to say a special word to women who have had an abortion. The Church is aware of the many factors which may have influenced your decision, and she does not doubt that in many cases it was a painful and even shattering decision. The wound in your heart may not yet have healed. Certainly what happened was and remains terribly wrong. But do not give in to discouragement and do not lose hope. Try rather to understand what happened and face it honestly. If you have not already done so, give yourselves over with humility and trust to repentance. The Father of mercies is ready to give you his forgiveness and his peace in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. [b]To the same Father and his mercy you can with sure hope entrust your child. [/b]With the friendly and expert help and advice of other people, and as a result of your own painful experience, you can be among the most eloquent defenders of everyone's right to life. Through your commitment to life, whether by accepting the birth of other children or by welcoming and caring for those most in need of someone to be close to them, you will become promoters of a new way of looking at human life.

The Catechism makes a somewhat awkward statement about them, but it is something:
As regards children who have died without Baptism [of water I presume is what the author of this meant], 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 them come to me, do not hinder them’ allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without baptism [again of water].” (CCC 1261)

There are many other truths which could be implicitly drawn out from Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture to support the salvation of prenatals, infants, children who die without a formal baptism of water.

Jesus died for everyone:

{2:3} For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
{2:4} [b]who wants all men to be saved and to arrive at an acknowledgment of the truth.[/b]{2:5} For there is one God, and one mediator of God and of men, the man Christ Jesus,
{2:6} who gave himself as a redemption for all, as a testimony in its proper time.

those who choose not to die with Jesus will be condemned. The ones who were given no choice at all will be saved because God wills it and makes it happen for them in spite of the grave sins of human persons and all its consequences.
[/quote]


Kafka... simply put, E. Councils infallable declarations cannot be contradicted, EVER. Any teaching in contradiction to them is false, all other teaching must be ween within the light of that which the Holy Spirit has inspired thrugh the infallable teaching of the E. Councils.

There is nothing else to say. If all of the Bishops denied the Trinity or that Jesus was fully God and fully Man it would not make it so, God has told us that these are the Truth.
God has Also told us that Baptism is necessary for Salvation. Babies who die in a state of original sin are rarely dying because of their faith, they are not Martyrs, how on earth could the Baptism of Blood apply?


This does not mean that I am disobediant to the Magesterium, quite the opposite, I simply aknowledge the Authroity of the Magesterium in its fullness.

Infallable statements are exactly that, infallable, they cannot be contradicted.

These were not implict teaching, but explicit. All other teaching must be understood in their light.

[kafka]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1306125189' post='2244757']
Kafka... simply put, E. Councils infallable declarations cannot be contradicted, EVER. Any teaching in contradiction to them is false, all other teaching must be ween within the light of that which the Holy Spirit has inspired thrugh the infallable teaching of the E. Councils.

There is nothing else to say. If all of the Bishops denied the Trinity or that Jesus was fully God and fully Man it would not make it so, God has told us that these are the Truth.
God has Also told us that Baptism is necessary for Salvation. Babies who die in a state of original sin are rarely dying because of their faith, they are not Martyrs, how on earth could the Baptism of Blood apply?


This does not mean that I am disobediant to the Magesterium, quite the opposite, I simply aknowledge the Authroity of the Magesterium in its fullness.

Infallable statements are exactly that, infallable, they cannot be contradicted.

These were not implict teaching, but explicit. All other teaching must be understood in their light.
[/quote]
What are you saying?

I'm not contradicting them, nor was Blessed John Paul II, nor is Pope Benedict XVI, nor are many of the Bishops, nor are many others. Rather some Catholics are misinterpreting them and falsely representing them and falsely teaching their own understanding of them.

As far as I know the limits of a Baptism of Blood has not been clearly defined by the Magisterium so that it cannot extend to prenatals, infants, or children who die untimely deaths as a result of severe sins. These innocents are not martyrs for the Faith, but they are by virtue of their unjust and untimely deaths united to Jesus on the Cross, who innocently died as a result of the severe sins of the human race at the express will of the Father. The Father permits and so wills these innocents to die unjust and untimely deaths as a result of severe sins just as he willed His Son to die on the Cross, but he provides the non-formal mystical baptism of blood so that they die in union with Jesus in the state of sanctifying grace and not with original sin. If God did not do this then they would die in original sin. But He effects it. He makes it happen. I know he does. He is Love, Mercy, Justice, Infinity, Eternity, Omnipotence.

