Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences  (Read 58533 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DecemRationis

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2359
  • Reputation: +885/-147
  • Gender: Male
Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
« Reply #75 on: December 18, 2025, 04:05:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.


    Freind, 

    I come as a friend. I have defended BoD in its simple core principle around here for a decade or so, so I do not write with any animus toward you. I might have years ago, when I would have proudly worn that badge, "Feeneyite." Still and always will have a soft spot for Father Feeney, who was railroaded by a bunch of apostates, and betrayed by a pope.

    But St. Alphonsus doesn't tell us what is de fide. 

    DR
    Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

    Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

    Offline gladius_veritatis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 8281
    • Reputation: +2589/-1127
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
    « Reply #76 on: December 18, 2025, 04:06:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.

    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?  
    "Fear God, and keep His commandments: for this is all man."


    Offline DecemRationis

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2359
    • Reputation: +885/-147
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
    « Reply #77 on: December 18, 2025, 04:08:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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? 

    If you are asking me where Limbo is . . .

    Many of us believe in Limbo. Did you think that a temporary place?
    Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

    Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

    Offline DecemRationis

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2359
    • Reputation: +885/-147
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
    « Reply #78 on: December 18, 2025, 04:16:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Actually, Gladius, it's right there; according to Pope Eugene IV, the infants go to hell:


    Quote
    Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Letentur coeli


    “We define also that… the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go straightaway to hell, but to undergo punishments of different kinds.



    If he's right, you might as well ask where hell is. 

    DR
    Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

    Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 48451
    • Reputation: +28592/-5352
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
    « Reply #79 on: December 18, 2025, 04:17:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.


    I think that people have to be very careful of English translations, especially where the word "hell" tends to translate "infer(n)us", as it does in this decree, just like the Creed using the same word for the Limbo Patrum, bosom of Abraham.  While the Creed refers to it (in English translation) as Hell, Our Lord alternatively calls it "Paradise".  It just means an area below, relative to the Kingdom.  Gahenna or other similar terms have been used to describe the place of punishment.  With regard to the expression that they are to be punished disparately, that could also include 0 punishment.  In fact, the Latin word there unequal, disparibus suggest a duality, as in, being in two different categories, between those in actual sin vs. those in original sin.  I think it's just saying that "neither one of them can make it to heaven, and what awaits those guilty of actual sin vs. original only are not even in the same category (disparibus).  So, actual and Original both result in not making it into the Kingdom of Heaven, but outside of that similarity, the two are not even in the same category in terms of what happen to them, i.e. that's where the similarity ends between the two, that either one deprives people of entry into Heaven.  No one has ever read this as any kind of definitive condemnation of Limbo.


    Offline gladius_veritatis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 8281
    • Reputation: +2589/-1127
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
    « Reply #80 on: December 18, 2025, 04:19:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If you are asking me where Limbo is . . .

    I asked what I asked.  If you'd rather not share your own actual thoughts on the matter, that is perfectly fine.  Thank you all the same.
    "Fear God, and keep His commandments: for this is all man."

    Offline DecemRationis

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2359
    • Reputation: +885/-147
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
    « Reply #81 on: December 18, 2025, 04:22:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I think that people have to be very careful of English translations, especially where the word "hell" tends to translate "infer(n)us", as it does in this decree, just like the Creed using the same word for the Limbo Patrum, bosom of Abraham.  It just means an area below relative to the Kingdom.  Gahenna or other similar terms have been used to describe the place of punishment.  With regard to the expression that they are to be punished disparately, that could also include 0 punishment.  In fact, the Latin word there unequal, disparibus suggest a duality, as in, being in two different categories, between those in actual sin vs. those in original sin.  I think it's just saying that "neither one of them can make it to heaven, and what awaits those guilty of actual sin vs. original only are not even in the same category (disparibus).  No one has ever read this as any kind of definitive condemnation of Limbo.

    I'll leave that to the Latinists. I'm just quoting Denzinger. 

    Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

    Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 48451
    • Reputation: +28592/-5352
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
    « Reply #82 on: December 18, 2025, 04:23:28 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I'll leave that to the Latinists. I'm just quoting Denzinger.


    Well, yeah, just saying you're quoting the English translation.


    Offline DecemRationis

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2359
    • Reputation: +885/-147
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
    « Reply #83 on: December 18, 2025, 04:25:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I asked what I asked.  If you'd rather not share your own actual thoughts on the matter, that is perfectly fine.  Thank you all the same.

    Sorry. You asked, where? The traditional answer is Limbo. Maybe a translation issue, but Denzinger translates Eugene IV as saying hell. 

