Prayer for the baptism of aborted babies
#11
Quote:Please distinguish theological opinion from doctrine. Limbo is an optional belief, like apparitions.

And the other option is Hell.  The only question open to opinion is whether the unbaptized suffer the pain of sense or not.  Pope Sixtus in the bull "Effranaetum" was clear that abortion was a great crime not only because it deprived an innocent of life, but also excluded them from attaining the Beatific vision.  

The prayer for the "Baptism of aborted babies" is ambiguous in that if you are praying that they get Baptism like mentioned in the Holy Office decree, it is OK.  But if you think that saying that prayer is like administering the sacrament, you are wrong.  
Reply
#12
Quote:Please distinguish theological opinion from doctrine. Limbo is an optional belief, like apparitions.

Yet more proof Credo is a modernist.

Reply
#13
(04-23-2010, 10:50 AM)Petertherock Wrote:
Quote:Please distinguish theological opinion from doctrine. Limbo is an optional belief, like apparitions.

Yet more proof Credo is a modernist.

apparitions may be approved as credible by the Church but they are never doctrine.  limbo apparently never was, either, according to what the Pope said a year or two ago.  check the Catholic Encyclopedia, which is available at New Advent, and see what it says about apparitions and private revelations and about limbo.  it was published around 1912 or 1917 so it's not modernist in any way.

Reply
#14
(04-23-2010, 11:12 AM)i.p.i. Wrote:
(04-23-2010, 10:50 AM)Petertherock Wrote:
Quote:Please distinguish theological opinion from doctrine. Limbo is an optional belief, like apparitions.

Yet more proof Credo is a modernist.

apparitions may be approved as credible by the Church but they are never doctrine.  limbo apparently never was, either, according to what the Pope said a year or two ago.  check the Catholic Encyclopedia, which is available at New Advent, and see what it says about apparitions and private revelations and about limbo.  it was published around 1912 or 1917 so it's not modernist in any way.

I knew apparitions were never doctrine but I thought limbo was. I guess the modernists can change everything...I am sure JPII would have said Purgatory is optional if he could get away with it.

Reply
#15
(04-23-2010, 11:13 AM)Petertherock Wrote:
(04-23-2010, 11:12 AM)i.p.i. Wrote:
(04-23-2010, 10:50 AM)Petertherock Wrote:
Quote:Please distinguish theological opinion from doctrine. Limbo is an optional belief, like apparitions.

Yet more proof Credo is a modernist.

apparitions may be approved as credible by the Church but they are never doctrine.  limbo apparently never was, either, according to what the Pope said a year or two ago.  check the Catholic Encyclopedia, which is available at New Advent, and see what it says about apparitions and private revelations and about limbo.  it was published around 1912 or 1917 so it's not modernist in any way.

I knew apparitions were never doctrine but I thought limbo was. I guess the modernists can change everything...I am sure JPII would have said Purgatory is optional if he could get away with it.

But he didn't, did he? Purgatory is an established doctrine of Faith, whereas Limbo is not. Modernists didn't "change" that.  i.p.i just stated that the Encyclopedia he told you to look up was from the  early 1900's. How is that modernist??
And I don't think that makes Credo a modernist at all. I agree with him.
Reply
#16
(04-23-2010, 02:39 AM)JamieF Wrote: The can of worms it opens?  If you can get an aborted baby saved through baptism before it is born, it renders anti-abortion useless as the main reason to protest against it is the fact that the baby spends eternity in limbo and never gets to see the sight of God.  That is more important than the murder sin of the mother and doctor.

Secondly, if God would ad hoc baptize babies that are going to be aborted, why can't he just do it to the whole human race?  It makes baptism seem like an unnecessary innovation.

Original sin infects the soul from the moment of conception - all babies who die before baptism go to limbo - the upper level of hell.  They have no hope of salvation.

