Limbo as Dogma?

[stringbeanduck]

As you said – the quote is from the “theologians” Not from the Pope himself—so that nullifies your statement that the Pope revised the teachings— for he has done no such thing.

Well some1 is wrong here. I need some help. The article says,

"Pope Revises ‘Limbo’ for Babies"

The first paragraph says

Pope Benedict XVI has revised traditional Roman Catholic teaching on so-called “limbo,” approving a church report released Friday that said there was reason to hope that babies who die without baptism can go to heaven.

My parents brought this to my attention a few months ago.

 

[Walking_Home]

Well some1 is wrong here. I need some help. The article says,

"Pope Revises ‘Limbo’ for Babies"

The first paragraph says

My parents brought this to my attention a few months ago.

---

You will not find any statement by Pope Benedict XVI “revising” limbo. As I said prior—the ITC report is nothing but words on paper. Many have taken this report and made it into what it is NOT—an authoritative statement coming from the Church.

 

[palmas85]

This has a couple errors in it. First we cannot question that those who lost children without baptism suffer. Second the worship of God requires acts of mercy. To console is to imitate God. This is what the primary purpose of religion the imitation of the divine in such a way that brings us closer to him.

Is this not what we are discussing? What exactly does the church teach. By implication you are saying that those who hold a position counter to yours are not being faithful to the Church i.e. Christ. Consequently you condemn them to hell. Obviously the fathers of the ITC disagree with you. As do the Orthodox. Remember where the idea of limbo comes from in the context of the infants. It is not in the early Fathers. It is in the post scismatic western Church only.
palmas85;3113033:

That is if you accept the Catholic position on Original Sin.
If you don’t, then you are free to believe whatever you want.

Again this is part of what we are discussing here what does the Church teach on this mater in this case.

I personally don’t care what the Orthodox believe to tell you the truth. Who made them the bastions of truth? I also don’t particularly care what the fathers as you say at ITM whoever they are, believe, say or advocate. They do not speak for the Church

We know what the Church teaches in this case. It teaches that baptism is necessary. That is what the Church teaches… If it does not teach that then show me where it says otherwise.

It seems to me that you have an Orthodox agenda here.

 

[stringbeanduck]

You will not find any statement by Pope Benedict XVI “revising” limbo. As I said prior—the ITC report is nothing but words on paper. Many have taken this report and made it into what it is NOT—an authoritative statement coming from the Church.

Then what is it? Pope Benedict has not denied he said this, has he? Why would the church publish such a document if it is worthless?

 

[Walking_Home]

Then what is it? Pope Benedict has not denied he said this, has he? Why would the church publish such a document if it is worthless?

---

Where and when did the Pope revise limbo. Where is his statement as speaking for the Church—in his own words. It does not exist.

What does exist is this. CCC 1261 is speaking of limbo. Limbo is the hope we have. That the unbaptised infants do not end up in the hell of the damned. Limbo is God’s mercy for the unbaptised infants.

vatican.mondosearch.com/search_en.aspx?query=Limbo&x=18&y=13

Limbo, 1261. See also Baptism; Funerals

 

[ttaylor]

I think this is an issue that is pointless… Most all of you seem to be ruled in your thought by people telling you how to think, mainly the Catholic Church… It doesn’t mean that the Church is correct…

 

[marci]

What does exist is this. CCC 1261 is speaking of limbo. Limbo is the hope we have. That the unbaptised infants do not end up in the hell of the damned. Limbo is God’s mercy for the unbaptised infants.

The CCC does not mention Limbo. This is your interpretation not the CCC’s.

CCC 1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: “Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,” allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. Al the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.

 

[stringbeanduck]

Hey, all I know is that is what it is called. He had a part in it. He did approve of it. Pope Benedict and John Paul II urged the study on Limbo and these are the findings. I don’t believe God would make a human who’s soul purpose is to dwell away from Him also who hasnt a chance to use it’s free will. No1 is sure of anything but we do know He has mercy.

