baptism of desire Vs Limbo

BTW, Duckbill.

MRyan has already established that having "hope" that an unbaptized infant may be saved does not indicate one "does not accept Carthage."

So, not only do you lack proof that I have such a hope, but even if you did, your charge would fail utterly.

"It has been decided likewise that if anyone says that for this reason the Lord said: "In my father's house there are many mansions"(JN14:2): that it might be understood that in the kingdom of heaven there will be some middle place or some place anywhere where the blessed infants live who departed from this life without baptism, without which they cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven, which is eternal life, let him be anathema. For when the lord says :"Unless a man be born of water and the Holy Ghost, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God"(Jn3:5), what Catholic will doubt that he will be partner of the devil who has not deserved to be a co-heir of Christ? For he who lacks the right part will without doubt run into the left" (Denzinger 102 fn.2; 30th edition)

No you wouldn't be a heretic per se. Since the pope ok-ed the commission and the CCC. There is room for discussion on the topic. But I reject the findings of the commission, that there is hope and think I have good reasons for doing so.

They don't seem to have investigated the possibility that Carthage could be considered infallible, most would say it was just a local council. So since there seems to be room to hold to the impossibility of infants' salvation without baptism=Limbo, as the commission itself states, I hold that doctrine.

Thread locked.