Hope or Presumption?
PeterII Wrote:Here we have more positive statements contradicting the notion of "hope."  It is clear that the common belief of the Church has always been that unbaptized babies do not go to heaven.  Not that there are theoretical means that possibly let them go to heaven.   Those means may exist in theory, but God does not use them.  We have no reason to hope He does.   







The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not state it like that.

Also, you say "it is clear", but it obviously not clear, even to the many learned people in the Church in history. You say "we have no reason to hope" but people have found reason to hope.

It is only clear that infant baptism is beneficial and should not be delayed and it is the only means of salvation they can receive in this world. The Church has not made any dogma about what happens after their death, and all we can do is hope as we do with all who have died.
Reply
From what I understand Catholics are free to personally believe in either:

1.) Salvation only for water-baptized Catholics.

or

2.) Universal salvation

and not violate any dogmas of the faith.

Is this true?
Reply
StevusMagnus Wrote:From what I understand Catholics are free to personally believe in either:

1.) Salvation only for water-baptized Catholics.

or

2.) Universal salvation

and not violate any dogmas of the faith.

Is this true?

For those who bicker about such things, they are missing the point. All the sacraments and dogmas and the Church are the means of salvation for the living. What happens after, we trust to God. It is not for us to judge dead people, but rather judge actions and words.

Those who try to say who goes to Heaven are missing the point (and rarely are on their way to heaven), as Jesus said to take the narrow path, rather than giving any clear cut off points. For infants, delaying baptism without need is a sin for the people responsible because they are withholding the only means of salvation we have for them and the benefits of infant baptism are known. It is up to us to do those things, and we leave the fate of the child up to God.
Reply
Quote:The Catechism of the Council of Trent does not state it like that.

Also, you say "it is clear", but it obviously not clear, even to the many learned people in the Church in history. You say "we have no reason to hope" but people have found reason to hope.

It is only clear that infant baptism is beneficial and should not be delayed and it is the only means of salvation they can receive in this world. The Church has not made any dogma about what happens after their death, and all we can do is hope as we do with all who have died.

It is was perfectly clear what the Church meant, which is why the modern Theological commission purposely changed the notion of children's limbo in their document into a "theory" rather than a "belief."  Their system can only work if Children's limbo is merely a theory rather than a certainty.
Reply
We've discussed this. Limbo is clearly the ordinary destination for man without grace, the question is whether God actually lets any otherwise personally innocent person die without grace.
Reply
Quote: A. Persons, such as infants, who have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism, cannot enter heaven;

This is the clearness I was looking for.  In theory, is it possible for a baptized Catholic to also go to limbo, or, once baptized, is heaven and hell the only options?  If they are, would a baptized Catholic who loves God very imperfectly go to a place of heaven that is much like limbo (i.e, they don't see God very well or at all, and only experience natural hapiness) or does everyone in heaven experience God fully and clearly?
Reply
7HolyCats Wrote:We've discussed this. Limbo is clearly the ordinary destination for man without grace, the question is whether God actually lets any otherwise personally innocent person die without grace.

We know that God gives every innocent person sufficient grace, but NOT efficacious grace. In an infant, there is no will to accept or reject efficacious grace.   
Reply
PeterII Wrote:In an infant, there is no will to accept or reject efficacious grace.   

How do you know?

Reply
ONeill Wrote:
PeterII Wrote:In an infant, there is no will to accept or reject efficacious grace.   

How do you know?

By definition. 
Reply
PeterII Wrote:
ONeill Wrote:
PeterII Wrote:In an infant, there is no will to accept or reject efficacious grace.   

How do you know?

By definition. 

In an infant, yes, but what about the soul of an infant?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)