Catholic Church Buries Limbo After Centuries

[FTS]

Tom, just as an advocate, what about baptism by blood? These children can be considered, I think, as martyrs for the faith. Why? Because they are being killed because of proponents and believers in the culture of death. The culture of death is antithetical to the culture of life. Christianity is the culture of life.

Therefore, those children are dying because of their parents’ (and others) spurning of life in favor of death. The children would, of course, choose life rather than death (that is a natural order of the universe, despite its twisting and distortion by certain ‘thinkers’ that non-existence is preferable to existence).

So since the children would choose life–and thereby the opportunity to choose Christ–and since they are denied that choice through no fault of their own, I argue that they are martyrs and thus eligible for baptism under baptism of blood.

I agree that aborted babies could specifically be baptised by blood or by desire. You may say they have this built-in desire for God, and they are murdered, becoming martyrs. Mother Angelica expresses the belief that aborted babies are baptised by blood. However, what about a child, younger than the age of reason, dies from a disease or an accident? What about a mentally-retarded adult who dies and truly doesn’t possess real reason and free will? The baptism by blood could not be applied. Yet I do think the baptism by desire would be. This is why I feel the baptism by desire is the key to this subject, but also recognize that specifically for aborted babies baptism by blood may be their particular form of baptism, and baptism by desire for the rest of those who die below the age of reason, or those that do not truly possess authentic reason and free will. Again I’m sure some people will personally disagree and argue for Limbo in these situations, but can you really have a problem with people who lean on the side of God’s great mercy in these areas in which there is no specifically revealed infallible teaching from God? As Father Corapi says, God’s name is mercy. And Sacred Scripture tells us that “God is love.” I feel God lavishes His mercy and love upon these individuals.

 

[FTS]

We can guess at any number of ways God can allow those unborns into Heaven, which is why we can hold hope. The truth is those unborns are not at an age of reason, they do not have a clue who Christ is at the point, and have no way of choosing Christ or desiring Christ. Now, God can certainly allow those souls a special way into Heaven that He has not revealed to us, yet we do not know what that is, and cannot say it exists definitively. The bottom line is: God told us baptism by water was an absolute, everything else is guess work.

The existence of baptism by blood and baptism by desire are not mere guess-work. Rather their existence is the teaching of the Catholic Church.

 

[FTS]

lol, when are the Church’s statements not distorted by the media or even rogue theologians? You can’t expect them to ever give an intelligent response to any kind of Catholic news.

Limbo as we’re discussing it here obviously requires a much deeper understanding of the essentials of our faith than the vast majority of Catholics today have. That’s a sad indictment on the success of catechesis today. The only way you’re going to get people to understand limbo, as the ITC is discussing it, is by effectively teaching about original sin, grace, and baptism.

You’re assuming, in your assertion that this declaration of hope from the ITC damaged Catholics’ concept of original sin, that most Catholics today actually understand the importance of sacramental baptism and therefore what limbo is. But the reality is that not many know, or really care at all. Most Catholics are still going to just go with the “limbo is a cruel medieval reality and thank goodness it’s gone!” idea, until the media starts preaching otherwise (which it never will…).

Consider it a blessing that you understand the seriousness of the issue, and critically read the ITC document for your own understanding. We cannot really preoccupy ourselves with how secular society interprets what the Church says, unless it brings Catholics into imminent danger–as we learned with the Regensburg address.

Please don’t regard Catholics who believe that these infants go to Heaven are ignorant in the faith, and that those who believe in Limbo are somehow superior in knowledge. It doesn’t take a leap of logic to recognize that if a person is validly baptised by desire, their Original Sin is wiped away, and they ARE VALIDLY BAPTISED. Also remember you are talking about an issue in which we are FREE to differ in opinion. Do not say things a Pharisee would be quick to state. It appears Pope JPII and Pope Benedict XVI leans towards agreement with myself and others in this forum, and I welcome you to come up with a long list of minds that are superior in intellect to those two great men.

 

[FTS]

Wow! You hit it exactly right! Most people just do not know and do not care to learn more about their faith.

You see, the theological construct of Limbo is meant to give a explanation for why baptism is so very important that can be understood by everyone, even by people who never open a Bible or a Catechism, along with the very real need to explain what happens to unborn and unbaptized babies.

If the Church teaches parents that there is a strong possibility that their unborn babies could end-up in Limbo because their original sin has not been washed away (using Jesus’ own Words as support), then those same parents suddenly become quite motivated to get their born kids/babies baptized. If you tell those same parents that their unborn and unpbatpized babies/kids will go to Heaven, then many of those parents will cease caring about baptism–baptism will become like Confirmaiton, not important (we see this sort of thinking happening with Confirmation, which is a horrible and tragic reality in the Church today that so few Catholics are Confirmed).

