Posted on 01/18/2011 4:31:08 PM PST by stfassisi
“”The “Dogmatic Constitution” title, is just a title””
Nonsense!You’re following in the footsteps of Feeney and not what the Church says
“”unbaptized child will not go to heaven. It is the NEVER contested consensus of the Fathers””
It’s not the consensus of the fathers,ver,it came out Saint Augustine,the consensus leaves salvation of infants who die in the hands of God. To my knowledge the Orthodox believe the same.
I’m pinging Kolo to the Orthodox view of this so others can see it.
I’m in hope you can control yourself and be kind to him if he decides to respond?
You are just winging it. In the matter of infant baptism, I have dogma, councils, Fathers, doctors, popes on my side. You are just being obdurate. This is basic stuff.
Yes, all Latin Church dogmas, councils, Fathers, doctors and popes. And what they came up with in the Middle Ages, indeed what they were compelled to come up with, is as a direct result of Blessed Augustine's inability to understand the Greek of +Paul in Romans 5:12. The final four words of that passage, were translated into Latin as "in quo omnes peccaverunt" (in whom (meaning Adam) all men have sinned) which is what Blessed Augustine was using. In the original Greek it says "...ἐφ' ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον" (because all men have sinned). The problem is that "ἐφ' ᾧ " means, here, "because" not "in quo", in whom (referring back to Adam). This mistranslation and Blessed Augustine's fight with Pelagius, caused 1600 years of error in the West about ancestral sin. To the extent that the Latin Church dogmas, councils, Fathers, doctors and popes followed Augustine's notion which arose out of his ignorance of Greek, they have all been in error. What this all leads to, among other things, is what was the consensus patrum about what happens to the souls of unbaptized infants after death...which to all intents and purposes is a collective "We don't know; trust God".
So far as I can tell, this was never much of an issue outside of the Latin Church because the Eastern Fathers understood ancestral sin differently from Blessed Augustine's erroneous notion born of his inability to read Greek, or at least read it well. +Gregory of Nyssa did write on the subject but concluded that we must leave the salvation of this infants up to God. His writing, On Infants’ Early Deaths, doesn't speculate on what happens save to say that it is all within God's Providence. +Anastasios of Sinai likewise leaves the salvific fate of these children to God and does not speculate where they end up. In any event, this is a subject upon which, as the Vatican has noted, "It would not be fitting to probe God’s judgments with one's hands'. . . ."
As I said, this simply isn't an issue in the East because, a) our understanding of ancestral sin is different from that of the Church of Rome and b) we tend to accept that there are matters like this one which are beyond our understanding and totally up to God.
Pathetic. Well what did you expect stfassisi when you go outside of the Church to learn the faith? This man does not believe in papal infallibity, therefore, all the dogmas are man made to him. So, he read somewhere that the root of everything is a “St. Augustine’s mistranslation of Greek”. Amazing! If he was a Protestant he’d be laughed off this thread, but, because he is something exotic of which Americans know nothing about, he is given a free pass.
“In the country of blind men, the one eyed man is a king”.
“In the country of blind men, the one eyed man is a king”.
Indeed I do not. There were a number of popes who didn't either, +John XXII for example called it a doctrine inspired by the "Father of Lies" but that is of course off topic.
"...therefore, all the dogmas are man made to him.""
Are the popes all automotons mouthing the very words of God when a dogma is proclaimed by them sua sponte? How Mohammedan of you! Is this the latest from the sede vacantist crowd?
"So, he read somewhere that the root of everything is a “St. Augustine’s mistranslation of Greek”. Amazing! If he was a Protestant he’d be laughed off this thread, but, because he is something exotic of which Americans know nothing about, he is given a free pass."
I take it you can't read Greek either. That's a shame, but not in the least bit a surprise.
I take it you can't read Greek either. That's a shame, but not in the least bit a surprise.
The assumption, that you quoted from some article, to the effect that a Catholic dogma has it's root in a mistranslation by one person back 1500 years ago, has been brought up by millions before you among the Protestants. That is what I meant in what i wrote above.
Let me add that Orthodox groups are hollowed out, they're dead, they have nothing, all you have left are critiques against the absolute truths the Catholic Church has preserved ALIVE. You are just another Protestant that thinks he "cracked the code". Once the people on FR figure that out, your gig is up.
Enjoy your status as a guru on FR while it lasts.
What I wrote was quite clear:
“”The dogmatically decreed fate of the unbaptized infants, eternal life in paradise without the beatific vision, is better than had that fetus been allowed to grow up and end up in Hell by his sinful life.””
