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

Author Topic: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"  (Read 11224 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeanJohnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15064
  • Reputation: +9980/-3161
  • Gender: Male
Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
« Reply #90 on: August 21, 2018, 03:02:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Again, you're missing the point, since logic is not SeanJohnson's strength.  I'm saying that it's not possible that God would allow anyone who perseveres in justification to die without the Sacrament.  But I personally don't believe that justification is possible before Baptism (where I'm not in complete agreement with Father Feeney.)

    Just answer the question please:

    Is it theologically possible that any of those who die justified are damned?

    If you answer yes, can you provide a single citation to back it?
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."


    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7782
    • Reputation: +4577/-579
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #91 on: August 21, 2018, 03:06:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Forgive me, but you appear to just be begging the question, and aside from that, jumping quite a bit ahead.  All I've been talking about for three pages is faith.  That's it, nothing else.  My sole purpose at this point is over the question of whether or not supernatural faith can be had prior to baptism.  If you agree with me that catechumens may have faith (per Denz. 798 ) then we can debate other points elsewhere.  If you disagree, then let's keep on with that thread and get a definition of supernatural faith produced.  As I said earlier, I have no interest in proceeding to later points if we're resting on a faulty premise of when faith (which is necessary for justification) can begin.

    ETA: just to prevent any confusion with this or any other post, when I say "faith" in these contexts I always mean supernatural faith unless noted otherwise.  Not natural faith, not an act of faith, not a mere "awareness" of what God has revealed, but the virtue of supernatural faith, "without which it is impossible to please God."

    I do not believe that catechumens can possess supernatural Faith before the Sacrament; only natural.

    Even if they are somehow able to attain it, I do not know how this Faith alone can be sufficient for salvation. Is supernatural Faith the only requirement for salvation or even Justification? No, that is only a fraction of it.

    I think the most authoritative definition of supernatural Faith is that given in Vatican I Council, Third Session, Chapter 3.

    Quote
    Since human beings are totally dependent on God as their creator and lord, and created reason is completely subject to uncreated truth, we are obliged to yield to God the revealer full submission of intellect and will by faith. This faith, which is the beginning of human salvation, the catholic church professes to be a supernatural virtue, by means of which, with the grace of God inspiring and assisting us, we believe to be true what He has revealed, not because we perceive its intrinsic truth by the natural light of reason, but because of the authority of God himself, who makes the revelation and can neither deceive nor be deceived. Faith, declares the Apostle, is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen [17].

    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.


    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +453/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #92 on: August 21, 2018, 03:10:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Mithrandylan
    I emphasized a few things for convenience.  Mainly, that Trent is describing the acquisition of supernatural faith on the part of the catechumen.

    Trent does neither speak of "supernatural faith" nor of an "acquisition of faith". Obviously the term is not needed in the context of Justification.

    Trent explains what "conceiving faith by hearing" means. It means that the catechumens "are freely moved toward God, believing that to be true which has been divinely revealed and promised".

    All what is described in Chapter VI (The manner of Preparation) is not Justification but only preparation. Chapter VII (What the justification of the impious is, and what are the causes thereof) starts with "This disposition, or preparation, is followed by Justification itself". Consequently, Justification has not yet happened when the catechumen has "conceived faith by hearing". Also, no sanctification has happened yet, because "Justification itself, is not remission of sins merely, but also the sanctification and renewal of the inward man". Furthermore, the "impious", the "man of unjust", having "conceived faith by hearing", has not yet become "just". A "man of unjust becomes just" only "by Justification itself" which does not happen before "disposition, or preparation" is over.

    Hence, to "conceive faith by hearing", does neither justify, nor sanctify, nor make the catechumen "an heir according to hope of life everlasting". Neither does it "communicate the merits of the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ".

    All this is clear from Chapter VI. and the first sentence of Chapter VII (see quote from papalencyclicals.net below).

    Then Chapter VII says that the instrumental cause of Justification is the sacrament of baptism. By the sacrament of baptism the "impious" are justified. Faith, hope, and charity are gifts that are not infused before the sacrament od baptism. The infused faith could rightly be called 'supernatural faith', because it is infused and not just a human belief or conviction.


