tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post7652896767559128788..comments2023-10-30T08:00:43.585-05:00Comments on Shameless Popery: Where Do Unbaptized Babies Go When They Die?Joe Heschmeyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06998682878420098470noreply@blogger.comBlogger98125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-19306800806936562372014-09-30T13:07:11.022-05:002014-09-30T13:07:11.022-05:00The difference between believers (faithful Catholi...The difference between believers (faithful Catholics in full communion with the Church) and non-believers is the covenant that believers are part of. Babies born into the families of believers will have the blessings of the covenant applying to the whole family-- and hence their parent's faith (and faithfulness!) can speak for them. Non-believers have no such covenant to cover them.magalabastrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13197264291053494191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-41096907085833519392014-06-03T08:42:11.335-05:002014-06-03T08:42:11.335-05:00You should probably back up a few steps before dec...You should probably back up a few steps before deciding about baptized babies going to heaven or hell. Exactly how clear is it that there is a heaven and a hell, or that adults are going there? And don't be confusing the heavens (sky) or the kingdom of heaven with heaven as a destination. The Bible is actually amazingly unclear if the intention were to teach us about destination heaven and destiantion hell !!!queuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13700195176285254614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-78503771572334562752014-03-20T14:32:38.989-05:002014-03-20T14:32:38.989-05:00Joe, 1st, please understand that I mean no disresp...Joe, 1st, please understand that I mean no disrespect. With that being said, you make a good point, I understand completely from where you are coming. I also understand that she was speaking on a personal agenda and not generalizing on the 1st part of her post. But, the 2nd part "Your faith spoke for this child. Baptism for this child was only delayed by time. Your faith suffices." is, with all due respect a somewhat bigoted statement. Now, going by what this says, I'm inclined to ask again, "What about the babies of unbelievers or people of other religions? What happens to those babies when they die before having had the chance to get baptized or not having had the time to grow the consciousness to accept God?" <br /><br />Thank you,<br /><br />ClivensAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08144960908939566710noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-31973281991595226712014-03-19T20:42:42.621-05:002014-03-19T20:42:42.621-05:00Clivens,
The babies in question had no say in the...Clivens,<br /><br />The babies in question had no say in the matter. It wasn't their fault that they weren't baptized. So there's no particular reason to believe that they would be treated differently than the unbaptized children of believers.<br /><br />God bless,<br /><br />JoeJoe Heschmeyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06998682878420098470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-10092022472966174102014-03-19T08:19:31.752-05:002014-03-19T08:19:31.752-05:00Please accept my sincere condolences. A question s...Please accept my sincere condolences. A question still boggles my mind, though. What about the babies of unbelievers or people of other religions? What happens to these babies when they die before having had the chance to get baptized or not having had the time to grow the consciousness to accept God?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08144960908939566710noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-18343122541421085192013-10-26T22:09:16.642-05:002013-10-26T22:09:16.642-05:00This is the crux of the matter. The component mis...This is the crux of the matter. The component missing is that the Blood of Christ saves, not an act of baptism. <br />A loving God would never harm the innocent ones. <br /><br />The thief on the cross was not baptized and he was in paradise that day for believing.<br />The solution is Jesus not water. But this is the matter for the living. <br /><br />All those AnaBaptists died for nothing. Because the answers are the same, unbaptized babies go to the Father. <br />People think in the physical terms vs. spiritual. <br />As in you must be born again and eat my flesh......but Jesus was speaking spiritual words. <br /><br />If all we need is water, then we do not need the Cross. <br />But the water immersion reflects the change of a new believer who has died and raised again like Christ. <br />If water saves, then we need to start dropping water on our big cities and Islamic countries. <br />Maybe a rain can be used instead. Or we can desire them to be saved. <br /><br />Outside the Blood of Christ all is confusion. <br /><br /> <br /><br />PopPophttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02612159320574220853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-50075570418453590162013-10-08T09:58:00.598-05:002013-10-08T09:58:00.598-05:00Very good article, but I would add one amendment. ...Very good article, but I would add one amendment. You say Augustine harbored serious doubts about what happens to unbaptized babies who die. No, he was explicit about this matter: He believed -- and said so in very certain terms -- that unbaptized babies who die suffer the torments of Hell. This is not a matter for debate; it is an observation of fact. The Jansenists and those who honored Jansenist principles, were stern Augustinians in their thinking, and all of them, including Blaise Pascal, concluded that these babies are in Hell. My reading of everything the Church has taught about the matter since Augustine's time seems to indicate that the Church simply does not agree with the former Bishop of Hippo. I am very glad that is the case.Johnny Cure-dentshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15762795382889962687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-15123844190407227322013-06-29T02:00:37.286-05:002013-06-29T02:00:37.286-05:00JoAnna, it was a beautiful quoteJoAnna, it was a beautiful quoteAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-35321650242104997082013-06-29T01:58:10.528-05:002013-06-29T01:58:10.528-05:00Very rational and thoughtful point Leila, and the ...Very rational and thoughtful point Leila, and the overall tone of the article is one of hopeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-39381200638956145842013-05-05T19:19:01.429-05:002013-05-05T19:19:01.429-05:00Nothing impure enters Heaven (Rev. 21:27)(And ther...Nothing impure enters Heaven (Rev. 21:27)(And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.).<br />(John)(Jn-3-5)(Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.)<br /><br />Islam is the true way, there is no Original sin in our bodies.<br />Nobel Quran<br />2:35 We said: "O Adam! dwell thou and thy wife in the Garden; and eat of the bountiful things therein as (where and when) ye will; but approach not this tree, or ye run into harm and transgression." <br /> <br /> 36 Then did Satan make them slip from the (garden), and get them out of the state (of felicity) in which they had been. We said: "Get ye down, all (ye people), with enmity between yourselves. On earth will be your dwelling-place and your means of livelihood - for a time." <br /> <br /> 37 Then learnt Adam from his Lord words of inspiration, and his Lord Turned towards him; for He is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful. <br /> <br /> 38 We said: "Get ye down all from here; and if, as is sure, there comes to you Guidance from me, whosoever follows My guidance, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. <br /> <br /> 39 "But those who reject Faith and belie Our Signs, they shall be companions of the Fire; they shall abide therein."<br /><br />And that is allAmmarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04263351514393537521noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-59124896006544304822013-03-11T06:29:37.331-05:002013-03-11T06:29:37.331-05:00"St. Bernard of Clairvaux, a 12th-century the..."St. Bernard of Clairvaux, a 12th-century theologian and a Doctor of the Church, wrote to a couple who had suffered a miscarriage,<br /><br /> “Your faith spoke for this child. Baptism for this child was only delayed by time. Your faith suffices. The waters of your womb — were they not the waters of life for this child? Look at your tears. Are they not like the waters of baptism? Do not fear this. God’s ability to love is greater than our fears. Surrender everything to God.”"<br /><br />So it is a letter of St Bernard's. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00900893132437548227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-81313116581616906892012-08-03T09:35:52.292-05:002012-08-03T09:35:52.292-05:00Hey! I'm a regular reader, new poster to your...Hey! I'm a regular reader, new poster to your blog, and I have a question concerning John the Baptist's lack of Original Sin.<br /><br />As far as I can tell, the Church has not make a formal statement on whether or not JtB was actually born without Original Sin. Could you provide me with your source that proves otherwise? Much appreciated!