I was showing you how I can see God's mercy in the dogma that unbaptized infants will have eternal life in paradise without suffering, BUT they will not have the beatific vision.
I gather that you, on the other hand, see absolutely no mercy in the dogma. OK, then let me analyze your theory, that aborted children go straight to heaven (which by the way you have not provided ONE clear magisterial quote that says they go to heaven, all you've provided is that "we entrust them to God's mercy".):
If people through the ages had believed what you write, that aborted children go straight to heaven, what do you think this world would be like today? People sacrifice their own lives for the sake of country. In many religious systems, people committed (commit) suicide for the sake of a future paradise. If the Catholic Church had taught that aborted infants go straight to heaven, as you teach, abortion would have become a heroic sacrifice by the parents.
Your sentimental theology is not very well thought out. But that's your problem, you are trying to invent your own religion. Save your time, the Holy Ghost has already revealed the truth on the matter, his dogmas on the fate of the unbaptized infants.
Ver-””If people through the ages had believed what you write, that aborted children go straight to heaven, what do you think this world would be like today? People sacrifice their own lives for the sake of country. In many religious systems, people committed (commit) suicide for the sake of a future paradise. If the Catholic Church had taught that aborted infants go straight to heaven, as you teach, abortion would have become a heroic sacrifice by the parents.””
What Nonsense!The Salvation if the infants is left in the hands of God so they would not know for sure
Also,people who knowingly commit abortion while knowing the Church teachings would be committing virtual suicide to their own Salvation in the scenario you wrote
Ver-””Your sentimental theology is not very well thought out.””
You denying aborted infants heaven is not well thought out since we don’t know for sure
Still can't read Greek, can you! Well, vd, in fact I know about this from studying theology a very long time ago. There may be articles about this; I don't know. I do know what the Greek says and what the Latin says are two very different things. I am surprised, however, that Protestants would bring up this linguistic problem since they accept the Augustinian notion of Original Sin as doctrine...just like your filioque "dogma".
"You are just another Protestant that thinks he "cracked the code"."
My Metropolitan would be surprised to hear that I am a Protestant. In fact, so would a certain Cardinal Archbishop and all the Protestants on FR! Hey, wf, this sede vacantist thinks I'm one of you guys!
"Enjoy your status as a guru on FR while it lasts."
Guru? I am merely the simple grandson of simple Greek peasants and the first among sinners, vd.
If you& They don't know for sure, then why do you/they keep saying that unbaptized infants go to heaven?
The tactic behind the FALLIBLE Vatican II nouvelle teaching that "we leave it to the mercy of God", is precisely to counter the dogma, without saying so. You yourself have consistently said that they go to heaven, and that is precisely what all the dumbed down Catholics of today believe, that unbaptized infants all go to heaven. Therefore, your above comment is irrelevant, since the people are given the impression that the only bad is murder, which is not an eternal punishment.
Mankind is paying for the sin of Adam to this day. What did we do to deserve that? Yet there it is. No different than the blameless aborted infant. I suppose you also don't believe in the punishments for original sin?
re:You denying aborted infants heaven is not well thought out since we don’t know for sure
It is not I who deny, but all of Church tradition, and DOGMA. You are just winging it. You know nothing about the subject. You don't bother studying anything, you are just learning from others by having your childish comments corrected. That is no way to learn truth. Get off your butt and do some real research, instead of playing these games. You'll rarely learn truth that way, and if and ever you do hear the truth, you won't hold on to it for very long.
I have 5 children under the age of 8, I'm sorry, but, I don't have any more time to answer any more of your comments.
Do real research, rather than prodding people with whatever pops into your head, to see if they'll teach you by correction with good sources.
God Bless,
The matter is of prime importance to eternal salvation, and yet you say "There may be articles about this; I don't know". Your comment is a perfect example of your belief system being hollow and empty and just a reaction to Catholicism. There "may be articles out there".
If a Catholic said the same thing about original sin, "I know about this from studying theology... There may be articles about this; I don't know.", he would be laughed out of FR.
As I said, this has never been much of an issue in the East, certainly not one of "prime importance to eternal salvation".
"If a Catholic said the same thing about original sin, "I know about this from studying theology... There may be articles about this; I don't know.", he would be laughed out of FR."
And yet when I say such a thing, I'm not. Why do you suppose that is, vd?
That's just an excuse for sticking ones head in the sand. What that translates to in the West is "we never did any further inquiry into anything after we separated from Rome". That's why I said; all the Orthodox churches are hollow and dead. Just a bunch of fat bearded clergy making a living off the niche they created in their countries.
