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

Author Topic: Aborted babies & baptism of blood  (Read 14446 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Aborted babies & baptism of blood
« Reply #65 on: February 10, 2019, 06:42:12 PM »

Cdl. Cajetan, O.P., in his commentary on III q. 68 a. 11 ("Whether a child can be baptized while yet in its mother's womb?") is even more explicit, saying that even in utero infants can be martyrs like the Holy Innocents:

I am pretty sure that Cajetan's general opinions on the fate of unbaptized babies are heterodox, anyway. It seems that he also shared the error of Calvin, that of believing that unbaptized babies may be saved through Baptism of Desire. This "desire" being that of the parents.  I have not read the original writing but arch-heretic Calvin also taught that infants born of parents who have the Faith are saved, even though they should die without Baptism.

Fortunately, Cajetan's error on infantile Baptism of Desire "was ordered expunged from his works by the Pope. In his decree against the Synod of Pistoia in 1794, Pius VI alludes to “that place of the lower regions which the faithful generally designate as the limbo of the children” in which the souls of those dying “with the sole guilt of original sin”. Nevertheless, the view which the Holy Father adopts in no way holds either for a parental or infantile ‘baptism of desire’ nor for the rewards of the Beatific Vision for unbaptized souls (Denzinger 1526). This limbo of the children amounts to merely the ‘highest place’ in the abode of Hell, as explained by St. Vincent Ferrer in his sermon preached on the Octave of the Epiphany.

https://catholicism.org/unbaptized-infants-malone.html

Re: Aborted babies & baptism of blood
« Reply #66 on: February 10, 2019, 06:59:58 PM »
The mentioned error of Pistoia that His Holiness Pius VI condemned reads as follows:

Quote
The Punishment of Those Who Die with Original Sin Only

[Baptism, sec. 3]

Danzinger 1526 26. The doctrine which rejects as a Pelagian fable, that place of the lower regions (which the faithful generally designate by the name of the limbo of children) in which the souls of those departing with the sole guilt of original sin are punished with the punishment of the condemned, exclusive of the punishment of fire, just as if, by this very fact, that these who remove the punishment of fire introduced that middle place and state free of guilt and of punishment between the kingdom of God and eternal damnation, such as that about which the Pelagians idly talk,--false, rash, injurious to Catholic schools.



Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Aborted babies & baptism of blood
« Reply #67 on: February 10, 2019, 07:51:32 PM »
I read the Latin text at the link to Cajetan.

He believed that infants could benefit from BoB ... but only if they were killed "propter Christum" (on account of Christ).  He again used the Holy Innocents example, but failed to take into account that this was in the Old Dispensation.

Secondly, he believed in a vicarious Baptism of Desire, whereby if the parents desired to baptize the child, the child could benefit from desire.  This is what was forced to be expunged from his writings.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Aborted babies & baptism of blood
« Reply #68 on: February 10, 2019, 07:55:34 PM »
What's interesting also is that St. Augustine cited St. Cyprian as the originator of the BoB concept, and mentioned that St. Cyprian had argued from the example of the Good Thief.  That's a double fail.  Not only did the Good Thief die in the old dispensation, but he was not killed on account of Christ, but for his crimes.

Online Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: Aborted babies & baptism of blood
« Reply #69 on: February 10, 2019, 09:27:39 PM »
Right.  The good thief was saved for 2 reasons, both of which were necessary under the Old Law (and still are, under the New...but the New has additional requirements) - Faith and contrition.  St Dismas recognized Christ as his redeemer and confessed his sins with a pure act of love.  Christ acknowledged his Faith and personally forgave him his sins.  St Dismas also accepted his sufferings as just on account of his crimes.  This is exactly how the Jews were saved in the Old Testament and also how we are in the new, except we have Faith in Christ through His Church and we confess our sins to Christ through a priest.  

Hard to compare St Dismas to any other saint (Old/new) since he’s one of the few choice persons to actually talk to Christ when he was on earth.