This idea does not contradict what is revealed in Sacred Tradition-Sacred Scripture and what is taught by Sacred Magisterium. I mean maybe I'm not perfect at expressing it all, but all the ideas expressed above do not contradict Tradition-Scripture-Magisterium. They are rooted in it. When one reads a Magisterial teaching, one has to read and interpret it in light of everything. The Faith is one.

A third and final resting place where the innocents live out a life of natural happiness apart from God forever does in fact contradict Sacred Tradition-Sacred Scripture-Sacred Magisterium. It expressly contradicts what Jesus, the Apostles, the Prophets, the Sacred Authors and many other Catholics taught. The fact that God and all we have seen and read that He has done through the eyes of Faith tells me and many Catholics that he does not abandon these little ones.

And I'm not going to spend a lot of time defending this here. I've done it on and off for four years. One of my first theological posts was about this.

Edited May 23, 2011 by kafka

[RashaLampa]

[quote name='kafka' timestamp='1306126530' post='2244765']
What are you saying?

I'm not contradicting them, nor was Blessed John Paul II, nor is Pope Benedict XVI, nor are many of the Bishops, nor are many others. Rather some Catholics are misinterpreting them and falsely representing them and falsely teaching their own understanding of them.
[/quote]

[i][size="6"]So you are saying that you don't agree with the following teachings?[/size]
[/i][color="#cc0000"][size="4"][b]
[/b][/size][/color]

[color="#cc0000"][size="4"][b]Infallible teachings[/b][/size][/color] related to babies not entering heaven:

[b]Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Session 11, Feb. 4, 1442: [/b]
[color="#0000ff"]"Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when 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, it advises that holy baptism ought not be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people."[/color]
[b]
Council of Lyons II, 1274[/b]
[color="#800080"]"The souls of those who die in mortal sin [/color][color="#800080"][size="3"][b]or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell,[/b][/size][/color][color="#800080"] yet to be punished with [/color][color="#800080"][size="3"][b]different punishments[/b][/size][/color][color="#800080"]." [/color](Denzinger 464)

[b]Council of Florence, 1438-1445:[/b]
[color="#006400"]"the souls of those who depart in actual mortal sin or [/color][color="#006400"][size="3"][b]in original sin only, descend immediately into hell [/b][/size][/color][color="#006400"]but to undergo punishments of [/color][color="#006400"][size="3"][b]different kinds[/b][/size][/color][color="#006400"]"[/color] (Denzinger 694)

[b]Pope Martin V, Council of Constance, Session 15, July 6, 1415 - [/b]
Proposition 6:[color="#8b0000"] "Those who claim, that the children of the faithful dying without sacramental baptism will not be saved, are stupid and presumptuous in saying this = Condemned." [/color]Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Vol. 1, p. 422
[b]
Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, On Original Sin, Session Va: [/b]
[color="#000080"]"If anyone says that recently born babies should not be baptized even if they have been born to baptized parents; or says that they are indeed baptized for the remission of sins, but incur no trace of the original sin of Adam needing to be cleansed by the laver of rebirth for them to obtain eternal life, with the necessary consequence that in their case there is being understood a form of baptism for the remission of sins which is not true, but false: let him be anathema."[/color] (Denz. 791)


[color="#cc0000"][size="4"][b]Authoritative: Ordinary Magisterium[/b][/size][/color]:

[b]16th Council of Carthage[/b] (approved by Pope Zosimus and the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus ):

[color="#0000ff"]"It has been decided likewise that if anyone says that for this reason the Lord said: "In my father's house there are many mansions"(JN14:2): that it might be understood [/color][color="#0000ff"][size="2"][b]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 eternal life, let him be anathema[/b][/size][/color][color="#0000ff"][b].[/b][/color][color="#0000ff"]
For when the lord says :"Unless a man be born of water and the Holy Ghost, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God"(Jn3:5), what Catholic will doubt that he will be partner of the devil who has not deserved to be a co-heir of Christ? For he who lacks the right part will without doubt run into the left" [/color](Denzinger 102 fn.2; 30th edition)