It is? vd, during the millennium that the Bishop of Rome remained in communion with the other Patriarchs of The Church, just how many Ecumenical Councils were held in the West? Just how many dogmas were proclaimed in the West? None, right? And of those dogmas which were proclaimed, how many does the East no longer recognize? None, right? But in the West, you deny the proper procession of the Holy Spirit in derogation of the proclamation of the God bearing Fathers of the 2nd Ecumenical Council. Your "dogma" of the Immaculate Conception denies the dual nature of Christ and makes a mockery of the dogma proclaimed by the God bearing Fathers of the Council of Chalcedon. I suggest, vd, that your belief system makes a mockery of the dogmas of The Church.
BTW, vd, I'm not seeing all sorts of support for your Feeneyite theology from the Latins around here. In fact, I'm not even hearing crickets chirping! Could it be that they see Feeney the way most members of The Church who know anything about him do, as a miserable, vicious, anti Semite and a disobedient old man?
"People know that, so, they don't bother going any further, it's just your opinion. They say “whatever”."
Can I attribute that witty and pithy observation to you personally, young man? :)
You just confirmed what I wrote:,p> "What that translates to in the West is "we never did any further inquiry into anything after we separated from Rome".
The inquiring, the life of the East died in the 9th century.
re: I'm not seeing all sorts of support for your Feeneyite theology from the Latins around here
All I've posted on this thread is Catholic dogma,the fathers, popes, councils. You yourself confirmed that it is the Catholic Church's teaching. AND By the way, as I posted on the very first posting on this thread:
"There are followers of Fr. Feeney who run mass centers all over the USA (most offer the Traditional Latin Mass, but there are some that even offer the Novus Ordo), all approved by the local bishops and Rome. Thus, Rome, considers their interpretation of EENS "as it is written" to be Catholic. Rome does not call them heretics or schismatics, therefore, anyone that does, is actually putting their own personal prejudices and opinions above the Vatican authorities, and the pope".
Look, I could care less about your religion, and the million others like it. I have the truth, I don't need to seek outside of the Catholic Church. Now, I can not comprehend why you would feel a need to comment on these intricate details of Catholicism?
Because I was asked to, v. But beyond that, it is particularly important that we Orthodox come as close as possible to understanding just who or what might be coming along with the Bishop of Rome if he comes into communion with the hierarchs of The Church in the East. Your comments, representative as they are of at least a segment of Roman Catholicism (rather like the other segments which promote clown masses, gay masses and nuns in pantsuits) confirm some of what many Orthodox laymen and monastics and clergy have been saying about the Church of Rome for a long time now, namely that any talk of reunion with Rome is unacceptable nonsense. That's ironic, actually, since the dialog we were called to by JPII, and subsequently by BXVI, and the EP, was supposed to accomplish the exact opposite. Now, that said, tomorrow a number of RCIA students and their teachers will be attending the Divine Liturgy at our parish so they can learn about the development of the Liturgy and see how The Church in the East has worshiped for the past 1600+ years. The local Latin Ordinary feels this is very important for your converts to learn. Another irony, eh v, your converts attending a "hollow" liturgy in a "dead" church on orders of the Roman Catholic bishop?
I do know what the Boss said about it, and nothing is more clear: “Whoever welcomes a child like this in my name welcomes me…For I tell you that their angels in Heaven always see the face of my Father in Heaven” Matthew 18: 5, 10
Ver-””The dogmatically decreed fate of the unbaptized infants””
If this is complete Dogma than why do you think the Church put together a Theological commission in 2007 from the following Vatican document?It’s because the door is quite possibly open to heaven for babies who die before baptism and is not a shut case as you say it is.This is subject to the mercy of God
THE HOPE OF SALVATION FOR INFANTS
WHO DIE WITHOUT BEING BAPTISED
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html
Excerpts
In these times, the number of infants who die unbaptised is growing greatly. This is partly because of parents, influenced by cultural relativism and religious pluralism, who are non-practising, but it is also partly a consequence of in vitro fertilisation and abortion. Given these developments, the question of the destiny of such infants is raised with new urgency. In such a situation, the ways by which salvation may be achieved appear ever more complex and problematic. The Church, faithful guardian of the way of salvation, knows that salvation can be achieved only in Christ, by the Holy Spirit.
Rather, the Catechism teaches that infants who die without baptism are entrusted by the Church to the mercy of God
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.