Vatican theologians study issue of limbo

[itsjustdave1988]

son of pio:

As a father who has a son stillborn 7 yrs ago I find this slightly troubling. It was nice have somewhere to hang your hopes on. Now…who knows where my son is??

God knows. You can hang your hopes on Him and His mercy, because he can and has sanctified infants in the womb in accord with His Will.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Matt16_18:

Aren’t you contradicting yourself? First you say that the Catholic Church does not teach that the Church Militant should pray for anyone to be justified after death, then you say that “non-justified dead can gain justification” by the prayers of the Church Militant.

Perhaps I didn’t word it clear enough. I disagree that according to Lyons II and Florence understanding of “hell”, that it means a place where those in original sin can become justified after death. I meant that the Catholic Church has not even hinted as such a novel thesis.

According to Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma,

***The definition of the doctrine of the impossibility of justification after death was projected at the [First] Vatican Council (Coll. Lac. VII 567)." ***(pg. 474)

To be clear… I am not proposing that still-born babies cannot be justified. I’m saying that if they are justified extra-sacramentally, then it occurs before death, and as such they DO NOT die in original sin.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

We should all realise that Limbo is *not *an unhappy fate.

I agree that blissful existence is a part of the theological concept of limbo, at least according to some school of thought. However, I think John Paul II and many others had difficulty reconciling blissful existence with eternity apart from God.

What I’m thinking (and hope) is that the Church will be more inclined to discard the notion of limbo and move toward a more hopeful teaching that God can and does extra-sacramentally sanctify infants in ways known only to Him. Even before Trent, this teaching was speculative.

From Dr. Ludwig Ott’s *Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, *under heading “**Souls who depart this life in the state of original sin are excluded from the Beatific Vision of God. **(De Fide)”

If this is indeed de fide, then the only manner infants can gain the Beatific Vision of God is to depart this life without original sin.

Various Catholic theories have been proposed but are speculative, not doctrinal. According to Ott, Book II, Section 1:

“The spiritual re-birth of young infants can be achieved in an extra-sacramental manner through baptism by blood (cf. the baptism by blood of the children of Bethlehem). Other emergency means of baptism for children dying without sacramental baptism, such as prayer and desire of the parents or the Church (vicarious baptism of desire–Cajetan), or the attainment of the use of reason (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. Cf. D 712.” [emphasis added]

(Dr. Ludwig Ott, *Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, *Edited in English by James Canon Bastible, D.D., Translated from the German by Patrick Lynch, Ph.D., Tan Books, Rockford IL, Fourth Edition, 1960, first published in English in 1955, pg. 114)

What I hope is that the Vatican will study these various theories and determine what level of theological certainty can be held regarding them. I don’t think there’s enough support in tradition to make any of these theories de fide. However, I see it as at least a pious opinion of Catholic theology that infants have a hope of being sanctified extra-sacramentally before death.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Ah, Satan would have us believe that it is a waste of time to offer Masses for the stillborn and aborted infants. But the Church certainly does not teach that it is a waste of time to offer Masses for these infants.

Nor do I think it a waste of time. However, the law of prayer is the law of believing. What are we praying for at these Masses?

According to Fr. Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.
ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/zlitur79.htm

With respect to the advisability of offering the Mass for the “salvation” of unbaptized infants, No. 1283 invites us to pray for their salvation.

Since the Mass is also an intercessory prayer, then it should be possible, in general terms, to offer the Mass for such an intention even though we may not yet be theologically sure of what the concept of salvation might be in this particular case. …

These rites are usually done more for the sake of the living than for the dead. And this would be the principal factor to be considered in deciding to permit obsequies, especially when the parents clearly intended to baptize the child. …

The Mass formulas do not generally intercede for the salvation of the child but rather implore that God may comfort the grieving parents with the hope of his mercy, acceptance of his will and the consolation of knowing that he takes care of us.

 

[Matt16_18]

itsjustdave1988:

Perhaps I didn’t word it clear enough. I disagree that according to Lyons II and Florence understanding of “hell”, that it means a place where those in original sin can become justified after death. I meant that the Catholic Church has not even hinted as such a novel thesis.

This is hardly a novel idea! Every single OT saint that died before Christ resurrected from the dead was sanctified after their death. These saints were in a state of original sin while they were in Sheol (hell), and they were waiting there for Christ to sanctify them so that they could possess what God had destined them to receive - the beatific vision. Why has it suddenly become impossible for God to sanctify children that died in a state of original sin after they have died?

From Dr. Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, under heading “Souls who depart this life in the state of original sin are excluded from the Beatific Vision of God. (De Fide)”

If this is indeed de fide, then the only manner infants can gain the Beatific Vision of God is to depart this life without original sin.

