• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Catholic tradition of Limbo

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I now have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

[or how to spell
]
 

Eliyahu

Active Member
Site Supporter
I understand that you don't understand what I am saying, which is quite usual when we discuss about Catholic Theories.

Here are some tips from Catholic Encyclopedia about Limbo:

that their condition is one of happiness,
that it is temporary, and
that it is to be replaced by a condition of final and permanent bliss when the Messianic Kingdom is established.
In the New Testament, Christ refers by various names and figures to the place or state which Catholic tradition has agreed to call the limbus patrum.


This is quite similar to Purgatory when they explain about it.
Even when RC claim about Purgatory, they mention "Holy Tradition", then they strongly pushed Limbo by mentioning "Holy Tradition" and referred to several verses of Bible in its own way, which is typical way of RC.

If Limbo was not sustained officially by RC, why should RC Priests have to appeal to Pope to jettison it?
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by stray bullet:

It's not that the story telling must stop. Only if the Church issued a doctrinal statement regarding limbo or its non-existence would it need to stop. I believe the Pope is trying to have the clergy and layman favor the non-existence of limbo and the idea that unbaptized, untaught babies enter the fullness of Heaven just as much as we.
Why limbo was ever of interest I don't know.
Indeed since nobody but Catholics believe in it - and since now the Catholics want to say they don't believe in it - why is the Pope trying to stop/end belief in something that you claim Catholics don't believe in??

It would be like the Pope issuing statement that said "we need to consider the Easter Bunny to no longer be real - Easter eggs should no longer be thought of as coming from the Easter Bunny".

And then of course - all RC posters saying "and of course we never did think the Easter Bunny was real". The fact that he has to make that point "clear" or to "encourage Bishops to start teaching/agreeing that the Easter Bunny is not real" betrays the serious nature of the myth and its teaching/endorsement in Catholicism.

In Christ,

Bob
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
The International Theological Commission, an arm of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, is about to issue a new catechism of Catholic doctrine that does away with Limbo, the Corriere reported this week. The catechism is likely to be approved by Pope Benedict XVI, formerly Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, because as cardinal, Ratzinger was the gatekeeper of Catholic doctrine under the late Pope John Paul II.
Kind of interesting "verbage" for a doctrine the RCC never taught.

In Christ,

Bob
 

stray bullet

New Member
Originally posted by Eliyahu:
I think the whole debate becomes too much complicated for the readers to understand.
Let's simply think about Limbo.

When and how was it established?
When was it declared?
What was the scriptural background for it?
Limbo was never declared and I'm not aware of any direct scriptural background.
It is not a doctrine of the Catholic Church and never was. It was an idea floating around that some theologians thought up during the Medieval period.

[quoteThis may tell us how Roman Catholic establish their own theories and sometimes force the people believe and sometimes jettison them quietly or sometimes excuse about them in a sophisticated way.[/quote]

Limbo was an idea, it was not forced upon anyone. It was never really part of our beliefs, so it can't be jettisoned. It is not excused in a sophisticated way because it doesn't need to be excused.

Limbo was a theory developed late in Church, it has no basis (that I'm aware of) in Scripture or Holy Tradition. It was just in idea floating around that caught on in some of the clergy.

Purgatory is the name of a concept that was part of Holy Tradition with some Scriptural suggestion of its existence. It is a doctrine of the Church.

Christian belief is very simple and clear.
We were forgiven to go to Heaven just by the Grace of God. None of our works deserve to get any reward from God or to go to Heaven.
Catholics agree with that.

What Jesus has done for us was enough for everybody. We don't become more capable after we die, than we are while we are alive on this world. No one after death can pay for what we sinned on this world.
If Robber at the Cross could go to Heaven directly without going to Purgatory, why not the today's believers can go to Heaven without going to Purgatory?

Such theory may sound reasonable to those who have no faith about the powerful ransom by the Blood of Jesus who shed the precious blood at the Cross which is enough for all the redemption.
It has nothing to do with no faith about the power of Christ's blood. Purgatory is not about earning salvation, nor paying for your own sins. If you could pay for your sins, then you could work your way out of hell, but you can't. In order to be saved, you must receive forgiveness from God, which is forgiven by the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

To use a metaphor, if we are like planks of wood, then sins are like nails being driven into the wood. There is no way you can pull those nails out on your own- only God does that, by Christ's death and resurrection. Even though the nails have been removed, there is still damage to the wood. Purgatory helps soul undo the damage of their sins.
 

stray bullet

New Member
Originally posted by Eliyahu:
I was talking about the way of excusing Jettison -Limbo.