I'm sorry, your response is just moronic.  It might be worse for an aborted baby to go to limbo than be murdered, but if the only reason you oppose abortion is because the child won't go to heaven, I fear your own soul may already be forfeit.  That is a completely ass backwards theological viewpoint.  People aren't protesting abortion because the child might not have a chance of going to heaven.  They are protesting because it is MURDER.  THIS is the main reason to protest against it.

The reason why he can't just do it to the whole human race is because the rest of us have the choice to choose for him or against him.  I was asking my priest, a very traditional one, about how could God send someone to hell for trying to be happy.  His response was that hell is necessary for the simple fact that it is the logical conclusion of choosing against God.  If we are free to choose for or against God, hell is a logical necessity.  So, it seems logical then that, since aborted babies are given no choice for or against God, they can't be sent to hell because they were never given a choice.  Hell is not a punishment.  It is a choice each of us make.

We absolutely do not know what happens to unbaptized babies when we die.  You have no way of knowing that God doesn't make a way possible.  In fact, I dare say you reject the Gospel by believing in a god who WOULDN"T make a way possible.  God is a loving father, remember the prodical son?  So you believe in a God that would run to meet his son that was returning to him, but he'd strain out a gnat and not allow an aborted baby into heaven for no other reason than he was physically prevented by someone else from being baptized.  You have killed the spirit of the law by desiring to stick to its every last iota.  Your soul is in greater danger now than the soul of any aborted baby.
Reply
#17
Melkite Wrote:In fact, I dare say you reject the Gospel by believing in a god who WOULDN"T make a way possible.

Humani Generis - On false opinions threatening to undermine the foundation of Catholic doctrine Wrote:Others destroy the gratuity of the supernatural order, since God, they say, cannot create intellectual beings without ordering and calling them to the beatific vision.
Reply
#18

there are many articles online citing this same report from 2007.  here's part of one from
April 21, 2007:


Limbo has been in limbo for quite some time, but is now on its way to extinction.

A Vatican committee that spent years examining the medieval concept published a much-anticipated report Friday, concluding that unbaptized babies who die may go to heaven.

That could reverse centuries of Roman Catholic traditional belief that the souls of unbaptized babies are condemned to eternity in limbo, a place that is neither heaven nor hell. Limbo is not unpleasant, but it is not a seat alongside God.

Catholic doctrine states that because all humans are tainted by original sin, thanks to Adam and Eve, baptism is essential for salvation. But the idea of limbo has fallen out of favor for many Catholics, who see it as harsh and not befitting a merciful God.

The Vatican's International Theological Commission issued its findings -- with the approval of Pope Benedict XVI -- in a document published by the Catholic News Service, the news agency of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. The commission is advisory, but the pope's endorsement of the document appears to indicate his acceptance of its findings.

Limbo, the commission said, "reflects an unduly restrictive view of salvation."

"Our conclusion," the panel said in its 41-page report, is that there are "serious theological and liturgical grounds for hope that unbaptized infants who die will be saved and brought into eternal happiness." The committee added that although this is not "sure knowledge," it comes in the context of a loving and just God who "wants all human beings to be saved."


A church decision to abolish limbo has long been expected. Benedict and his predecessor, the late Pope John Paul II, expressed misgivings about the concept. Benedict, when he was still Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and the church's top enforcer of dogma, said he viewed limbo as a mere "theological hypothesis." Never part of formal doctrine because it does not appear in Scripture, limbo was removed from the Catholic catechism 15 years ago.

From the Latin "limbus," for hem or edge, limbo refers to a "state of natural happiness" outside heaven, a destination for the souls of babies who were not baptized and certain virtuous people, such as faithful Jews who lived before the time of Christ.

In the 5th century, St. Augustine declared that all unbaptized babies went to hell upon death. By the Middle Ages, the idea was softened to suggest a less severe fate, limbo.



Baptism with water remains a fundamental step to salvation in Catholic doctrine, and the new document urges parents to continue to baptize their children.