<br /><br />NickThe Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10912004305181626195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-28204176737273180202012-06-27T16:58:48.691-05:002012-06-27T16:58:48.691-05:00Joe thank you for this wonderful, clear, hope-fill...Joe thank you for this wonderful, clear, hope-filled post! As someone who has lost two babies to miscarriage, the concept of Limbo has always troubled me--and yet the reality is that Scripture and the Church do NOT explicitly teach that these babies automatically go to Heaven. At any rate, I so appreciated your words, and I will continue to hope to see my two little ones again one day in Heaven.Brianna Heldthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08224838737334231065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-91719158264152919972012-06-27T12:31:57.998-05:002012-06-27T12:31:57.998-05:00Well, the persecuted Christians are not really in ...Well, the persecuted Christians are not really in the same boat as the unborn, since they ALL would have committed at least one personal sin, so their fate is completely unknown to us for that reason alone. Also, is the Church's declaration of canonization an act of infallibility? Really, I want to know because I have heard that it is not. Unlike you, I do not take the mortal body into consideration in this conversation since it amounts to nothing and will pass away. The soul is what matters here so a martyred Saint is certainly a crime for the perp since it severs the soul from right relation with God, but at the same time, it is a great victory for the one slain for the faith. What greater gift, if understood properly, could one receive than being slain victoriously for the Christian faith? Abortion does not have this quality since the crime is negative for both parties.<br /><br />Christ said one must be born again via water and spirit (baptism), not "one must be martyred" to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. When a statement like this is made with a clear "need" for something; the devil will surely try to prevent that "need" from happening. Only abortion prevents this need for baptism, not martyrdom or any other sin due to the other forms of baptism. To wrap this up, it seems somewhat clear that we just don't know how Baptism of Desire can be applied and seems to be the only option outside Sacramental Baptism for the unborn to go to Heaven. But then, many still apply Baptism of Blood to the unborn because of the Holy Innocents. However, the Holy Innocents died directly because of Christ, not just for Him; they were slain in His place. Surely Christ's Divine favor should rest upon them as the Church teaches. Also, the Holy Innocents that were circumcised are saved under the Old Covenant(but only through Christ in the New) and those not circumcised yet because of age would have died by Baptism of Desire by proxy of their parents, if we are allowed to go there. I shall pray for the unborn, nonetheless.<br /><br />Take care,<br />MichaelCM7https://www.blogger.com/profile/07438061668265715771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-35824904695789774722012-06-27T11:25:32.348-05:002012-06-27T11:25:32.348-05:00Michael,
Don't worry, I'm enjoying this d...Michael,<br /><br />Don't worry, I'm enjoying this discussion. I would reiterate that Satan enjoys the death of the martyrs (and of the Holy Innocents), yet we know that they went on to eternal bliss. At least in part, it's about corrupting the souls of those who do the killing; it's probably also mindless evil. I suppose I don't see a reason to buy the argument "abortion is bad, Satan enjoys it, therefore the murdered unborn must not go to Heaven," without also buying the argument, "Christian persecution is bad, Satan enjoys it, therefore the martyrs must not go to Heaven." What am I missing?<br /><br />I.X.,<br /><br />JoeJoe Heschmeyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06998682878420098470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-26267469977714537072012-06-27T11:22:47.374-05:002012-06-27T11:22:47.374-05:00Joe,
You make some good points and they are well ...Joe,<br /><br />You make some good points and they are well taken. Mortal sin is a very big deal since our physical death is unknown. My intent was not to make light of it, but trying to stress that the death of an unbaptized infant is even worse since there is no time left for repentance, and we know God's mercy ends at death as judgement begins. Abortion is a big win for Satan, a victory that surpasses most other offenses; surely you wouldn't disagree with that. Since it is the great sin of our time and many other times, I can't think the fruits of it would be rather benign toward the murdered unborn. From Satan's perspective, if the murdered unborn went to heaven, then he should think of some other great sin to lure us into, one that has more sting, though I am not sure what that could be.<br /><br />I am just thinking out loud and enjoy your comments back, it causes me to reflect more on the situation.<br /><br />Thanks,<br />MichaelCM7https://www.blogger.com/profile/07438061668265715771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-11478676439327673562012-06-26T17:05:28.836-05:002012-06-26T17:05:28.836-05:00Michael,
Good questions. My thoughts:
1- one mus...Michael,<br /><br />Good questions. My thoughts:<br /><i>1- one must be baptized to go to heaven; period the end.</i><br />This certainly appears to be correct, as long as we don't falsely equate this with water (or Sacramental) Baptism, since the Church clearly teaches, as you note in # 2.<br /><br /><i>3- whether we accept baptism of blood or not, it does not seem to come into play here since the unborn is not making a reasoned effort to die for the faith,...</i><br />The Holy Innocents don't seem to have made a "reasoned effort" to die for the faith, either.<br /><br /><i>however, some argue that the unborn are equal to the Holy Innocents, though the Holy Innocents were likely circumcised under the Old Covenant.</i><br />Certainly, most of them would have been, but it's very much possible, since Herod's orders applied to everyone from newborns to two year-olds, that there were uncircumcised children amongst those slain. Certainly, I know of no Church tradition that says that all of the Holy Innocents were circumcised. <br /><br />In fact, the other Scripture example I mentioned seems to clearly involve the death of an uncircumcised Jewish boy. We know that sons were circumcised on the eighth day (Lev. 12:3; Luke 1:59; Lk. 2:21), yet David's son died on the seventh (2 Sam. 12:18). That David still holds to a reasonable hope for reunion would seem to suggest that, under the Old Covenant, some uncircumcised children may have entered Heaven. So I don't think it's necessary to presuppose that the Holy Innocents were all circumcised, and I don't think that the Church <i>does</i> presuppose this.<br /><br /><i>4- there seems to be no teaching that says baptism of desire cannot be achieved by the desire of the parent on behalf of the child, even though traditionally, one must desire it for himself.</i><br /><br />I know of no direct teaching from the Magisterium. If I'm not mistaken, St. Thomas rejects this option, though.<br /><br /><i>Why would the Church teach that one must be baptized as soon as possible if the desire for it would suffice, either desired by the person or another on their behalf?</i><br /><br />This same objection could be raised for adults. Every adult that the Church baptizes is one who first desired that Baptism. But the Church doesn't decide that, given this desire, they no longer need Baptism. Sacramental Baptism is a much surer foundation than desire, even though both suffice.<br /><br /><i>What would be the great victory for Satan, if the aborted babies gained Heaven? I see abortion as evil because of it's fruits. If the fruit is ultimately good (heaven), then what is the big deal with abortion?</i><br /><br />Satan desires the destruction of the holy: the death of their soul, or barring that, their body. Hence, martyrdom. We don't say, "what's the big deal about martyrdom," since the martyrs are going to Heaven.<br /><br />And it's precisely because of this errant reasoning that God has chosen to shroud the question of the fate of the unbaptized in mystery.<br /><br /><i>The person that procures the abortion still has a chance for repentance and can still be saved.</i><br /><br />That's true of virtually every mortal sin. Does that mean mortal sin isn't a "big deal"?<br /><br />I.X.,<br /><br />JoeJoe Heschmeyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06998682878420098470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-91708633257626248012012-06-26T16:45:14.857-05:002012-06-26T16:45:14.857-05:00Joe, let me make some points that we all seem to a...Joe, let me make some points that we all seem to agree on and then ask some questions.<br /><br />We seem to agree that...<br />1- one must be baptized to go to heaven; period the end.<br />2- one can be baptized Sacramentally, by desire, and also by blood<br />3- whether we accept baptism of blood or not, it does not seem to come into play here since the unborn is not making a reasoned effort to die for the faith, however, some argue that the unborn are equal to the Holy Innocents, though the Holy Innocents were likely circumcised under the Old Covenant.<br />4- there seems to be no teaching that says baptism of desire cannot be achieved by the desire of the parent on behalf of the child, even though traditionally, one must desire it for himself.<br /><br />I think Baptism of Desire is a possibility but must not be taught as the norm since the Church has never applied it to one on behalf of another. This could cause people to be lax on baptisms for a child that has not reached the age of reason.<br /><br />Why would the Church teach that one must be baptized as soon as possible if the desire for it would suffice, either desired by the person or another on their behalf?<br /><br />What would be the great victory for Satan, if the aborted babies gained Heaven? I see abortion as evil because of it's fruits. If the fruit is ultimately good (heaven), then what is the big deal with abortion? The person that procures the abortion still has a chance for repentance and can still be saved.<br /><br />My understanding and position is that those aborted will go to limbo, but those miscarried may go to limbo or heaven depending on how Baptism of Desire is applied.<br /><br />Your thoughts?<br /><br />Thanks,<br />MichaelCM7https://www.blogger.com/profile/07438061668265715771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-13335727060972777002012-06-26T15:59:58.091-05:002012-06-26T15:59:58.091-05:00Joe,
