so why doesn't the church baptize the miscarried from the moment of conception?  what could be more unjust than to have to spend eternity in (i can't hardly type this with a straight face) moses' bosoms?   just how committed is the church to persons from moment of conception to say 3-4 weeks if it doesn't make more of an effort on their behalf?

good job!

Memento etiam, Domine, famulorum famularumque tuaruum N. et N., qui nos praecesserunt cum signo fídei, et dormiunt in somno pacis.

 The Church honors life in all its stages..as the saying goes....from the womb to the tomb.

 In the eyes of the Church life in the womb (undeveloped lungs) is just as precious as life outside the womb (developed lungs) so when a baby dies in utero, and if the parents bring that loss to the attention of the priest, then these prayers will include them.

You said OT but yet you quote from the NT?  Where is limbo in the OT?    Well known?  I've been reading scripture for 40 years and I've never seen Limbo in scripture. 

Abraham's bosom was also called Paradise.......after the cross Paradise was emptied....there is no one in there.

Jesus said to the thief on the cross...."today you will be with me in Paradise."  It's also said in scripture that he came and "set the captives free." 

The redeemer already came Lula....that's why Paul said he was in between wanting to stay to do the work of spreading the good news and going to be with the Lord.  He said:

"absent from the body is present with the Lord." 

there is no limbo, according to scriptures that is. 

either i'm losin my mind or some sorta miracluous transtextantiation has occured right here in river city resulting in moses' bosoms to become abraham's overnight.  

i'm all for a justifiable remedial edit--except when it impacts my reply without some sorta concession of errata.

KFC POSTS:

Hello KFC,

Read it again....I said it is was well known from Scripture that Heaven was closed until Christ came. You agree with that, right?

KFC POSTS:

True, the word "Limbo" itself is not found in Scripture just as the word "Trinity" itself isn't there.

So, just as the Church expounded the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity,  a term not found in Scripture, the Church defined the doctrine of the Limbo of the Just, as a place, a state or abode in which are detained the souls that have not obtained the happiness of heaven and beatific vision of God. While the actual term Limbo isn't found, the doctrine of Limbo is taught in Scripture.

In the first Creed, not found in Scripture, but given to us by the Apostles, Catholics profess, "He (Christ) descended into Hades, (Hell), the third day He rose again from the dead" Our Lord descend into this place to liberate the Just souls.  St. Peter taught...that Christ after His death went down to the souls that were in prison to announce their redemption. 1St.Peter 3:19; Acts 2:24; 31. Who were these souls? Now we come to understanding Abraham's bosom.

Just as you said, Abraham's bosom is a Jewish idiom that signifies Paradise. It's a place where departed souls of the Just of the OT, from Adam to the thief on the cross, go after death. Some exegetes understand Abraham's bosom in the sense that Abraham received Lazurus as a loving father would take his small son upon his lap or hold him close to him to his heart. Others say Lazurus received a place of honor at the banquet reclining at the right hand of Abraham, St.John 13:23. Jesus Himself frequesntly refers to the Limbo of the Fathers where the Just were detained until Ascension Day under the figure of a banquet or of a marriage feast St. Matt. 8:11; 25:10. He also calls it Abraham's bosom in His parable of Lazurus and Dives, the rich man, where after Lazurus died, his reward "was carried away by angels into Abraham's bosom."  

The deliverance of the Just was predicted by Osee 13:14, "O death, I will be thy death; Oh hell, I will be thy bite; and Zacharais 9:11, "thou also by the blood of the testament has sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit, wherein is no water." And also the same was expressed by St.Paul, Despoiling the principalities and powers, he hath exposed them condifently in open show, triumphing over them in himself." Col. 2:15.  

The Limbo of the Just souls of children also existed in the OT. Those who died in Original SIn and without personal sin were gathered there. Unlike the Just who had died in the state of grace and were waiting the Redeemer, these souls had not been been born into the life of grace. This place is also called "Limbo of the regenerate." Based upon St.Paul's Rom. 3:25, St.Thomas taught that children who died with Original Sin were no sharers in the faith in Christ. Therefore they didn't receive the fruits of Christ propriation, so as to be delivered.  St.Thomas holds that while the children not being born of water and the Spirit and cannot enter Heaven, they do enjoy happiness being united to God by a knowledge and love proportionate to their capacity.

