continued...

Also in CCC1260 it states "Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved." Now babies can not reason, they are ignorant of the Gospel, Christ & His Church, they seek the truth in their own way & to the degree they can by being curious babies - or processing the sensory stimulations around them and collecting information received from stimuli. We know by definition that human life begins from conception, so they are fully human and are doing God's will for them by simply being babies or unborn children doing what babies or unborn children do as well as tehy can "understand" it. "understand" is a very vague word, and a lot can fall under this. The church says the age of reason is around 7, but what about retarded people who live to be 40, are never baptized, and follow what they in their "understanding" think to be right?

Then there is abortion. Could this constitute baptism of blood since they are being killed out of selfishness and rejection of love, and ultimately rejection of God? Are they not wittnesses and victims of the selfish denial of God?

Perhaps I am wrong, but I would like to think that God in his infinite love, mercy and wisdom would not hold original sin aganist an innocent who didn't have the chance to either reject or accept Baptism. If parents can stand in for the consent of an infant, then why can't these situations I have mentioned be caouse for baptism of desire or blood?

Joe

-- Joseph Carl Biltz (jcbiltz@canoemail.com), January 15, 2003

Answers

Baltimore Catechism #3, Question #632:

Q. Where will persons go who -- such as infants -- have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism?

A. Persons, such as infants, who have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism, cannot enter heaven; but it is the common belief they will go to some place similar to Limbo, where they will be free from suffering, though deprived of the happiness of heaven.

Q. 651. What is Baptism of blood?

A. Baptism of blood is the shedding of one's blood for the faith of Christ.

Q. 652. What is the baptism of blood most commonly called? A. The baptism of blood is most commonly called martyrdom, and those who receive it are called martyrs. It is the death one patiently suffers from the enemies of our religion, rather than give up Catholic faith or virtue. We must not seek martyrdom, though we must endure it when it comes.

So, it seems that Baptism of Blood does not apply to the aborted, since the faith was never theirs in the first place. Even though their lives were taken from them, I don't think it can be reasonably argued that they die in defense of the Faith. If one or both parents is slaughtering their own child by abortion, I would say that baptism of desire would not apply either, since through the actions of the parents, they make it obvious that they have no intention of baptizing the infant. They can't; since they "choose" to deprive it of life in the first place. Would the baby desire Baptism if it had a voice? I suppose that question is left to the Mercy of Almighty God.

-- jake (jake1@pngusa.net), January 15, 2003.

Dear Jake,

It doesn't seem fair that only children lucky enough to be baptized as infants get to go to heaven if they have an early death. It is not the fault of the unbaptised ones that they were never baptized. Maybe there is something we don't know, or isn't revealed to us yet. I have an unsettling feeling about this, and I'm sure God will answer my questions about it, if I go to heaven.

Sharon

Sharon

-- Sharon (delipasta@hotmail.com), January 15, 2003.

I tend to also agree that we perhaps do not know everything about this. Since we were made for God and our hearts are restless until we rest in Him, then it seems that if these innocents would go just to Limbo (which I do not believe is doctrine that it exists) they would be eternally frustrated, not being able to be united to God their End.

Joe

-- Joseph Carl Biltz (jcbiltz@canoemail.com), January 15, 2003.

If the parents or guardians of an infant have the sincere intention of baptizing a child, and are taking steps to have that child baptized, or would be taking such steps if the birth of the child were imminent, but the child dies either before birth or between birth and water baptism, that child receives baptism of desire. It was by the choice and desire of the parents or guardians, not by the child's personal desire, that he/she would have received water baptism; therefore that same desire is sufficient to confer the graces of baptism upon the child in the event of death prior to water baptism. This might also apply to a case where one parent strongly desires the baptism of the child, but the other parent will not allow it. In such a case however, water baptism in secret would likely be justifiable, by a priest or deacon, or if that were practically impossible, by the believing parent ("impossible" and "incovenient" should not be taken as synonyms here.) This might not apply however, to a situation where the parents repeatedly or indefinitely postpone the baptism of their child without just cause, or merely have a vague intention of "getting that done someday".

continued ...............

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 15, 2003.