You would say Purgatory was on the edge of Catholic Doctrines, next to Limbo, when you find it is on Impasse as well.
Purgatory is not on the edge of Catholic doctrine, it is Catholic doctrine.

Limbo is not, it's an idea. Doctrine is not another name of 'ideas', 'theories' or 'beliefs'. Doctrine is a belief stated by the Catholic Church and is infallible and static.
 

stray bullet

New Member
Originally posted by Eliyahu:
This is quite similar to Purgatory when they explain about it.
Even when RC claim about Purgatory, they mention "Holy Tradition", then they strongly pushed Limbo by mentioning "Holy Tradition" and referred to several verses of Bible in its own way, which is typical way of RC.

If Limbo was not sustained officially by RC, why should RC Priests have to appeal to Pope to jettison it? [/QB]
They are asking the Pope to comment on it and discourage clergy from subscribing to the theory.
 

stray bullet

New Member
Originally posted by BobRyan:
Indeed since nobody but Catholics believe in it - and since now the Catholics want to say they don't believe in it - why is the Pope trying to stop/end belief in something that you claim Catholics don't believe in??[

It would be like the Pope issuing statement that said "we need to consider the Easter Bunny to no longer be real - Easter eggs should no longer be thought of as coming from the Easter Bunny".

And then of course - all RC posters saying "and of course we never did think the Easter Bunny was real". The fact that he has to make that point "clear" or to "encourage Bishops to start teaching/agreeing that the Easter Bunny is not real" betrays the serious nature of the myth and its teaching/endorsement in Catholicism.

In Christ,

Bob
Catholics subscribed to the idea, but it was not part of our official beliefs and was most definately not a doctrine. Catholics were free to believe limbo existed or didn't.

The thing about limbo is that there was nothing in the doctrine actually against it, so Catholics were free to believe in it or not.

Let's think of a contemporary issue like homosexuality. There are some Catholics who will believe that it is a choice and that people can overcome it and have heterosexual attractions. There are other Catholics who will believe it is not a choice and is permanent. While the Church teaches that homosexual activity is immoral, Catholics are free to subscribe to either notion about whether or not it is a choice.

What is going on with limbo would be like asking the Pope to discourage believing homosexuality is not a choice. Yes, there were some Catholics that believed it wasn't a choice.. but it wasn't a doctrine and wasn't a belief of the Church officially.
 

stray bullet

New Member
Originally posted by Eliyahu:
You may be talking about 1 Cor 3 instead of 13, which says about Christ as the foundation. No man can build up upon any other foundation like Peter, the human being, than Jesus Christ.

It explains about the test of the works, not the test of any person by fire.

"Fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is"
By such tests, every person will be awarded his or her own rewards. It doesn't mention any single spelling of PURGATORY.
Of course, purgatory is a name for a concept. Is the word Trinity in the bible? No.

Do you think that any one can pay all that is due to him? Can you pay anything due to you now?
Can you pay anything due to you after death? Do you become more capable to pay after death, than while you are alive now?

Mt 18:22-35 talks about the forgiveness, not about PURGATORY. If the person took the forgiveness as really his own and became a true believer, he would not have done so like casting his fellow servant into prison. So, it talks about the hell.
Don't you believe that Jesus Christ has already paid all that is due to you ?

I believe that Jesus Christ paid all the price for my sins and that it was sufficient when Jesus declared " IT IS FINISHED".

Do you have this faith in you as well ?
Please read my post about the wooden plank, should explain it.

Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition Matthew 15:6
Holy Tradition is not a 'tradition', it is what we call apostolic teaching. Paul taught Holy Tradition because the NT wasn't written yet. The apostles spread the Gospel through Holy Tradition- because Matthew, Mark, Luke and John weren't written yet. Like our bibles come from old Greek manuscripts, the manuscripts come from Holy Tradition.