 

[Walking_Home]

Hey, all I know is that is what it is called. He had a part in it. He did approve of it. Pope Benedict and John Paul II urged the study on Limbo and these are the findings. I don’t believe God would make a human who’s soul purpose is to dwell away from Him also who hasnt a chance to use it’s free will. No1 is sure of anything but we do know He has mercy.

---

God allows it. Just as He allows for disaster to strike—where even the innocent die. Just as He allows for an innocent child–to be taken my a murderer–to be abused and killed. And many a time the murderers are the childs own parent and/or parents.

 

[marci]

Here is what pope Benedict thinks about limbo and salvation for unbaptized infants:

The Ratzinger Report pp 147-148

Limbo was never a defined truth of faith. Personally–and here I am speaking more as a theologian and not as Prefect of the Congregation–I would abandon it since it was only a theological hypothesis. It formed part of a secondary thesis in support of a truth which is absolutely of first significance for the faith, namely, the importance of baptism… One should not hesitate to give up the idea of “Limbo” if need be (and it is worth noting that the very theologians who proposed “Limbo” also said that parents could spare the child Limbo by desiring its baptism and through prayer); 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.

Pope JPII in Evangelium Vitae addressing woman who have had an abortion: "The Father of mercies is ready to give you His Forgiveness and His peace in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. You will come to understand that nothing is definitively lost and you will also be able to ask forgiveness from your child, who is now living in the Lord"

Seems pretty clear to me.

 

[surgei]

What’s the point of original sin then if God is just going to remove it from everybody? This type of thinking leads one on the path to universal salvation. There are countless Saints who have taught there is only a few who will be saved. It is pure arrogance to believe one knows more than the greatest of the Saints and Doctors of the Church regarding this matter.

But according to them if you would cooporate with grace you would outshine them. Instead you take their theologic faults for virtues and virtues for faults.
Drift
188 was a rather nice ping on the hull of your personal warship of infalabity guarding what your church teaches as a discapline. Would that you desired Truth and understanding more than being right.

 

[surgei]

---

God allows it. Just as He allows for disaster to strike—where even the innocent die. Just as He allows for an innocent child–to be taken my a murderer–to be abused and killed. And many a time the murderers are the childs own parent and/or parents.

Their is grave danger when we equate the temporal sufferings or pleasures of this life with the eternal states of the imortal soul no matter how grave or leanthy those temporal states may be.

 

[Walking_Home]

Quote: Walking_Home
What does exist is this. CCC 1261 is speaking of limbo. Limbo is the hope we have. That the unbaptised infants do not end up in the hell of the damned. Limbo is God’s mercy for the unbaptised infants.

The CCC does not mention Limbo. This is your interpretation not the CCC’s.

CCC 1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: “Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,” allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. Al the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.

---

The link I posted is the search of the Vatican site. It reflects Limbo is found in the CCC and points to 1261. So it IS the CCC interpretation.

CCC second edition, pg 817.
Limbo, 1261. See also Baptism;Funerals.

 

[Walking_Home]

Here is what pope Benedict thinks about limbo and salvation for unbaptized infants:

The Ratzinger Report pp 147-148

Limbo was never a defined truth of faith. Personally–and here I am speaking more as a theologian and not as Prefect of the Congregation–I would abandon it since it was only a theological hypothesis. It formed part of a secondary thesis in support of a truth which is absolutely of first significance for the faith, namely, the importance of baptism… One should not hesitate to give up the idea of “Limbo” if need be (and it is worth noting that the very theologians who proposed “Limbo” also said that parents could spare the child Limbo by desiring its baptism and through prayer); 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.

Pope JPII in Evangelium Vitae addressing woman who have had an abortion: "The Father of mercies is ready to give you His Forgiveness and His peace in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. You will come to understand that nothing is definitively lost and you will also be able to ask forgiveness from your child, who is now living in the Lord"

Seems pretty clear to me.