No it's not the same.   True the word Trinity isn't used but not only is the principal found all thru scripture you can see that all three are not only named but are referred to as God.  Limbo just isn't there......unless you want to say Limbo and Paradise are the same.  If so, I guess the question begged to be answered is why is it called "limbo" and not Paradise?  Also, if Limbo is Paradise and using the scriptures you did give above, why would the RCC still say there's others going to Limbo AFTER Christ opened the door and set the captives free? 

There are diff words for hell.   Gehenna is the real genuine hell. No one is there yet.   Hades is a waiting place for unbelievers until the day of judgment.  It's sort of like going to the county jail awaiting trial.  Separated by a great gulf was Paradise where the believers or the just went.  That compartment is now empty because what you mentioned about the creed was that Christ set them free....the unbelievers are still in Hades ( not Gehenna). 

So Christ did NOT descend into hell (hades) but into Paradise like he said he would.  I think the confusion is the two compartments were  near each other with that gulf between them.  See Luke 16. 

when the term "bosom" is used it usually means "intimate; heart to heart."  So I'd agree with those you say have exegeted this passage.   Here's another found in John 1:

"No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him."

you've said this twice now with no prooftext.  I already asked you in my last posting if you could show me where.  I'd be most interested in which scripture you're referring to.  Are you saying Zech 9:11?  The pit?  Cuz that's not limbo. The pit where there is no water were cisterns used as dungeons during the babylonian captivity. 

Huh?  Thomas taught this?  Where?  Can you show me this using scripture?  Or do you have to go outside of scripture to prove this? 

Yes.  Sorry about the lack of reading comprehension.....think I read it too fast after reading the sentence before it. 

euphemism or ???

Yes, I understand that Abraham's bosom, Paradise and Limbo are the same place.  

I think the short answer is becasue we have different epochs of salvation history. Salvation came about one way before Christ and a different way after Christ's Death, Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven.

The Apostle's Creed is a statement of truths the Apostle's believed and the Creed states, "He (Christ) descended into Hell"...

We agree "Hell" here does not mean the place where the damned are, but a place come to be known as Abraham's Bosom or Paradise, as you say separated by a great, impassable gulf...in the parable of Lazurus and Dives, Lazurus went to Abraham's bosom and Dives (gulp) went to Hell, (so Hell existed and he was at least one of those who God condemned there, KFC.)

You know that when our first parents committed Original Sin, death came into the world, Heaven was closed against them and us, (all their prosperity) and no human could be admitted into Heaven till after the death of Our Lord for by His death He redeemed the world and by His resurrection from the dead, would once more open the Gates of Heaven.

During the time that Adam sinned and Christ, 4,000 years, some good people, like Abraham, Moses, Isaac, Jacob, David, and others, who tried to serve God by keeping the divine laws known to them and believing the Messias would some day come to redeem them. When they died, they couldn't go to Heaven, becasue it was closed....and not to Hell becasue they died in a state of goodness and not to Purgatory becasue they would have to suffer there for a while. Where would they go?

God in His goodness provided a place called Abraham's bosom, Paradise, Limbo...where they would stay in happiness and peace until Our Lord reopened Heaven. So, while Our Lord's Body lay in the tomb, His soul "descended into Hell" to tell them that at His ascension He would take them into Heaven with Him. 

While hanging on the Cross, Our Lord promised the pentitent Thief "This day you will be with Me in Paradise." The thief's soul did not go into Heaven until Our Lord's Ascension but rather to the place where the Just awaited there release. By Our Lord's descent on the day  He died, that portion of Hell was turned into Paradise. In 258, Saint Cyprian wrote, "He went like a great King who delivers His subjects from a prison where they have been kept in durance."

It all boils down to Original Sin. Since Adam's sin, every person born, save the Blessed Virgin Mary, Immaculately conceived without Original comes into this world with the guilt of OS.  The major effect of OS is the deprivation of sanctifying grace. St.Paul explains in Rom. 5:12 that we are all sinners and have incurred the penalty of death.  

With OS, we inherit our fallen human nature from Adam. The Council of Trent taught ex cathedra that no one is innocent by nature, that it's necessary that we recognize and confess that all lost their innocence in the prevarication of Adam, Rom. 5:12; 1Cor.15:22, having become unclean, Is. 64:6, and as by nature children of wrath. Eph. 2:3.

