Limbo

[Dorothy]

I personally do not believe in the “limbus infantium”.
Limbo would include that those infants who die without a Catholic baptism would not see heaven, but enter into a place that has only the mildest torments because of original sin. I can’t see how any torments would be justified and how God would inflict this upon infants and aborted children. As the Bible does not mention such a thing I refuse to believe that this kind of an injustice truly exists.

At one time “Limbo” was theological speculation, not a definite teaching of the Church. I suppose people heard it so much they thought it was teaching. AND…it was never speculated to be a place of “mild torment” as you have stated above. It was speculated to be a place of happiness and peace, but not the fullness of the Beatific Vision of God.

Remember, it was speculation, not a teaching of the Church.

It never ceases to amaze me how things can get so twisted as people add to what they hear.

 

[Janet1983]

At one time “Limbo” was theological speculation, not a definite teaching of the Church. I suppose people heard it so much they thought it was teaching. AND…it was never speculated to be a place of “mild torment” as you have stated above. It was speculated to be a place of happiness and peace, but not the fullness of the Beatific Vision of God.

Remember, it was speculation, not a teaching of the Church.

It never ceases to amaze me how things can get so twisted as people add to what they hear.

I know that it never was a teaching (that’s why I also stated in a later post that every Catholic is basically free to believe in its existence or not).
I also know that some call the absence of the beatific vision the mildest form of torment and others declare the ones in this limbo to be in a state of happiness.

 

[una_fides]

Shin, Great job on this thread!

 

[Rence]

You are placing limitations on God that I do not recognize, nor do many in the Church.
Feelings do not play a role in this for me but I understand how it is easier to dismiss me if you believe so. This is all a matter of Justice.
Please explain the Justice in punishing someone for a choice they never were able to make?
All those in limbo before Christ’s resurrection died without sanctifying grace and without baptism but Christ welcomed them into Heaven.

Thank you for the confirmation, I agree with all that you said.

 

[Janet1983]

You are placing limitations on God that I do not recognize, nor do many in the Church.
Feelings do not play a role in this for me but I understand how it is easier to dismiss me if you believe so. This is all a matter of Justice.
Please explain the Justice in punishing someone for a choice they never were able to make?
All those in limbo before Christ’s resurrection died without sanctifying grace and without baptism but Christ welcomed them into Heaven.

Thank you for the confirmation, I agree with all that you said.

I’m off marking my calendar… I agree with both of you guys.

 

[Genesis315]

Dying in original sin results in the loss of the beatific vision and in actual sins leads to actual torments. Thus, if a soul died in original sin without actual sins, he would experience the state popularly called “Limbo.” So I guess that means Limbo exists. Remember, the suffering of those in Hell is proportional to the number and gravity of the unforgiven sins, just like glory in Heaven is proportional to merit. “Limbo” is merely the outskirts of Hell–the farthest end of the spectrum: no actual suffering due to actual sins.

Does any soul end up there? That we cannot say with certainty since the particular judgment of souls is not revealed until the General Judgment (of course, there are extraordinary exceptions).

Based purely on available knowledge, an unbaptized infant would end up there. However, we cannot say that with certainty as there is the possibility that God cleanses that soul of original sin in some way not revealed to us. Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma provides some examples of possibilities:

"Other emergency means of baptism for children dying without sacramental baptism, such as prayer and the desire of the parents or the Church (vicarious baptism of desire—Cajetan, St. Bernard), or the attainment of the use of reason in the moment of death, so that the dying child can decide for or against God (baptism of desire—H. Klee), or suffering and death of the child as quasi-Sacrament (baptism of suffering—H. Schell), are indeed possible, but their actuality cannot be proved from Revelation. Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Book 2, Section 2, § 25

 

[twf]