Do not forget, faith for many people comes down to the easiest/quickest solution (just think about Protestant Churches, especially mega-Churches, the easy in, easy out, do nothing, just claim the Lord and punch the ticket approach). Anything to make faith easier, quicker, less to do, etc…

It will not take terribly long for abortionists to grasp these new statements and distort them and then use it to tell Catholics that aborted babies go straight to Heaven, so they should not feel guilt, that in fact the Mothers are doing the unborn a favor by sending straight to Heaven.

Further, if unborn babies go to Heaven, and if Limbo is truly gone and meaningless, then why bother baptizing anyone? After all, if God will definitely have mercy on the unborn (who never faced any challenges with sin), then shouldn’t God’s mercy be even greater towards born people who have had to fight the daily battle against sin and evil? In other words, if baptism is not required in some circumstances, then how can it not be thought that Baptism will not be required in any circumstance?

Can you not see the basic truth of this topic? Jesus said if we are not bapitzed by water and spirit, we will not enter the kingdom of God. Jesus did not qualify His remarks and we cannot qualify them for Him.

You act as if someone who believes that unborn babies can achieve salvation must state that baptism by water in unecessary. As Father Corapi would say, Happy Horse Manure. God has revealed to us that He desires us to be baptised by water. This will never change. However, in extraordinary means, a person can be baptised by blood or by desire. But obviously if possible, we are to be baptised by water. There is simply no problem here, you are trying to create an inconsistency that doesn’t exist.

 

[FTS]

Thank God they buried Limbo. Why would anyone think that God would create a “Disney World” for the afterlife? Heaven is the place to be. I am much more comfortable with the belief that the unbaptised are essentially given the same chance as the people who died prior to Christ’s resurrection.

Thumbs up to Heaven, thumbs down to virtual heaven!

Wouldn’t someone who died unbaptised be invincibly ignorant?

We must remember, invisible ignorance only can be applied if that person has truly sought truth and to do God’s will. If they have failed to do so through their own fault, invisible ignorance doesn’t apply to them.

 

[FTS]

If a human comes into existence when a sperm fertilizes an egg, and if scientists are correct that over 50% of these fertilized eggs perish, then they constitute the majority of humanity.

From what I have heard, this statistic is guess-work and nobody truly knows the real number. But I do personally believe that those little babies who perish are baptised by desire and welcomed into their Father’s Kingdom.

 

[holy_wood]

Help me I am confused. Are there four spiritual reals after death, i.e.(Heaven, Hell, Limbo and Purgatory) or is Limbo and Purgatory the same thing.

If they are then I am even more confused, for I how I understand it “Purgatory” is a state of purification after death and “Limbo” is a state of ecstacy.

 

[FTS]

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.

I do believe that those who die before the age of reason, and those who do not truly possess reason and free will, such as the mentally handicapped, will be baptised by desire and enter Heaven. I am not saying this is guaranteed truth with certainty, but neither is belief in Limbo. I am simply stating my personal opinion, an opinion which is acceptable according to the teaching of the Catholic Church. Of course we can choose to deny Him, and not accept Him, to cut ourselves off from relationship with Him, to cut off sanctifying grace in our souls, through our actions and free will. But God is just, merciful, and loving. He loves His children and desires our salvation. This forms the basis for my belief on the subject. I lean on the side of God’s great mercy.

 

[FTS]

Help me I am confused. Are there four spiritual reals after death, i.e.(Heaven, Hell, Limbo and Purgatory) or is Limbo and Purgatory the same thing.

If they are then I am even more confused, for I how I understand it “Purgatory” is a state of purification after death and “Limbo” is a state of ecstacy.

Purgatory is the purification some people on the road to Heaven will undergo. To be in Purgatory is to be on the way to Heaven, guaranteed. There we will be purified of the temporal punishments due to sin that we may have. Limbo is theological speculation, not official teaching of the Catholic Church. Some people believe infants that die without water baptism go to Limbo, a place of happiness but without the presence of God, that exists in Hell but possesses no pain. I believe these infants are validly baptised by desire and enter into Heaven. We are free to have our own personal opinions on this matter. Hope that helps!

 

[holy_wood]

So if I understand Limbo correctly then the Church teaches that it is a possibilty(** I underestand it is a matter of personal belief and it is uncertain) **our fallen brethren ( dead unbaptized infants) go to Hell.

 

[rlg94086]

So if I understand Limbo correctly then the Church teaches that it is a possibilty(** I underestand it is a matter of personal belief and it is uncertain) **our fallen brethren ( dead unbaptized infants) go to Hell.

