Prayer for the baptism of aborted babies
#31
(04-24-2010, 04:13 PM)Clare Wrote: People who point out that Limbo has never been defined, ignore the fact that it is de fide that infants who die unbaptised are deprived of the Beatific Vision.

First Limbo is Hell--the "edge" of Hell, simply without torments due to actual sins. Second, replace "unbaptized" with "in original sin" in your statement. It is de fide that those souls who die in original sin only go to a state without the beatific vision, but without actual torments. It is not heresy to assert other possible ways original sin can be cleansed. Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma lists other possibilities, one of which is reflected in Fr. Martin's prayer posted earlier.
Reply
#32
(04-24-2010, 04:35 PM)SaintSebastian Wrote:
(04-24-2010, 04:13 PM)Clare Wrote: People who point out that Limbo has never been defined, ignore the fact that it is de fide that infants who die unbaptised are deprived of the Beatific Vision.

First Limbo is Hell--the "edge" of Hell, simply without torments due to actual sins.

Yes, that's why I said that the alternative to Limbo is suffering in Hell. Limbo is basically Hell without the suffering.

Quote:Second, replace "unbaptized" with "in original sin" in your statement. It is de fide that those souls who die in original sin only go to a state without the beatific vision, but without actual torments. It is not heresy to assert other possible ways original sin can be cleansed. Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma lists other possibilities, one of which is reflected in Fr. Martin's prayer posted earlier.

I'd be quite happy if that were the case, but we cannot count on it, or else people will get lax about baptising.
Reply
#33
(04-24-2010, 04:59 PM)Clare Wrote:
Quote:Second, replace "unbaptized" with "in original sin" in your statement. It is de fide that those souls who die in original sin only go to a state without the beatific vision, but without actual torments. It is not heresy to assert other possible ways original sin can be cleansed. Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma lists other possibilities, one of which is reflected in Fr. Martin's prayer posted earlier.

I'd be quite happy if that were the case, but we cannot count on it, or else people will get lax about baptising.
I think there are other ways to explain the importance of baptizing that do not leave parents of still-born and miscarried children in even greater pain.  People who have to deal with the loss of a child should be given hope for the eternal fate of their child.  I liked the way Jacafamala put it.  These children are happy wherever they are. 

And all of us deal with the tragedy of abortion.  Millions of children are being killed.
Reply
#34
(04-24-2010, 11:20 AM)Larry Wrote: Even in some good Moral and Sacramental Theology books from the pre conciliar era, some theologians of unimpeachable orthodoxy held out hope for the salvation of unbaptized infants, especially to those who were the offspring of devout Christian parents. I believe that the book Outline of Moral Theology by Francis O'Connell considers this a common opinion(the book was in print from Roger McCaffrey's Roman Catholic Books imprint; I don't know if it still is).

Fr. Malachi Martin penned this prayer sometime in the 1970's. I try to say it daily:

"Lord Jesus, through the hands of Your Immaculate Mother, I offer you all my thoughts, words and actions today for all of the intentions of Your Most Sacred Heart. I especially offer you all of the acts of faith in You, and in Your Love, which I perform in order to obtain from Your Sacred Heart the grace of baptism for all of the innocent babies who will be murdered this day by abortion. Because their own fathers and mothers will violently refuse them life, and thus refuse to stand before Thee as guarantors of their babies faith in you, accept me as the spiritual father/mother of those babies. And accept my faith as a guarantee of these babies desire to be with You forever. Thus having been killed most cruelly, they may be admitted into your presence as sinless martyrs attesting to the truth of your love and your salvation. I ask this for Your Holy Name's sake. Amen."

Any errors in grammar are mine, not Fr. Martin's. I recite from memory; I no longer know what happened to the printed text I used to have.

that's a great prayer.  thanks for posting.


Reply
#35
(04-23-2010, 09:48 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(04-23-2010, 07:59 PM)voxpopulisuxx Wrote: The whole thing is tied up with original sin. Is the Stain of Original sin enough to keep one out of heaven? The Church has dogmatically affirm this to be true, ipso facto the poor children do not see heaven. I too lost a child and this is hard truth, but The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away, Praise be the Lord...end of debate. We all want there to be a different answer, but Gods ways are not our ways, and His reasoning is not ours. The horror of abortion is that it kills twice. The horror of original sin is that children lost with out baptism are beyond human hope of salvation. In the end the only answer well get to this one is from God himself if we make it to Heaven.

