Do you believe in limbo?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Steve_O_Brien
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Steve_O_Brien

Guest
I’m convinced that it’s absolutely impossible for the Catholic Church to abandon the theological deduction known as limbo, and to teach instead that all infants dying without the sacrament of Baptism attain the supernatural happiness of the beatific vision in heaven.

I further believe that the “hope” for a “way of salvation” for these children in section 1261 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church can, and must, be undestood as the unending *natural *happiness of limbo, not the unending supernatural happiness of the beatific vision.

Although Catholic doctrine cannot be determined by polls, I think that it would be helpful to conduct this poll to see how much confusion there is among Catholics regarding the above points.

Please note this: those who vote for option #2 (heaven) should *also *vote for either option #5 or option #6 to indicate whether or not they believe that everyone goes to heaven.

I request that only Catholics respond to this poll.

Thanks!

Keep and spread the Faith.
 
Steve_O_Brien said:
I’m convinced that it’s absolutely impossible for the Catholic Church to abandon the theological deduction known as limbo, and to teach instead that all infants dying without the sacrament of Baptism attain the supernatural happiness of the beatific vision in heaven.

I further believe that the “hope” for a “way of salvation” for these children in section 1261 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church can, and must, be undestood as the unending *natural *happiness of limbo, not the unending supernatural happiness of the beatific vision.

Although Catholic doctrine cannot be determined by polls, I think that it would be helpful to conduct this poll to see how much confusion there is among Catholics regarding the above points.

Please note this: those who vote for option #2 (heaven) should *also *vote for either option #5 or option #6 to indicate whether or not they believe that everyone goes to heaven.

I request that only Catholics respond to this poll.

Thanks!

Keep and spread the Faith.
Click to expand...
In paragraph #2 of the above post, I meant to type “understood.” Not only should the management of our forum allow an indefinite time period for correcting typos and making other revisions, but it should also provide a spelling checker.

I urge everyone interested in limbo to read Patrick J. Toner’s article in the Catholic Encyclopedia:

newadvent.org/cathen/09256a.htm

Keep and spread the Faith.
 
I can’t vote. Where’s the option that states the heaven, hell, purgatory, limbo doesn’t exist?
 
ribozyme said:
I can’t vote. Where’s the option that states the heaven, hell, purgatory, limbo doesn’t exist?
Click to expand...
That question will be asked on this message board in about 9 or 10 years; and at that time you can expect to get as wide range of opinions as you will on this thread.

“When I return will I find, think ye, any faith on earth”
 
I believe that the Church will either retain the theory of Limbo, or it will create a new theory that is essentially Limbo with a different name.
 
I don’t believe in Limbo but trust in God’s mercy for these unbaptised infants.

Limbo is anyway only a theological hypothesis which we have never been required to believe in.
 
Theologically, I think it is possible, but I can’t perceive of a Heaven in which I won’t get to hold the baby I lost in miscarriage. I don’t know if that is a purely emotional response.

However, if I who love imperfectly can’t conceive of it, then how can God who loves perfectly not have these little ones around him?

:confused:
 
This poll is somewhat skewed. Limbo = Hell. Limbo is just the outer fringe of hell, where the punishment is the denial of the beautific vision.
 
Yes—since the Church teaches that not baptising will deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God. Since infants do not have personal sin----limbo is God’s just mercy.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

The Baptism of infants

1250 Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which all men are called.50 The sheer gratuitousness of the grace of salvation is particularly manifest in infant Baptism. the Church and the parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth.51
 
Guardian said:
This poll is somewhat skewed. Limbo = Hell. Limbo is just the outer fringe of hell, where the punishment is the denial of the beautific vision.
Click to expand...
Agreed 👍

Limbo just makes good sense. I think the parallels between limbo and The Orthodox Church’s understanding of the afterlife are too similar to be ignored, IMHO.
 
I said “I do not know”

This is, theologically speaking, the CORRECT answer.

The Church herself has stated, the Catechism states, the theologians have all admitted: NO REVELATION WAS MADE ON THIS SUBJECT.

Any belief in limbo is merely speculation, and any belief that they get to heaven is merely Hope. But niether outcome can be a subject of Faith.

Now, it is dogma that IF someone dies with original sin on their soul, but no mortal, they will go to limbo. Well, the dogma as phrased actually doesnt say “limbo” but instead says something like, “hell, but with no positive punishments…only the loss of the beatific vision, but with perfect natural happiness”. But that’s basically limbo.

