Is there a Limbo?

[Chazemataz]

Of course! I used to dance the limbo with my grandparents when I was younger. We would go under a broomstick. I of course always won. On a more serious note, where does the Bible mention Limbo? Where did the Catholic Church pull that out from?

 

[turboEDvo]

I can limbo lower that almost anyone I know (except my sister, but she dances so what do you expect). Now I just need to get my ankle fixed…

Eamon

 

[tuopaolo]

Limbo is a doctrine that was taught by bishops and priests, including at least one prior pope. It was never something taught with a supreme binding authority. “Doctrine” just means “teaching.”

 

[Angainor]

I like C.S. Lewis’ vision of limbo. This is taken from “Screwtape Proposes a Toast” which is an appendix in my edition of “The Screwtape Letters”. For those unfamiliar, Screwtape is a devil and a senior position in the devil hierarchy specializing in tempting humans. Here Screwtape is toasting the quality of human souls they have captured:

Screwtape:

The difficulty lay in their very smallness and flabbiness. Here were vermin so muddled in mind, so passively responsive to environment, that it was very hard to raise them just enough; but not that fatal millimetre of ‘too much’. For then, of course, all would possibly have been lost. They might have repented. On the other hand, if they had been raised too little, they would very possibly have qualified for Limbo, as creatures suitable neither for Heaven nor for Hell; things that, having failed to make the grade, are allowed to sink into a more or less contented sub-humanity forever.

Lewis speaks of the dehumanizing affects of some types of evil in such works as “The Abolition of Man”, but I don’t recall if he ever gave it the name Limbo anywhere else.

 

[Exporter]

BibleReader:

The choices you give in your survey are very cute.

Yes, there is a Limbo. There must be, due to Original Sin theology. The only reason why there is debate about Limbo is that few comprehend Original Sin theology with clarity.

The “bottom line” of Original Sin theology is that before the action of the grace won by Christ on the cross, we are each of us inherently alienated from God, and “untouchable” to Him. We are “dirty,” so to speak. Free will Man, uninspired by grace, is a sensuous, self-seeking pig. This is what babies are. Babies are inherently ineligible for Heaven.

When Christ died on the cross, He purchased the grace we need to get to Heaven. Baptism is a “grace conduit.” For babies, with an inactive free will, so that Actual Grace can not be accepted by the free will, Baptism is the only grace conduit.

If they die unbaptized, babies simply lack “touchability” in God’s eyes.

Since God is not unjust, He’s not going to send unbaptized babies to that Bedlam of crazed selfish grace rejecters we call “Hell.”

There has to be a better place for morally-innocent-but-“untouchable”-pre-baptized babies.

So, yes, there is a Limbo.

---

I like this post by BibleReader.

In my considerably long experience I have always heard that unbaptised babies go not to heaven and not to hell but to limbo. Limbo is a restful and happy place. Before the Crusifixion good men went to limbo. See 1st Peter 3: 19, here it is called a prison.

 

[FdeS2]

In short, no. It is not taught by the Catholic Church that limbo exists now. I agree that there may have been a Limbo of the Fathers, for where else would they be? It could be argued that they were in purgatory, so if anyone has an arguement for or against that please put it out here. Anyway, I talked with several priests about this. They told me that long ago at the end of a meeting to discuss the subject of salvation and the role of baptism, one of the members of the “council” wrote in his notes, “where unbaptized children go is in limbo”, or something to that effect. In essence, what he was saying is that the subject is not decided yet, or “in limbo”. The topic was still in the air, still out in the open. He died before he could explain and it was taken to mean that those people go to limbo. Later, some people came across these writings, read them more carefully, and realized what he had really meant. So, limbo was a mistake.

 

[tuopaolo]

FdeS2:

I agree that there may have been a Limbo of the Fathers, for where else would they be?

Limbo of the Fathers (by whatever name) is mentioned in both the Roman Catechism and the new Catechism of the Catholic Church. In the Catechism of the Catholic Church it is referred to as “Abraham’s bosom.” I don’t remember what term the Roman Catechism uses but it may use the term “Limbo” Whatever it’s called, it’s the same thing by different names.

 

[FdeS2]

After pondering this for about a year and reading the Catechism a lot, I’m still a little perplexed. I’ve heard that the Limbo of the Fathers existed until Jesus’ Death and Resurrection and then ceased to exist because it’s purpose was served. I’ve also considered that it could be Purgatory and still exists. I’m going to do some more looking into this topic and I’ll tell you what I dig up (it may take a while).

 

[gap51]

FdeS2:

After pondering this for about a year and reading the Catechism a lot, I’m still a little perplexed. I’ve heard that the Limbo of the Fathers existed until Jesus’ Death and Resurrection and then ceased to exist because it’s purpose was served. I’ve also considered that it could be Purgatory and still exists. I’m going to do some more looking into this topic and I’ll tell you what I dig up (it may take a while).

