Limbo And Extra Ecclesiam

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='mortify' post='1524696' date='May 11 2008, 01:23 AM']Baptism is necessary in terms of means and precept, without it there is no salvation.[/quote]
I disagree. If through no fault of his own a man has no access to baptism, he will be judged by God according to his manner of life, and whether or not he cooperated with the divine energies given to him in an extraordinary fashion.

Edited May 11, 2008 by Apotheoun

[goldenchild17]

alright thanks apotheoun. I'm going to have to do some more reading and if you don't mind I'd like to pass along your posts to someone who I believe can help me digest it a little bit better. I'm sure this is due to a lack of understanding on my part but I'm having a really difficult time justifying what I think you are saying in accordance with what I thought was true Catholic teaching. Anyways, I'll be back hopefully after I've understood this a little better. peace

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1524697' date='May 11 2008, 02:23 AM']I disagree. If through no fault of his own a man has no access to baptism, he will be judged by God according to his manner of life, and whether or not he cooperated with the divine energies given to him in an extraordinary fashion.[/quote]

So that as to understand, would not it be correct to say such a man would be saved by what you described and for the lack of his pagan religion, and not because of it that he could be saved.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1524698' date='May 11 2008, 01:27 AM']alright thanks apotheoun. I'm going to have to do some more reading and if you don't mind I'd like to pass along your posts to someone who I believe can help me digest it a little bit better. I'm sure this is due to a lack of understanding on my part but I'm having a really difficult time justifying what I think you are saying in accordance with what I thought was true Catholic teaching. Anyways, I'll be back hopefully after I've understood this a little better. peace[/quote]
I am sure it is difficult for you, because most Latins are ignorant of the beliefs of Eastern Christians; and so, it must be somewhat shocking to discover that hell itself is a form of redemption, i.e., redemption from non-being (cf. St. John Chrsystom, [i]Homily 9 on 1st Corinthians[/i]), but part of the joy of life is that it is filled with new discoveries.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1524695' date='May 11 2008, 02:20 AM']I would not use the word "place" necessarily in order to describe it; instead, I would simply say that God Himself is man's end.[/quote]

I have heard ArchBishop Sheen describe it similarly. So this makes sense.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1524701' date='May 11 2008, 01:36 AM']So that as to understand, would not it be correct to say such a man would be saved by what you described and for the lack of his pagan religion, and not because of it that he could be saved.[/quote]
He would be saved because he participated in God's energy by living a life of virtue, and because "God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, [and] his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments" (Pius IX, [i]Quanto Conficiamur Moerore[/i], no. 7).

[goldenchild17]

okay well I don't know what I think of all that just yet, but answer me one more question for now, if you would. What is baptism and how does it play into all this? What is it's significance? Because of original sin is simply the inheritance of death, then what good is baptism, because we still die whether we are baptised or not, are we not? thanks

[mortify]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1524697' date='May 11 2008, 02:23 AM']I disagree. If through no fault of his own a man has no access to baptism, he will be judged by God according to his manner of life, and whether or not he cooperated with the divine energies given to him in an extraordinary fashion.[/quote]


Quoting from St John Chyrsostom's commentary on John 3:5 (link posted earlier):

[color="#0000FF"]"[And] do ye who have not yet been deemed worthy, do all things that you may be so, that we may be one body, that we may be brethren. For as long as we are divided in this respect, though a man be father, or son, or brother, or anything else, he is no true kinsman, as being cut off from that relationship which is from above. What advantages it to be bound by the ties of earthly family, if we are not joined by those of the spiritual? what profits nearness of kin on earth, if we are to be strangers in heaven? [b]For the Catechumen is a stranger to the Faithful[/b]. He has not the same Head, he has not the same Father, he has not the same City (...) [b]We risk no common danger; for if it should come to pass, (which God forbid!) that through the sudden arrival of death we depart hence uninitiated, though we have ten thousand virtues, our portion will be no other than hell, and the venomous worm, and fire unquenchable, and bonds indissoluble.[/b]"[/color]

Edited May 11, 2008 by mortify

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1524705' date='May 11 2008, 01:43 AM']okay well I don't know what I think of all that just yet, but answer me one more question for now, if you would. What is baptism and how does it play into all this? What is it's significance? Because of original sin is simply the inheritance of death, then what good is baptism, because we still die whether we are baptised or not, are we not? thanks[/quote]
Your questions have already been answered in the text that I quoted from Fr. Meyendorff:

"The contrast with Western tradition on this point is brought into sharp focus when Eastern authors discuss the meaning of baptism. Augustine’s arguments in favor of infant baptism were taken from the text of the creeds (baptism for "the remission of sins") and from his understanding of Romans 5:12. Children are born sinful, not because they have sinned personally, but because they have sinned "in Adam"; their baptism is therefore also a baptism "for the remission of sins." At the same time, an Eastern contemporary of Augustine’s, Theodoret of Cyrus, [b][i]flatly denies that the creedal formula "for the remission of sins" is applicable to infant baptism[/i][/b]. For Theodoret, in fact, [b][i]the "remission of sins" is only a side effect of baptism, fully real in cases of adult baptism[/i][/b], which is the norm, of course, in the early Church and which indeed "remits sins." [b][i]But the principal meaning of baptism is wider and more positive[/i][/b]: "[i]If the only meaning of baptism is the remission of sins[/i]," writes Theodoret, "[i]why would we baptize the newborn children who have not yet tasted of sin? But the mystery [of baptism] is not limited to this; it is a promise of greater and more perfect gifts. [b]In it, there are the promises of future delights; it is a type of the future resurrection, a communion with the master’s passion, a participation in His resurrection, a mantle of salvation, a tunic of gladness, a garment of light, or rather it is light itself[/b][/i]."