Sure. That’s why we baptize infants. Is it probable that unbaptized infants go to Hell? Not to most people. That’s why theologians developed the concept of Limbo. Unlike Purgatory (purification on the way to Heaven), I believe Limbo is supposed to be a permanent state. Some call it a part of Hell (IOW…anything outside of the Beatific Vision is Hell).

Now, does Limbo actually exist? Who knows? Either way, we need to baptize infants, because we don’t really know their fate.

At least, that’s the way I see it. Maybe I’m just not flexible enough to do the Limbo anymore.

 

[FTS]

So if I understand Limbo correctly then the Church teaches that it is a possibilty(** I underestand it is a matter of personal belief and it is uncertain) **our fallen brethren ( dead unbaptized infants) go to Hell.

While technically you could believe they suffer in Hell, virtually nobody really believes this. People either belief they go to Limbo or to Heaven. I personally believe they are baptised by desire and go to Heaven.

 

[johnstown_johnn]

Then you believe that infant baptism is meaningless.

meaningless? Absolutely NOT ! Even though an infant is unaware of this special “washing away”, in the sequece of Catholic sacraments, baptism is acknowledged by the child as he/she advances to adolescents (young manhood/womanhood) by the sacrament of Confirmation.

We also, during the Eastertime, as a congregation, REAFFIRM our renounciation of the devil and both publicly and orally embrace our baptisms.

St. Paul baptized an entire “household.” Certainly not a stretch to assume the very young were included in the “household.”

We are BORN with this stigma, and a newborn is, in a sense of speaking, a child of Adam and Eve after The Fall. Baptism transforms the newborn to be a child of the Ho;ly Trinity. The power of that sacrament is mindboggling.

We are baptized from our very begginigs on earth; confirm our baptisms at Confirmation; and we publicly reaffirm our baptisms during Eastertime… this is a lot of emphasis of the sacrament, yes?

 

[Tom317]

I do believe that those who die before the age of reason, and those who do not truly possess reason and free will, such as the mentally handicapped, will be baptised by desire and enter Heaven. I am not saying this is guaranteed truth with certainty, but neither is belief in Limbo. I am simply stating my personal opinion, an opinion which is acceptable according to the teaching of the Catholic Church. Of course we can choose to deny Him, and not accept Him, to cut ourselves off from relationship with Him, to cut off sanctifying grace in our souls, through our actions and free will. But God is just, merciful, and loving. He loves His children and desires our salvation. This forms the basis for my belief on the subject. I lean on the side of God’s great mercy.

No, respectfully you are wrong, your personal views about baptism are not in-line with the Church. According to the Church baptism is an absolute, not a choice, which includes babies and children of all ages. One cannot say that a baby or young can have baptism of desire because they have not even reached the age of reason. After all, an eight week-old baby being baptized is not desiring that baptism, the parents desire the baby’s baptism and the discussion of whether or not a parents desire is enough is far from settled. I also lean on the side of God’s mercy and I do hope non-Catholics and the unbaptized are given some path to salvation…yet what you are missing is that I can hope for such things (as a child hopes for Santa Claus to come), but my hope means nothing, God either has a path or He does not and God has NOT revealed any other path but baptism by water and the spirit.

If your view is correct, then the Church is wrong to baptized anyone under seven years old, and in fact the Church should follow the model of baptizing adults only, since they are the ones that hold the greatest maturity and ability to know the faith and to desire baptism. It is also important that we not think the Church has contructed formal teachings that are contrary to Scripture or Tradition, for the Church never contradict infallible revelation.

 

[Tom317]

meaningless? Absolutely NOT ! Even though an infant is unaware of this special “washing away”, in the sequece of Catholic sacraments, baptism is acknowledged by the child as he/she advances to adolescents (young manhood/womanhood) by the sacrament of Confirmation.

We also, during the Eastertime, as a congregation, REAFFIRM our renounciation of the devil and both publicly and orally embrace our baptisms.

St. Paul baptized an entire “household.” Certainly not a stretch to assume the very young were included in the “household.”

We are BORN with this stigma, and a newborn is, in a sense of speaking, a child of Adam and Eve after The Fall. Baptism transforms the newborn to be a child of the Ho;ly Trinity. The power of that sacrament is mindboggling.

We are baptized from our very begginigs on earth; confirm our baptisms at Confirmation; and we publicly reaffirm our baptisms during Eastertime… this is a lot of emphasis of the sacrament, yes?

You are making my point for me. Baptism is of critical importance, one MUST be baptized to be saved, period. There are no known exceptions to this rule. This fact has formed the foundation of why the Church baptizes infants and why it has always placed stress on parents to have their children bapitzed as soon as possible, because the Church knows baptism is an absolute and it knows Jesus said we cannot enter the kingdom without it.