    Quote from: Trent, Decree on Justification
    CHAPTER VI.
    The manner of Preparation.

    Now they (adults) are disposed unto the said justice, when, excited and assisted by divine grace, conceiving faith by hearing, they are freely moved towards God, believing those things to be true which God has revealed and promised,-and this especially, that God justifies the impious by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus; and when, understanding themselves to be sinners, they, by turning themselves, from the fear of divine justice whereby they are profitably agitated, to consider the mercy of God, are raised unto hope, confiding that God will be propitious to them for Christ’s sake; and they begin to love Him as the fountain of all justice; and are therefore moved against sins by a certain hatred and detestation, to wit, by that penitence which must be performed before baptism: lastly, when they purpose to receive baptism, [Page 34] to begin a new life, and to keep the commandments of God. Concerning this disposition it is written; He that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him; and, Be of good faith, son, thy sins are forgiven thee; and, The fear of the Lord driveth out sin; and, Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost; and, Going, therefore, teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; finally, Prepare your hearts unto the Lord.

    CHAPTER VII.
    What the justification of the impious is, and what are the causes thereof.
     
    This disposition, or preparation, is followed by Justification itself, which is not remission of sins merely, but also the sanctification and renewal of the inward man, through the voluntary reception of the grace, and of the gifts, whereby man of unjust becomes just, and of an enemy a friend, that so he may be an heir according to hope of life everlasting.
    Men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple ... Jerome points this out. (St. Robert Bellarmine)

    Offline Maria Regina

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3776
    • Reputation: +1004/-551
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #93 on: August 21, 2018, 03:11:17 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • If any died in a state of justification without/before Baptism, then it would have been St. Joseph and St. John the Baptist.  But they did not enter into the beatific vision due to some ontological defect that prevented this.  So here's a situation where justification doesn't not inherently mean salvation and beatific vision.
    St. Joseph, St. John the Baptist, St. Anna (the mother of the BVM), and all those righteous ones who died before Christ's Holy Passion, Death, and Resurrection, including St. Dismas, the Good Thief on the Cross, were granted the grace to repent of any sins and were justified by Christ when He descended into Hades for three days, preached to the Old Testament Saints, set them free from the bonds of Hades, and opened Paradise to them.

    Noteworthy, the Church honors St. Joseph the Beloved, St. John the Forerunner, and St. Anna as three of our greatest saints.
    Lord have mercy.

    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +453/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #94 on: August 21, 2018, 03:23:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • In other words, God damns the just.

    Got it.

    :popcorn:

    Nobody is just, if he hasn't received the sacrament of baptism. Before baptism, men are "impious" and "unjust". Read cuм hoc tempore!
    Men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple ... Jerome points this out. (St. Robert Bellarmine)


    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +453/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #95 on: August 21, 2018, 03:26:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Father Feeney holds that God will never allow the justified to die without the Sacrament.

    Trent teaches: Nobody is justified, if he hasn't received the sacrament of baptism. If Feeney holds what you say, he doesn't believe what Trent teaches.
    Men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple ... Jerome points this out. (St. Robert Bellarmine)

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #96 on: August 21, 2018, 03:32:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Nobody is just, if he hasn't received the sacrament of baptism. Before baptism, men are "impious" and "unjust". Read cuм hoc tempore!

    Then the old Catholic Encyclopedia is heretical in its description of the “limbus patrum” when it describes it as:

    In theological usage the name is applied to (a) the temporary place or state of the souls of the just who, although purified from sin, were excluded from the beatific vision until Christ's triumphant ascension into Heaven (the "limbus patrum")

    How were these souls justified if there was no baptism?

    Are you so intransigent and obstinate that you would judge the CE heretical, rather than backing away from your erroneous opinion?
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10312
    • Reputation: +6220/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #97 on: August 21, 2018, 03:34:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • From Trent on Justification, Chapter 6:
    http://www.thecounciloftrent.com/ch6.htm


    CANON III.-If any one saith, that without the prevenient inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and without his help, man can believe, hope, love, or be penitent as he ought, so as that the grace of Justification may be bestowed upon him; let him be anathema.