---

Unfortunately–you seem to have fallen under the mistaken belief that “opinions” by JPII and in this case also Card. Ratzinger are infallible.

 

[Greg72]

Unfortunately–you seem to have fallen under the mistaken belief that “opinions” by JPII and in this case also Card. Ratzinger are infallible.

You’re not addressing me, but I seem to feel the same way as marci on this issue and I have no such belief.

Cardinal Ratzinger made it clear that he was expressing a personal opinion. He is a man of such intellect and honor that his opinion carries a lot of weight with me.

JPII didn’t sound as though he was expressing an opinion at all (though to the best of my knowledge it wasn’t an infallible statement). If he is beatified, what will you believe?

If the idea of Limbo arose as an alternative to the belief that unbaptized infants suffered in hell for all eternity, then isn’t the next logical step to come to the realization that God doesn’t deny them heaven either?

I’m with the Pope on this one.

One thing that has always bothered me about baptism is how much it relies on the parents. Knowing what it does, I believe that it should be done more freely - and I absolutely cannot believe that a child would suffer in hell, limbo or wherever because of the neglect of his or her parents (let alone if they were killed in the womb - though this could be considered an extreme form of neglect),

 

[SemperFidelis]

How come everyone is so quick to accept the personal opinions of the two most recent Popes when there is a far greater number of Popes who have explicitly taught Limbo?

 

[SemperFidelis]

But according to them if you would cooporate with grace you would outshine them. Instead you take their theologic faults for virtues and virtues for faults.
Drift
188 was a rather nice ping on the hull of your personal warship of infalabity guarding what your church teaches as a discapline. Would that you desired Truth and understanding more than being right.

No offense, but I have no need or desire to hear the opinions from someone regarding Original Sin and Limbo when said person isn’t in communion with the Pope.

 

[SemperFidelis]

I am a Catholic

Read below:

but that doesn’t mean I condone or agree with everything the Church does.

Then you are not…

I use my brain as well.

Clearly not efficiently, or else your brain would be in line with the Church’s.

To be dogmatic is to be ignorant,

To be Dogmatic is actually the opposite of ignorant, it is to espouse the Truth. Your ignorance regarding this issue is telling.

 

[Greg72]

How come everyone is so quick to accept the personal opinions of the two most recent Popes when there is a far greater number of Popes who have explicitly taught Limbo?

One of the reasons is because they are the most recent.

I believe that the Holy Spirit is guiding us towards Truth.

 

[Walking_Home]

You’re not addressing me, but I seem to feel the same way as marci on this issue and I have no such belief.

Cardinal Ratzinger made it clear that he was expressing a personal opinion. He is a man of such intellect and honor that his opinion carries a lot of weight with me.

JPII didn’t sound as though he was expressing an opinion at all (though to the best of my knowledge it wasn’t an infallible statement). If he is beatified, what will you believe?

If the idea of Limbo arose as an alternative to the belief that unbaptized infants suffered in hell for all eternity, then isn’t the next logical step to come to the realization that God doesn’t deny them heaven either?

I’m with the Pope on this one.

One thing that has always bothered me about baptism is how much it relies on the parents. Knowing what it does, I believe that it should be done more freely - and I absolutely cannot believe that a child would suffer in hell, limbo or wherever because of the neglect of his or her parents (let alone if they were killed in the womb - though this could be considered an extreme form of neglect),

---

You are right — Card. Ratzinger expressed his opinion (before he ascended to the papacy) . JPII was not infallible in each and every word—and this **will not **change even if he is beatified.

You speak of the next logical step being God does not deny heaven-----but who really is doing the speaking. A persons own desire — to manipulate in order to have God do what they want.

zenit.org/article-17840?l=english
Room for God

“He who speaks in theology should be God himself,” said the Pope. “And our speaking and thinking should only serve to have him heard, so that the world of God can find room in the world.”