In the case of a child who dies unbaptized, without the advantage of baptismal intent on the part of a parent or guardian, the Church no longer suggests that he/she might "go some place similar to Limbo". The Church simply says "we entrust them to the mercy of God". I personally believe this wording leans away from the idea of Limbo, or any denial of the Beatific Vision to such children - not because the idea of Limbo was innately unmerciful - but simply because I believe an all-merciful and all-just God would not deny His presence to the most innocent of His children. Again, that is my personal take on the matter.

A baby or young child generally cannot receive baptism of blood, since this typically requires that a person's death is the direct result of his/her own faith, and a baby has no faith. Children killed by abortion are murder victims, but not martyrs. One situation in which a baby might be considered to receive baptism of blood - and this is conjecture, I am not certain - would be the case of a child who was killed in direct retaliation for the religious beliefs of his/her parents; or of a whole family, including an unbaptized baby, who were put to death because of the faith of the parents. However, even in such theoretical cases, it is likely that parents with faith that strong would be anticipating water baptism for their child, so baptism of desire would presumably apply here anyway.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 15, 2003.

The baptism of desire , so far as I can find, has never been defined ex cathedra, by the Church. Pope Pius XI, seemed to approve it in one of his encyclicals, but for the most part, the evidence seems to point the other way. The Council of Trent (session 22), declared the baptism of water was absolutely necessary, or the desire for it. Some theologians say that the desire for it means that, even if you receive it, but did not desire it, it would not be valid. Apparently, one cannot receive a sacrament against their will.

-- Ed Richards (loztra@yahoo.com), January 15, 2003.

Dear ed,

Such a theological interpretation, in order to be valid, would require the teaching of Trent to indicate "baptism with water AND the desire for it" are required for validity. However, that wording would eliminate the possibility of infant baptism. The use of "OR" in this teaching clearly means that one OR the other is required, but not necessarily both.

One cannot receive a sacrament AGAINST one's will (a forced marriage, for example, is invalid), but one can receive a sacrament without making a specific conscious act of desire or acquiescence, such as when a person in a coma receives the sacrament of the sick, or when an infant is baptized.

Peace! Paul

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 15, 2003.

Dear Paul, An infant, obviously cannot desire baptism, or a man in a coma, etc.but anyone of proper age, and state of mind, can use their free will, can be baptized. If baptism of desire sufficed, one could receive the following sacraments, and obviously, they cannot. We must go back to the source. Our Lord said "Unless". The writings of the early fathers echoed that teaching. Closer to the source, better, and clearer the fact. And I am not a Feenyite, ( I hate that label). Anyway Feeney was not excommunicated for that. It was for disobedience , in not coming to Rome.

-- Ed Richards (loztra@yahoo.com), January 15, 2003.

It is not the fault of the unbaptised ones that they were never baptized

Very true, Sharon, and again; I think it needs to be said that Dvine Mercy is the final arbiter, and Its ways are inscrutible.

Great discussion, everyone!

-- jake (jake1@pngusa.net), January 15, 2003.

Dear Ed,

Baptism of desire confers all the same graces as water baptism. However, whether or not it qualifies an individual to receive the other sacraments is really irrelevant, given that baptism of desire occurs only at the moment of death! It is not the mere fact of desire for baptism that confers the grace, but the specific event of being prevented by death from receiving water baptism, in spite of your immediate desire and intent to do so. Therefore, no-one who receives baptism of desire subsequently receives any other sacraments.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 15, 2003.

The Catholic Church has never determined the fate of unbaptized children. Although not an official teaching of the Church, most Catholics believe that the fate of unbaptized children is limbo. The idea of limbo is a theological speculation about what happens to people who depart this life in original sin (1 Cor. 15:22) but without actual sin (Rom. 9:11). The unborn, babies, young children,and the retarted would be the only ones allowed into limbo. These particular persons lack actual sin, so they would not be in hell, but they have original sin, so they would not be in heaven. God being perfect would place these souls in a place of natural glory (limbo) until the final judgement. WHAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH OFFICIALLY TEACHES: Vatican II (Gaudium et Spes 22) "For since Christ died for all (Rom. 8:32) . . . we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery" This obviously includes infants and those severely retarded. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 1261) states: "As regards children who have died without baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God, who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children, which caused him to say, "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them" [Mark 10:14, cf. 1 Tim. 2:4], allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the

-- David Trieger (Triegerdaddyfive@aol.com), February 03, 2003.