We know that a similar state held the old testaments saints before the coming of Christ, and I would postulate that this “limbo of the fathers” and the “limbo of the infants” WOULDNT BE DIFFERENT…if there was a “limbo of the infants”. The distinction between the two needlessly complicates things.

However…while we know that IF someone dies with original sin on their soul they go to limbo…we do not know if, since the coming of Christ, God actually extraordinarily saves all souls who have not mortally sinned. So while we know what the fate of those who die in original sin WOULD BE, we don’t know if God actually lets anyone die that way…or if he gives them grace by extraordinary means at the last moments of their life.

I think he probably does. He did not publically reveal this fact because he did not want us to be able to presume it. He did not want us to be able to presume it because he wanted us to fullfill the baptismal obligation with all urgency.

But, while not revealed and thus not a subject of “belief” or “faith”, I think we can have very good HOPE that unbaptized infants get to heaven, given grace by God outside that ordinary channel (baptism) which God’s revelation has absolutely imposed on us. And it is still the most urgent obligation regardess of my hope in a possible extraordinary justification by God, because (not having been revealed) I can not presume such an extraordinary action, especially given what God has told me.

We have our marching orders: baptize as if it was the only way to get the child to heaven. In retrospect, if we cannot complete this task…we can have hope God saved them anyway. But in terms of what we may presume and thus act on…we have our commandment. Anything else God does is his business and not ours to know until judgement day.
 
I never believed in limbo. I’m glad the Church has decided to pitch that idea.

I believe I will hold the 6 babies I lost to miscarrage in heaven. They are NOT on some fridge sideline of hell. No way. :nope:
 
So—who here believes the Church lied when She stated that by not confering baptism to a child --denies the child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God.
 
Walking_Home said:
So—who here believes the Church lied when She stated that by not confering baptism to a child --denies the child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God.
Click to expand...
not me.

I thought it was never something etched in stone?
 
Walking_Home said:
Yes—since the Church teaches that not baptising will deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God. Since infants do not have personal sin----limbo is God’s just mercy.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

The Baptism of infants

1250 Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which all men are called.50 The sheer gratuitousness of the grace of salvation is particularly manifest in infant Baptism. the Church and the parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth.51
Click to expand...
Are you saying that this paragraph is talking about the parent not baptizing the child and the child immediately dying? I’m thinking of the child not immediately dying, but living many years, but without the benefit of baptism.

On the surface, to me, a child being *alive *without the benefit of baptism is their main point when they say “deny”. The point is, why not free the child from darkness asap after birth so that they can live in freedom?
 
Oops!! I voted before I read that you only wanted Catholics to vote, thus skewing the results…
(Never let it be said that I don’t have an opinion…)
 
Pug said:
Are you saying that this paragraph is talking about the parent not baptizing the child and the child immediately dying? I’m thinking of the child not immediately dying, but living many years, but without the benefit of baptism.

On the surface, to me, a child being *alive *without the benefit of baptism is their main point when they say “deny”. The point is, why not free the child from darkness asap after birth so that they can live in freedom?
Click to expand...
Look at the heading for CCC 1250–Infant baptism. It is in reference to infants-children who die without baptism. Only thru baptism can they receive the sheer gratuitousness of the grace of salvation. CCC 403 and 1250 makes this clear.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

The consequences of Adam’s sin for humanity

403 Following St. Paul, the Church has always taught that the overwhelming misery which oppresses men and their inclination towards evil and death cannot be understood apart from their connection with Adam’s sin and the fact that he has transmitted to us a sin with which we are all born afflicted, a sin which is the “death of the soul”.291 Because of this certainty of faith, the Church baptizes for the remission of sins even tiny infants who have not committed personal sin.292

The Baptism of infants

1250 Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which all men are called.50 The sheer gratuitousness of the grace of salvation is particularly manifest in infant Baptism. the Church and the parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth.51
 
1257 … God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but He Himself is not bound by His sacraments.

(Emphasis in the original, final sentence in a paragraph on the necessity of baptism.)

So, answer to the poll … I don’t know. I think that God does have some provision for the children who are lost to miscarriages and stillbirths … I did not deny those three children baptism, they were not candidates because one must be alive to receive the sacrament, and they were never alive outside my body.

The ordinary way is through the sacrament of baptism. Given a choice, no responsible parent would trust in the hope that God will provide an extraordinary way and treat baptism as of minor importance (or lesser importance than the party afterwards).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top