FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
Another EENS, please be patient... - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Archives (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Theology and Philosophy (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Thread: Another EENS, please be patient... (/showthread.php?tid=44655)



Re: Another EENS, please be patient... - Gregory I - 05-13-2011

But those who die in original sin alone are punished in hell. That is not deliberate personal sin, yet it is justly punished. You have to synthesize this contradiction. ???


Re: Another EENS, please be patient... - wulfrano - 05-14-2011

(05-13-2011, 11:43 PM)Gregory I Wrote: But those who die in original sin alone are punished in hell. That is not deliberate personal sin, yet it is justly punished. You have to synthesize this contradiction. ???

I love every newborn.  Be he jew, moslem, budist, pagan, protestant, schismatic, as regards his parents' religion.  And I know that if he dies without the use of reason and without baptism that he will not go to live with the devil because he did not do anything consciously and willfully wrong.  His place is traditionally called Limbo.  A place of natural happiness.


Re: Another EENS, please be patient... - Pheo - 05-14-2011

(05-14-2011, 01:26 AM)wulfrano Wrote: I love every newborn.  Be he jew, moslem, budist, pagan, protestant, schismatic, as regards his parents' religion.  And I know that if he dies without the use of reason and without baptism that he will not go to live with the devil because he did not do anything consciously and willfully wrong.  His place is traditionally called Limbo.  A place of natural happiness.

And I've always understood that this state of natural happiness is still a form of punishment.  We have to remember that it's natural happiness deprived eternally of the Beatific Vision.  This seems to be consistent with the notion that there are different degrees of punishment in Hell based on personal sin (just as there are different degrees of glory in Heaven).  Knowing that one is deprived of His glory forever...I don't know, it doesn't sound like too much of a party.

So as Limbo is still a part of Hell, it seems to me that this is still one of the punishments of Hell.  That's just how I've always seen it.


Re: Another EENS, please be patient... - wulfrano - 05-14-2011

And I've always understood that this state of natural happiness is still a form of punishment.  We have to remember that it's natural happiness deprived eternally of the Beatific Vision.  This seems to be consistent with the notion that there are different degrees of punishment in Hell based on personal sin (just as there are different degrees of glory in Heaven).  Knowing that one is deprived of His glory forever...I don't know, it doesn't sound like too much of a party.

So as Limbo is still a part of Hell, it seems to me that this is still one of the punishments of Hell.  That's just how I've always seen it.
[/quote]

You are pretty close.  Indeed, original sin alone is punished in the sense that those in Limbo will never see God.  And yet, their punishment is not that of the damned.  The damned blasphemers  will not ever see God and they will always be floating ambers in the endless firestorm of hell.

As for my own particular opinion, I must say that Our Lord, if He so wishes, can immediately and directly baptize anyone, anywhere, anytime,  He wants, making him or her a member of His Mystical Body.


Re: Another EENS, please be patient... - Pheo - 05-14-2011

(05-14-2011, 02:31 AM)wulfrano Wrote: You are pretty close.  Indeed, original sin alone is punished in the sense that those in Limbo will never see God.  And yet, their punishment is not that of the damned.  The damned blasphemers  will not ever see God and they will always be floating ambers in the endless firestorm of hell.

Yeah sorry if I wasn't clear - that's how I understand it too.


Re: Another EENS, please be patient... - Gregory I - 05-14-2011

I simply believe what the dogma says: Those who die in original sin alone descend to hell where they are punished. The unbaptized infant is punished. The details of limbo are speculation, and the tradition that had the longest history is that the unbaptized infant definitely suffers at least the pain of loss if not the pain of sense.

Natural happiness should not exist for those who are being punished; otherwise, the punishment is useless. What good is getting spanked if you don't feel it? God justly punishes the unbaptized soul because that soul is an enemy of God.


Re: Another EENS, please be patient... - wulfrano - 05-14-2011

(05-14-2011, 02:46 AM)Gregory I Wrote: I simply believe what the dogma says: Those who die in original sin alone descend to hell where they are punished. The unbaptized infant is punished. The details of limbo are speculation, and the tradition that had the longest history is that the unbaptized infant definitely suffers at least the pain of loss if not the pain of sense.

Natural happiness should not exist for those who are being punished; otherwise, the punishment is useless. What good is getting spanked if you don't feel it? God justly punishes the unbaptized soul because that soul is an enemy of God.

The only thing that gets you into hell is having died in mortal sin.  Original sin is not mortal sin.  Therefore original sin does not get you into Heaven but it does not get you into hell either.  Therefore those who speak of Limbo are right.


Re: Another EENS, please be patient... - SouthpawLink - 05-14-2011

"The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell, yet to be punished with different punishments" (Second Council of Lyons, Profession of Faith of Michael Palaeologus, A.D. 1274: Denz. 464).

"Moreover, the souls of those who depart in actual mortal sin or in original sin only, descend immediately into hell but to undergo punishments of different kinds" (Council of Florence, Laetentur Coeli, 6 July 1439: Denz. 693).

P.S. - I'm weary of privately interpreting the Council of Trent -- in response to Gregory I -- but I've already begun a response to points made earlier in the thread (concerning Session VI).  Maybe I'll post it later today...  Anyway, what I will say briefly is that it's highly odd for the same Fathers who apparently excluded baptism of desire at Trent to teach it right after the conclusion of the Council, in the Roman Catechism.  Had they forgetten all about sessions VI and VII while writing the catechism?  ???

"One of the first acts of the new Pontiff was to appoint a number of expert theological revisers to examine every statement in the Catechism from the viewpoint of doctrine."

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/romancat.html


Re: Another EENS, please be patient... - wulfrano - 05-14-2011

@ SouthpawLink.

Thank you for posting conclusive authoritative texts.

"The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell, yet to be punished with different punishments" (Second Council of Lyons, Profession of Faith of Michael Palaeologus, A.D. 1274: Denz. 464).

"Moreover, the souls of those who depart in actual mortal sin or in original sin only, descend immediately into hell but to undergo punishments of different kinds" (Council of Florence, Laetentur Coeli, 6 July 1439: Denz. 693).

Positive punishment (fire) for the damned and negative punishment (deprivation of vision) for original sin.


Re: Another EENS, please be patient... - Stubborn - 05-14-2011

(05-14-2011, 04:47 PM)wulfrano Wrote: Positive punishment (fire) for the damned and negative punishment (deprivation of vision) for original sin.

After the "age of reason" the positive punishment of hell.