    I believe in Limbo, and what Eugene IV says. If you want a geographical location for hell or whatever Eugene IV was saying, I've no idea "where" on a map.
    Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

    Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

    Offline WorldsAway

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1430
    • Reputation: +929/-131
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
    « Reply #84 on: December 18, 2025, 04:29:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • After the General Judgment, the aborted babies will live in the new Paradise, the NHNE. They, along with everyone else in the NHNE, will see God's face, as Apocalypse 22:4 says.

    The various Limbos are temporary abodes. The pre-General Judgement, disembodied beatific vision is also a temporary abode of the disembodied Saints. Those abodes only exist until the Second Coming/General Judgement/NHNE. Then after the GJ, those souls are united with their glorified bodies. Then all things are made "new." This is the eschatological telos of Christianity.

    And at the GJ, the reprobate souls are united with their bodies and cast into everlasting Hell.


    Quote
    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, it advises that holy baptism ought not be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people

    Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence


    Quote
    6. Those who claim that the children of the faithful dying without sacramental baptism will not be saved, are stupid and presumptuous in saying this.

    Condemned proposition of John Wyclif at Council of Constance 


    Quote
    If anyone says that recently born babies should not be baptized even if they have been born to baptized parents; or says that they are indeed baptized for the remission of sins, but incur no trace of the original sin of Adam needing to be cleansed by the laver of rebirth for them to obtain eternal life, with the necessary consequence that in their case there is being understood a form of baptism for the remission of sins which is not true, but false: let him be anathema

    Pope Paul III, Council of Trent 

    John 15:19  If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

    Offline Angelus

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1648
    • Reputation: +641/-128
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
    « Reply #85 on: December 18, 2025, 04:32:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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? 

    A resurrected man (body united with soul) after the General Judgment, whose only infraction is original sin, spends his eternity in the New Heaven and New Earth (aka the new Paradise). Prior to the GJ, he spent his time in Limbo.

    NHNE is only one place, the new Paradise. The point of the new Paradise is that it is the permanent home of the righteous people (as opposed to Hell for the reprobate). 

    Yes, all who were "saved" from the fires of hell while they were in the state of disembodied souls will, of course, end up in the NHNE once they are united to their glorified bodies.

    After the GJ, there is no more "earth" as we know it now. Read the Apocalypse 21 again:

    1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth. For the first heaven and the first earth was gone, and the sea is now no more.  2 And I John saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.  3 And I heard a great voice from the throne, saying: Behold the tabernacle of God with men, and he will dwell with them. And they shall be his people; and God himself with them shall be their God.



    Offline Angelus

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1648
    • Reputation: +641/-128
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
    « Reply #86 on: December 18, 2025, 04:43:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0


  • Quote from: Angelus on Today at 03:53:58 PM
    Quote
    Quote
    After the General Judgment, the aborted babies will live in the new Paradise, the NHNE. They, along with everyone else in the NHNE, will see God's face, as Apocalypse 22:4 says.

    The various Limbos are temporary abodes. The pre-General Judgement, disembodied beatific vision is also a temporary abode of the disembodied Saints. Those abodes only exist until the Second Coming/General Judgement/NHNE. Then after the GJ, those souls are united with their glorified bodies. Then all things are made "new." This is the eschatological telos of Christianity.

    And at the GJ, the reprobate souls are united with their bodies and cast into everlasting Hell.

    Quote
    Quote
    Quote 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, it advises that holy baptism ought not be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people

    Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence

    Quote
    Quote
    Quote 6. Those who claim that the children of the faithful dying without sacramental baptism will not be saved, are stupid and presumptuous in saying this.

    Condemned proposition of John Wyclif at Council of Constance

    Quote
    Quote
    Quote If anyone says that recently born babies should not be baptized even if they have been born to baptized parents; or says that they are indeed baptized for the remission of sins, but incur no trace of the original sin of Adam needing to be cleansed by the laver of rebirth for them to obtain eternal life, with the necessary consequence that in their case there is being understood a form of baptism for the remission of sins which is not true, but false: let him be anathema

    Pope Paul III, Council of Trent

    The unbaptized baby's SOUL will go to the limbo of the Children. They are not "saved," meaning they do not immediately enter the beatific vision as disembodied souls.

    But at the GJ, when all souls are united with their bodies, the unbaptized babies, along with all other people, must be put EITHER on the RIGHT or on the LEFT. Either they are righteous or reprobate. Piux IX said that God in "his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments." [Quanto] Therefore, the unbaptized babies will go to the NHNE, not to Gehenna, since those are the only two "places" in the eschatological description of the Apocalypse 21-22.


