CathInfo.com

Here is something I wrote to a relative about 3 years ago. Feeneyites take note.

The term "de fide" is a label theologians place on teachings (particularly for confessors to use). A teaching being labeled "de fide" means it is "of faith" so that if you were to deny it deliberately, it would mean that you would lose the divine virtue of Faith (which is what makes a heretic).

When someone commits ANY mortal sin, such as murder, they automatically lose the divine virtue of charity.
Someone who willingly denies a "de fide" teaching also commits a mortal sin, and not only loses the divine virtue of charity but ALSO that of divine faith.
Catechisms don't show these labels on teachings, because it is meant for confessors to know how to handle it. There are teachings in the catechisms that are not "de fide", but you can't tell which ones, because we are obliged to believe ALL, even that which is less than "de fide".
So, if someone denies a major teaching that is less than "de fide", he would NOT lose the divine virtue of faith, but he would still commit a mortal sin (losing the divine virtue of charity).
Feeneyites wrongly think if something is not "de fide", they are free and clear to reject it without any consequences!
But, baptism of desire IS "de fide". St. Alphonsus says so written in his Moral Theology, Book 6, Section II (About Baptism and Confirmation), Chapter 1 (On Baptism), page 310, no. 96:

"Baptism of desire is perfect conversion to God by contrition or love of God above all things accompanied by an explicit or implicit desire for true baptism of water, the place of which it takes as to the remission of guilt, but not as to the impression of the [baptismal] character or as to the removal of all debt of punishment. It is called "of wind" ["flaminis"] because it takes place by the impulse of the Holy Ghost who is called a wind ["flamen"]. Now it is "de fide" that men are also saved by Baptism of desire, by virtue of the Canon Apostolicam, "de presbytero non baptizato" and of the Council of Trent, session 6, Chapter 4 where it is said that no one can be saved 'without the laver of regeneration or the desire for it.'"

The writings of St. Alphonsus were scrutinized by the Church, when he was beatified, again when he was canonized, and again when he was declared a Doctor of the Church. Approved. He is also consider THE moral theologian. His books were followed by clergy so that in the confessional they would advise any penitent who denied baptism of desire that they must believe it as true or else cease to be Catholic.

St. Alphonsus, and the Church approving, could not have made a mistake.

So, a resurrected man whose only "infraction" is original sin, has an immortal body and soul that will not be separated throughout eternity, and spends eternity WHERE, in what 3-D region?  Under the earth, in darkness, but sans fire?  What sort of existence is that?  How would such a life NOT be a disproportionate punishment?

Additionally, are the new heaven AND new earth -- two distinct words joined by AND, which actually intensifies any indication of TWO distinct things -- one place or two?  What is the point of a new, unpopulated earth?  Presumably ALL who are saved will be in the new heaven, no?  So who, if anyone, is on earth at this point? 

I recall there being Magisterial statements that Limbo is part of hell. Of course, hell with be there for eternity.

This I do remember with ability to point to the source:

The "punishment" of those infants would be deprivation of the beatific vision, but no real suffering. I can't recall if that is just theory or if there are Magisterial statements directly supporting that.