Hope or Presumption?
#1
In the case of unbaptized infants:

Catechism of the Council of Trent
Quote:The faithful are earnestly to be exhorted to take care that their children be brought to the church, as soon as it can be done with safety, to receive solemn Baptism.  Since infant children have no other means of salvation except Baptism, we may easily understand how grievously those persons sin who permit them to remain without the grace of the Sacrament longer than necessity may require...

Catholic Encyclopedia
Quote:Finally, it is to be noted that only adults are capable of receiving the baptism of desire.


VERSUS



The New Catechism (CCC)
Quote: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,” allows 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."

Martin Luther
Quote:I hope that when little children are denied baptism without their fault, and the command of Christ and prayer are not despised, the kind and merciful God will graciously remember them. Let their souls be left in the hands of and at the will of their Heavenly Father, who, as we know, is merciful.

Modern Church Speak: International Theological Commission, The Hope of Salvation for Infants who Die without Being Baptised

Quote:footnote 3. The idea of Limbo, which the Church has used for many centuries to designate the destiny of infants who die without Baptism, has no clear foundation in revelation, even though it has long been used in traditional theological teaching. Moreover, the notion that infants who die without Baptism are deprived of the beatific vision, which has for so long been regarded as the common doctrine of the Church, gives rise to numerous pastoral problems, so much so that many pastors of souls have asked for a deeper reflection on the ways of salvation. The necessary reconsideration of the theological issues cannot ignore the tragic consequences of original sin. Original sin implies a state of separation from Christ, and that excludes the possibility of the vision of God for those who die in that state.

In other words, let's make something up to suit modern whims because the traditional Catholic teaching causes "issues."

Reply
#2
PeterII Wrote:In other words, let's make something up to suit modern whims because the traditional Catholic teaching causes "issues."

There is no dogma which says that such infants are not allowed into Heaven. The issue isn't necessary at all, and only a side thing.

I see no problem with the new phrasing. We all can and should hope for the salvation of those who we cannot reach.

I do not know why people feel an urge to insist that unbaptised infants cannot go to Heaven. It is not the dogma of the Church and only seems to cause grief for those who miscarry. The most uncharitable acts I've ever seen by Catholics involve this issue.

The Church has spoken. It has not changed any dogma. You have no right to contest or mock it.
Reply
#3
Yes it is a dogma of the Church that unbaptized babies cannot enter heaven. The term "Limbo" was just never defined.
Reply
#4
didishroom Wrote:Yes it is a dogma of the Church that unbaptized babies cannot enter heaven. The term "Limbo" was just never defined.

Where is this dogma defined? All we can do for their salvation is baptise them, so we should do all we can, but does that mean they cannot enter Heaven or will not?
Reply
#5
Did the Council of Trent (or any Council) "solemnly declare" that unbaptized infants go to hell? Surely no one would miss this.. but apparently I have.

- Lisa
Reply
#6
StrictCatholicGirl Wrote:Did the Council of Trent (or any Council) "solemnly declare" that unbaptized infants go to hell? Surely no one would miss this.. but apparently I have.

- Lisa

No, I have never seen any statement which states that. The Limbo of Infants was never dogma. There are some fully, in the Church, who believe they go to a fringe of Hell, to limbo or to Heaven. Each without contradicting Church teachings.

It is for this reason it is a useless speculation, except that we should baptise as soon as we can because it is the only thing we can do. Those who feel an urge to insist they cannot go to Heaven are being very uncharitable. Believe it in your heart, do not try to force your personal opinion on others, especially those in grief.
Reply
#7
ONeill Wrote:It is for this reason it is a useless speculation, except that we should baptise as soon as we can because it is the only thing we can do. Those who feel an urge to insist they cannot go to Heaven are being very uncharitable. Believe it in your heart, do not try to force your personal opinion on others, especially those in grief.

Well, as a mother who has lost a baby, I hope for hope.
 
- Lisa

Reply
#8
The term 'Limbo' was never defined as dogma, but that doesn't mean the Church has not spoken of it infallibly.


[Jansenist] teaching was condemned by Pope Pius VI in 1794:
The doctrine which rejects as a Pelagian fable that place of the lower regions (which the faithful generally designate by the name Limbo of the Children) in which the souls of those departing with the sole guilt of original sin are punished with the punishment of the condemned, exclusive of fire, just as if by this very fact, that those who remove the punishment of fire introduced that middle place and state, free of guilt and punishment between the kingdom of God and eternal damnation, such as that about which the Pelagians idly talk: [Condemned as] false, rash, injurious to Catholic schools (Denz. 1526).
 
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).
 
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)


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.

Reply
#9
didishroom Wrote:The term 'Limbo' was never defined as dogma, but that doesn't mean the Church has not spoken of it infallibly.

It is widely accepted by people in the Church, but people are held to it.

This issue is not important. We know the only thing we can do is baptise and then the rest is up to God. It is futile to spend so much time dwelling on the issue.

My personal opinion is one of the three I mentioned (fringe of hell, limbo or heaven) but I do not see it important or valuable enough to share as it would do no good and we are all allowed to believe as we will. What is there to gain over arguing about it or trying to convince others?
Reply
#10
StrictCatholicGirl Wrote:
ONeill Wrote:It is for this reason it is a useless speculation, except that we should baptise as soon as we can because it is the only thing we can do. Those who feel an urge to insist they cannot go to Heaven are being very uncharitable. Believe it in your heart, do not try to force your personal opinion on others, especially those in grief.

Well, as a mother who has lost a baby, I hope for hope.
 
- Lisa

As another mother who has lost a baby, I also hope.


Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)