I'm very sorry for your loss, but it just cannot be known what God will do.  The Church has NOT dogmatically proclaimed that it is impossible for an unbaptized infant to go to heaven.  The only thing we can know is that baptism is ordinarily necessary.  Is it possible that God will allow unbaptized infants to be kept out of heaven?  Sure, it's possible, we don't know.  It is also possible that God makes another way possible for them since they had no other chance.  To suggest that no other way is possible is to bind God's hands, not permitting him to work outside of the law he made for us.  We are bound by his law; he is not.  Fortunately, children who die before baptism are not beyond human hope of salvation, and I am very sorry for you, both because I can't imagine how unbelievably hard it must be to despair of your own child's salvation, and also because you suffer such despair needlessly.  You can't possibly know that God definitively refuses to make a way possible, and since you can't know that, there is always still hope.  You're Ruthenian.  What is the authentic Byzantine tradition on this?
thanks for the compassion but I don't suffer because I accept Gods justice.
Original sin is dogmatic
ipso anyone with the stain of it does not enterheaven...since baptism is the only revealed method to clense us I cannot see any alternative accept a pius hope
Reply
#36
Fr. Martin was clever enough to ask that the aborted babies be received as "martyrs" since it would be Calvinism to assert otherwise.  Original sin can be remitted through martyrdom which acts in a quasi ex opere operato manner.  And while it is possible that some babies may have been aborted in witness to the Catholic faith, the reality is that most babies are simply aborted for convenience sake, and not out of hatred for Catholicism.  Also, this wouldn't apply to the souls of miscarried babies. 

The conclusions of the ITC document (which is not magisterial) are ridiculous since it itself admits that Limbo was common teaching until the mid 20th century.  If these new contradictory hopes are not modernism, then what is?
Reply
#37
(04-25-2010, 04:17 PM)voxpopulisuxx Wrote: thanks for the compassion but I don't suffer because I accept Gods justice.
Original sin is dogmatic
ipso anyone with the stain of it does not enterheaven...since baptism is the only revealed method to clense us I cannot see any alternative accept a pius hope

Original sin is dogmatic but what is not is that God can't cleanse it after death.  Baptism is the only revealed method to cleanse it.  To suggest that because it is the only revealed method, there is no other method is an assumption, not a revealed truth.  Why do you see it as impossible that God would cleanse a child who had no chance of baptism?  We can't know that he does do it, but we can't know that he does not do it either.  I imagine the reason it is not revealed is because we don't need to know.  Whether an aborted or unbaptized baby is cleansed without baptism or not, is about as much to us as whether St. John would live until the second coming.  It's a fallacy to assume that because no other method has been revealed to us, therefore no other method exists.

(04-25-2010, 06:59 PM)PeterII Wrote: Fr. Martin was clever enough to ask that the aborted babies be received as "martyrs" since it would be Calvinism to assert otherwise.  Original sin can be remitted through martyrdom which acts in a quasi ex opere operato manner.  And while it is possible that some babies may have been aborted in witness to the Catholic faith, the reality is that most babies are simply aborted for convenience sake, and not out of hatred for Catholicism.   Also, this wouldn't apply to the souls of miscarried babies. 

So God could possible save those who die for the sake of the Catholic Faith, but couldn't possibly save those murdered for conveniences sake?  Sorry, this line of reasoning is the same as "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"  If what you are saying is true, then the whole concept of children's limbo is nothing more than scholasticism run amock.  Plain and simple.
Reply
#38
Petertherock Wrote:The only happy memory of JPII is when Benedict XVI became the next Pope.

That was uncalled for.

As you're not aware of such protocol, it is customary to refer to a recently dead pope's time in office as a time of "happy memory," even if the guy was a blackguard.
Reply
#39
Quote:So God could possible save those who die for the sake of the Catholic Faith, but couldn't possibly save those murdered for conveniences sake?  Sorry, this line of reasoning is the same as "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"  If what you are saying is true, then the whole concept of children's limbo is nothing more than scholasticism run amock.  Plain and simple.

God can do whatever He wills, and has made His will manifest in the doctrines of the Church.  What is running amuck these days are modernist errors based on sentimentality.  Desiring that others are immaculately conceived, or hoping that God has a way to make women priests does not make it so.  Water Baptism is a necessity of means to those incapable of receiving a precept, and that is common teaching that will never change.  You can't contradict God's law. 
Reply
#40
(04-25-2010, 08:03 PM)Credo Wrote: As you're not aware of such protocol, it is customary to refer to a recently dead pope's time in office as a time of "happy memory," even if the guy was a blackguard.

It's also customary for the Pope to wear the Tiara.  Customs are not traditions, even lower case ones.

Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)