"There is no salvation which is not from Christ and ecclesial by its very nature," the report said.




http://articles.latimes.com/2007/apr/21/...fg-limbo21

although i always accepted the idea that our child who died before birth was in Limbo, i think it is logical that God's mercy would save babies who died before birth and thus couldn't be baptized.  remember the parables of Jesus: the shepherd who searches for the one lost sheep, the man who kills the fatted calf to celebrate the homecoming of his prodigal son, who squandered his inheritance in sin and returned to beg to work with his father's pigs.  if the sinful prodigal son could be welcomed home, why not the soul of a baby who died with nothing but original sin?

of course this allows for the salvation of babies who are aborted but i don't see anything wrong with that as the babies didn't choose to be aborted or unbaptized.  a woman willing to kill her unborn child was unlikely to be stopped by the fear that he will go to Limbo instead of Heaven since Limbo was always seen as a place of perfect happiness, with the exception that those in Limbo could not see God. 

i also read that in Africa many babies born to Catholic parents die before they can be baptized.  there is high infant mortality and perhaps a shortage of priests, though of course any baptized Christian can baptize in an emergency.  perhaps Africans will only accept baptism by a priest.  Cardinal Levada was quoted in another article as saying that many babies are not baptized today.  it wasn't clear if he was speaking specifically of Catholic babies, but the report urged Catholic parents to baptize their children.  a conservative Catholic was quoted as saying that this report brings Catholics closer to Protestants but mainstream Protestants have always baptized infants because those churches are derived from the Catholic Church.  it is only the Baptists, Disciples of Christ, and others outside the mainstream who require children to be old enough to choose baptism for themselves and i believe they have to be in their early teens at least.
Reply
#19
(04-23-2010, 02:39 AM)JamieF Wrote:
(04-23-2010, 12:45 AM)Melkite Wrote: what's wrong with it?

The can of worms it opens?  If you can get an aborted baby saved through baptism before it is born, it renders anti-abortion useless as the main reason to protest against it is the fact that the baby spends eternity in limbo and never gets to see the sight of God.  That is more important than the murder sin of the mother and doctor.

Secondly, if God would ad hoc baptize babies that are going to be aborted, why can't he just do it to the whole human race?  It makes baptism seem like an unnecessary innovation.

Original sin infects the soul from the moment of conception - all babies who die before baptism go to limbo - the upper level of hell.  They have no hope of salvation.
This is a hard but necessary truth.
Reply
#20
(04-23-2010, 01:23 AM)i.p.i. Wrote: do a search for the recent thread on healing the family tree.  the baptizing of miscarried babies was discussed in that thread.  some people toss holy water into the air in an attempt to baptize babies that were miscarried.  it doesn't hurt anybody but it doesn't work, either.

we lost an unborn baby so i know firsthand the pain parents feel and the need for some type of ritual but you can't baptize the dead.  that's a mormon thing.  you can give the lost child a name and pray for him or her and it seems to me that the Church should have some sort of blessing for parents who've been through this, sort of like the churching of women after childbirth but involving the father, too. 

i don't even know what the Church says today about babies who die in the womb.  do they go to Heaven?  does original sin begin with birth or in the womb?  the Pope talked about limbo not existing a couple of years ago and people got upset that aborted babies would go to Heaven.  i don't know why they shouldn't, they certainly didn't choose to be murdered. 

i would like to know, where is my child?  limbo is OK by me, Heaven is better, but i want to know our baby didn't go to hell for dying before he was born and could be baptized.  that makes no sense and i don't believe God is cruel.  he'd be 31 now if he'd lived, though St. Augustine says everyone is 37 in Heaven, so i'm hoping Nicholas Elias is 37. 
Where ever he is, I trust that Nicholas Elias is perfectly happy.  :)  :pray2:

http://www.audiosancto.org/sermon/200704...Limbo.html



Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)