Pope Francis Appoints Spanish Jesuit Ladaria to Succeed Cardinal Müller

National Catholic Register ^ | July 1, 2017 | Edward Pentin

[CTrent1564]

piusv:

I think that Limbo is possible? Could also be Heaven? for the quote about the unborn infant states “how can any torment touch it?” So it is plausible that Saint Gregory of Nysaa could be suggesting Limbo or Heaven, since lack of torment would be in Limbo and is definitely in heaven.

But my understanding of how the Orthodox interpret this more akin to God saved them, yet not in ways revealed to the Church, thus they are in heaven. I don’t think the Orthodox accepted Saint Augustine’s views on Limbo which suggest to me Saint Gregory of Nysaa suggests that they are in heaven.

But for that we would need an Orthodox to give us more detail on how this teaching from Saint Gregory of Nysaa is understood down through the centuries.

[CTrent1564]

piusv:

I may have misread it but it seemed it was implying they go to hell. I apologize, I will go back and read the quote more carefully, it sounded almost “Divine fate” i.e. double predestination, which of course is not Catholic Doctrine

Ok what you are saying makes sense.

[CTrent1564]

piusv:

I read your first sentence and saw the Hell part but you clarified it by saying that if we reject Limbo, then they would go to hell. So I erroneously ascribed it you but since you accept Limbo, you are not saying unbaptized infants go there, rather Limbo. Got it, getting tired keeping tract of everything.

I don’t accept that rejecting Limbo means they go to hell, The Writings of Saint Perpetua and Saint Gregory of Nysaa suggest God saving them via Extraordinary means (outside the Sacraments, which are the normative means) is possible, at least, I read it that way.

[piusv]

It seems to me that we should be focusing on what the Latin Church continued to teach throughout the life of the Latin Church, no? I don't really care what the schismatic Orthodox believe. Is it possible that there were other erroneous opinions in the very Early Church? Sure.

But the issue is that the teaching on Limbo is part of the Ordinary Magisterium. This was what was taught by the Church for hundreds of years. All you have to do is consult the catechisms prior to JPII's Modernist Catechism to see that this is true.

[piusv]

I would argue that this is your (erroneous) interpretation of their positions. It is much more likely that they believed what the Church taught via the ordinary magisterium. Although it is also quite possible that they were in error. Saints are not infallible.

[CTrent1564]

piusv:

Well I think not respecting what the Orthodox believe is not something I agree with. I would argue that one of the causes of the Protestantism was the that the Latin Church lost contact with the Greek Fathers, hence legal and forensic scholastic theology became dominant in the West and that sort of lead into Protestantism. That is just and opinion that I have but one I think has some scholarly basis.

And yes I am aware Limbo was part of Ordinary Magisterium. But that term developed in the 19th century to deal with the higher critic schools in Germany to remind them that the faithful are bond to adhere to both solemn Magisterial teachings (Council of Papal Decree) and those that were held by the common consensus of the Church and theologians down through the years. I think the higher critics were rejecting everything not part of the Solemn Magisterium (I think that is correct).

But it was never defined via a Church Council or in the manner like the Papal Infallibility, Immaculate Conception or Assumption of Mary. Like I said the entire theology of Limbo for infants started with Saint Augustine in his debate against Pelagius and his followers.

[piusv]

As a Catholic, you are expected to believe the teachings in the ordinary magisterium as well as the extraordinary magisterium. MOST (as in a LARGE %) of Church doctrine is not "defined". Most of Catholic doctrine is ORDINARY MAGISTERIUM. No one can toss out those teachings.

You are just another modern, conciliar Catholic who has no real understanding of Traditional Catholic teaching...and you do not appear to really want to know it.

I and other posters have given you a number of quotes from popes, councils, and saints throughout the history of the Church that support that those in original sin must receive baptism to get to Heaven. It seems you wish to focus on a rare quote that you believe fits your belief system (and there is no proof that it actually does). You want to believe that the unborn go to Heaven and you're doing everything possible to ignore those teachings that prove you wrong. I am not even certain that you actually read them and if/when you do, you seem to botch them up. From this discussion, it also appears you wish to minimize the scourge of abortion by believing that they all just go to Heaven anyway. Face it. If they just lose their bodies, that pales in comparison to losing their souls.

Generally speaking, it seems that you are more interested in the feel good option. You are more willing to toss out the ordinary magisterium on the teaching of Limbo because you prefer a teaching that sends unborn and unbaptized babies to Heaven...even if it does violence to Church teaching regarding those who die in original sin. You'd much rather look to the schismatic Orthodox (who also do not follow Catholic teaching and are not part of the Catholic Church).

Given all of the above, I am done wasting my time here. If anyone else wishes to continue on the merry-go-round with you, they may do so, but I'm done.

[CTrent1564]

piusv:

Well I don’t think it is a merry go round. To totally reject the Eastern Tradition, in my view, is problematic. Why does Saint Augustine’s view automatically trump (no pun intended) Saint Gregory of Nyssa’s view or Saint Perpetua’s account of her vision. If by conciliar Catholic you mean I accept all Pope’s post Vatican II, then yes I am. Do I have a favorable opinion of every Pope Post Vatican II, well lets say have a favorable opinion of 2 out of the last 3, but charity calls me to stop at this point.

I am well aware most teachings or Ordinary Magisterium but all Ordinary Magisterium teachings are not the same. No Pope has ever ex cathedra states Jesus Rose from the Dead because it is Direct Divine Revelation and does not need to be defined with an ex cathedra statement.

No feel good about everything or anything on my part. Sense you felt the need to say I am interested in the “feel good option, my advice but be careful with moving to the “God of Fate option” that one child is born because a Mother chooses not to abort vs. one is aborted before birth. In my view, that is already a step through the Door towards absolute double predestination.