Why would "young children" or severely retarded adults go to "Limbo". Most young Catholic children are baptized, and so are most Catholic adults, mentally compromised or not. The whole tradition of Limbo was based upon the problem of babies who die unbaptized. You are correct in saying that the Church makes no definitive statement regarding the eternal destination of such babies (including aborted babies). However, virtually no-one in the Church still subscribes to the "Limbo" theory. By entrusting such children to the mercy of God, the Church avoids making a specific statement where there is insufficient evidence to do so; but the obvious implication in making such a statement, with no mention of "Limbo" as a possibility, is that God, Who is all-merciful, would not deprive the most innocent of His children from eternal salvation, and life among the saints.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), February 03, 2003.

Amen!

-- Joseph Carl Biltz (jcbiltz@canoemail.com), February 04, 2003.

There are many different theories running wild today regarding salvation. There is really only one truth which all the faithful must submit to. The Church through its Extraordinary, Universal and Ordinary Magisterium has taught that a unbaptized child doesn't enter the Kingdom of Heaven nor Purgatory. Here are some quotes from the Church that prove this fact.

"The punishment of original sin is deprivation of the vision of God, but the punishment of actual sin is the torments of everlasting hell." (Pope Innocent III; Denz. 410)

In 1274 the Council of Lyons taught:

"The souls of those who die in mortal sin or in original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell, yet to be punished with different punishments." (Denz. 464)

"'If anyone denies that infants newly born from their mothers' wombs are able to be baptized,' even though they be born of baptized parents, 'or says they are baptized indeed for the remission of sins, but that they derive nothing of original sin from Adam, which must be expiated by the laver of regeneration' for the attainment of life everlasting, whence it follows, that in them the form of Baptism for the remission of sins is understood to be not true, but false: let them be anathema. For what the Apostle has said: 'By one man sin entered into the world, and by the sin death, and so death passed upon all men, in whom all sinned' (Rom. 5:12), is not to be understood otherwise than as the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For by reason of this rule of faith from a tradition of the Apostles even infants, who could not as yet commit any sins of themselves, are for this reason truly baptized for the remission of sins, so that in them there may be washed away by regeneration, what they have contracted by generation. 'For unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'" (John 3:15). (Council of Trent - Session V, Decree on Original Sin, 4, Denz. 791)

Mark Trieger

-- Mark Trieger (trieger4@earthlink.net), February 06, 2003.

Dear Mark,

The prevailing theories of the 13th century notwithstanding, the current teaching of the Magisterium is:

"As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them", allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1261)

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), February 06, 2003.

Paul

The Church has infallibly taught that a baby/child who dies without baptism can not enter Heaven or Purgatory. The Council of Florence stated "Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when no help can be brought to them by another remedy than through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are snatched from the domination of the Devil and adopted among the sons of God, ..." (Denainger 712)

It has also been a universal teaching of the Chruch Fathers, Doctors, Popes and Councils that when a person dies with original sin on their soul they decend to Hell to recieve their punishment.

Mark

-- Mark Trieger (trieger4@earthlink.net), February 08, 2003.

Dear Mark,

If your first sentence were true, the quote I offered above from the current teaching of the Catholic Church would be heretical. However, you fail to differentiate between actual declarations of doctrinal truth, which are infallible, vs. subsequent explanations or interpretations of such doctrinal truth, which are not necessarily infallible. The statement "Baptism is necessary for salvation" is an infallible truth of the Church. However, that doesn't mean that every statement subsequently made by the Church in explanation of that doctrine is likewise infallible. The Church's understanding of that infallible truth evolves over time, as it does on all doctrinal matters, and various ideas, explanations, and interpretations may at various times be proposed, promulgated, abandoned, adjusted, or expanded, and various inferences drawn. The fact that such interpretations and inferences directly relate to an infallible pronouncement of doctrine does not automatically make such additional ideas likewise infallible. Thus at one time the Church may say "Baptism is necessary for salvation" (infallible); "therefore all unbaptized babies must go to hell" (fallible inference). Later, in light of additional centuries of scholarship and deeper understanding of the spiritual truths inherent in the doctrine, the Church may teach "Baptism is necessary for salvation" (infallible); "but the necessary graces of Baptism can be attained by martyrdom or by sincere desire, not only by actual pouring of water". The doctrine remains the same. Indeed it must, for infallible truth cannot be altered. But the Church's understanding of it becomes fuller, and expands upon the earlier understanding. Still later the Church may teach (as it now does), "Baptism is necessary for salvation"; but, "the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them", allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism". The doctrine remains unchanged; but the Holy Spirit has guided the Church beyond its original simplistic, legalistic interpretation, to reflect more perfectly the mind of God, who is the origin of the doctrine.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), February 08, 2003.

