HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Aug. 27, 2007 Recent striking controversy about the interestingly posited existence of Limbo is really just the merely pale stalking horse for what is, one suspects, actually intended ultimately, meaning, in the final end, questioning the asserted theological existence of Hell itself. After all, Hell is the most multicultural, pluralistic, and diversity influenced place imaginable, just what liberals, leftists, and many centrists or moderates would approve of ideologically, not just an exclusive place for DWMs (Dead White Males). The present and ostensible debate is, however, seen as the manifest issue of Limbo; but, the real later target of attack is the latent question of whether or not Christians ought to still believe in the affirmed existence of Hades, the last place for all the (self-)damned souls. This is because, according to the Roman Catholic religion, there is held to be no metaphysical extinction possible for any souls of rational beings, which includes human beings, of course. So, once in Hell, always in Hell (a place where misery loves company; it cannot, in fact, be logically avoided). Therefore, the good way St. Thomas Aquinas had creatively explained the logical, intellectual, and metaphysical necessity of trying to understand properly why intermediate beings between man and God ought to and do exist can be cited here; it then provides a fairly appropriate analogy, in cognate thinking, as to why both Limbo and Purgatory need to be held as real places, besides the ugly reality, of course, of Hell itself, the ultimate un-vacation, one must say. Surely, the slippery slope of nominalist reasoning is well perceived by which, first, Limbo is so slyly questioned and, next, Purgatory – and, with the putative ratiocination of who says A must say B – then, lastly, even Hell must be then declared as actually also nonexistent, which is the true goal of all neo-Pelagians. Pelagians, among other aspects of the beliefs of such heretics, denied the doctrine of the existence of Original Sin. The neo-Pelagians (in the past, Rousseau, Kant, Marx, and others) are they who take the ever latest manifestations of such a bold heresy into the farther domains of politics, ethics, etc. by formulating wildly various ideologies that bespeak of the supposed natural goodness of Man (a god-term if there ever was one) before his being supposedly corrupted by institutions, society, or whatever. What is the more immediate concern here? The Roman Catholic Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was this year advised by the International Theological Commission by the latter’s document, of April 20, 2007, innocently entitled: The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptized. It was signed, unfortunately, by Pope Benedict XVI who, thus, lent it [who misinformed him?] an unneeded kind of weird legitimacy. The heretical thinking of the postmodernist theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar is, one thinks, seen in the odd confines and structure of this terribly confused, bizarre, perverse, damnable, contradictory, and, in general, (to say the least) quite badly conceived document. Nothing really new is, nonetheless, added in the still optional thinking involved; this is, of course, since Limbo is not a dogmatic matter requiring any needed faithful assent. And yet, the fairly reasonable and studied suspicion rationally exists that the heretical notion of universal salvation (defended by Balthasar and others) is being rather slyly asserted, meaning more in the general tone of the words if not all simply put into the words themselves. Reading needed on this important subject would logically include such a work as: Light in Darkness: Hans Urs von Balthasar and the Catholic Doctrine of Christ’s Descent into Hell by Alyssa Lyra Pitstick who wisely notes Balthasar’s (at a minimum)rather unorthodox views. Of course, it is Roman Catholic teaching that Christ did not, in fact, literally go into Hell; what is meant by various formulations of creedal statements is that He went to where the souls of the righteous dead were in order to take them all to Heaven at the Resurrection. Original Sin, according to the Catholic faith, had once in the past fully closed off Heaven, meaning any salvation for any souls, until the horrible debt created by Adam and Eve was fully paid by the sorrowful Crucifixion of Jesus; His glorious and magnificent Resurrection, therefore, permitted Him to absolutely rescue all of the just souls, meaning those without sin, who had then been simply held in Limbo until His expected coming. (Of course, lengthy theological statements as further justifications, etc. are not being cited here to, thus, just keep the discussion brief.) Of course, as Leopold von Ranke had said, all ages are forever equidistant to God, thus, past, present, and future are only purely human or temporal categories of contemplation. So, salvation is a uniquely contemporary event, more than most people ever realize. Thus, Limbo is not just a logical possibility but fits neatly and rather soundly in with the doctrine of Purgatory and creatively, moreover, reinforces substantively the latter to a more than significant degree of both studied understanding and proper comprehension in terms of a better kind of theological certainty. The ever contemporary event of salvation, one suspects, has Limbo as truly providential part of the interesting plan for salvation, meaning, of course, as the intermediate location for those souls who did not consciously have the ability to commit sin, though yet possessed of the asserted taint of Original Sin. Since in the Final Judgment only two possible places will and do functionally exist for all souls, therefore, the souls of all the dead will then go either to Heaven or Hell. Purgatory only exists temporarily prior to the Final Judgment as does, therefore, Limbo itself, meaning that it stays during the time of the General Judgment immediately after physical death, according to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. Thus, any sophistical attempt to question the fact of Limbo’s reality will inevitably lead to also the then related questioning of Purgatory, which would destroy, some would say, much of the “poetry” of life [… to Hell you say… with such poetry]; this reaction is surely due to the pervasive nominalism in cognition manifested by the neo-Pelagians seen both inside and outside Holy Mother Church. By reasonable extension, therefore, Limbo is, one perceives, also a temporary place, of course, as was carefully pointed out previously. This proper defense and understanding of the theological doctrine of there then being a Limbo is, simultaneously, an adamant and logical, forceful and considerate, call for requisite