[b]Pope St. Innocent I, in 417, Synod of Milevis[/b] : [color="#a0522d"][size="2"]"[/size][/color][color="#a0522d"][size="2"][b]The idea that infants can be granted the rewards of eternal life even without the grace of baptism is utterly foolish[/b][/size][/color][color="#a0522d"][size="2"]"[/size][/color] [size="2"](DS 219).[/size]

[b]Pope Innocent III, [/b]
who asserted that those dying with only original sin on their souls will suffer [color="#006400"]" [/color][color="#006400"][size="2"]"no other pain, whether from material fire or from the worm of conscience,[/size][/color] [color="#006400"][size="2"][b]except the pain of being deprived forever of the vision of God[/b][/size][/color][color="#006400"]" [/color](Corp. Juris, Decret. l. III, tit. xlii, c. iii -- Majores). (Denzinger 410)

[b]John XXII, Nequaquam sine dolere, Nov 21, 1321:[/b]
[color="#ff0000"][size="2"]"...the souls...of those who die in mortal sin, or with only original sin descend immediately into hell; however, to be punished with different penalties and in different places." [/size][/color](Denzinger 493a)
[b]
Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, Aug. 28, 1794,[/b]
"Baptism" section 3:
[color="#0000ff"]"The doctrine which rejects as a Pelagian fable, that place of the lower regions [/color][color="#0000ff"][size="3"][b](which the faithful generally designate by the name of the limbo of the children)[/b][/size][/color] [color="#0000ff"]in which the souls of those departing with the sole guilt of original sin are punished with the punishment of the condemned, exclusive of the punishment of fire, just as if, by this very fact, that these who remove the punishment of fire introduced that middle place and state free of guilt and of punishment between the kingdom of God and eternal damnation, such as that about which the Pelagians idly talk,-[/color][color="#0000ff"][b]-false rash injurious to Catholic schools[/b][/color][color="#0000ff"]." [/color][color="#000000"](i.e. condemned [/color]the Jansenists'[color="#000000"] anti-limbo position as rash) [[/color]Denzinger[color="#000000"] 1526][/color]

[b]Pius XII-Allocution to midwives, October 29, 1951.[/b]
[color="#8b0000"]"An act of love is sufficient for the adult to obtain sanctifying grace and to supply the lack of baptism; [/color][color="#8b0000"][size="2"][b]to the still unborn or newly born this way is not open[/b][/size][/color][color="#8b0000"]."[/color]

[b]The Holy Office in 1958[/b] (now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) provided as follows:
[color="#4b0082"]"The practice has arisen in some places of delaying the conferring of Baptism for so-called reasons of convenience or of a liturgical nature--a practice favored by some opinions, [/color][color="#4b0082"][size="2"][b]lacking solid foundation, concerning the eternal salvation of infants who die without Baptism....[/b][/size][/color][color="#4b0082"]Therefore this Supreme Congregation, with the approval of the Holy Father, warns the faithful that infants are to be baptized as soon as possible. . . . Pastors and preachers are exhorted to urge the fulfillment of this obligation."[/color]

[b]The provincial Council of Cologne:[/b]
[color="#006400"][size="2"]"Faith teaches us that infants, since they are not capable of this desire, are excluded from the kingdom of heaven if they die [unbaptized]." [/size][/color](Collectio Lacensis, V. 320)


[b]PS:[/b]
The Holy Innocents were martyrs for Jesus Himself. They died in his place therefore are martyrs .

Even so Jewish boys are circumcised at 8 days and received sanctifying grace. More than likely God in his providence would have allowed no births 8 or 9 days before Herod's slaughter.