As some sort of help go here and hear

God bless

 

[byzmelkite]

It seems that Limbo has disapeared. It was a Midieval doctrine that had its roots from St. Augustine of Hippo’s writtings. St. Augustine was a great Bishop and a great influential theologian. What do you think about Limbo? Is there a Limbo?

Actually, I thought St. Augustine didn’t believe in limbo. St. Augustine taught that unbaptized infants went to hell. Some medieval scholastics suggested the idea of limbo.

 

[byzmelkite]

BibleReader:

The choices you give in your survey are very cute.

Yes, there is a Limbo. There must be, due to Original Sin theology. The only reason why there is debate about Limbo is that few comprehend Original Sin theology with clarity.

The “bottom line” of Original Sin theology is that before the action of the grace won by Christ on the cross, we are each of us inherently alienated from God, and “untouchable” to Him. We are “dirty,” so to speak. Free will Man, uninspired by grace, is a sensuous, self-seeking pig. This is what babies are. Babies are inherently ineligible for Heaven.

When Christ died on the cross, He purchased the grace we need to get to Heaven. Baptism is a “grace conduit.” For babies, with an inactive free will, so that Actual Grace can not be accepted by the free will, Baptism is the only grace conduit.

If they die unbaptized, babies simply lack “touchability” in God’s eyes.

Since God is not unjust, He’s not going to send unbaptized babies to that Bedlam of crazed selfish grace rejecters we call “Hell.”

There has to be a better place for morally-innocent-but-“untouchable”-pre-baptized babies.

Why not send unbaptized babies to hell? They are guilty of original sin. It could be that they are damned but receive the lightest punishments. Such was the view of most Fathers and theologians of the early Church.

 

[byzmelkite]

BibleReader:

The choices you give in your survey are very cute.

Yes, there is a Limbo. There must be, due to Original Sin theology. The only reason why there is debate about Limbo is that few comprehend Original Sin theology with clarity.

The “bottom line” of Original Sin theology is that before the action of the grace won by Christ on the cross, we are each of us inherently alienated from God, and “untouchable” to Him. We are “dirty,” so to speak. Free will Man, uninspired by grace, is a sensuous, self-seeking pig. This is what babies are. Babies are inherently ineligible for Heaven.

When Christ died on the cross, He purchased the grace we need to get to Heaven. Baptism is a “grace conduit.” For babies, with an inactive free will, so that Actual Grace can not be accepted by the free will, Baptism is the only grace conduit.

If they die unbaptized, babies simply lack “touchability” in God’s eyes.

Since God is not unjust, He’s not going to send unbaptized babies to that Bedlam of crazed selfish grace rejecters we call “Hell.”

There has to be a better place for morally-innocent-but-“untouchable”-pre-baptized babies.

So, yes, there is a Limbo.

Why not send unbaptized babies to hell? They are guilty of original sin. According to most of the Church fathers, unbaptized babies went to hell and received the lightest punishments.

 

[byzmelkite]

**It could also be a posibility that they could be cleansed of original sin through purgatory with prayer. It’s a big mystery and can not be solved by human reason alone, it needs more revelation. As former Cardinal Ratzinger said “**One should not hesitate to give up the idea of limbo, if need be (…); but the concern behind it must not be surrendered. Baptism has never been a side issue for faith; it is not now, nor will it ever be.”

If the very concept of an uncertain fate for the miscaried child is painful enough for the mother, for the sake of peace, love, and care, we should not teach her the concept of Limbo nor say that her dead baby will go there, since it is not a dogma. Even if there is a Limbo, what if someone can escape it through prayer and divine action? What if the dead unbaptised babies can be cleansed in Purgatory? We can continue to hope for the salvation of all, but we must also continue to emphasize the importance of baptism.

My answer to the above poll is “Maybe, I don’t know.” It is currently a theory not yet completely proven and not yet completely debunked. We are to be open on this issue and accept the fact that someday it would either be true or false, and openly accept that answer.

Amen to that. The bottom line is that we do not know the fate of unbaptized babies, but with the Catechism, we pray and hope for God’s mercy.

 

[byzmelkite]

BibleReader:

Hi, Defensor.

Babies did not “acquire” sin. It is in our “stuff.” We are made of sin-seeking garbage, and not more. When God merely created us, before Christ’s sacrifice our creation was not completed.

Wow, that’s heresy. Are you sure you shouldn’t join the Manicheans or gnostics? You need to re-read the Bible and your catechism.

 

[byzmelkite]

BibleReader:

Hi, Defensor.

Babies did not “acquire” sin. It is in our “stuff.” We are made of sin-seeking garbage, and not more. When God merely created us, before Christ’s sacrifice our creation was not completed.

That is why, in the Bible, after Eve, who stands for us, was taken out of the side of the Old Testament Adam, Genesis 2:21, something else followed Eve – and, in principle, us – out of the side of the New Testament Adam – the waters of salvation activated by the saving blood of Christ, John 19:34.