Infant baptism imparts the divine life, the mantle of salvation, the divine adoption, the tunic of gladness, the garment of light, and is a type of the resurrection, etc., but in the case of infant baptism there is no sin to be washed away.

Edited May 11, 2008 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='mortify' post='1524707' date='May 11 2008, 01:48 AM']Quoting from St John Chyrsostom's commentary on John 3:5 (link posted earlier):

[color="#0000FF"]"[And] do ye who have not yet been deemed worthy, do all things that you may be so, that we may be one body, that we may be brethren. For as long as we are divided in this respect, though a man be father, or son, or brother, or anything else, he is no true kinsman, as being cut off from that relationship which is from above. What advantages it to be bound by the ties of earthly family, if we are not joined by those of the spiritual? what profits nearness of kin on earth, if we are to be strangers in heaven? [b]For the Catechumen is a stranger to the Faithful[/b]. He has not the same Head, he has not the same Father, he has not the same City (...) [b]We risk no common danger; for if it should come to pass, (which God forbid!) that through the sudden arrival of death we depart hence uninitiated, though we have ten thousand virtues, our portion will be no other than hell, and the venomous worm, and fire unquenchable, and bonds indissoluble.[/b]"[/color][/quote]
Yes, I read the text you quoted, but as I said already, the Church is bound by the sacraments, but God is not, for He is absolutely free to impart His grace in any way that He wishes. My comment is not all that unusual, because the Latin Church's [i]Catechism[/i] expresses this same idea (cf. CCC #1257).

[goldenchild17]

Thanks again. I will try to get back to you soon. I do want to be able to understand Eastern theology but I've been so caught up with other things since I converted that's its been hard. It's particularly difficult since I don't trust hardly any sources that have come out since Vatican II. Do you know of any good pre-Vatican II sources that are a good primer for getting started in understanding Eastern theology?

[mortify]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1524709' date='May 11 2008, 02:58 AM']Yes, I read the text you quoted, but as I said already, the Church is bound by the sacraments, but God is not, for He is absolutely free to impart His grace in any way that He wishes. My comment is not all that unusual, because the Latin Church's [i]Catechism[/i] expresses this same idea (cf. CCC #1257).[/quote]

St John Chrysostom doesn't appear to leave any hope, not even for the Catechumens who are preparing themselves for Baptism, what then could he say for infants? Is there any evidence from any of the Fathers that unbaptized infants do get saved? It is certainly more pleasing to think that the unbaptized have a chance but if it is not within Sacred Tradition then this hope has no foundation. There is on the other hand the teaching of Christ and the Fathers (at least the Latin Fathers, St John Chyrsostom, and Origen) that baptism is absolutely necessary for infants and adults without exception.

Edited May 11, 2008 by mortify

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1524713' date='May 11 2008, 02:16 AM']Do you know of any good pre-Vatican II sources that are a good primer for getting started in understanding Eastern theology?[/quote]
Vladimir Lossky. [u]The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church[/u]. London: Latimer, Trend and Company, 1957.

[goldenchild17]

okay I'll check it out. Slightly off-topic, but would you say the Maronite Rite Church is more Roman in their theology? Because I attended a Maronite Rite parish for about 3 years when I was younger and attended their catechism classes (or whatever they're supposed to be called I don't recall learning anything different from what I learned in the Latin Rite.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='mortify' post='1524714' date='May 11 2008, 02:22 AM']St John Chrysostom doesn't appear to leave any hope, not even for the Catechumens who are preparing themselves for Baptism, what then could he say for infants?[/quote]
One quotation from St. John Chrysostom, which is not even from his homilies on baptism, is not going to change my position. Infants have no sin, and -- as Pope Pius IX said -- only those deserving of punishment will be punished. In his homilies St. John Chrysostom speaks of the gifts given to infants through the sacrament:

"Blessed be God, who alone does wonderful things! You have seen how numerous are the gifts of baptism. Although many men think that the only gift it confers is the remission of sins, we have counted its honors to the number of ten. It is on this account that we baptize even infants, although they are sinless, that they may be given the further gifts of sanctification, justice, filial adoption, and inheritance, that they may be brothers and members of Christ, and become dwelling places for the Spirit" (St. John Chrysostom, [i]Third Baptismal Instruction[/i], no. 6).

