The issue identified in the subject of this thread was broached by Forlorn in a current thread on baptism of desire. In his last post in that thread, Forlorn wrote:
In that post, Forlorn refers to a discussion I pointed him to in another Catholic forum, here:
1 Timothy 2:4 (forumotion.com)
I told Forlorn I'd move the discussion here, and I will begin it with a citation in Denzinger (Deferarri translation, 1954) to the central passage of Scripture with regard to God's will to save "all men," 1 Timothy 2:4, which states:
The passage is cited in Denzinger 318, where the Council of Quiersy states:
The only other time the verse is referenced in Denzinger is by the First Vatican Council Council at 1794, where it is cited with reference to the Church's divine mission (see my remarks below), the part of the verse there cited being God's desire that "all men" "come to the knowledge of the truth."
The first thing I want to note regarding 1 Timothy 2:4 is the link between God's desire to save "all men" and His desire that the same group "come to the knowledge of the truth." As the second citation to the verse by the First Vatican Council indicates, the divine mission of the Church to "all men" - which we know is Scripturally framed as Jєω and Gentile, male, female, etc. (see Galatians 3:26-29 etc.) - is being addressed here.
The question which Forlorn raised implicates whether God's desire to save "all men" is broader than merely an indication that His salvation is universal and open to "all men" without racial or any other distinction via the Church - i.e., does it encompass every single soul that has been generated in the womb or thereafter born which dies before baptism, the "only remedy" to men not capable of what Pius XII referred to as the "act of love" that requires rational choice and mature, informed and responsible will (as to the only remedy, see Denzinger 712 (Florence), 791 (Trent))?
The second point I want to make is as to the the language of the Council of Quiersy cited above. Note that the Council, after citing 1 Tim. 2:4, states "that certain ones perish, however, is the deserved punishment of those who perish" (emphasis added).
As Ladislaus pointed out in his response to Forlorn in the above-referenced thread, infants who die without baptism do not "perish" and suffer the damnation and torment of the damned who "deserve" it (Quiersy), but go to Limbo. I believe that is why the doctrine of Limbo, while not defined as de fide dogma, is essential to the truth and consistency of our Catholic faith.
Of course, this prescinds from the point raised by Forlorn, since those infants, while not damned, are indeed not "saved" in heaven.
I will continue with a discussion of St. Thomas's reflections on the meaning of 1 Tim 2:4's reference to God's desire to save "all men" in the Summa Theologica, First Part, Question 19, Article 6.
Of course I open this up for comment and the reflections of others who have studied the Scriptures and the Church's teaching on this issue.
DR
I am no expert on this.
An old priest I knew who was ordained long before Vat II, discussed this topic with me. He was a trained theologian. Also my uncle, ordained before vat II, had a doctorate in theology and was ordained in Rome, discussed It also.
They believed Limbo was shut when the gates of heaven were opened and is no longer in use.
As for babies who die before they are baptized, they explained that where they go after death depends upon the intent of the parents. If the parents would have baptized the child had they had the chance, then the baby goes to heaven. If the parents would not have baptized the baby, then the child ends up in purgatory.
Topic: God's salvific will to save "all men" and the death of unbaptized infants (Read 304144 times)