It sounds that you don't know much about the process how the Council of Florence declare the Purgatory and about the theory before that council. Purgatory seems to have showed up among Roman Catholics only after 593 AD and it was declared at Council of Florence.
Please let me know as much as about how the Florence Council declared it. If it was inspired by Holy Spirit, who received the message from Holy Spirit ?
What was the statement by Holy Spirit at that time, as we read Isaiah and Daniel?
Non-Catholics commonly confuse when something was declared a doctrine with when it was introduced. They think the Gospels were written down around the second century or so. The NT wasn't even canonized until the 5th Cnetury. Does that mean we didn't believe in the bible until the 5th Century? No, that means in the 5th Century the Church declared what texts were inspired and authoritative. The Holy Spirit inspires the men, who are the successors of the apostles, to speak on matters of faith without error, like Paul did in his epistles.

So, you try to avoid answering by Yes or No, but excuse in a complicated human theory which is typical way of Roman Catholic when they are in the impasse with their own human made doctrines.

Pope Pius 9 clearly mentioned 2 things:
1) NO SALVATION OUTSIDE HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC.
2) PAPAL INFALLIBILITY

Is 1) wrong or 2) is wrong? Or both are correct or wrong?
You are taking a statement out of context and make it look harsher than it does.
1) "NO SALVATION OUTSIDE HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC." - the term is "Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus" which translated strictly means "Outside of the Church, No salvation". It doesn't mean "Only Catholics are saved". It means outside of the Church, there is nothing that can save you.

What this means is that the teachings of Buddha can't save you. The Qur'an won't save you. Paganism, wicca, Shintoism- none of that stuff will save you. You are saved by what is in the Church- the Gospel, the Scripture, Holy Tradition, Jesus. The Church preserved and taught these things. Protestants hold on to them as well. If it wasn't for the Church, there would be no Gospel to hear about, etc. It is by Jesus pouring His grace through the Church, onto men, clergy and layman alike, that we are saved.

2) No, the Pope is not infallible. The Pope is a sinful, mortal man who can make mistakes. However, like an apostle (being a successor of Peter), the Pope can speak infallibly on matters of faith.. just like Paul, Peter, Matthew, Mark, John, et cetera all did.


I'll respond to the rest of the post later, which consists of a 'history' you'll find on geocities and hate websites, not in the books of any reputable source, nor taught in the history department of any public American Univerisity.
 

Eliyahu

Active Member
Site Supporter
stray bullet said:
Even though the nails have been removed, there is still damage to the wood. Purgatory helps soul undo the damage of their sins.

It seems that you don't believe :

Even Undoing the damage of their sins was done already at the Cross!

Was anything left undone at the Cross?

Do you believe that Jesus cried :
IT IS FINISHED !

Can Purgatory to anything that was not done by Jesus Christ?

There are many powerful verses supporting Trinity like 1 John 5:7.

What are the powerful verses supporting Purgatory, in the Bible?
 

Eliyahu

Active Member
Site Supporter
If Limbo is not the doctrine or belief that Catholic is holding, it would not be stated like this in the Catholic Encyclopedia:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09256a.htm


When Catholic explains about Purgatory it often touches Limbo as well because Catholic invented
Third Zone in addition to Heaven and Hell.

This is from a Catholic Site : http://www.catholic.com/library/purgatory.asp

It is no wonder, then, that those who deny the existence of purgatory tend to touch upon only briefly the history of the belief. They prefer to claim that the Bible speaks only of heaven and hell. Wrong. It speaks plainly of a third condition, commonly called the limbo of the Fathers, where the just who had died before the redemption were waiting for heaven to be opened to them. After his death and before his resurrection, Christ visited those experiencing the limbo of the Fathers and preached to them the good news that heaven would now be opened to them (1 Pet. 3:19). These people thus were not in heaven, but neither were they experiencing the torments of hell.


All of this human theory is based either on the belief that The Atonement by Jesus Christ was not sufficient, and/or
that the goodness of human works can save the people, or that some unknown truth can be established as doctrine by human theory.
 

