Catholic Church Buries Limbo After Centuries

[Jasny]

Sorry I forgot to tell yous what the Council of Carthage taught:
16th Council of Carthage (aproved by Zosimus and Council of Ephases see above):

“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)

 

[Tom317]

Sorry I forgot to tell yous what the Council of Carthage taught:
16th Council of Carthage (aproved by Zosimus and Council of Ephases see above):

“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)

Yes, in the father’s house their are many rooms, yet that does not tell us all people will be saved, we know of only one way to salvation–the Catholic Church is the only way that has been revealed and we cannot believe in any other way, we can only hope that God has a way for non-Catholics and for the unpbaptized.

 

[Tom317]

To those who think unborn babies go to Heaven, then you must think it is acceptable to not baptize babies and young children, because born babies and young children hold no more guilt then an unborn baby. If you are going to be intellectually honest, you must admit that a life that begins at conception has no capacity of personal sin until the age of reason, and therefore all people of all faiths and all walks of life will go straight to Heaven if they die before the age of reason without being baptized. IMO, there is no other intellectually sound argument. Which means that baptism and original sin only applies to those older than the age of reason, and I am just wondering why Christ did not say that.

 

[johnstown_johnn]

To those who think unborn babies go to Heaven, then you must think it is acceptable to not baptize babies and young children, because born babies and young children hold no more guilt then an unborn baby. If you are going to be intellectually honest, you must admit that a life that begins at conception has no capacity of personal sin until the age of reason, and therefore all people of all faiths and all walks of life will go straight to Heaven if they die before the age of reason without being baptized. IMO, there is no other intellectually sound argument. Which means that baptism and original sin only applies to those older than the age of reason, and I am just wondering why Christ did not say that.

All are “born” with original Sin…it OS, does not suddenly appear like the mumps or measles when a child reaches age of reason. Origina Sin in an inherited malady because it accompanies life at any stage…even in the womb and earlier than that. Personal sin and original Sin are a universe apart. Original Sin cannot be absolved in the confessional. Age or reason has nothing to do with it. It is, in a way, a Genetic defect. OS is a blemish that prohibits one from seeing God face-to-Face.

 

[LilyM]

I haven’t read the whole thread here, but I haven’t seen anyone express a certainty that all unbaptised babies go to heaven.

I have seen a lot of people express, as the Catechism teaches, that there is hope for them to be cleansed of OS outside the sacraments as we understand them, is all.

A hope in which I share, of course, but which certainly will not mean I won’t baptise any children I may have, nor in my experience has it persuaded others not to do so.

 

[napad]

I haven’t read the whole thread here, but I haven’t seen anyone express a certainty that all unbaptised babies go to heaven.

I have seen a lot of people express, as the Catechism teaches, that there is hope for them to be cleansed of OS outside the sacraments as we understand them, is all.

A hope in which I share, of course, but which certainly will not mean I won’t baptise any children I may have, nor in my experience has it persuaded others not to do so.

The problem I see, and I think some one wrote here in this thread, is if God doesn’t save all babies then some go to heaven and some go to hell fire, which is even worse than what Augustine thought.

 

[mark_a]

That, of course, is assuming that the parents actually do form the intention at some point to baptise their children. If they arrive at the conclusion that baptism isn’t necessary then they may not do so.

Thanks.

Then wouldn’t (the babies’ parents) invincible ignorance get the babies to heaven?

It’s going to be hard to convince people not to abort their babies when the Church was sending them to limbo anyways. It just seems to work counter to everything the Church is trying to do for the “most innocent of all”.

I’m glad the Church took a more positive approach than “limbo” provided.

 

[napad]

Thanks.

Then wouldn’t (the babies’ parents) invincible ignorance get the babies to heaven?

It’s going to be hard to convince people not to abort their babies when the Church was sending them to limbo anyways. It just seems to work counter to everything the Church is trying to do for the “most innocent of all”.

I’m glad the Church took a more positive approach than “limbo” provided.

Limbo is the positive approach in my reading of the subject.

The Church as taught many times that children who die without baptism can’t go to heaven. Limbo being the best way to keep the teachings already proclaimed and be merciful at the same time.

 

[LilyM]

Exactly - the idea behind limbo is that, while being denied the Beatific Vision, the souls there don’t suffer any pain of the senses at all. I don’t know precisely how that’s supposed to work in light of the fact that the Catechism says the chief pain of hell IS the separation from God, but there ya go anyways.

 

[napad]

Exactly - the idea behind limbo is that, while being denied the Beatific Vision, the souls there don’t suffer any pain of the senses at all. I don’t know precisely how that’s supposed to work in light of the fact that the Catechism says the chief pain of hell IS the separation from God, but there ya go anyways.