The Church teaches that every one  must be cleansed from this state of Original Sin, which makes one a child of the wrath. OS must be wiped away so that the soul that was spiritually dead can come to life. OS is removed by the laver of regeneration, and in the NT according to Christ's own words, it is by Baptism alone, that puts one of the path to Heaven. "Unless a man be brn again of water and the Holy Spirit, he shall not enter the Kingdom of Heaven." St. John 3:5.

It follows then that infants are to be baptised since OS falls on all and must be expiated by the laver of regeneration. This leads to the question of where do the souls of the unbaptized children go...and as far as the Catholic faith is concerned, it is that unbaptized souls do not go to Heaven. But yet, these babies have not the use of reason cannot commit actual sin and therefore can't be punished with the torments of Hell, yet OS deprives them of the Beatific Vision which is only enjoyed by the Blessed souls in Heaven.

According to the Chruch, the souls of the unbaptized, preborn or born babies,  go to a place, Limbo, where they are in a state of perfect natural happiness without any suffering, etc.

The debate that's going on in the Church over Limbo is more focused on whether this state of happiness is like that perfect state of Adam and Eve before the Fall.  

St.Thomas' teachings come from his masterpiece, Summa Theologica.

My 281 post gives the Scripture behind it.  

if that's the case (are you sure?) then I have no problem other than the fact they should call Limbo...Paradise...as it says in scripture.  There's really no limbo really.  They were in good hands and just awaiting the redemption to be finished.  That's why when Christ said "it is finished" he meant the payment was given for the souls of the redeemed. 

There is no difference before the cross or after the cross.  Salvation IS the cross whether you're looking ahead or behind (like we are).  There is salvation in no other name it says in scripture.   Salvation is in Christ alone whether looking ahead or behind.  They either looked forward to the promise of the Messiah or backwards like we do.  We see that very clearly right in Genesis when it says that Abraham was declared "righteous" (saved) because of his belief in the coming Messiah. 

Did you know that Christ (Christos)  means oil?  Maybe that's where we get "Crisco" from?  It means "annointed oil." 

 So when King David was annointed with oil in the OT he was in effect "Messiahed?"  Oil on the head in the OT symbolized God's annointing on him.   The whole annointing in the OT was a picture of the one who would someday come and be THE genuine "annointed one."  He would come filled with God's spirit.  Unlike David who was annointed physically Christ came filled without measure. 

How do you know this?  Were you there?  There's no scripture on this at all.  All we know is that he went to Paradise with Christ by day's end.  We know Christ set the captives free.  We can assume he did it right then or we can assume he did it when Christ ascended 40 days later.  I'm not sure how we can know for sure.  Maybe Christ went to Paradise, visited with all the spirits (saints) that had died previously, and set them free right then and then descended back into his body?  That's what makes sense in my mind, but I can't know for sure because I'm going outside of scripture. 

Where are you getting this?  We see BEFORE Christ died that Abraham and Lazarus were in a different spot than the rich man was.  There was already a separation.  One side was Paradise, and the other Hades.   So nothing was turned into Paradise AFTER Christ died.  It was already there.  ????

Why would that "portion" of hell (Hades)  be turned into Paradise if afterwards "absent from the body is present with the Lord?"  There is no need of a waiting room anymore.  We go straight to God in heaven because the price has been paid. 

lula posts 171

As an addendum to our discussion, pgs.5,6 and 7, about condom education and AIDS, I offer the latest coming out of Africa where there has been an explosion of AIDS even though we've (through the UN) been pumping loads of money, condom education and condoms to these African people.

Ugandan doctor links African AIDS epidemic to Western sexual values 

Kampala, Uganda, April 1 (CNA).-Each day more scientists, researchers and doctors are voicing their support for Pope Benedict XVI's statement that condoms are not decreasing the spread of AIDS in Africa. Dr. Filippo Ciantia, a Ugandan doctor who specializes in tropical medicine, told CNA that, "In every African country where there has been HIV prevalence decline, this has been preceded by decline in casual and multi-partner sex."

Ciantia worked in Northern Uganda from 1980-1989, the critical years where an unidentified virus, now known to be AIDS, began to spread. He described in a 2006 paper, "The Victory of Reason," what he had documented.