Eliyahu

Active Member
Site Supporter
Stary Bullet said:

You are taking a statement out of context and make it look harsher than it does .
1 ) "NO SALVATION OUTSIDE HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC." - the term is "Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus" which translated strictly means "Outside of the Church, No salvation". It doesn't mean "Only Catholics are saved". It means outside of the Church, there is nothing that can save you

This is a tricky way how Roman Catholic escapes from the wrong statements.

check this out!
http://www.christiantruth.com/rcchurchandrcfaith.html


Pope Innocent III (1198-1216 A.D.)
By the heart we believe and by the mouth we confess the one Church, not of heretics but the Holy Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic (Church) outside which we believe that no one is saved (From the letter Eius exemplo. Found in Denzinger, p. 166, #423).

Are the Baptists within the Holy Roman Church?


Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quadem, 1854
it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation ;

If you deny these, you are not the faithful Roman Catholic!

Or

You are denying Pope is infallible.

Did they say those words in the dream? or in the toilets? (not ex-cathedra)
 

Eliyahu

Active Member
Site Supporter
Originally posted by Matt Black
[/qb]
Please take some time to read Lumen Gentium; it should answer this question for you. [/QB][/QUOTE]

It is not so difficult that we find what was meant by the statements of Pope Pius 9 in 1854.

At that time no one would have thought that Pope was telling there are exceptions to the Baptists.
Throughout the history, RC maintained that position and Pius 9 just confirmed it.

In the medieval era, do you think that RC people thought there is salavation outside Roman Catholic? Do you think that RC thought there is Salavation in Anabaptists?
 

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Salavation? Is that some kind of weird drooling?

I don't propose to repeat what I posted in the earlier thread about purgatory; it speaks for itself.
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by Eliyahu:
In the medieval era, do you think that RC people thought there is salavation outside Roman Catholic? Do you think that RC thought there is Salavation in Anabaptists?
The Golden Age for the RCC was the "dark ages" for mankind.

As for the "view" of non-Catholics during those dark ages --

That is a matter of fact - history that is available to all who are willing to open their eyes.

Catholic Digest 11/1997 pg 100
The question:
A Baptist family who lives across the street gave me a book called the “Trail of Blood”, by J.M. Carroll. It attacks Catholic doctrine on infant Baptism, indulgences, purgatory, and so on. But I am writing to learn if there is anything in history that would justify the following quotation:
“The world has Never seen anything to compare with the persecution heaped upon the Baptists by the Catholic hierarchy of the Dark Ages. The Pope was the world’s dictator. This is why the Anabaptists before the Reformation called the Pope the Anti-Christ”. Then: “Fifty million died by persecution over a period of 1200 years because of the Catholic Church”
The answer from Fr. Ken Ryan:
“There weren’t any Baptists until 1609, generally thought of as a year occurring after the Dark Ages. (that is why the article above includes Anabaptists) Anabaptists (means anti-baptism of infants – so they re-baptized them as adults) means “re-baptizers” and was a name given to groups existing in the 3rd, 4th, 11th and 12th centuries but they had no connection with the violent civil-religious (Catholic) reformers who appeared in 1521 at Zwickau in Saxony. These 16th century Anabaptists rejected Catholic doctrine on infant Baptism and Lutheran justification by faith, among other things, and intended to substitute a new “Kingdom of God” for the social and civil order of their time. John Leyden was proclaimed King of New Sion at Munster where museums and libraries were destroyed and polygamy was introduced. This group AND Many others were Exterminated during the Peasants Wars by a Combination of civil and religious authority. Whether they were persecuted or punished depends on your point of view”
In the article above – Fr. Ken Ryan makes the meaning of “extermination” of that group and “many other groups” clear for modern readers.
Catholic apologists like Catholic Digest’s Fr. Ken Ryan quoted above often argue that the RCC isn't accountable for the Inquisition, since the state carried out the torturing and the executions. It was the RCC who defined these people as "heretics", however, and the RCC handed them over to the state (John 19:11).
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
When the RCC insisted on lovingly exterminating non-Catholics - did they do that because "there IS salvation outside the church"???

We know from the decrees of Popes and councils that the RCC viewed itself as having authority over the state.