What about the Old Testament “saints”? We venerate the prophets and patriarchs of the Old Testament as saints in heaven. The Carmelites, for example, celebrate the feast of St. Elijah the Prophet. On the Church’s calendar, December 24 is an optional feast of Adam and Eve, our First Parents (or at least it was in the past). Scripture teaches, and the Extraordinary Form of the mass confirms, that Abraham is our father in faith. In the Eastern Churches, in particular, many churches are dedicated to this or that Old Testament prophet. NONE of these old testament saints were baptized in the Christian sacramental sense. It is the tradition of the Church that Our Lord descended into Hades and opened the gates to heaven, allowing the righteous who had eagerly awaited his coming to enter into eternal bliss. Even St. John the Baptist, the only saint (besides Our Lady) whose nativity is celebrated in the Church, was never sacramentally baptized, yet we know from Scripture that he was filled wih the Holy Spirit even in the womb. If they were saved without baptism, why can’t God make other exceptions?

I agree Genesis315 - God is capable of removing original sin through means unknown to the Church.

 

[Gardenman]

This concept of Limbo can (and will) be argued and debated until the proverbial cows come home.
I went to catholic schools my entire life and was taught that this was indeed a speculation and NOT doctrine.
That said, and depending on what the real truth is regarding limbo, my intellect and sense of reasoning just can’t comprehend a loving, just, and merciful GOD denying a completely innocent child (be it an embryo, fetus, newborn etc.) the complete and utter fullness of heaven when it dies without having been baptized. Whether the child’s death was natural, an abortion, a miscarriage, or murder, these are the ultimate most innocent of all, and the most deserving of all that heaven has to offer. I would think that by virtue of their sheer innocence, at the moment of their deaths, they go to heaven so fast it would make one’s head spin !

 

[MIKE46]

You are placing limitations on God that I do not recognize, nor do many in the Church.

Feelings do not play a role in this for me but I understand how it is easier to dismiss me if you believe so. This is all a matter of Justice.

Please explain the Justice in punishing someone for a choice they never were able to make?

All those in limbo before Christ’s resurrection died without sanctifying grace and without baptism but Christ welcomed them into Heaven.

Do you accept the existance of Original Sin?

 

[Dorothy]

What about the Old Testament “saints”? We venerate the prophets and patriarchs of the Old Testament as saints in heaven. The Carmelites, for example, celebrate the feast of St. Elijah the Prophet. On the Church’s calendar, December 24 is an optional feast of Adam and Eve, our First Parents (or at least it was in the past). Scripture teaches, and the Extraordinary Form of the mass confirms, that Abraham is our father in faith. In the Eastern Churches, in particular, many churches are dedicated to this or that Old Testament prophet. NONE of these old testament saints were baptized in the Christian sacramental sense. It is the tradition of the Church that Our Lord descended into Hades and opened the gates to heaven, allowing the righteous who had eagerly awaited his coming to enter into eternal bliss. Even St. John the Baptist, the only saint (besides Our Lady) whose nativity is celebrated in the Church, was never sacramentally baptized, yet we know from Scripture that he was filled wih the Holy Spirit even in the womb. If they were saved without baptism, why can’t God make other exceptions?

I agree Genesis315 - God is capable of removing original sin through means unknown to the Church.

Yes, that is why we leave the unbaptized to the mercy of God, as it states in our Catechism.

 

[Ultima_Ratio]

I do not see how a Loving God could condemn those who had no choice an eternity without the Beatific Vision. To do so would be unjust in my mind and God, by definition, can not be unjust.

You are reasoning as if God owed man heaven, which He does not. If God owed man heaven, it would be unjust to deprive him of the beatific vision if he did not commit a sin; but since God does not owe man heaven, it is not in any way unjust for God to deprice him of it. The following dogma should show you that your thinking is not correct

The Council of Florence: “But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin only, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.” (Denzinger 693)

The Second Council of Lyons: “The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell, to be punished however with disparate punishments.” (Denzinger 464)

The only theological speculation associated with the doctrine of Limbo is whether the souls suffer a slight punishment of sense (St. Augustine), or no punishment of sense (St. Thomas). It is the more common opinion that the souls who die in original sin only enjoy perfect natural happiness. This teaching is found explicitly in catechisms.