I think the answer is seeing teachings as a whole and through the degrees of authoity of a said teaching. The Memorary says Mary is our life our sweetness and our hope but that line have to be seen in light of more authoritive teachings and dogmas. In this way we stay clear of private interpertations.

 

[mark_a]

The Memorary says Mary is our life our sweetness and our hope but that line have to be seen in light of more authoritive teachings and dogmas. In this way we stay clear of private interpertations.

I’ve heard that explained a couple of ways. The other is that Mary is:

. . . . .Mother of Mercy (God), (Who is) our life, our sweetness, and our hope.

Not that I’m trying to change the subject.

 

[LilyM]

I think the answer is seeing teachings as a whole and through the degrees of authoity of a said teaching. The Memorary says Mary is our life our sweetness and our hope but that line have to be seen in light of more authoritive teachings and dogmas. In this way we stay clear of private interpertations.

That’s the Hail Holy Queen, not the Memorare

Now the current CCC, I think most would agree, is pretty darn authoritative :yup: and that’s the document that states what I said about Hell. So it’s not always easy :nope:

 

[Tom317]

All are “born” with original Sin…it OS, does not suddenly appear like the mumps or measles when a child reaches age of reason. Origina Sin in an inherited malady because it accompanies life at any stage…even in the womb and earlier than that. Personal sin and original Sin are a universe apart. Original Sin cannot be absolved in the confessional. Age or reason has nothing to do with it. It is, in a way, a Genetic defect. OS is a blemish that prohibits one from seeing God face-to-Face.

Then you believe that infant baptism is meaningless.

 

[Tom317]

I haven’t read the whole thread here, but I haven’t seen anyone express a certainty that all unbaptised babies go to heaven.

I have seen a lot of people express, as the Catechism teaches, that there is hope for them to be cleansed of OS outside the sacraments as we understand them, is all.

A hope in which I share, of course, but which certainly will not mean I won’t baptise any children I may have, nor in my experience has it persuaded others not to do so.

Because you know better!

However, most Catholics listen to what they “think” is being taught by the Church. The Church has not dropped Limbo, nor has it said the unborn go to Heaven, it has simply said that we can safely hope they will go to Heaven. Yet, most Catholics will now think that unborn babies go straight to Heaven…which will cause the need for baptism to become weaker and weaker as time goes on…we have seen this across the board on many Catholic teachings.

 

[cor]

I’ve heard that explained a couple of ways. The other is that Mary is:

. . . . .Mother of Mercy (God), (Who is) our life, our sweetness, and our hope.

Not that I’m trying to change the subject.

That interpretation is not consistent with how the Latin text of the Hail Holy Queen reads which text includes inflections which exclude that from being a grammatical possibility. I think the Latin text can be found here:

newadvent.org/cathen/13409a.htm

I don’t see anything wrong with those appellations of Mary.

 

[cor]

I can’t edit my post anymore so…

I’ve heard that explained a couple of ways. The other is that Mary is:

. . . . .Mother of Mercy (God), (Who is) our life, our sweetness, and our hope.

Not that I’m trying to change the subject.

As I said that doesn’t square with the Latin which can be found here:

vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html

Salve, Regína,
Mater misericórdiæ,
vita, dulcédo et spes nostra, salve.

and which the UK version also found in the above link makes more clear perhaps:

Hail, Holy Queen, Mother of Mercy,
Hail our life, our sweetness and our hope!

I think some American Catholics pray the UK version, but I’m not sure.

I don’t think the prayer denies that everything comes from God.

 

[rlg94086]

Because you know better!

However, most Catholics listen to what they “think” is being taught by the Church. The Church has not dropped Limbo, nor has it said the unborn go to Heaven, it has simply said that we can safely hope they will go to Heaven. Yet, most Catholics will now think that unborn babies go straight to Heaven…which will cause the need for baptism to become weaker and weaker as time goes on…we have seen this across the board on many Catholic teachings.

Why do you keep claiming that “most Catholics” can’t grasp the subtleties of Church teaching that you and some of us can grasp? It just doesn’t seem charitable to me.

 

[LilyM]

Because you know better!

However, most Catholics listen to what they “think” is being taught by the Church. The Church has not dropped Limbo, nor has it said the unborn go to Heaven, it has simply said that we can safely hope they will go to Heaven. Yet, most Catholics will now think that unborn babies go straight to Heaven…which will cause the need for baptism to become weaker and weaker as time goes on…we have seen this across the board on many Catholic teachings.

To be honest, most Catholics probably believe and always have believed whatever they heck they want in regard to unbaptised babies - and most every other issue!

They’re just as likely to believe what parents or friends tell them about Catholicism as their priests or the Catechism.