Dear Paul,

You stated: "The Church's understanding of that infallible truth evolves over time". This is a false teaching. This statement is actually known as the heresy of Modernism. Vatican I stated: "The faith which God has revealed has not been proposed like a theory of philosophy, to be elaborated upon by human understanding, but as a divine deposit to be faithfully guarded and infallibly declared. Therefore, that sense of sacred dogmas is to be kept forever which Holy Mother Church has once declared, and it must never be deviated from on the specious pretext of a more profound understanding. Let intelligence, and science, and wisdom increase, but only according to the same dogma, the same sense, the same meaning. If anyone shall have said that there may ever be attributed to the doctrines proposed by the Church a sense which is different form the sense which the Church has once understood and now understands: let him be anathema. (Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith," ch. 4 Den: 1800; "On Faith," ch. 4 Canon 3, Den:1818) or as His Holiness Pope John Paul II states: "Nothing ever changes in the eternal Catholic doctrine" (L'Osservatore Romano n.49, Dec. 9, 1992) Now that we know that a Dogma can never change in its sense or its meaning, plus nothing can be added or taken away, we can get back to the question at hand. Where does a baby or child who dies without the sacrament of baptism go? The Council of Florence says: "Holy Baptism holds the first place among all the Sacraments because , by it, we are made members of Christ and of His Body, the Church. And since death has come to all men through the first man, unless we are re-born of water and the Holy Ghost, we cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven." (Decree fro the Armenians," Denzinger: 696) Notice what the Council stated. It says that "death has come to all men through the first man (Original Sin)" and "unless we are re-born of water and the Holy Ghost (Sacrament of Baptism) we cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven". In other words, the Council was teaching infallibly that a person who dies with Original Sin can not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

This statement made by the Church Fathers at the Council of Florence is true. We know it to be true, because (1) the Council of Florence was an infallible Council guided by the Holy Spirit, and (2) it is in agreement Scripture and Sacred Tradition. No Catholic can deny it, expect under the pain of heresy.

As the above statement is an infallible teaching of the Church, it is true then what the Council taught regarding the fate of unbaptized infants is also true. Again here is the quote from the Council of Florence: "Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when no help can be brought to them by another remedy than through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are snatched from the domination of the Devil and adopted among the sons of God, ..."(Denzinger 712)

In other words, a unbaptized child can not enter the Kingdom of Heaven because they still have Original Sin on their soul. The Council of Florence declared: "The souls of those who die in actual mortal sin, or only in Original Sin, immediately descend into Hell" (Denz.693). This is also the explicit teaching of the Council of Lyons II: "The souls of those who die in mortal sin or in original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell, yet to be punished with different punishments." (Denz. 464). This also universally taught by Doctors, Saints, and Popes of the Church i.e. St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, St.John Eudes and Pope Innocent III just to name a few.

We, the faithful, are bound to believe what has been infallibly defined by the Church, plus all those teachings taught in the Scriptures, Tradition, and the Universal and Ordinary Magisterium. The Church has taught that those children who die with Original Sin on their soul can not enter Heaven for to think otherwise, they are anathema. "On account of this rule of faith, even infants are truly baptized unto the remission of sins. Moreover, if anyone says that in the kingdom of Heaven there will be some place where infants live who departed this life without Baptism, without which they cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven which is eternal life: let him be anathema." (Pope St. Zosimus: Denzinger:102, n.2; Canon 2, XVI Council of Carthage)

Mark

-- Mark Trieger (trieger4@earthlink.net), February 09, 2003.

So Mark, what do you make of CCC 1261?

Joe

-- Joseph Carl Biltz (jcbiltz@canoemail.com), February 10, 2003.