EDIT: Shin, I just noticed post #12 where you included the above quotes and many more. That post should settled the issue for Catholics.

 

[Innocent3]

You are reasoning as if God owed man heaven, which He does not. If God owed man heaven, it would be unjust to deprive him of the beatific vision if he did not commit a sin; but since God does not owe man heaven, it is not in any way unjust for God to deprice him of it. The following dogma should show you that your thinking is not correct

The Council of Florence: “But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin only, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.” (Denzinger 693)

The Second Council of Lyons: “The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell, to be punished however with disparate punishments.” (Denzinger 464)

The only theological speculation associated with the doctrine of Limbo is whether the souls suffer a slight punishment of sense (St. Augustine), or no punishment of sense (St. Thomas). It is the more common opinion that the souls who die in original sin only enjoy perfect natural happiness. This teaching is found explicitly in catechisms.

EDIT: Shin, I just noticed post #12 where you included the above quotes and many more. That post should settled the issue for Catholics.

Good post. I would like to add that God knows more than we do. Our minds are finite, emotional and have evil tendencies. We shouldn’t limit God to our ways of “justice.”

Isaias 55:9
For as the heavens are exalted above the earth, so are my ways exalted above your ways, and my thoughts above your thoughts.

 

[una_fides]

What about the Old Testament “saints”? We venerate the prophets and patriarchs of the Old Testament as saints in heaven. The Carmelites, for example, celebrate the feast of St. Elijah the Prophet. On the Church’s calendar, December 24 is an optional feast of Adam and Eve, our First Parents (or at least it was in the past). Scripture teaches, and the Extraordinary Form of the mass confirms, that Abraham is our father in faith. In the Eastern Churches, in particular, many churches are dedicated to this or that Old Testament prophet. NONE of these old testament saints were baptized in the Christian sacramental sense. It is the tradition of the Church that Our Lord descended into Hades and opened the gates to heaven, allowing the righteous who had eagerly awaited his coming to enter into eternal bliss. Even St. John the Baptist, the only saint (besides Our Lady) whose nativity is celebrated in the Church, was never sacramentally baptized, yet we know from Scripture that he was filled wih the Holy Spirit even in the womb. If they were saved without baptism, why can’t God make other exceptions? agree Genesis315 - God is capable of removing original sin through means unknown to the Church.

              CATECHISM OF POPE SAINT PIUS X

The Church in Particular
8 Q. What is the Catholic Church?
A. The Catholic Church is the Union or Congregation of all the baptised who, still living on earth, profess the same Faith and the same Law of Jesus Christ, participate in the same Sacraments, and obey their lawful Pastors, particularly the Roman Pontiff.
9 Q. State distinctly what is necessary to be a member of the Church?
A. To be a member of the Church it is necessary to be baptised, to believe and profess the teaching of Jesus Christ, to participate in the same Sacraments, and to acknowledge the Pope and the other lawful pastors of the Church.
…

23 Q. In what does the Body of the Church consist?
A. The Body of the Church consists in her external and visible aspect, that is, in the association of her members, in her worship, in her teaching-power and in her external rule and government.
24 Q. To be saved, is it enough to be any sort of member of the Catholic Church?
A. No, to be saved it is not enough to be any sort of member of the Catholic Church; it is necessary to be a living member.
27 Q. Can one be saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church?
A. No, no one can be saved outside the Catholic, Apostolic Roman Church, just as no one could be saved from the flood outside the Ark of Noah, which was a figure of the Church.
28 Q. How, then, were the Patriarchs of old, the Prophets, and the other just men of the Old Testament, saved?
A. The just of the Old Testament were saved in virtue of the faith they had in Christ to come, by means of which they spiritually belonged to the Church.

If one has perfect charity and perfect contrition for his sins, then he can be saved through a baptism of desire. Prior to Christ’s coming, this was the means by which the OT saints were saved coupled with their supernatural faith in God and in Christ to come (whether this faith in the coming Redeemer was explicit or implicit is a matter of speculation). It was much more difficult to be saved prior to the coming of Christ than it is now, as perfect contrition and perfect charity are not easy to come by. (See the Catechism from the Council of Trent on why Christ instituted the sacrament of Penance.) Hope this helps.

