Author Topic: Limbo & Baptism? (Read 25136 times)

Vladimir · « **Reply #5 on:** August 31, 2009, 04:17:21 PM »

Quote from: Jehanne

Quote from: Vladimir
I think that you should baptise your child as soon as possible. That was standard in older times because of the high rate of infant mortality. But I think that you can delay it in order to have a priest baptise the child, instead of doing it yourself.

An unbaptised child still goes to Hell if he dies, so it is not worth the risk.

That's the point, isn't it? SIDS, right? So, yes, I think that infants should be baptized immediately after birth instead of waiting for a priest to do it. Was not this the practice for centuries??

I do not think so. I think that the child was brought to church as soon as possible.

CM · « **Reply #6 on:** August 31, 2009, 09:21:26 PM »

The child goes to into the fires of hell if it is unbaptized, but if it is healthy and you TAKE PROPER CARE of the child, then I think you should have a priest baptize it.

A Catholic priest. Not a heretic.

Meaning he cannot believe in baptism of desire, limbo of infants, salvation for those who die in invincible ignorance, even if there were people at one time in the world who COULD be invincibly ignorant of the Faith, etc.

In short, I applaud you for baptizing your child, since I highly doubt you will find such a priest. I have been trying and trying, and I STILL have not found such a priest (one who will actually address these important doctrinal concerns).

If anybody knows of one, then I will be glad to make their acquaintance.

Jehanne · « **Reply #7 on:** September 01, 2009, 11:03:22 AM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

The child goes to into the fires of hell if it is unbaptized, but if it is healthy and you TAKE PROPER CARE of the child, then I think you should have a priest baptize it.

That's my point, though! Even given a "healthy" infant, SIDS is always possible; therefore, why not baptize immediately after birth? Would a traditional priest be willing to do this? How about a Norvus Ordo one?

Belloc · « **Reply #8 on:** September 01, 2009, 11:07:28 AM »

Quote from: Vladimir

I think that you should baptise your child as soon as possible. That was standard in older times because of the high rate of infant mortality. But I think that you can delay it in order to have a priest baptise the child, instead of doing it yourself.

An unbaptised child still goes to Hell if he dies, so it is not worth the risk.

Hell as in the same for mortal sinners? or a different place? How do we explain away St. Thomas Aquinas then?

Vladimir · « **Reply #9 on:** September 01, 2009, 11:25:03 AM »

Quote from: Belloc

Quote from: Vladimir
I think that you should baptise your child as soon as possible. That was standard in older times because of the high rate of infant mortality. But I think that you can delay it in order to have a priest baptise the child, instead of doing it yourself.

An unbaptised child still goes to Hell if he dies, so it is not worth the risk.

Hell as in the same for mortal sinners? or a different place? How do we explain away St. Thomas Aquinas then?

Isn't it a place in Hell without the torments of Hell (other than separation from God)?

Author Topic: Limbo &amp; Baptism? (Read 25136 times)

Author Topic: Limbo & Baptism? (Read 25136 times)