Even if it were true that unbaptized infants could not enter Heaven (the Beatific Vision), it strains credibility that our loving and merciful FATHER would permit them to be tortured in Hell forever and ever.

I believe that's one of the reasons St. Thomas Aquinas came up with the theory of the Limbo of the Infants, a place where these children would experience natural, if not supernatural, happiness for all eternity, knowing Him by nature if not by grace.

Seriously ... can anyone imagine Jesus Christ, who scolded the Apostles for not allowing little children to come to Him, not doing anything and everything possible to secure the eternal happiness of these little ones?

I mean, come on. We're talking about ALMIGHTY GOD here, our loving Father, Christ the Son and our Brother, and the dear Holy Spirit. Don't They love every child at least as much as we love our own children? Wouldn't they be at least as anxious to see these children happy and free from suffering as their own parents?

My opinion is that whatever happens to an unbaptized baby - or any unbaptized human, for that matter - it will be the best, most loving, most merciful thing possible or imaginable for that soul. You can't overestimate God's mercy. :-)

-- Christine L. :-) (christine_lehman@hotmail.com), February 10, 2003.

Christene, you rock!

Joe

-- Joseph Carl Biltz (jcbiltz@canoemail.com), February 10, 2003.

Joe

The CCC #1261 is actually an ambiguous statement. It is ambiguous for it allows for different interpretations. Before we look at #1261, we should look at what the Catechism actually tells us regarding Original Sin and the Sacrament of Baptism.

1250 "Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which all men are called. The sheer gratuitousness of the grace of salvation is particularly manifest in infant Baptism. The Church and the parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth."

Notice what #1250 says. "Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness". Inother words, children and babies are in darkness not in light. They are as the Scriptures attest Children of wrath (sorry don't have the passage #).

Now, can a person who dies in darkness i.e. sin whether Original or Mortal be saved? No. This is the teaching of the Church. It is de fide (of the faith) and is dogma.

Now lets look at 1261. It says: "As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them", allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism."

There are two interpretations here. (1) That children who do not receive the Sacrament of Baptism can be saved or (2) that the Church hopes that God will bring salvation to these poor souls.

#1 is liberal and also the teaching of John Calvin. It is heresy.

#2 is a teaching of hope. It is not of the faith. The Church hopes that God will bring these poor souls who died in the stain of Original Sin into the Kingdom of God at the final judgement for right now a person who dies with the stain of Original Sin only, descends to Hell and doesn't see God face to face i.e. Limbo.

The Church is not saying that these poor souls will be saved. It is hopeing that God will do it, but do to the infallible teachiing of the Church regarding Original Sin and the Sacrament of Baptism, the Church knows they are lost right now.

Mark

-- Mark Trieger (trieger4@earthlink.net), February 10, 2003.

If John Calvin taught that the sky is generally blue during the daytime, would that be heresy too?

-- Christine L. :-) (christine_lehman@hotmail.com), February 10, 2003.

Mark, How can they be "Lost right Now", do you infer "perhaps not later"?

I really think that we do not know truely what part this plays in God's plan. My original question asked wether or not the parents desire for the child to be baptized could be considered baptism of desire in case the baby died before water baptism was administered.

God knows, we can speculate and try to find out, but only He knows and has the power to break our concepts and logic.

joe

-- Joseph Carl Biltz (jcbiltz@canoemail.com), February 10, 2003.

To continue more seriously, I think the reason so many people oppose these doctrines about Baptism of Blood/desire, is because they think it might make people relax and say, "Oh well, we don't need to evangelize anymore, because God is going to give the grace of Baptism to everyone anyway."

Granted, there may very well be people who think like that. (May? We KNOW there are people who think like that!) But the whole point of this doctrine is not to prevent us from baptizing people into the Faith - it's to remind us not to despair of the salvation of those who died unbaptized, so that we won't stop praying for them.

After all, if it is UNCHANGEABLE DOCTRINE that no one who dies unbaptized will ever enter Heaven, why has the Church NEVER declared that any particular human being - even Judas - is in Hell? After all, we KNOW that people by the millions have died without the sacrament of baptism. Why hasn't the Church ever declared, as a point of faith, that such and such an individual, known to have died without the Sacraments, is currently enjoying the warm weather in Hell?