"We must say, therefore, that grace was bestowed in circumcision"
Summa [color="#000080"][u][url="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4070.htm"]http://www.newadvent.../summa/4070.htm[/url][/u][/color]

Edited May 23, 2011 by RashaLampa

[kafka]

[quote name='RashaLampa' timestamp='1306153559' post='2244825']
[i][size="6"]So you are saying that you don't agree with the following teachings?[/size]
[/i][color="#cc0000"][size="4"][b]
[/b][/size][/color]

[color="#cc0000"][size="4"][b]Infallible teachings[/b][/size][/color] related to babies not entering heaven:

[b]Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Session 11, Feb. 4, 1442: [/b]
[color="#0000ff"]"Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when 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, it advises that holy baptism ought not be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people."[/color]
[b]
[/quote]
no what I am saying is that I dont agree with your arrogant and pharasaical and non-existent understanding of the teachings not to mention your peacock and girlish array of color coding.

in this teaching the Ecumenical Council is focusing on baptism of water and of course rightly stating that they need and should be baptized as soon as possible. It is not condemning any idea of a non-formal mystical baptism of blood if the formal baptism of water is not provided. God is not limited by the negligence and foolishness of his fallen and sinful children when eternal salvation is at stake. He can and does effect a Baptism of Blood to the prenatals, infants and children when needed in the case of premature death.

I will get to the rest by the end of the day.

Edited May 23, 2011 by kafka

[Fides_et_Ratio]

Kafka,

You have no Magisterial teachings to back up your fantasies. It is perfectly just and merciful for God to send unbaptized infants to limbo (/hell). The default option is not heaven. Original Sin is not some willy-nilly thing that really doesn't matter in the end. A soul with no stain on it except the stain of Original Sin is barred from heaven. This whole matter was laid out very clearly by Pope Eugene IV: "Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when[u] [b]no help[/b] can be brought to them by another remedy than through the [b][i]sacrament [/i][/b]of baptism[/u], through which they are snatched from the domination of the Devil and adopted among the sons of God, it advises that holy baptism ought not be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people." (my emphasis)

However which way you want to do theological gymnastics with baptism of blood (or desire), it is not a sacrament. There is only one sacramental baptism: baptism with water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

Pope Innocent I (Denzinger 219) : "The idea that infants can be granted the rewards of eternal life even without the grace of baptism is utterly foolish"

[Laudate_Dominum]

I hereby deny the existence of teh [i]limbus infantium[/i].

[kafka]

[quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' timestamp='1306171316' post='2244911']
Kafka,

You have no Magisterial teachings to back up your fantasies. It is perfectly just and merciful for God to send unbaptized infants to limbo (/hell). The default option is not heaven. Original Sin is not some willy-nilly thing that really doesn't matter in the end. A soul with no stain on it except the stain of Original Sin is barred from heaven. This whole matter was laid out very clearly by Pope Eugene IV: "Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when[u] [b]no help[/b] can be brought to them by another remedy than through the [b][i]sacrament [/i][/b]of baptism[/u], through which they are snatched from the domination of the Devil and adopted among the sons of God, it advises that holy baptism ought not be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people." (my emphasis)

However which way you want to do theological gymnastics with baptism of blood (or desire), it is not a sacrament. There is only one sacramental baptism: baptism with water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

Pope Innocent I (Denzinger 219) : "The idea that infants can be granted the rewards of eternal life even without the grace of baptism is utterly foolish"
[/quote]
Are you are out of your Christian gourd?

I've got Sacred Tradition-Sacred Scripture sound interpretations of Magisterium in light of Tradition and Scripture. The theological commission of Blessed John Paul II, the authorization of the said theological commission's document by Pope Benedict, the recent teachings of many Bishops, the prayerful agreement of millions of Catholics, the sensum fidelium, the development of doctrine, the just and loving and merciful and wonderful God: Father, Son, Spirit, Mary the Immaculate Conception, the Angels and Saints all on my side. Maybe the theological opinion of a non-formal mystical Baptism of Blood isnt perfectly worked out, but these prenatals, infants, and children are saved, they are non-formally baptised like Mary was, they are with God (after a brief stay in an 'upper fringe' of Purgatory) and they will witness against your interpretations on the Last Day (billions of them maybe trillions).

It is not just to send the unbaptized babies to an upper fringe in hell. It is not possible for any true human happiness supernatural and natural all inclusive the way God made human persons from the very beginning, Adam and Eve being in the state of sanctifying grace at the moment of their creation. There is no true happiness apart from God. Original sin is grave but God is more grave. God saves these little ones.

