Posted on 02/28/2008 6:25:40 AM PST by Manfred the Wonder Dawg
ROMAN CATHOLICISM: A DIFFERENT GOSPEL
In their lust for unity the Emergent Church and post-evangelical “Protestants” are right now embracing the Roman Catholic Church as another Christian denomination. But the issue is simple: If, as taught the Church of Rome, no one can enter the Kingdom of God without “the new birth in baptism” then we are now in hopeless contradiction with the Gospel contained in Holy Scripture.
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:8)
Speaking The Truth In Love
Let me make this as clear as I possibly can for the Roman Catholics who may read this work in Christ from Apprising Ministries. I personally am former member of the Church of Rome and care very deeply about those, such as the majority of my own family line, who are trapped in this apostate man-made system of religion known as Roman Catholicism. I also fully realize that what I say may sound “unloving” and possibly even “harsh.” However, there is just nothing that I can do about that. By not telling the Truth we aren’t doing anyone a service.
(Excerpt) Read more at apprising.org ...
The Catholic Church's position on this matter is that the issue cannot be defined as dogma one way or the other, since it is not part of the Deposit of Faith. Therefore, the Church doesn't have the ability to make a definitive statement. BTW: as an aside, at least this unwillingness to "create doctrine" without anything like a divine mandate should show you that the Church doesn't "just make things up out of wholecloth," as is often alleged!
Anyway, to fill in the obvious vacuum here, there have been several theories advanced over the years. One, quite rarely held these days, championed by St. Augustine, is simply that these infants are damned. Another, much more common today, is that the souls of infants can be given some kind of illumination and can make a choice, based on that, for God or no. Under these conditions, something like Baptism of Desire is achieved for those who accept God. The third option is probably the best-known and has had a very long pedigree. That is that infants who die without baptism go to a place of natural happiness, but are deprived of the Beatific Vision (actual presence before God in Heaven). This state is commonly known as "Limbo." It is sometimes considered to be the least punitive level of Hell, while others see it as separate. In any case, since the infants, and other small children, who haven't attained the age of reason at death haven't committed any personal sins, they are not punished with the physical pains of Hell as described by Jesus. To the extent that they're punished at all, it is through the knowledge of their eternal loss of the vision of God.
Those are the three main theories. There are some permutations of them, but you see the basic idea. Personally, I lean toward the Limbo theory myself, though it is not so much in favor, these days, and both JPII and Benedict seem to have opted away from it. But, since all of these theories are just opinions, anyway, a Catholic is free to hold to any one of them in good conscience. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church says (1261), all we can do in this scenario is "entrust them to the mercy of God, as she [the Church] does in her funeral rites for them."
Well there is an answer.Be in constant prayer:)I once read about a Saint who had a broken grandfather clock.The only thing it did was chime ever 15 minutes.People would ask him why do you keep it.He said to remind me to pray.The holiest man I ever met was a non-catholic.He gave up everything to help the homeless.He told me he had a dream that we would met 3 times.Sure enough it was 3 times.The last time I saw him we gave him all the left over food from a luncheon for his homeless shelter.It was like a treasure to him.That was the last time I saw him.
“That is that infants who die without baptism go to a place of natural happiness, but are deprived of the Beatific Vision (actual presence before God in Heaven). This state is commonly known as “Limbo.”
I have a hard time with that theory when David says “He cannot come to me but I will go to him”. But as sandyeggo said, “the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God,”.
I grant that the area is a difficult one. In the end, only God knows, and we won’t find out till after our own individual deaths.
“I grant that the area is a difficult one.”
Interesting how much time we spend speculating rather than doing, and usually, that’s where the heated arguments come from.
Deut. 29:29, “The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.”
Hey me too! We're a Catholic Jurassic Park here! ;D
Indeed, it is quite interesting! Though I would say, from the Catholic perspective, anyway, that most of the topics “discussed” are less speculative than this one. Regarding this matter of the salvation of unbaptized infants and little children, we simply have no “definitive” answer, unfortunately.
Yep! Just a couple of dinosaurs! But, in general, apart from things like Limbo that can’t be defined anyway, I suspect that we dinosaurs are coming back into “our day”! And, unlike the dinos in Jurassic Park, we don’t even need highly manipulative genetics to do it!
Benedikt: Gott Geschickt!
That's certainly your prerogative. Though one thing that may make it easier to believe is thinking of where Abraham and the other patriarchs were before Christ opened heaven. The "bosom of Abraham" is traditionally thought of as a kind of limbo.
Granted, it's a different case than we're discussing here, but at least it shows that the idea of a kind of middle place is not alien to Christianity.
ya beat me to it! ;)
I thank God for you, too, dear brother in Christ!
I'm still shocked that someone can post a thread and bash the Catholic religion right in the title, and get away with it. Makes me look at FR in a new way.
So, Catholic bashing is allowed here. And someone can deliberately start a fight (er, uh, thread).
What use is a religion moderator if 'anything goes'?
I'm sure you will find others here willing to engage your question, but I am not one of them.
But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all [men], apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And [that] they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will. – 2 Timothy 2:23-26
This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. – I John 1:5-7
But anti-[pick a belief] threads are allowed as long as they are open threads so they can rebutted and as long as they don't cross the line into hate mongering (Jack Chick et al.)
For guidelines pertaining to the Religion Forum, click on my profile page.
With all due respect, if the “bashing” bothers you then this kind of thread may be more trouble than it is worth for you.
I like threads like this. Gives me a chance to spout off. ;)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.