    --Catholics believe that one cannot have faith, hope or charity without the inspiration of the Holy Ghost.

    CANON IV.-If any one saith, that man's free will moved and excited by God, by assenting to God exciting and calling, nowise co-operates towards disposing and preparing itself for obtaining the grace of Justification; that it cannot refuse its consent, if it would, but that, as something inanimate, it does nothing whatever and is merely passive; let him be anathema.

    --Catholics believe that one's free will, moved and excited by God (i.e. actual grace) is a co-oerating factor for being properly disposed to receive justification.  Receiving justification is NOT a passive action, which can't be refused and over which man has no consent.  In other words, God does not force grace on people.

    CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.

    --Faith alone does not provide justification.  (This canon alone, destroys BOD, for it shows that an implicit desire by a non-catholic is insufficient for salvation.)  To be justified requires a proper preparation and dispostion, which only comes "by hearing" the truths of the Faith, in their details, so that the non-catholic understands Catholicism's beliefs.  An implicit, hazy, generalized "love of God" does not suffice for the reception of justification, and certainly not Baptism.


    In the Preamble to these decrees, Trent explains that:
    Chapter I:  The inability for Nature or the Law to Justify

    The holy Synod declares first, that, for the correct and sound understanding of the doctrine of Justification, it is necessary that each one recognise and confess, that (paraphrasing)...

    Summary:  One must believe in Original Sin, free will and the impairment of human nature.

    --(An ignorant person, or a muslim/hindu/etc does not believe in original sin, so BOD is not possible for them; only for a catechumen.)


    Chapter 2:  On the Incarnation
    Summary:  One must believe in the Incarnation and its necessity

    --(Same as above...BOD is only possible for a catechumen)


    Chapter 3:  Who are Justified through Christ
    Summary:  One must believe that through Original Sin, all are born in sin and require a Redeemer, who is Christ, who died for our sins, and provided a way to become adopted sons of God and have our sins washed away.  These graces are for all men, though not all will receive them.

    --(Same as above...)


    Chapter 4: Justification of the Impious and the Law of Grace
    Summary:  One cannot have grace and be re-born except through Baptism, whereby we are justified through it, or the desire thereof. 

    --(This desire must be explicitly FOR BAPTISM, and not just FOR GOD.  An ignorant person cannot desire baptism, so they can't be justified.  Ignorance isn't a virtue; it's a punishment for sin).


    Chapter 5: On the Necessity, in adults, of a Preparation for Justification

    Summary:  The beginning of justification is by God's grace, where sinful men are called, through no merits of their own; those who are called are quickened by God's grace to co-operate with the illumination of the Holy Ghost, yet sinful man has the power to reject this illumination, but this illumination is not due to their free will. 

    --(If man does not receive the Holy Ghost's illumination, he cannot be justified.  Ergo, BOD is not possible for those who haven't received illumination from the Holy Ghost, for by definition an ignorant person hasn't received any illumination from God.  Further, an ignorant person or a "good willed" Muslm haven't had ANY preparation for baptism.  A desire "for God or heaven" is not sufficient.)


    Chapter 6: The manner of Preparation
    Summary:  Those are disposed to unto justice, who assisted by Divine Grace (i.e. actual grace), conceiving faith by hearing (i.e. have an idea of the Church), are freely moved towards God, believing those things to be true which God has revealed and promised,...understanding themselves to be sinners...turn from the fear of divine justice towards the mercy of God...confiding, by hope, that God will be propitious to them for Christ's sake.

    ...they begin to love God as the fountain of justice; and are therefore moved against sins by a certain hatred and detestation, to wit, by that penitence which must be performed before baptism:  lastly, when they purpose to receive baptism, to begin a new life, and to keep the commandments of God.

    Concerning this disposition it is written; He that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him; and, Be of good faith, son, thy sins are forgiven thee; and, The fear of the Lord driveth out sin; and, Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost; and, Going, therefore, teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; finally, Prepare your hearts unto the Lord.


    --(An ignorant person cannot purpose to receive Baptism, or begin a new life.  They can, arguably, decide to keep the commandments, since all these are written in man's heart, except for the first 3, being the Divine Commandments, which they would learn about during their "hearing" of the Faith.  But since they haven't heard, being still ignorant, they cannot decide to keep ALL the commandments.