"I began to notice some young adults … [who] were severely wasted, with chronic diarrhea, skin rashes and fever. Others were affected by disseminated tuberculosis. I still recall that I hardly believed the results of the biopsy…we were faced with a new disease." The name given to this disease in Uganda was "Slim Disease," but after it was identified as HIV/AIDS, Dr. Ciantia related that "it was clear that there was no cure."

The Ugandan Government eventually realized that this new deadly disease could quickly "wipe away our country," he recalled.  In order to prevent its spread early on, the government produced the booklet, "Guidelines on Control of AIDS," which stressed the need for behavioral change instead of marketing condoms.

Regarding condoms, Ciantia clarified that he has found "limited or no direct evidence" that the societal promotion of condoms has contributed to "the reduction or slowing down of HIV in generalized epidemics."

In 1991, Ugandan President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni rejected "condom social marketing" and instead emphasized a behavioral change approach at an AIDS conference in Florence, Italy. He said, "…I have been emphasizing a return to our time-tested cultural practices, which emphasized fidelity and condemnation of pre-marital or extra-marital sex. Young people must be taught the virtues of abstinence, self control and postponement of pleasure and sometimes sacrifice..."

Museveni and others in the medical and social work community in Uganda urged this approach, which "led to an impressive mobilization of the entire society, single persons, groups, the Church and other religious organizations and associations," said Dr. Ciantia.

The "epic of the people of Uganda," as Ciantia called it, awakened "people to discover the full dignity and value of human life and love." Though difficult at times, it was through the virtue of hope and the support of friends and family that behavioral change was able to occur, he said.

The three behavioral changes encouraged by the Ugandan plan--known as the ABC behaviors--are: abstinence, faithfulness and lastly, condom use by casual partners. Out of these three changes, Ciantia reported that the behavioral change that made the greatest impact appears to be "faithfulness or partner reduction behaviors by Ugandan men and women, whose reported casual sex encounters declined by well over 50 percent between 1989 and 1995."

Overall, the result of this approach has been the dramatic reduction of HIV/AIDS in the adult population from about 18% in the late 1980s to 6.4 % in 2005.

Dr. Ciantia explained that there are three major lessons we can learn from Uganda.  First of all, we see that development occurs when the people are the subject of change.  It cannot be accomplished by just handing over "technical or scientific tools," there needs to be a real involvement of the persons and communities.

We can also learn that fighting HIV/AIDS needs to be based on evidence and proper verification of facts. The evidence shows that the "Ugandan experience provides, in the time of the evidence-based medicine, an African lesson to the whole world," the tropical medicine specialist said.

Finally, we see that the solution must focus on the human person and her/his responsibility and not just a general addressing the "masses" approach, Dr. Ciantia emphasized.

The opposition to these lessons "is really ideological," he charged, pointing out that "we are facing smoking and alcoholism with strong primary behavior campaign[s] and seriously limiting personal choices (for a public and personal health benefit). But sexual behavior cannot be touched! This is real Western taboo."

He closed by noting that the Holy Father "has been realistic, reasonable and evidence-based. All criticize him, but actual empirical [data] support his position."

Dr. Ciantia has also published a letter along with several African colleagues further detailing the evidence for their postion. It can be read at http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/document.php?n=810

Lula you said this: 

I replied with this:

and you give me this? 

That's it?  Not good enough Lula.  You made a claim but have not backed it up with scripture.  Your post 281 does NOT give the scripture behind what you said Thomas taught.  If you know the truth, a lie stands out straight and bold when it comes up.  I immediately recognized what you said as a lie because it's so contrary to the WHOLE of scripture.   In fact, it's very foreign like reading another language. 

I'm glad you qualified this with "according to the church."  This is NOT in scripture.  Remember David and Bathsheba's baby?  He did not go to Limbo.  Neither was he baptized.  He was Jewish afterall.  This is where your RCC church and scripture contradict each other and why people get so confused.  The bible says plainly..."absent from the body is present with the Lord."  2 Cor 5:8.  (just like the unbaptized thief on the cross).  Can you show me in scripture where babies go into limbo? 

I'm going to skip all the other stuff you said about baptism because we've been down that route before. 

Most of your posting in #281 which you know I don't buy into so I'll leave it at that.