All this talk comes down to one point: Jesus mandated baptism in order to enter the kingdom and He made no qualifications or exceptions and we cannot make exceptions for Him.

If unborn babies go to Heaven without baptism (which they clearly cannot receive), then baptism in a general sense becomes quite meaningless and it is better to be aborted then to live (of course I do not believe that, but that is the only logical conclusion, unless people and the Church want to pervert 2,000 years of known truth). Therefore, Limbo makes far more sense then the many different theories being tossed about on these threads. And take note that the Church has not gotten rid of Limbo, nor has the Church said unborn babies go to Heaven…people are already assuming the Church has said and done that, but it has not. In actual fact, the Church has NOT changed its position about Limbo at all.

 

[Tom317]

You act as if someone who believes that unborn babies can achieve salvation must state that baptism by water in unecessary. As Father Corapi would say, Happy Horse Manure. God has revealed to us that He desires us to be baptised by water. This will never change. However, in extraordinary means, a person can be baptised by blood or by desire. But obviously if possible, we are to be baptised by water. There is simply no problem here, you are trying to create an inconsistency that doesn’t exist.

See, that is simply wrong. God never said He desires us to be baptized by water; rather, God told us that we only the baptized (by water and spirit) will enter the kingdom…that is what God said, not what the voices of men say. God never said anything about desiring baptism, He said very clearly that we must be baptized in to enter the kingdom.

What I am saying is this: if baptism is not required by some of us, then justice would demand that it not be required of all of us. If unborn babies (who cannot be baptized in any way), go to the Beatific Vision, then baptism is meaningless because it means God will save us even without His absolute command for baptism.

Can you not see? There are consequences for our actions. If a baby is aborted there are conseqeunces for the baby, for the mother and for the abortionist. If there are no consequences, then the faith is meaningless. The baby suffers a consequence because it was not baptized, the mother and the abortionist suffers a conseqeunce as a result of their mortal sin. If this is not true, then baptism means nothing, sero, nadda, zilch, and the it also means the Church is not infallible, original does not exist, etc. It all crashes down.

 

[Tom317]

The existence of baptism by blood and baptism by desire are not mere guess-work. Rather their existence is the teaching of the Catholic Church.

I do not challenge the truth of blood and desire, I am saying that unborn babies and born babies, and even young children, are utterly incapable of desiring something that they cannot even understand. The Church says that one cannot even be guilty of personal sin until the age of reason because a person is simply not developed enough to know better. If one dies for the faith, or if one understands what baptism is and truly desires to be baptized, then yes they can and likely would receive those forms of baptism if they died before receiving water baptism. However, this simply does not apply to unborn babies, born babies, or children up to age seven.

So, this means what we are saying is that a different Gospel is being applied to unborn babies, born babies and children through age seven, and that the Gospel as we know is applied to those aged seven and above. I don’t remember learning about two completely different Gospels, have you?

 

[Tom317]

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.

So, you are re-inventing the Gospel now?

 

[Tom317]

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.

Truly, why do people have such trouble with this topic. It is so clear. Jesus said we must be baptized by water and spirit, He left no escape hatches or new paths or new Gospels to follow. He thought so strongly of baptism that He Himself was baptized even though He carried no sin at all. We can theorize all we want and we can talk about the theif on the cross (who I believe went to Paradise, not Heaven), but all of this stuff is mere conjecture, not facts. Limbo is conjecture as well, and that is why it does not have to be believed.

It is simple: All people, the unborn, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Christians, etc…MUST be baptized to enter the kingdom. Jesus told us this, and He did not qualify His remarks. If God allows a way to Heaven for the non-baptized, it is His business and He simply has not revealed that to us or the Church. What God has revealed to us and the Church is that we must be baptized, so we have no right giving people false expectations of heaven for those who have not been baptized, when God has never once said He will save those who have not been baptized. We must obey by following what God said, and not what we want Him to have said.

Many, many people feel it was quite harsh and unfair for God to have made the Jews His Chosen out of entire world of choices, yet that is what God did, and what the fate of the other people cannot be known unless God tells us, and He has not told us.

It is fine to hope, like the Church says we can, it is wrong to believe that the unbaptized go toe Heaven, and it is wrong to make new inventions that lead people astray.

Follow God, not men.

 

[Tom317]

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.

Yes, so if they here the unborn go to Heaven, then abortion seems like an act of mercy and baptism becomes less important. Confirmation is only done for something like 1/3 of Catholics, yet it also a critical sacrament that has been watered down over the last 30-40 years.