    Quanto Conficiamur Moerore

    "Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments. Also well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. Eternal salvation cannot be obtained by those who oppose the authority and statements of the same Church and are stubbornly separated from the unity of the Church and also from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff, to whom “the custody of the vineyard has been committed by the Savior.”


    Offline WorldsAway

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1430
    • Reputation: +929/-131
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
    « Reply #87 on: December 18, 2025, 04:50:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • C'mon, man. If you want to define "saved" or "salvation" in a way that has never been meant by the Church to get out of what is being taught...well, you can't do that, but ok

    But I would like to see your explanation of Paul III's "eternal life"

    He teaches that the infants need to be cleansed by the laver of rebirth [Sacrament of Baptism] to obtain "eternal life
    John 15:19  If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 48451
    • Reputation: +28592/-5352
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
    « Reply #88 on: December 18, 2025, 04:50:22 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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? 

    We don't know ... as it's pure speculation.  Where are Our Lord and Our Lady even now, and St. Joseph (if you believe, as I do, that he too had been assumed into Heaven), and where are Enoch and Elijah?  We're not sure.  I suspect there's a place that has a glorifed type of physicality to it, where it's more ethereal, similar to the properties of glorified bodies, but that even the non-glorified bodies will be somewhat different the second time around.

    So, my personal belief is that the realms of the blessed and those in Limbo overlap somewhat, where the two can interact, naturally speaking, but the blessed enjoy the Beatific Vision.  In my view it's similar to the design of the temple, where there's a Holy of Holies, an inner sanctum, into which the blessed can enter, but then outside of that there was another place that people could worship God, and perhaps a third, a courtyard of the Gentiles, as they called it.  Not sure.

    Perhaps another vision would be similar to how a village might have been in Medieval times, where you would have a castle, where the royal family would dwell, but then outside of that would be a little village with various dwellings, but the people from inside could come out and interact with those on the outside.

    Taking these with a grain of salt, but a lot of those who had these "near death" or "dead and back" types of experiences report that there's a beautiful place with fields, flowers, colors that don't exist here, but then describe a gate that they can't get past.  Now, they often characterize it to where the gate is a point of no return, but it could also be a gate into the Kingdom, as it were.  St. Peter Claver raised a woman back to life who, after a time, he ultimately realized that she had not been baptized, despite having appeared to be a devout Catholic, even daily Communicant, for many years.  She reported that she was in a beautiful place, but that she was told that she could go no farther since she did not have the wedding garment.

    As St. Paul said, he had no words to describe it, and we don't know.  God has chosen not to reveal all the details, but has dropped some tantalizing hints.  How/where are the angels in relation to the human blessed?  Where are Our Lord and Our Lady and St. Joseph rigth now?  We just don't really know.

    But I believe strongly in extending that delineation between natural justice and the free unmerited glory of supernatural life.  While I understand the point of those stories or descriptions where people suffer cruel torments that would make human torture chambers seem tame by comparison, namely, to scare them straight, but I think it's just a certain perspective on the matter, since if some human being were to torture people cruelly in his basement, we'd consider him a degenerate, a monster ... and that kind of image should not be projected onto God.  Whatever happens we do to ourselves, but the end result, the suffering caused, will be extreme ... just that God isn't standing there with thumb screw and iron maidens coming up wtih creative ways to torture poeple.  It's like when Our Lady speaks of God's wrath that she's staying His hand.  That too is just figure of speech to help our dumb brains get some idea.  God is perfectly simple, does not get angry at one time, merciful at another.  He doesn't change.  If we perceive Him as changing, it's because we are changing and create the conditions quoad nos where the same love of God can seem to us like mercy and at another time like wrath, if we reject it ... but it's not God changing, it's we who change, and make God's simplicity SEEM as though it's changing.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 48451
    • Reputation: +28592/-5352
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Claiming something is not "de fide" still has hellish consequences
    « Reply #89 on: December 18, 2025, 04:53:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • The unbaptized baby's SOUL will go to the limbo of the Children. They are not "saved," meaning they do not immediately enter the beatific vision as disembodied souls.

    Just stop with this.  "Saved" and "Salvation" do not mean going immediately to Heaven, but going to Heaven period, regardless of whether you make a stopover to Purgatory or not ... and it has never had that meaning in Catholic sources.  But perhaps Ratzinger can come back from his faked death and open the gates of Heaven for them.  You're incredibly close to the condemned heresy of "apokatastasis".