religious orthodoxy in set terms of traditionalist Roman Catholicism versus what ought to be recognized as blatant heresy. It is not the simplistic case, nevertheless, that Limbo needs to be reaffirmed as a vital part of Catholic teachings in defense of the Faith; it is the providential case, however, that its boorish and callous negation and final denial will have certain quite easily foreseeable results, as Richard Weaver had, e.g., correctly pointed out that ideas have consequences. Modernity, and especially postmodernity in human thought, increasingly turns noted exceptions that ought to logically prove and uphold a rule into themselves becoming new rules or norms of thought. If unbaptized children are freed from the horrible consequences of Original Sin, meaning, e.g., because of exceptional circumstances making God’s mercy synonymous always with His justice, then this special case becomes wildly transmuted into a then supposed new norm; this is as to finding assumed new ways or means of “creatively” sidestepping Original Sin and its always logical dire consequences for human souls. The theologically improper elimination of Limbo, therefore, must come to sadly produce both unwanted effects and affects regarding such extremely important theological matters as: Soteriology, study of the doctrine of salvation through Christ, Christology itself, and, of course, Eschatology, the final matters pertaining to death and, ultimately, to all of salvation itself. Thus, Balthasarianism, a highly intellectualized version of neo-Pelagianism qua heresy, was thought up by a very subtle, clever, cunning heretic who does not actually or directly remove Hell from its existence but indirectly undermines and destroys the very qualities definitive of its meaningful existence and consequences by supposedly emptying Hell of all souls. An inconsequential Hel (an oxymoron), by definition, is really no kind of Hades at all, as Balthasar readily and theologically knew, when he wrongly engaged in some quite impressive tergiversation (read: lying) and some, one can add, truly inspired Orwellian logicism (see: Pitstick’s Light in Darkness, a quite revealing tome indeed). For the ever precious sake of true Christianity and for the then greater sake of all of orthodox Catholicism itself, the necessary intellectual doctrine, though not dogma, of Limbo must and ought to be rigorously and intellectually, morally and spiritually, well defended to help greatly avoid and hold in contempt the now postmodernist-inspired, onrushing tendency toward affirming a universal salvation – blessed by the insane teachings of theo-nominalism. After all, sound Catholic teaching is that God interestingly created Hell for His creation, meaning the self-damned human souls, so that they would not, in fact, be simply obliterated in their beingness; this is besides, for instance, His most evident and genuine respect for a human creature’s precious free will. While the Supreme Being nonetheless hates the souls in Hell, He cannot, one suspects, contradict Himself by hating the basic act of His creation, which is, for God, always a true act of selfless love, not hate. The opposite of love is actually, one knows, indifference, not hate. Those who wish to deny Hell to people who had deliberately been misanthropic or malicious in their earthly lives are really mean spirited and uncharitable, truly cruel and inconsiderate, because people who hate people would be absolutely, completely, unhappy in Heaven for all eternity – if they could get there, of course. The total emptying of the fiery furnace is viciously non-altruistic, though too many misinformed metaphysicians do still wish it were true. Think of the advantages of eternal damnation. Someone has a definite and clear place to go immediately after death and, moreover, for all of eternity versus the seemingly harsh postponement of Heaven for certain souls in either Limbo or Purgatory. All those souls in the terrifying infernal regions actually wanted to go there because their free choice of committing mortal sin(s) was an act of vile hate directed against the Deity, the Supreme Being. The Protestant/heretical notion of “hate the sin, love the sinner” thus totally ignores the noted critical and revealing fact that Christ, for instance, both hated and cursed the Pharisees. This is very genuinely important to remember, as well as its many obvious theological implications and sensed consequences, indications and verifications, meaning, thus, directly contrary to the teachings of Balthasar and others of his assorted ilk. Catholicism, in forever sharp and intelligent contrast, asserts strongly and so clearly that God hates all those who commit unrepented mortal sin(s), which, as one important example, is illustrated superbly by the eternally unforgiveable sin against the Holy Ghost as was committed, e.g., by Judas Iscariot. Only a surely weird, nominalist-inspired, postmodernist “God” would schizophrenically “ love” the eternally condemned and evil souls who are in Hell and who, therefore, must always violently and maliciously hate Him forever and, moreover, all that He -- dare one say it? -- everlastingly represents. Theologically speaking, therefore, it is manifestly seen as vitally necessary to still retain the dogmas pertaining to both Hell and Purgatory, the latter as an intermediate place for those souls who did not commit a single mortal sin but lack a needed period of spiritual purification and conditioning. Limbo, as a logical result, serves as yet another proper and intermediate place for unbaptized souls neither yet deserving, of course, of being sent to either Purgatory or Hell. In proper and righteous conclusion, it is to be pleasantly hoped, by all orthodox Catholics and those other Christians keenly aware of what is so truly and spiritually at stake, that the very noxiously strange document – forever unsupported by the blessed truth of the Church’s Magisterium -- produced by the idiotic intellects at the International Theological Commission will justly get the ignominious and proper consignment to an absolute oblivion that it so richly and justly deserves. This, of course, means a true nirvana, dear friends, not Limbo! (And, the author of this article, of course, willingly challenges anyone to disagree.) Athanasius contra mundum! ------------ About the author: Joseph Andrew Settanni, CRM, CPC is a Certified Records Manager and Certified Professional Consultant with 30 years of professional experiencein data, archives, records and information management. Email: mkeegan311@earthlink.net Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com. Please link to this article rather than copying and pasting it onto your site (which would be unauthorized and illegal). |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