 

[Lamafacaja]

Yes, there is a Limbo. It’s Traditional Church doctrine since apostolic times.

If there’s no Limbo, and unbaptized babies aren’t going to hell proper, then everyone is born in a state of grace. But we no everyone is born with original sin. Baptism initiates us into the Church and wipes away the stain of original sin. Otherwise, what do we need Baptism for?

Those in Limbo are most likely perfectly happy.

 

[Shin]

Shin, Great job on this thread!

I’m sure you would have done a better one, in retrospect.

But I got tired of waiting, and felt people deserved the references the way the tide was going.

Listen to the sermon folks!

The priest will explain Limbo and its place in Catholic doctrine.

The part on the doctrine of Limbo starts at 6:40 in, if you’re in a rush.

 

[Dempsey1919]

I started a thread on Limbo in the Apologetics forum. I do not know what to believe about Limbo. It seems that the Church had a lot to say about Limbo in previous ages but it is rarely ever discussed these days. It seems that Limbo has been forgotten.

I once listened to a sermon by Archbishop Fellay of the SSPX and he stated that Limbo is a doctrine of the faith. He provided quotations and evidence to support his view. He also said that the Church can never say that Limbo does not exist because it would contradict previous teachings. He said that the “NO” Church glosses over the issue but can never explicitly state that Limbo does not exist.

I suppose this is one of the issues, which could be discussed during the Rome-SSPX talks. This is one area where post-Vatican II teachings seems to contradict the traditional teachings of the Church.

I invite you all to post in the aforementioned thread. I really want to discuss this issue fully because I think Limbo is an important subject.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Do you accept the existance of Original Sin?

Yes I do, now its your turn.

Do you accept the omnipotence of God?

 

[palmas85]

Yes I do, now its your turn.

Do you accept the omnipotence of God?

I’ll jump in here if you and Mike don’t mind… If you accept the concept of original sin how do you square it with your statement of

I do not see how a Loving God could condemn those who had no choice an eternity without the Beatific Vision. To do so would be unjust in my mind and God, by definition, can not be unjust.

If it would be unjust to cut those off without seeing the beatific vision, then why permit original sin at all? It seems manifestly unjust and unfair to lay blame on everyone throughout eternity for something that they personally had absolutely nothing to do with. Yet, still He does it.

Gods justice is not the same as yours or mine and neither is the mind of God the same as yours and mine. If it was then why would He allow something like original sin to even exist? To us it makes no sense and seems unjust and cruel. Do you think it also seems that way to Him? By your own statement He cannot be unjust and unfair. Yet He allows this gross injustice to lay on each and everyone of us from conception until baptism.

Why?

Once you start applying your standards of morality to God, you start to run into some tremendous difficulties.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I’ll jump in here if you and Mike don’t mind… If you accept the concept of original sin how do you square it with your statement of

I do not see how a Loving God could condemn those who had no choice an eternity without the Beatific Vision. To do so would be unjust in my mind and God, by definition, can not be unjust.

If it would be unjust to cut those off without seeing the beatific vision, then why permit original sin at all? It seems manifestly unjust and unfair to lay blame on everyone throughout eternity for something that they personally had absolutely nothing to do with. Yet, still He does it.

Gods justice is not the same as yours or mine and neither is the mind of God the same as yours and mine. If it was then why would He allow something like original sin to even exist? To us it makes no sense and seems unjust and cruel. Do you think it also seems that way to Him? By your own statement He cannot be unjust and unfair. Yet He allows this gross injustice to lay on each and everyone of us from conception until baptism.

Why?

Once you start applying your standards of morality to God, you start to run into some tremendous difficulties.

If you are going to jump in then answer my question.

 

[simple_soul]

*I have a quick question. It would read, as an underlying and overall theme in some of the posts here that in order to see the beatific vision of God one has to be baptized, cleansed of original sin. Is this a correct understanding? *