 

[FTS]

You can choose to **hope **that unborn babies go to Heaven, there is nothing in Scripture, or in Tradition, that tells they will go to Heaven. The only thing we know for sure is Jesus made baptism an absolute and until the later half of the 20th cetury that truth was held without challenge. Now, since Vatican II, all of sudden there are all sorts of new ways to get into Heaven. I don’t buy it, you are free to if you want. However, placing all of our own arguments to the side, it comes to something quite simple:

Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

What the Church allows is for us to hope that unborn babies can somehow be welcomed into Heaven, the Church does NOT say they go to Heaven, nor can the Church say that, for if it ever does, the faith is gone.

As for the thief on the cross, there are plenty of theologians through history who believe that the Paradise the theief went to is limbo, because he was not baptized by water.

Now, answer me this: Why do you perceieve that eternal natural happiness is somehow a punishment? No person is gauranteed the Beatific Vision, so why do you (and others) seem to feel it is unfair that some souls will receive eternal happiness? What is wrong with that?

I totally agree that one must be baptised to enter into Heaven. The Old Testament figures that died in a state of grace were “baptised by desire”, because they sought the truth and did God’s will, which would implicitly create this “baptism by desire.” It was my own theological speculation of such, and when I asked the Philosophy expert on the EWTN forum, he said I was correct. I believe that these infants are validly baptised, via “baptism of desire.” I have previously described the three ways in which this is possible, and I can re-post them if necessary. I believe that this is the case, and as a faithful Catholic I am ALLOWED to do so. Just take a look at the Catechism of the Catholic Church to realize this. I never said Catholics must believe this, my entire point is that we can do so, just as you can strongly believe in Limbo if you so desire. And why do you say that if the Church ever declared that unborn babies do go to Heaven, that the faith would be gone? Of course not. It is purely theological speculation as to whether I am correct or you are correct on this matter, and if the Church defined one of our views as correct, infallibly, one way or the other, we would then know who was right. It is that simple. We may be surprised by this truth, but we would have to have faith and just realize that we are fallible human beings and cannot totally understand nor comprehend the perfect justice of God. To say otherwise would be rejecting the infallible teaching authority that the Catholic Church does possess. But don’t worry, I doubt that there will be infallible, definitive teaching revealed on this subject. Who knows, but I personally doubt it. We will all find out someday I guess. Also the Good Thief certainly went to Heaven and not Limbo. Jesus Christ told him that “today you will be with me in Paradise.” I’m pretty sure Jesus resides in Heaven, not Limbo. Why do you insist the Good Thief needs to be baptised by water? That is not Catholic teaching. Baptism by blood or desire is extraordinary means yes, but just as valid as baptism by water. And to answer your last question, eternal happiness may sound nice but to be exempt of the presence of God is most certainly punishment, there is no denying it. Although Hell is probably physically painful, the chief characteristic is the separation from God! And I do not believe God would expect nor demand the impossible, and that he would decide to not give a child a chance to be with Him forever in Heaven. This is why I personally believe they are baptised by desire, and that their Heavenly Father welcomes them into His Kingdom with open arms.

 

[FTS]

FTS;2150792]

newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm#XI

The fate of infants who die without baptism must be briefly considered here. The Catholic teaching is uncompromising on this point, that all who depart this life without baptism, be it of water, or blood, or desire, are perpetually excluded from the vision of God. This teaching is grounded, as we have seen, on Scripture and tradition, and the decrees of the Church. Moreover, that those who die in original sin, without ever having contracted any actual sin, are deprived of the happiness of heaven is stated explicitly in the Confession of Faith of the Eastern Emperor Michael Palæologus, which had been proposed to him by Pope Clement IV in 1267, and which he accepted in the presence of Gregory X at the Second Council of Lyons in 1274. The same doctrine is found also in the Decree of Union of the Greeks, in the Bull “Lætentur Caeli” of Pope Eugene IV, in the Profession of Faith prescribed for the Greeks by Pope Gregory XIII, and in that authorized for the Orientals by Urban VIII and Benedict XIV. Many Catholic theologians have declared that infants dying without baptism are excluded from the beatific vision; but as to the exact state of these souls in the next world they are not agreed.

Unborn babies cannot receive baptism of desire because that requires them to be at an age of reason, which the Church declares to be age seven.

Therefore, we can hope, but only hope, that unborn babies, and Hindus, and Muslims, etc., can somehow be brought into Heaven, but we cannot believe it because the Church does not teach that and because none of those people in those groups have been baptized by water.

Again, these theories showcase how infants could be baptised by desire…

1. At the very moment before death, they are supernaturally given an infusion of free will and reason, and God presents them the choice to deny or accept Him.
2. The prayers of saints or angels in Heaven for these babies could, through the unique allowance and power of God, enable a Baptism of Desire for the child.
3. All people have a built-in desire for God. Some of us pursue this and others don’t, through their own free will. Since babies are innocent and have not chosen to reject God but rather desire God, immediately preceding death this built-in desire for God that all humans have from the moment of conception would create a valid baptism of desire.