I’m surprised something so basic isn’t posted on the vatican website.
I’m noticing in the document you linked, that much of it is both in Latin and Greek – but the definitions are only in Latin. Considering it was supposed to be oecumenical with the eastern rites – I find the definitions not having a parallel Greek coulumn, surprising; I am also very surprised that the vatican does not even appear to have a Latin copy online, nor even a translation in English, let alone a Greek one. (hopefully someone will fix that lacuna soon…)
I tried both a google search (eg) site:vatican.va “vel solo originali decedunt”
and also a site search directly from the vatican yields no results, nor does “concilium florentinum” nor even “florentino” find the document; although I can find dozens of references to the council of Florence…
It’s very disturbing that such a fundamental historical document is missing…
I’m looking it up because a Maronite deacon made some comments regarding a personal belief/opinion that all infants, eg: the unbaptized, he thinks are in heaven due to some scripture regarding ‘their angels’ (which I need to ask him more about, later); but I was under the impression the Maronites reunited with Rome just after Florence, and so that they would have read these definitions in Greek and that they reunited with the understanding that they agreed to the dogmas defined in the Council of Florence. ( I understand other Eastern rites repudiated their own delegates signing of the Council, but I didn’t think that was true of the Maronites. )
Is it possible that the Greek speaking Eastern rites never saw the definition I’m transcribing below in Latin, in their native lanuguage? Or is it just somewhere else in the document, and I overlooked it? (If there are any mistakes, let me know… I tried to be very careful to not make typographical errors, but my Latin is poor. )
Item si vere poenitentes in Dei caritate decesserint, antequam dignis poenitentiae fructibus de commissis satisfecerint, & omissis, eorum animas poenis purgatoriis post mortem purgari ; & ut a poenis hujusmodi releventur, prodesse eis fidelium vivorum suffragia, missarum scilicet sacrificia, orationes & eleemosynas, ac alia pietatis officia, quae a fidelibus pro aliis fidelibus fieri consueverunt secundum ecclesiae instituta, illorumque animas, qui post baptisma susceptum nullam omnino peccati maculam incurrerunt, illas etiam quae post contractam peccati maculam in suis corporibus, vel eisdem exutae corporibus ( prout superius dictum est ) sunt purgatae, in coelum mox recipi, & intueri clare ipsum Deum trinum & unum , sicuti est , pro meritorum tamen diversitare alium alio perfectius. Illorum autem animas, qui in actuali mortali peccato, vel solo originali decedunt, mox in infernum descendere, poenis tamen disparibus puniendas.
Compare the document to the EWTN translation:
Also, if truly penitent people die in the love of God before they have made satisfaction for acts and omissions by worthy fruits of repentance, their souls are cleansed after death by cleansing pains; and the suffrages of the living faithful avail them in giving relief from such pains, that is, sacrifices of masses, prayers, almsgiving and other acts of devotion which have been customarily performed by some of the faithful for others of the faithful in accordance with the church’s ordinances.
Also, the souls of those who have incurred no stain of sin whatsoever after baptism, as well as souls who after incurring the stain of sin have been cleansed whether in their bodies or outside their bodies, as was stated above, are straightaway received into heaven and clearly behold the triune God as he is, yet one person more perfectly than another according to the difference of their merits. But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.
To the best of my limited knowledge, the EWTN translation is pretty accurate about the last sentence, as I think “solo” is dative form of “alone”, but I’m wondering if it is it possible that “mox” means “soon” – and not necessarily ‘straight-away’ / ‘immediately’ ?