Replies

The media always tries to make mischief for the Church on these issues. I have no idea what Pope Benedict will actually decide.

Off the top of my head, I don't think it was a burning issue. Why not just leave it alone? There are plenty of more urgent concerns at the moment.

The media always tries to make mischief for the Church on these issues.

The church can only make trouble for itself. As it stands, the Catholic church has no problem with evolution, so, there's no problem. Should they change their mind, there's a problem.

Why not just leave it alone? There are plenty of more urgent concerns at the moment.

Good point. And if the rest of the Christian denominations would decide the same as the Catholic church, then the conflict between faith and science is over.

Unfortunatly, some people make money from the conflict, so the problem is likely not going away.

Off the top of my head, I don't think it was a burning issue. Why not just leave it alone? There are plenty of more urgent concerns at the moment.

I'd say it is one of the most fundamental concerns because it involves the fate of a human soul after death. At its crux, the problem is that the unbaptized child cannot form the intent to benefit from the doctrine of baptism by desire. On the flip-side, though, is the fact that the child also cannot form the intent to sin. Thus, the child cannot enter Heaven because he has not been born again through the Sacrament of Baptism, but the child cannot be damned because he never made a decision to reject a state of grace.

I would argue for the organic growth of the doctrine of baptism by desire: if the parents of the child could reasonably have been expected to ask for baptism, then the child should benefit from baptism by desire. If the parents could reasonably have been expected to not ask for baptism, then I would argue that the child's soul would exist in a joyous state such as limbo.