That is why the blood and water comes out of Jesus’ side…It is part of the ingredients of our creation.

Our creation wasn’t completed until Christ died.

There is nothing “unjust” about sending babies to Limbo. Limbo is not a place of punishment. But it is not the Beatific Vision. It’s probably just about the exact equivalent of here, where we are. Query: Was creating us and putting us here on Earth “unjust”? I don’t think so. Do you? If not, then Limbo isn’t “unjust.”

Notice what Ratzinger does – he says that the Limbo theory is secondary to Baptism theology.

Before Baptism or Baptism by Desire or Baptism by Blood, we are still just sin-seeking garbage. Outside of grace, presence before God – the Beatific Vision – kills us. It annihilates us. See Exodus 33:20.

That is why Mary had to be immaculately conceived. When the almightiness of God touched her person at the time of the Annunciation, and joined to her flesh in her womb, Mary would have been destroyed, had she not been immaculately conceived.

Limbo exists, therefore, for the samne reason that Mary was immaculately conceived.

Where are you getting this nutty theology?

 

[byzmelkite]

itsjustdave1988:

Whether you call it “limbo” or not, these statements of Catholic doctrine are true…

According to the Council of Lyons II (1274):

According to the Council of Florence (1493):

If it is supposed that Pope Benedict XVI is refuting these councilar decisions, than I believe such suppositions to be in error.

The salient question that is of free opinion within speculative theology is whether or not infants enjoy an extra-sacramental means of sanctification. I believe they do. Nevertheless, God is not obliged to employ such a means for anyone on earth, not even infants. But, we are right to pray to Jesus that he “lead all souls to heaven, especially those most in need of thy mercy” and have hope in the mercy of God.

Amen, thanks Dave. This is the best post on the subject yet.

 

[BibleReader]

byzmelkite:

Why not send unbaptized babies to hell? They are guilty of original sin. According to most of the Church fathers, unbaptized babies went to hell and received the lightest punishments.

I think that when the Fathers said that unbaptized babies go to “Hell” and received the lightest “punishment,” they had a Limbo-like place – similar to Earth in its pain – in mind. Why confuse? Let’s just call it “Limbo,” so that all understand that it’s not that Bedlam of crazed God-haters we call “Hell”!

 

[BibleReader]

byzmelkite:

Where are you getting this nutty theology?

Wel-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l, my friend, Genesis 2:21 and John 19:34 and Exodus 33:20 are from the Roman Catholic Bible approved and published by the Church’s own inspired Magisterium, and Ratzinger’s words were spoken by Ratzinger.

 

[BibleReader]

**byzmelkite, quoting BibleReader: **Hi, Defensor.

Babies did not “acquire” sin. It is in our “stuff.” We are made of sin-seeking garbage, and not more. When God merely created us, before Christ’s sacrifice our creation was not completed.

byzmelkite: Wow, that’s heresy. Are you sure you shouldn’t join the Manicheans or gnostics? You need to re-read the Bible and your catechism.

BibleReader: Sorry, byzmelkite, but you’ll just have to put away your bell, book and candle. It’s sound.

The Original Sin concept articulated in my pieces here suffuses all Catholic theology. It is why Christ had to suffer and die. It is why there is a Limbo. It is why Mary was immaculately conceived. It is why salvation is “by grace alone.” It is why the monk Pelegius was a heretic.

 

[Roman_Army]

**byzmelkite, quoting BibleReader: **Hi, Defensor.

Babies did not “acquire” sin. It is in our “stuff.” We are made of sin-seeking garbage, and not more. When God merely created us, before Christ’s sacrifice our creation was not completed.

byzmelkite: Wow, that’s heresy. Are you sure you shouldn’t join the Manicheans or gnostics? You need to re-read the Bible and your catechism.

BibleReader: Sorry, byzmelkite, but you’ll just have to put away your bell, book and candle. It’s sound.

The Original Sin concept articulated in my pieces here suffuses all Catholic theology. It is why Christ had to suffer and die. It is why there is a Limbo. It is why Mary was immaculately conceived. It is why salvation is “by grace alone.” It is why the monk Pelegius was a heretic.

**I never heard anything about our seed being made of garbage and sin. It is not until the sperm cell firtilizes the egg and becomes an embryo and develops a soul that original sin is contracted. That is how God prevented the original sin from consuming Blessed Mary as an embryo, he protected the developed soul like with a shield. So in otherwords, Mary had original sin around her but not in her and when she said “yes” to Jesus it was completely destroyed. **

A man’s sperm does not have a soul, a woman’s egg does not have a soul, when they come together a soul is born and produced. So in other words, in this belief of yours of the seed having original sin, then what is baptism for? Does a baptized man have original sin? No! Therefore, his seed doesn’t either. But, his kids contract the original sin. Original sin does not come until the embryo is formed (in which the soul is produced). It’s like a demon waiting for when the soul becomes present in order to attack it.