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1524716' date='May 11 2008, 02:28 AM']Slightly off-topic, but would you say the Maronite Rite Church is more Roman in their theology? Because I attended a Maronite Rite parish for about 3 years when I was younger and attended their catechism classes (or whatever they're supposed to be called I don't recall learning anything different from what I learned in the Latin Rite.[/quote]
Yes, the Maronite Church has been more thoroughly Latinized than the other Eastern Catholic Churches, but – like the Byzantine Catholic Churches – the Maronites have begun a process of de-Latinization.

[Selah]

The whole idea of limbo is interesting. I always saw it as just something to show that God does not will anyone to go to hell. Even little children. Even if they do die without baptism, God will still be merciful and send them somewhere else, anywhere, but hell. SO, I am not sure what I think of limbo. But nonetheless, it's interesting.

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+

[dairygirl4u2c]

id also add, to the list of beefs i have. 'whatsover you bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven..." etc, in matthew 18, cause it shows it's not limited to peter in i think 16, the 'you are peter' verse.
and the genearl lack of, to me, sufficient proof for the papacy in the early church.
and lots of other little beefs i have, that i seem to share with teh orthodoxy, ive come to find.
i have more explanations about that in other threads.


and there's some more contradiction concerns, bt a lot of stuff i gotta get organized,,, definitely nothing concrete right now though. just observations like 'the only way the catechism can be truly never wrong, is if limbo is in fact existant-- to the dismay of many modern folks.' and then id point out, that i know not all claim it's infallible all the time, etc, and inseert many other disclaimsers.

Edited June 1, 2009 by dairygirl4u2c

[dairygirl4u2c]

extra ... no salvation outside

quotes from non popes that bolster the idea that the CC contradicted itself, by showing more proof of what was intended by those popes who seemed to have the 'rigid view'

[quote]Saint Charles Borromeo, Founder, (died A.D. 1584): "I wish to die in the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church in which all the saints since Jesus Christ have died, and out of which there is no salvation." (Prayer to Guardian Angel)



Saint Peter Canisius S.J., Doctor, (died A.D. 1597): "Outside of this communion, as outside of the ark of Noah, there is absolutely no salvation for mortals: not for Jews or pagans who never received the faith of the Church, nor for heretics who, having received it, corrupted it; not for schismatics who left the peace and unity of the Church; and finally neither for the excommunicated or those who for any other serious cause deserve to be put away and separated from the body of the Church like pernicious members. For the rule of Cyprian and Augustine is certain: he will not have God for his Father who would not have the Church for his mother." (Catechismi Latini et Germanici)



Saint Robert Bellarmine S.J., Doctor, (died A.D. 1621): "Outside the Church there is no salvation [...] therefore in the symbol [Apostles Creed] we join together the Church with the remission of sins: "I believe in the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of Saints, the forgiveness of sins" [...] For this reason the Church is compared with the ark of Noah, because just as during the deluge, everyone perished who was not in the ark, so now those perish who are not in the Church." (On the Sacrament of Baptism)



"I believe that for the good Christians there is eternal life full of every happiness and free from every sort of evil; as, on the contrary, for the infidels and bad Christians, there is eternal death full of every misery and deprived of every good." (Compendium)



Saint Francis de Sales, Doctor, Founder, (died A.D. 1622): "Neither faith without the Church nor the Church without the faith can save you, any more than the eye without the head or the head without the eye could see light."



"Either you had the true Faith, or you had it not. If not, O unhappy ones, you are damned! ~ Or else men can be saved outside the true Church, which is impossible! Here is the definition of the Church: The Church is a holy university or general company of men united and collected together in the profession of the one same Christian Faith; in the participation of the same Sacraments and Sacrifice; and in obedience to the one same Vicar and lieutenant-General on earth of Our Lord Jesus Christ and Successor of St. Peter; under the charge of lawful bishops. Thank God we are not Jews; we are Catholics! [...] The Word of God is infallible; the Word of God declares that Baptism is necessary for salvation; therefore, Baptism is necessary for salvation." (Catholic Controversies)



“All Protestants will be damned.” (In, On the Church of Christ by Jacques Maritain)



Saint Peter Claver S.J. (died 1654): "Saint Ursula gave her life, together with that of all her friends, for the sake of that faith which I am now describing to you, and think how contrary is the religion you profess to that which they professed; and that Saint Lucius, King of England, was so obedient to the Roman Apostolic See, and had so great a respect for the Chair of Peter, that every year he sent to Rome rich gifts and jewels as tokens and tributes of his recognition. So too did all his descendants until Henry VIII and Ann Boleyn. And consider how that you and all your flock, misled, are following a road that ends in Hell!" (Peter Claver: Saint of the Slaves, Fr. Angel Valtierra, S.J. Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1954.)



Saint John Eudes (died A.D. 1680): "If I had died as a pagan, a heretic, or an apostate, you would have reason indeed to weep. [...] Weep! Weep! Burst into tears, tears of blood! For those are the people who are really dead. [...] It is for such a death that one must shed tears of blood, for those who have not lived as Christians. [...] Let infidels and heretics, let the relatives and the friends of bad Catholics weep without consolation and weep unceasingly for the death of their departed ones!"
[/quote]