Obviously, it's because we know that ultimately EVERY soul's salvation depends on the mercy of God - and that God does not give up on ANY soul until the moment of death. And that many people who SEEM to have died unrepentant, may *still* have repented in their final moments, without any living human being aware of it.

It seems impossible to us that any unbaptized person may still enter heaven. But we have Jesus Christ's word that "with God, ALL things are possible." :-)

-- Christine L. :-) (christine_lehman@hotmail.com), February 10, 2003.

Christine

On your quote: "If John Calvin taught that the sky is generally blue during the daytime, would that be heresy too? ". No. Calvin taught a truth.

Calvin just didn't follow the Dogma of Origin Sin and the Dogma that those who die in Original Sin can not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. The Church has anathema those who say babies can go to Heaven or Purgatory without Baptism.

"On account of this rule of faith, even infants are truly baptized unto the remission of sins. Moreover, if anyone says that in the kingdom of Heaven there will be some place where infants live who departed this life without Baptism, without which they cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven which is eternal life: let him be anathema." (Pope St. Zosimus: Denzinger:102, n.2; Canon 2, XVI Council of Carthage)

Mark

-- Mark Trieger (trieger4@earthlink.net), February 10, 2003.

Joe

When a child is born, they are born a child of wrath. They are lost or as the Church says in darkness. It is true that in the future they may become justified, but when we are born, we are in darkness because of Original Sin.

My original question asked wether or not the parents desire for the child to be baptized could be considered baptism of desire in case the baby died before water baptism was administered.

Trent answers your question:

"'If anyone denies that infants newly born from their mothers' wombs are able to be baptized,' even though they be born of baptized parents, 'or says they are baptized indeed for the remission of sins, but that they derive nothing of original sin from Adam, which must be expiated by the laver of regeneration' for the attainment of life everlasting, whence it follows, that in them the form of Baptism for the remission of sins is understood to be not true, but false: let them be anathema. For what the Apostle has said: 'By one man sin entered into the world, and by the sin death, and so death passed upon all men, in whom all sinned' (Rom. 5:12), is not to be understood otherwise than as the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For by reason of this rule of faith from a tradition of the Apostles even infants, who could not as yet commit any sins of themselves, are for this reason truly baptized for the remission of sins, so that in them there may be washed away by regeneration, what they have contracted by generation. 'For unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'" (John 3:15). (Council of Trent - Session V, Decree on Original Sin, 4, Denz. 791)

Mark

"On account of this rule of faith, even infants are truly baptized unto the remission of sins. Moreover, if anyone says that in the kingdom of Heaven there will be some place where infants live who departed this life without Baptism, without which they cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven which is eternal life: let him be anathema." (Pope St. Zosimus: Denzinger:102, n.2; Canon 2, XVI Council of Carthage)

Mark

-- Mark Trieger (trieger4@earthlink.net), February 10, 2003.

Christine L.

Why hasn't the Church ever say a human is in Hell? The Church preaches the good news not the bad. This is why the Church only tells us of those souls who have made it in Heaven to give us hope and ask those Saints to pray for us.

"It seems impossible to us that any unbaptized person may still enter heaven."

True.

"But we have Jesus Christ's word that "with God, ALL things are possible."

True.

We are bound to the Dogma that those souls who die with Original sin can not enter Heaven or Purgatory.

TRUE!

Mark

PS The teachings of baptism of desire has led to the lack of missionary work. Since Vatican II, Missionary work as almost disappeared.

-- Mark Trieger (trieger4@earthlink.net), February 10, 2003.

Missionary work is what leads to Baptism of desire ... OR Baptism of water! How can someone desire that which He has not heard of?

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), February 10, 2003.

Paul

I will try to answer your question: "Missionary work is what leads to Baptism of desire ... OR Baptism of water! How can someone desire that which He has not heard of?".

There are two thoughts to this question. The first one is the Orthodox thought. The second is the liberal thought started in the 19th century.

The first one can be found in what all Catholics need to believe in: Scripture, Tradition, Ex-ordinary Magisterium (Infallible pronouncements), and the universal and Ordinary Magisterium.

