Author Topic: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved? (Read 31283 times)

Last Tradhican · « **Reply #255 on:** February 02, 2020, 09:44:27 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on February 02, 2020, 07:41:51 PM

I’ve never heard of the “limbo of infants” only “limbo”. The quote by Innocent III that has been posted 3x does not limit limbo to infants but anyone who dies with original sin only. An adult can, in theory, repent of their sins, so they could die with only original sin on their souls. Of course this is my opinion, but so is the idea that limbo is ONLY for infants.

It's up to you to prove it, and you have not. Quote me some saints teaching that "An adult can, in theory, repent of their sins, so they could die with only original sin on their souls" and go to Limbo.

Stanley N · « **Reply #256 on:** February 02, 2020, 09:49:26 PM »

Quote from: Last Tradhican on February 02, 2020, 09:35:37 PM

It is a declared dogma of the Church and has been for longer than EENS:

The "Limbo of the infants" is not a single concept. Some aspects are doctrines, some aspects are speculations.

For example, look at the quote you provided in response - it appears to say those dying with only original sin suffer the pain of loss. Is that your understanding of the limbo of the infants?

Last Tradhican · « **Reply #257 on:** February 02, 2020, 09:52:44 PM »

Quote from: SeanJohnson on February 02, 2020, 09:42:04 PM

Because the Church is unanimous in affirming that those who die in grace are united to the Church, even if not members of the Church.

That's a puerile comment. It is just an end run around all the dogmas of EENS, baptism, confession, perfect act of contrition, belief in Christ and the Holy Trinity.....
That's like saying that those who die in a state of sanctifying grace are saved. Yeah, of course, no revelation there. The problem is how do they get in a state of sanctifying grace without being baptized Catholics, nor wanting to go to confession to a priest. Not even a Catholic can get in a state of sanctifying grace unless he at least is willing to go confess his sins to a priest (a Perfect act of contrition requires it!), and even that is not a given unless he actually goes to confession.

Last Tradhican · « **Reply #258 on:** February 02, 2020, 09:57:13 PM »

Quote from: Stanley N on February 02, 2020, 09:49:26 PM

The "Limbo of the infants" is not a single concept. Some aspects are doctrines, some aspects are speculations.

For example, look at the quote you provided in response - it appears to say those dying with only original sin suffer the pain of loss. Is that your understanding of the limbo of the infants?

Go back and read all of the quotes I posted about Limbo of the infants.

Stanley N · « **Reply #259 on:** February 02, 2020, 10:23:08 PM »

Quote from: Last Tradhican on February 02, 2020, 09:57:13 PM

Go back and read all of the quotes I posted about Limbo of the infants.

I have. As I said, some aspects are doctrine, some are not. To that extent I agree with PV and Lad.
I agree with LT that limbo of the infants - whatever exactly it entails - is for the unbaptized who never achieved the use of reason.

Stubborn · « **Reply #260 on:** February 03, 2020, 05:18:24 AM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on February 02, 2020, 07:41:51 PM

I’ve never heard of the “limbo of infants” only “limbo”. The quote by Innocent III that has been posted 3x does not limit limbo to infants but anyone who dies with original sin only. An adult can, in theory, repent of their sins, so they could die with only original sin on their souls. Of course this is my opinion, but so is the idea that limbo is ONLY for infants.

Where do you get this opinion from Pax? Forgive me if I'm wrong, but it seems to agree with Sean.

Unam Sanctam says simply, there is no forgiveness of sin outside the Church - so any assumed repentance, while not perhaps entirely worthless, will not be forgiven:
“With Faith urging us we are forced to believe and to hold the one, holy, Catholic Church and that, apostolic, and we firmly believe and simply confess this Church outside of which there is no salvation nor remission of sin...."

The Nicene Creed says: "I confess one baptism for the remission of sins."

Scripture teaches all those outside of the Church are guilty of the sin of unbelief, reference John 16:8-9:
"And when he is come, he will convict the world of sin, and of justice, and of judgment. [9] Of sin: because they believed not in me..."