Right click on the web page while it is play...Joe,<br /><br />Right click on the web page while it is playing and "save as". This will save the mp3 to your desktop where you can listen to it via a media player.<br /><br />MichaelCM7https://www.blogger.com/profile/07438061668265715771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-25321153290492236302012-06-26T14:32:35.708-05:002012-06-26T14:32:35.708-05:00Hold on just a second there before declaring victo...Hold on just a second there before declaring victory. What <i>exactly</i> is the priest saying contrary to the post above? And what do you mean that he has "the authority of the Church on the matter behind him"? <br /><br />I've tried numerous times to listen to that homily, but every time I pause it or try to move ahead or backwards, the whole thing starts over. I've only made it about 13 1/2 minutes in, and don't really want to start over. Can you just summarize what it is that he's saying, and I'll respond to any actual substantial point?<br /><br />I.X.,<br /><br />JoeJoe Heschmeyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06998682878420098470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-56140774961597511512012-06-26T13:52:05.394-05:002012-06-26T13:52:05.394-05:00The priest has the authority of the Church on the ...The priest has the authority of the Church on the matter behind him; there's no doubt he's correct.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13130721368229111666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-6495665456365337432012-06-25T16:53:03.681-05:002012-06-25T16:53:03.681-05:00Jordan,
That was a great homily. Thank you. I h...Jordan,<br /><br />That was a great homily. Thank you. I hope Joe responds to it because he says things that are contrary to it. Though, the priest that gave this homily may very well be incorrect also but he did give many quotes to back his position and I don't see where he misinterpreted them.<br /><br />Thanks,<br />MichaelCM7https://www.blogger.com/profile/07438061668265715771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-57841588097695933342012-06-25T12:36:40.766-05:002012-06-25T12:36:40.766-05:00You need to listen to this: http://www.audiosancto...You need to listen to this: http://www.audiosancto.org/sermon/20070422-Contra-Sedevacantism-and-the-Recent-Document-on-Limbo.htmlAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13130721368229111666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-55363504649507514392012-06-24T20:40:23.679-05:002012-06-24T20:40:23.679-05:00I guess that's the point I'm making: Pope ...I guess that's the point I'm making: Pope Pius's quote doesn't say "damnation" is only for voluntary sin, but that the punishment with eternal torments (plural) is only for voluntary sin. Two different things. So, someone with original sin but not atual sin will still be damned, but he won't be punished with eternal torments. Limbo is a place of the damned, but there are no torments there for actual sin. Your blog pointed out why Limbo is not a perfect explanation, and I agree, but it is the best we've got.<br /><br />Now Gregory was saying that those who died in ages past without baptism, were saved in some cases, but not saved unto Heaven, but saved unto Limbo where they waited Christ to come and set them free. He says later in that same book, "But before our Redeemer by His own death paid man's penalty, those even that followed the ways of the heavenly country, the bars of hell held fast after their departure out of the flesh, not so that punishment should light on them, but that while resting in regions apart, they should find the guilt of the first sin a bar to their entrance into the kingdom, in that the Intercession of the Mediator was not yet come." And this is what I think Pope Pius IX was picking up on, like Pope Gregory said, "not so that punishment should light on them..."<br /><br />It is my entirely private opinion that children who die without baptism go to Limbo and there they encounter Christ (since Limbo is outside of time) and if their souls believe in Him, then they can be released. We know Chirst went to Limbo 2000 years ago, but that is reckonned in time, but once there, He was no longer within time, and so just because a baby dies today, that doesn't mean he can't encounter Chirst in Limbo, since Limbo is outside of time.Deliveringithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06669033602496014348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4999044146888823867.post-16720302692207661592012-06-24T13:18:55.662-05:002012-06-24T13:18:55.662-05:00Unabashed Catholicism. The name was originally gi...Unabashed Catholicism. The name was originally given in jest by one of my Calvinist friends, when I was having trouble coming up with a good blog title. I liked it, and kept it.Joe Heschmeyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06998682878420098470noreply@blogger.com