human/animal hybrids
#11
(05-13-2010, 02:33 PM)Vivace Wrote: What's worse is that no one in my class could understand what the big dilemma was, and I'm in the supposed "Bible Belt" of Canada.

I didn't know we had a Bible Belt.  I suppose it's because I'm from Toronto and we don't know anything about the rest of Canada.
Reply
#12
(05-13-2010, 03:43 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(05-13-2010, 02:33 PM)Vivace Wrote: What's worse is that no one in my class could understand what the big dilemma was, and I'm in the supposed "Bible Belt" of Canada.

I didn't know we had a Bible Belt.  I suppose it's because I'm from Toronto and we don't know anything about the rest of Canada.

I meant Southern Alberta. I had never really heard us called that either, but most of my professors use that term. I guess it fits  :)
Reply
#13
(05-13-2010, 12:39 PM)The_Harlequin_King Wrote: I believe anything that has a rational soul must either be free of original sin to start with, or must have it and also have the capability to be redeemed. The only case of being "human enough to be stained by original sin but not human enough to receive baptism" I can think of is vampires, but.... well, you know. Interesting fiction, but ridiculous to talk about in real theology.

So at what point does the rational soul come in?  It's at some point before birth and possibly at conception, right?  Honestly, I wasn't even thinking this when I asked the original question, and this might be more a question for Vetus Ordo, but if anything with a rational soul is either free of original sin or has the capability of being redeemed, how does Limbo fit in with that?  Vetus, from a defined magisterial position,  is HK right in saying that to have original sin means there must also be the capability of being redeemed, or is that not entirely accurate?  If it is accurate, how would you explain this as not being a contradiction to refute limbo that I'm obviously thinking it would be?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)