Ladislaus · « **Reply #261 on:** February 03, 2020, 05:59:05 AM »

Quote from: Last Tradhican on February 02, 2020, 09:44:27 PM

It's up to you to prove it, and you have not.

Nobody has to prove anything; conversely, nobody is required to believe this. Again, this is SPECULATION. If you argue that this CANNOT be believed, then it's up to you to prove that it cannot be.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #262 on:** February 03, 2020, 06:00:53 AM »

Quote from: Last Tradhican on February 02, 2020, 09:52:44 PM

That's a puerile comment. It is just an end run around all the dogmas of EENS, baptism, confession, perfect act of contrition, belief in Christ and the Holy Trinity.....
That's like saying that those who die in a state of sanctifying grace are saved. Yeah, of course, no revelation there. The problem is how do they get in a state of sanctifying grace without being baptized Catholics, nor wanting to go to confession to a priest. Not even a Catholic can get in a state of sanctifying grace unless he at least is willing to go confess his sins to a priest (a Perfect act of contrition requires it!), and even that is not a given unless he actually goes to confession.

Sean: If you die in sanctifying grace, you go to heaven.
Response: You can only be in a state of sanctifying grace if you're baptized (Church teaching).

Conclusion: You can only go to heaven if you're baptized.

Quo vadis Domine · « **Reply #263 on:** February 03, 2020, 06:32:27 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on February 03, 2020, 06:00:53 AM

Sean: If you die in sanctifying grace, you go to heaven.
Response: You can only be in a state of sanctifying grace if you're baptized (Church teaching).

Conclusion: You can only go to heaven if you're baptized.

Lad, I didn’t go through the whole thread, so sorry if you already answered this objection. How do you respond to CHAPTER IV of the Council of Trent explicitly teaching that the desire for baptism is sufficient for Justification (i.e. salvation)?:

“A description is introduced of the Justification of the impious, and of the Manner thereof under the law of grace.
By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.”

Last Tradhican · « **Reply #264 on:** February 03, 2020, 07:48:46 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on February 03, 2020, 05:59:05 AM

Nobody has to prove anything; conversely, nobody is required to believe this. Again, this is SPECULATION. If you argue that this CANNOT be believed, then it's up to you to prove that it cannot be.

Pax denies that it is his own speculation, you do not. He denies that it is called Limbo of the Infants, you do not. I asked for you to give me some Saint quotes talking about a healthy normal adult going to Limbo of the Infants. You said there is are no such quotes that it is just Ladislausisms. Pax has not once made all of that clear as you have. He teaches that adults go to Limbo as if it was a dogma, he has never stated that it is his own personal speculation.

I teach that only infants and the mentally handicapped go to Limbo of the infants because that is all that all of the quotes on Limbo of the infants talks about, unbaptized infant. Also, no one can produce any Saint (or a private revelation) saying that a healthy adult has gone to Limbo of the Infants.

Last Tradhican · « **Reply #265 on:** February 03, 2020, 07:55:51 AM »

Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on February 03, 2020, 06:32:27 AM

Lad, I didn’t go through the whole thread, so sorry if you already answered this objection. How do you respond to CHAPTER IV of the Council of Trent explicitly teaching that the desire for baptism is sufficient for Justification (i.e. salvation)?:

“A description is introduced of the Justification of the impious, and of the Manner thereof under the law of grace.
By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.”

First, you tell me, how does a person that has no desire to be baptized, no desire to be a Catholic, no belief in Christ or the Holy Trinity (like a Jew, Hindu, Buddhist....), how can he be saved by this quote from Trent?