Here is what the Church teaches:

"He who does not have the Son does not have life." (I St. John 5:12)

"Jesus saith: I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no man cometh to the Father but by Me." (St. John 14:6)

"Not even the ones who are able to say that they did not hear the Gospel of Christ will free themselves from condemnation, since faith depends on hearing." (St. Augustine)

"No one may attain eternal life except through faith in Our Lord Jesus Christ." (Pope Paul III)

Understanding what the Church has said regarding the Invincible Ignorant person here is what the Church teaches about those who seek to know God:

"For, whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How, then, shall they call upon Him in Whom they have not believed? Or how shall they believe in Him of Whom they have not heard? Verily, their sound hath gone forth into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the whole world" (Romans 10:11-18)

In other words, if one who has not heard of the Lord, how can they be believe and be saved? St. Paul tells us that if they ask to know God ("their sound hath gone forth into all the earth"), God will give them the actual grace to come to know Him, love Him, and worship Him.

Here are some more quotes regarding this issue:

"If any man will do the will of God, he shall know the doctrine. He who has My commandments and keeps them loves Me, and I will love him and will manifest Myself to him." (St. John 7:17; 14:21)

NOTE: If a person who is Invincibly Ignorant of God, but keeps God's commandments, God will manifest Himself to that person i.e. get the faith to that person. God doesn't leave those who seek him whether explicitly or implicitly alone, but wills they be saved as the next Scripture tells us.

"God our Savior will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth." (I St. Timothy 2:4)

"Everyone who wishes may find Thee, O Lord; but he who asks not, receives not." (St. Teresa of Avila)

NOTE: Here is the Doctor of the Church, St. Teresa, answers you question short and simple (unlike me). If they do not seek, they will not find.

Now lets consider the Liberal thought to your question. The Liberal thought rejects the Dogmas and the Doctrines of the Church. They do not believe that a person who seeks God, that God will manifest Himself to that person or send a preacher to them. They believe that Invincible Ignorance saves.

We know that Invincible Ignorance doesn't save for number of reasons.

(1) If Invincible Ignorance saves, why did Jesus give the Command to His Apostles to preach the world throughout the world and those who believe and are baptized may be saved?

(2) Those who die with Original Sin, descend to Hell and receive their punishment (can't see God face to face).

(3) The Saints against Invincible Ignorance saves:

"It may be true that there are, in the remotest parts of the world, some people who have not yet seen the light of the Savior. Certainly, God's manifold and ineffable goodness has always provided, and still provides, for all mankind in such a way that not one of the reprobates can find an excuse as though he had been refused the light of truth." (St. Prosper of Aquitaine) 4

"But if Christ "enlightens every man who comes into this world" (Jn. 1:9) why have so many remained unenlightened? How then does Christ "enlighten every man"? He does so, as far as in Him lies. For grace is poured out over everyone. It is easily attainable by all. However, if some people, willfully shutting the eyes of their mind, do not wish to receive the light, then their darkness arises from their own wickedness in cutting themselves off from grace. Whoever does not wish to enjoy these gifts may blame himself for his blindness." (St. John Chrysostom) 5

(4) Scripture teaches Invincible Ignornance doesn't save:

"The Gentiles walk in vanity, having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance in them because of the blindness of their hearts." (Ephesians 4:17-18)

"Those who perish do not receive the love of truth in order that they might be saved. Therefore, God will send them the operation of error, to believe lying, so that all may be judged who have not believed the truth but have consented to iniquity." (II Thessalonians 2:10-11)

(5) Just go back to the Orthodox Thought

I hope this helps.

Mark Trieger

-- Mark Trieger (trieger4@earthlink.net), February 11, 2003.

Isn't "Limbo" a dance they do in the Caribbean? I don't think the word is in the Bible at all?

;)

-- Jane Doe (sassprita@yahoo.com), February 12, 2003.

Jane:

LOL.

No the word "limbo" is not found in the Scriptures but neither is 'purgatory, or Trinity". Are we to become like the Protestants who the Scriptures alone for their basis of faith, or are we going to follow the Traditions handed down to us weather it is in Scripture or word of mouth?

Mark

-- Mark Trieger (trieger4@earthlink.net), February 12, 2003.

[This thread starts with the word, "continued," because the first part of Joe's thoughts are found on a separate thread here.]

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), March 02, 2003.