You live out your pharasaical phantasy.

edit: took out Wolf at the very end. Maybe a bit far, but I may be proven wrong.

Edited May 23, 2011 by kafka

[Fides_et_Ratio]

You have been shown Conciliar and Papal texts explicitly stating the contrary position. You have none to back up your position. (a theological commission has zero weight when it comes to defining Catholic doctrine... commissions don't define doctrines: Ecumenical Councils and Popes do).

There is no need for name calling. I may have been strong in calling your assertions "fantasies", but I can promise you you'll never find any Magisterial statement that backs up your idea that "the ones who were given no choice at all will be saved because God wills it and makes it happen for them"-- because it doesn't exist. Such a blatant denial of free will runs contrary to everything the Church has ever taught about God.

Edited May 23, 2011 by Fides_et_Ratio

[Groo the Wanderer]

I like pie. MMMM...pie!





Now chill out you folks, have some pie, and play nice.

[Don John of Austria]

This topic has been beaten to death on phatmass. Way before Kafka came.... usually it has had to do with aborted babies.


Why are we discussing it again?

[dairygirl4u2c]

before the issue was more of 'what is the actual teaching on this?' for those good catholics wanting to know.

now the issue is more of 'isn't there a contradiction here, and why or why not'
althoiugh it does seem to be more of the former, given now it's amongst catholics debating what the teaching is. (which i would maintain is all showing my position, that there's contradictions afoot.... eg, the idea that we can have a mystical baptism etc seems strongly to go against the intent of the popes expressing that infants go to hell, limbo, or whatever. based on the clear reading, and historical accounts of it all v. what's taught now)

Edited May 23, 2011 by dairygirl4u2c

[dairygirl4u2c]

i actually like the idea of limbo, if it were a place for justice to play out more surely. allowing them all to go to heaven, just because they happened to die early doesn't seem quite right, and hell of course doesn't either, with the idea of a loving God.
but i'm not a catholic and just throwing that out there.

[kafka]

[quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' timestamp='1306180963' post='2245000']
You have been shown Conciliar and Papal texts explicitly stating the contrary position. You have none to back up your position. (a theological commission has zero weight when it comes to defining Catholic doctrine... commissions don't define doctrines: Ecumenical Councils and Popes do).

There is no need for name calling. I may have been strong in calling your assertions "fantasies", but I can promise you you'll never find any Magisterial statement that backs up your idea that "the ones who were given no choice at all will be saved because God wills it and makes it happen for them"-- because it doesn't exist. Such a blatant denial of free will runs contrary to everything the Church has ever taught about God.
[/quote]
You and others have arrogantly quoted them without any interpretation or explanation or support in Tradition and Scripture. The Magisterial teaching will come sooner than later because it can be drawn directly from Divine Revelation and implicitly from synthesizing several Magisterial teachings. The two recent Popes are moving in this direction via the theological commission. The sensum fidelium is agreeing. Bishops are teaching it and so on.

And I can explain the Magisterial quotes. I understand them (unlike you), know their level of Magisterium, and who is to say I havent read them all one hundred times. You can belittle the way I put the Faith into my own words all you want, but at least I'm not a false representative of what the Church thinks waving my Magisterial quotes around like a Protestant waving the Bible. And I take pleasure in the name calling because it fits your type. Jesus, John the Baptist, the Prophets and so on all did the same. May God confuse you, correct you, punish you, and bring you to repentance for you pharasaism.

Alright I'm going to start another thread in Transmundane later as a resource for future reference. The stench of this thread is stifling me.

Edited May 24, 2011 by kafka

[Fides_et_Ratio]

Kafka,

I have not belittled you, correction of another is not mean; it's a work of mercy (when done in charity). I can see your own emotions are getting in the way of you having a real discussion about this issue. I will pray for you... please keep reading and studying the faith. As our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI has said numerous times: there is not a pre and post Conciliar Church. It is the same Church and we must understand her teachings within a hermeneutic of continuity and not brush off and/or ignore the teachings of the past. Her teachings are constant and true.


Pope Gregory XVI, [i]Mirari Vos[/i] “… nothing of the things appointed ought to be diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved both as regards expression and meaning.”