    Secondly, one who desires to receive baptism, even if they are muslim, hindu, etc cannot be properly called a muslim or hindu anymore, for if they truly desire to enter the Church and to being a new spiritual life, they will have had to discard their erroneous religion in order to accept Christ's.  Therefore, it is wrong to say that muslims or hindus etc can receive BOD, since Trent tells us that only those who desire the Faith (i.e. catechumens) are properly disposed to receive baptism.  Therefore, as Trent teaches, only formal catechumens are properly disposed and prepared to receive Baptism, whether in fact or by desire.)


    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4452
    • Reputation: +5061/-436
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #98 on: August 21, 2018, 03:48:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The tempers are certainly running high now, which is usually when I bow out.  I'll kindly request that any of my interlocutors (or Sean Johnson) PM me when it gets back on track.  I've singularly endeavored, for five pages now, to only discuss one argument (not a "conflation" of them, as Lad contends-- he has a bad habit of setting up strawmen so that he can feed his bizarrely masochistic obsession with unorthodoxy).  I don't like sounding like a broken record, so that's it for me.  I truly fear adopting the sort of impatience and eagerness to discover error so rampant among some of the posters in this thread.  I think that's soul-destroying.  Where your treasure is, there is your heart. 

    I certainly won't ask (even less expect) an apology, but I gave no heretical formulations (that's twice, without batting an eye, that Lad has thrown this type of charge my way, never substantiated).  Ladislaus is so committed to unearthing unorthodoxy that he's starting to invent it.  Rather than assuming that one understands, go to my posting history and look for the formulation in question.  ctrl+f will be your friend.   https://www.cathinfo.com/profile/?area=showposts;u=2023

    I'll leave you guys with this consideration from Pope Pius XI's most trusted moral theologian, Fr. Vermeersch:


    Quote
    Be kind; do not seek the malicious satisfaction of having discovered an additional enemy to the Church. The bitterness of some men's writing is very exasperating, and irritation will sometimes bring down a tottering structure which a little kindness might have saved. What would have become of Abelard without the gentleness of Peter the Venerable? Charity has good, not evil, for its object; it would rather win hearts by gentleness than humiliate them by an assumption of superiority. Be courteous; in the fight against error treat your adversary with deference. And, above all, be scrupulously truthful. To all, friends and foes alike, give that serious attention which does not misrepresent any opinion, does not distort any statement, does not mutilate any quotation.

    We need not fear to serve the cause of Christ less efficiently by putting on His spirit. In our own day especially, when men love to make a show of sincerity, and when so many honest but mistaken souls are yearning for the truth, let us count Christian loyalty as one of the most powerful influences to induce men to accept the gift of faith. Defective arguments weaken sound propositions; false statements embitter disputes, perpetuate controversies, multiply misunderstandings, and give an opening for crushing rejoinders. An arrogant and uncompromising tone in an author makes men reluctant to listen to his arguments, and anxious to see him proved to be wrong. We do not establish a truth by showing that there is little evidence to support it; we cannot eradicate error by making it look like truth; and we cannot hope to persuade a reader if we begin by exciting his antipathy. There is much sound sense as well as humour in the words of St. Augustine: "Wolves sometimes disguise themselves in sheep's clothing, but that is no reason why sheep should change their skins.” Those victories alone give glory to Christ which are won by the weapons of Christ, for these are the weapons of justice.5 To wish for no other victory, we need great self-control, perfect confidence in the ultimate triumph of truth, zeal untainted by unworthy motives; and this self-control, this confidence, this zeal, enhance the private virtue of tolerance, and invite the admiration of all men. ("On Tolerance", 1913)
    .
    See you guys later
    "Be kind; do not seek the malicious satisfaction of having discovered an additional enemy to the Church... And, above all, be scrupulously truthful. To all, friends and foes alike, give that serious attention which does not misrepresent any opinion, does not distort any statement, does not mutilate any quotation. We need not fear to serve the cause of Christ less efficiently by putting on His spirit". (Vermeersch, 1913).