The Fourth Lateran Council, for example, the ecumenical council that dogmatized transubstantiation, declared (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/lat4-c3.html):

”Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and to the best of their ability to exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church; so that
whenever anyone shall have assumed authority, whether spiritual or temporal, let him be bound to confirm this decree by oath. But if a temporal ruler, after having been requested and admonished by the Church, should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated by the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province. If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the
supreme pontiff [the Pope], that he may declare the ruler's vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith; the right, however, of the chief ruler is to be respected as long as he offers no obstacle in this matter and permits freedom of action. The same law is to be observed in regard to those
who have no chief rulers (that is, are independent). Catholics who have girded themselves with the cross for the extermination of the heretics, shall enjoy the indulgences and privileges granted to those who go in defense of the Holy Land.
Other councils, such as Vienna, issued anti-Semitic decrees that ordered the persecution of Jews. The persecution of other groups, such as the Waldensians, was also ordered by the RCC.
For example, Pope Innocent VIII issued a bull in 1487 ordering that people "rise up in arms against" and "tread under foot" the Waldensians.
Roman Catholic and former Jesuit Peter de Rosa writes in Vicars of Christ (Crown Publishers, 1988),

"Of eighty popes
in a line from the thirteenth century on not one of them disapproved of the theology and apparatus of the Inquisition. On the contrary, one after another added his own cruel touches to the workings of this deadly machine."
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
The Catholic historian von Dollinger writes in The Pope and the Council,
"From 1200 to 1500 the long series of Papal ordinances on the Inquisition, ever increasing in severity and cruelty, and their whole policy towards
heresy, runs on without a break. It is a rigidly consistent system of legislation; every Pope confirms and improves upon the devices of his predecessor....It was only the absolute dictation of the Popes, and the notion of their infallibility in all questions of Evangelical morality, that made the Christian world...[accept] the Inquisition, which contradicted the simplest principles of Christian justice and love to our neighbor, and would have been
rejected with universal horror in the ancient Church."
Consider the following news stories from the Vatican City.




Vatican Hosts Inquisition Symposium

By CANDICE HUGHES


.c The Associated Press

VATICAN CITY (AP) –
The Vatican assembled a blue-ribbon panel of scholars Thursday to examine the Inquisition and declared its readiness to submit the church's darkest institution to the judgment of history.

The three-day symposium is part of the Roman Catholic Church's countdown to 2000. Pope John Paul II wants the church to begin the new millennium with a clear conscience, which means facing up to past sins.

For many people, the Inquisition is one of the church's worst transgressions. For centuries, ecclesiastical ``thought police'' tried, tortured and burned people at the stake for heresy and other crimes.

``The church cannot cross the threshold of the new millennium without pressing its children to purify themselves in repentance for their errors, infidelity, incoherence,'' Cardinal Roger Etchegaray said, opening the conference.

The inquisitors went after Protestants, Jews, Muslims and presumed heretics. They persecuted scientists like Galileo. They banned the Bible in anything but Latin, which few ordinary people could read.

The Inquisition began in the 13th century and lasted into the 19th. An index of banned books endured even longer, until 1966. And it was 1992 before the church rehabilitated Galileo, condemned for saying the Earth wasn't the center of the universe.

The symposium, which gathers experts from inside and outside the church, is the Vatican's first critical look at the church's record of repression.

Among other things, it will give scholars a chance to compare notes on what they've found in the secret Vatican archives on the Inquisition, which the Holy See only recently opened.

``The church is not afraid to submit its past to the judgment of history,'' said Etchegaray, a Frenchman who leads the Vatican's Commission on the Grand Jubilee.

Closed to the public and press, the symposium is not expected to produce any definitive statement from the Vatican on the Inquisition. That is expected in 2000 as part of the grand ``mea culpa'' at the start of Christianity's third millennium.

The great question is whether the pontiff will ask forgiveness for the sins of the church's members, as it did with the Holocaust, or for the sins of the church itself. Unlike the Holocaust, the Inquisition was a church initiative authorized by the popes themselves.

Etchegaray on Thursday swept aside the idea that it can be seen a series of local campaigns whose excesses might be blamed on secular authorities. There was only one Inquisition, he said, and it was undeniably an ecclesiastical institution.

The pontiff may give a hint as to his thinking on Saturday, when he meets with participants in the conference.

About 50 scholars from Europe, the United States and Latin America are taking part.

AP-NY-10-29-98 1403EST
 
Top