Limbo as Dogma?

[Matariel]

St Agustine may have been a great saint, but he was wrong on that one. Original Sin is imputed to us from our original parents; it is not something we are guilty of. Babies are innocent, as they have made no other choice; Original sin is not their choice. That does not deny the need for Baptism; but the need for baptism doesn not imply personal guilt.

There is baptism of blood and baptism of desire-- is it possible that infants may recieve some equivalent whilst yet alive, but not out of the womb.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

If we’re going to speak of unbaptized infants, or the stillborn, what of early miscarriages? What about implantation failures? The Church teaches, of course, that these are human beings. They had divinely created souls from the moment of conception. Are all these in Limbo (or Hell?!) too? Can anyone really imagine that God creates a soul to have its body die within a matter of hours or days and then assigns/condemns that soul to limbo?

I am not speaking authoritatively here, by any means, but here’s the way I look at it: there is the normative ways for things and then there are non-normative cases. The sacraments of Penance and Baptism are the normative way sins are forgiven, but not the only way. For instance, perfect contrition can restore a soul to grace before confession:

catholicity.com/baltimore-catechism/lesson30.html

I see nothing in Church writings to prevent God from “finding a way” to give the unbaptized the chance to be saved. The question has been struggled with, but not answered.

 

[Genesis315]

What is dogma is this: (1) the punishment of original sin is the loss of the beatific vision; (2) the punishment of actual sins are the actual torments we associate with Hell

“Limbo” refers to the state of those who die with just (1) but not (2). The only souls that could possibly end up in this state, with a few exceptions, are unbaptized infants.

However, we know that God is love and therefore desires the ultimate good for all of us (“God desires all men to be saved”). We acknowledge the possibility of grace being granted to those who, through no fault of theirs, were never baptized. We know this can be done when the person makes a perfect act of charity, for example. However, since infants do not have the ability to make such a willful act, we can not say for certain that they receive that grace.

One can still posit generally that unbaptized infants end up in the state lacking the beatific vision. We can also however hope and pray that God axtraordinarily grants them that grace–and since we are forbidden from passing judgment on any particular soul, I think that is what we must do.

This essay from the ITC is actually very helpful in understanding this topic (despite highly erroneous media reports saying it abolished limbo, etc.–in fact, quite the opposite, it affirms the possibility):

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html

 

[StMartin_67]

What is dogma is this: (1) the punishment of original sin is the loss of the beatific vision; (2) the punishment of actual sins are the actual torments we associate with Hell

Agreed. This is dogma.

“Limbo” refers to the state of those who die with just (1) but not (2). The only souls that could possibly end up in this state, with a few exceptions, are unbaptized infants.

If you accept this you are applying the use of reason to the situation. An infant (nor anyone without the use of reason) simply cannot commit an actual mortal sin because he has not the ability to reason.

Genesis315:

However, we know that God is love and therefore desires the ultimate good for all of us (“God desires all men to be saved”). We acknowledge the possibility of grace being granted to those who, through no fault of theirs, were never baptized. We know this can be done when the person makes a perfect act of charity, for example. However, since infants do not have the ability to make such a willful act, we can not say for certain that they receive that grace.

So a willful act is required for those who have the use of reason but not for those who do not have that ability as of yet.

Genesis315:

One can still posit generally that unbaptized infants end up in the state lacking the beatific vision.

Yes, it appears that one must do this.

Genesis315:

We can also however hope and pray that God axtraordinarily grants them that grace–and since we are forbidden from passing judgment on any particular soul, I think that is what we must do.

Why? Because we are forbidden from “passing judgment on any particular soul”; does that mean we cannot know with moral certainty that a man who dies in a state of unrepentant public mortal sin is damned?

This essay from the ITC is actually very helpful in understanding this topic (despite highly erroneous media reports saying it abolished limbo, etc.–in fact, quite the opposite, it affirms the possibility):

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html

This document provides no reason for its “conclusion”.

 

[StMartin_67]

If we’re going to speak of unbaptized infants, or the stillborn, what of early miscarriages? What about implantation failures? The Church teaches, of course, that these are human beings. They had divinely created souls from the moment of conception. Are all these in Limbo (or Hell?!) too? Can anyone really imagine that God creates a soul to have its body die within a matter of hours or days and then assigns/condemns that soul to limbo?

I am not speaking authoritatively here, by any means, but here’s the way I look at it: there is the normative ways for things and then there are non-normative cases. The sacraments of Penance and Baptism are the normative way sins are forgiven, but not the only way. For instance, perfect contrition can restore a soul to grace before confession:

catholicity.com/baltimore-catechism/lesson30.html

I see nothing in Church writings to prevent God from “finding a way” to give the unbaptized the chance to be saved. The question has been struggled with, but not answered.

However, God has spoken through Scripture and through the tradition of the Church (also the official interpreter of Scripture) as to the economy that God has established.

The ITC is not the Church and offered no theological reasons for it’s opinion.

 

[Matariel]

However, God has spoken through Scripture and through the tradition of the Church (also the official interpreter of Scripture) as to the economy that God has established.

The ITC is not the Church and offered no theological reasons for it’s opinion.

Hm. That is a good point…

 

[system]

God is not bound by the Church’s sacraments. We may try to bind Him with out references to Church councils and papal quotations, and I bet God, being God, finds all of this very amusing.

Think about it. How many billions (perhaps trillions) of unborn children have died as a result of a miscarriage without the mother even knowing they’re pregnant? What about children who die in childbirth? God allowed all of these things to happen, presumably for the good of the people involved and greater good since they are not the result of sin. Is it for the greater good that all of these billions souls should be hopelessly separated from God because they had the misfortune to die before or shortly after birth, presumably within the purview of God’s will? Is it for the good of their own souls that they should be separated from God? Is there justice in that? Would a just God allow it?

BTW, that doesn’t even take into account the souls of aborted children. Imagine having to spend eternity in hell or limbo because your mother killed you. Does that sound like justice to you? Would God let such an injustice stand? Is such a thing or the greater good of all souls, or the good of the soul of the aborted person?

Did Christ die on the cross so that untold numbers of souls could be lost forever through miscarriages and abortions through no fault of their own?

Imagine awakening in limbo (or worse, hell). This is your first moment of consciousness. In hell, it’s unimaginable pain and horror. In limbo, it’s knowing that you will never be united with God. And you had no choice. No say in the matter. You never got to choose God. Never got to love Him. Never made that choice. And yet, somehow, since God allowed it, this is for your own good and the greater good of all souls. Imagine someone telling you that as you burned in hell or hopelessly longed in limbo.

Is God creating these souls so that they may be separated from Himself through original sin, allowing them no opportunity to make the choice to love Him?

That doesn’t seem very orthodox to me. In fact, it seems antithetical to Catholicism.

Also, imagine this. The soul of an unbaptized infant is told by God, “I’m sorry. I know you don’t understand why this is happening, but you have original sin on you and there really is nothing I can do to help you, even if I want to.”

That would seem to call God’s omnipotence into question. Is original sin more powerful than God’s mercy?

So, if unbaptized infants do not go to Heaven, it would seem to be either because God is powerless in the face of their original sin or intentionally created them and then denied them any opportunity for salvation.

Are you willing to accept that, or even defend such a position about God?

Blessedly, God is not bound by the Church’s sacraments and can do as He pleases, despite all of our protesting to the contrary. That being the case, I believe God desires the salvation of all, is capable of defeating original sin by His grace, and welcomes unbaptized infant souls into his presence rather than condemning them for not making a choice with which they were never presented.