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #266 on:** February 03, 2020, 08:07:51 AM »

LastTrad,
Let me clear up what I think. I don't know why you're getting bent out of shape here; you're the one who keeps saying that this-or-that in regards to Limbo is dogma. I keep saying ALL details of Limbo are speculation. It can probably be argued that the idea of Limbo is doctrine, but we can't say for sure who is or isn't there.
.
1. You have argued that you "never heard" of adults going to Limbo. I'll counter by saying I've never heard the term "limbo of infants", which implies adults can't go.
2. For the 3rd time, Pope Innocent's quote on Limbo COULD include adults, since he does not say infants only, but says that those who die with only original sin go to Limbo.
3. On the thread of 'salvation for native Indians' there was some saint who said that God could leave some "good natured" Indians in ignorance as a blessing because while they are good-willed on a natural level, He knew they wouldn't accept the Faith, so He did not have it preached to them, so they wouldn't be guilty for this grave sin. Thus, they could die and their eternal suffering would be minimal. ...This is obvious speculation, but it's the line of thinking that I am arguing.
4. It's possible for an unbaptized, above-the-age-of-reason person to die without mortal sins. Like a 7-10 year old. Or even an adult "ignorant native". Is it likely? No. Possible? Yes.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #267 on:** February 03, 2020, 08:09:05 AM »

Quote

"An adult can, in theory, repent of their sins, so they could die with only original sin on their souls"

Sorry, this is not correct. I responded too fast and I abjure this error. Sorry for the confusion.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #268 on:** February 03, 2020, 08:22:09 AM »

Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on February 03, 2020, 06:32:27 AM

Lad, I didn’t go through the whole thread, so sorry if you already answered this objection. How do you respond to CHAPTER IV of the Council of Trent explicitly teaching that the desire for baptism is sufficient for Justification (i.e. salvation)?:

“A description is introduced of the Justification of the impious, and of the Manner thereof under the law of grace.
By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.”

Sure, Quo. We've spent hundreds of pages discussing these issues, so I hesitate to dredge it up ... and derail this thread for another 100 pages.

Trent here, IMO, is teaching that BOTH the laver (Sacrament) AND the desire are necessary for justification.

The language is quite deliberate. It does not say that someone CAN be justified WITH either the laver or the desire. Rather, it says that one CANNOT be justified WITHOUT either the laver or the desire. CANNOT WITHOUT teaches necessary cause but not sufficient cause.

I cannot play a game of baseball without a bat or a ball. Does this mean that I CAN play baseball if I have ONE or the OTHER?

Trent's core teaching is that the Sacraments both work ex opere operato but then also require cooperation of the will. There's in fact a condemnation of the proposition that one is magically justified by Baptism even if one does not desire to receive it.

This is just the summary here, but that's the crux of how I interpret Trent. Of course, Father Feeney is quite correct that justification is not the same as salvation. Trent in fact teaches this later, that an additional grace of final perseverance is required to transition from justification to salvation.

Quo vadis Domine · « **Reply #269 on:** February 03, 2020, 08:29:17 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on February 03, 2020, 08:22:09 AM

Sure, Quo. We've spent hundreds of pages discussing these issues, so I hesitate to dredge it up ... and derail this thread for another 100 pages.

Trent here, IMO, is teaching that BOTH the laver (Sacrament) AND the desire are necessary for justification.

The language is quite deliberate. It does not say that someone CAN be justified WITH either the laver or the desire. Rather, it says that one CANNOT be justified WITHOUT either the laver or the desire. CANNOT WITHOUT teaches necessary cause but not sufficient cause.

I cannot play a game of baseball without a bat or a ball. Does this mean that I CAN play baseball if I have ONE or the OTHER?

Trent's core teaching is that the Sacraments both work ex opere operato but then also require cooperation of the will. There's in fact a condemnation of the proposition that one is magically justified by Baptism even if one does not desire to receive it.

This is just the summary here, but that's the crux of how I interpret Trent. Of course, Father Feeney is quite correct that justification is not the same as salvation. Trent in fact teaches this later, that an additional grace of final perseverance is required to transition from justification to salvation.

I think you know that I respect your opinion on many things. I’ll make a new thread to hash this out.

Author Topic: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved? (Read 31283 times)

Last Tradhican

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?

Stanley N

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?

Last Tradhican

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?

Last Tradhican

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?

Stanley N

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?

Stubborn

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?

Ladislaus

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?

Ladislaus

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?

Quo vadis Domine

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?

Last Tradhican

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?

Last Tradhican

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?

Pax Vobis

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?

Pax Vobis

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?

Ladislaus

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?

Quo vadis Domine

Re: Why do all major Trad organisations teach those in false religions can be saved?