    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +453/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #99 on: August 21, 2018, 04:08:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is correct, and the vast majority of BoDers fall into heresy on this point.  Elsewhere, Trent explicitly taught that, in the case of Confession, perfect contrition without the Sacrament of Confession did not suffice to restore the soul to a state of justification, that the Sacrament is necessary as the instrumental cause.  Same thing must be said for Baptism, but many BoDers deny this and claim, quite heretically, that justification and salvation can happen without the Sacrament of Baptism.  In fact, Miths' original formulation (of "through", which I correct to "before") was heretical.

    Yes, the Council of Trent teaches that perfect contrition (in case of a baptized person), which includes the explicit desire for the sacrament of confession, restores the sould to the state of justification.

    And no, same thing must not be said for baptism, since the Council does not teach such a thing and forbids to teach otherwise.
    Men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple ... Jerome points this out. (St. Robert Bellarmine)

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10312
    • Reputation: +6220/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #100 on: August 21, 2018, 04:16:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Is it theologically possible that any of those who die justified are damned?

    If you answer yes, can you provide a single citation to back it?
    Is it theologically possible that any who die justified but not baptized go to heaven?  (p.s. some catechumens were baptized, though they were referred to catechumens still).
    If yes, provide a citiation.
    I'll wager there are no theological opinions for either case because it's a question the Church has yet to answer.


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #101 on: August 21, 2018, 04:23:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Yes, the Council of Trent teaches that perfect contrition (in case of a baptized person), which includes the explicit desire for the sacrament of confession, restores the sould to the state of justification.

    And no, same thing must not be said for baptism, since the Council does not teach such a thing and forbids to teach otherwise.

    And yet the CE teaches us that the “limbus patrum” was the place or state  where the souls of the just (even though there was no baptism) were detained until Christ’s ascension.

    For your (mis)reading of Trent to be correct, the existence of the “limbus patrum” is an impossibility.

    And of course, none of the theologians who describe the “limbus patrum” thusly (which is the common and constant doctrine of the Church) realized they were running afoul of Trent.

    Nor did any of the censors librorum notice.

    It wasn’t until Fr Feeney’s disciples “discovered” all these errors that we are finally able to go back and correct all these “errors” (and I won’t even mention the implications present regarding indefectability and infallibility bound up in making such an absurd argument.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +453/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #102 on: August 21, 2018, 04:24:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Then the old Catholic Encyclopedia is heretical in its description of the “limbus patrum” when it describes it as:

    In theological usage the name is applied to (a) the temporary place or state of the souls of the just who, although purified from sin, were excluded from the beatific vision until Christ's triumphant ascension into Heaven (the "limbus patrum")

    How were these souls justified if there was no baptism?

    Are you so intransigent and obstinate that you would judge the CE heretical, rather than backing away from your erroneous opinion?

    I am talking about Justification as declared and defined by the Council of Trent in the 16th century, Justification "under the law of grace" and "since the promulgation of the Gospel".
    Men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple ... Jerome points this out. (St. Robert Bellarmine)

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10312
    • Reputation: +6220/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #103 on: August 21, 2018, 04:28:19 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    And yet the CE teaches us that the “limbus patrum” was the place or state  where the souls of the just (even though there was no baptism) were detained until Christ’s ascension.

    For your (mis)reading of Trent to be correct, the existence of the “limbus patrum” is an impossibility.
    The Old Testament saints were justified and adopted sons of God, due to following the Old Law, which is analogous to Baptism in the New Law.  The reason they were in Limbo was because Heaven was still closed due to Original Sin (opened at Christ's ascension), not because they hadn't been baptized.

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is BOD Merely a "Disputed Issue?"
    « Reply #104 on: August 21, 2018, 04:28:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Is it theologically possible that any who die justified but not baptized go to heaven?  (p.s. some catechumens were baptized, though they were referred to catechumens still).
    If yes, provide a citiation.
    I'll wager there are no theological opinions for either case because it's a question the Church has yet to answer.

    You mean like every soul in the “limbus patrum?”

    Ps: I saw a question in your response (which I have just answered), but I did not see an answer.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."