If is was a clear cut this, then there would be no debate about Limbo. The Catechism would be explicit - there is no hope for heaven children that died without being baptized.

Another way to interpret what Ott has said is that infants that die without being baptised do not see the beatific vision immediatly upon their death, but they are not eternally deprived of all hope of heaven. The Church Militant can pray for these poor souls, just as she prays for the Church Suffering.

To be clear… I am not proposing that still-born babies cannot be justified. I’m saying that if they are justified extra-sacramentally, then it occurs before death, and as such they DO NOT die in original sin.

Perhaps God extra-sacramentally baptizes all innocent children before they die. I don’t see any way that the Catholic Church could ever declare this as a dogma though.

 

[stanley123]

“Other emergency means of baptism for children dying without sacramental baptism, such as prayer and desire of the parents or the Church …”
If prayer and desire of the parents or the Church can save a child from limbo (which is a place in hell), then could this be true of anyone in hell? For example, in the hypothetical situation that someone were in hell (which we don’t know if it is or who is it), could the Church change its mind and say that the prayer and desire of the parents or relatives and friends and the Church could obtain a release of that person from everlasting fire? It was mentioned in a different thread that 90% of all Catholic married people in the USA practice ABC, which is gravely wrong… Now if one spouse were to die in mortal sin without the benefit of confession, could the prayers of the other spouse release that person from hell?

 

[itsjustdave1988]

“Other emergency means of baptism for children dying without sacramental baptism, such as prayer and desire of the parents or the Church …”

Prayer for the “dying” is what Ott is describing. If one dies in a state of original sin, they descend immediately into hell. These prayers are for the dying such that the do not die in original sin.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

This is hardly a novel idea! Every single OT saint that died before Christ resurrected from the dead was sanctified after their death.

It is novel with respect to limbus infantum. Limbus patrum and limbus infantum are not the same thing, nor does the Church teach the same things about them.

Abraham, and those in Abraham’s bosom, were justified before their death. Limbus patrum existed because their individual justification was not sufficient to open the gates of heaven to them.

 

[Matt16_18]

itsjustdave1988:

… Limbus patrum and limbus infantum are not the same thing, nor does the Church teach the same things about them.

I agree.

It is novel with respect to limbus infantum.

Is it? There were certainly infants that were dying before Christ died and resurrected from the dead. Every infant died in a state of original sin before the Sacrament of Baptism was instituted by Christ. Are all those infants condemned to never to see the beatific vision too? If they are not, then it was possible for God extra-sacramentally sanctify those infants after their death.

Why would God now be impotent to extra-sacramentally sanctify infants after their death?

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Matt16_18:

I agree.

Is it? There were certainly infants that were dying before Christ died and resurrected from the dead. Every infant died in a state of original sin before the Sacrament of Baptism was instituted by Christ. Are all those infants condemned to never to see the beatific vision too? If they are not, then it was possible for God extra-sacramentally sanctify those infants after their death.

Why would God now be impotent to extra-sacramentally sanctify infants after their death?

I’ve been consistent in asserting that it is possible–that is, within God’s power–to sanctify after death. No matter how many times you imply it, I am not limiting God’s power. I’m saying that it is against Catholic doctrine that a person who dies without justification will be justified after death. There’s a difference.

For example, God could have redeemed us many number of ways, but there’s ONE WAY in which God DID redeem us according to Catholic doctrine. By simply teaching that “one way” does not limit God, but merely asserts what our revealed religion teaches about HOW God does redeemed us.

Likewise, Catholic doctrine asserts that the opportunity for being justified is before death. The OT fathers were made righteous BEFORE death, just as every human after the advent of Christ.

Origen suggested that justification could occur after death, but this teaching was condemned by the Church.

 

[Matt16_18]

stanley123:

How do you understand the declarations of both the Second Council of Lyons in 1274 and the Council of Florence held between 1438 and 1445,. They taught that: “The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with only original sin soon go down into hell, but there they receive different punishments” (Denziger 464, 693).

The word “hell” in this quote means the abode of the dead.

Those that die in state of mortal sin go to the hell of the damned where there is no possibility of their salvation.

Those that die with original sin only are not unlike the OT Saints that were dying before Christ died and resurrected from the dead. Christ had to descend to the dead (“he descended into hell”) to instruct the souls that would eventually go to heaven.

The righteous dead that were only in a state of original sin were waiting for Christ in Abraham’s bosom, a place that Christ describes to the good thief as “Paradise”. Their suffering was a longing to see the beatific vision - something like the suffering of a lover that longs for her beloved. A sweet sorrow, so to speak.

Others among the dead were in a state of original sin, and while not culpable for the eternal punishment due the sins of the damned, they were also not yet wholly free from inordinate self-love. These souls were waiting for Christ in Purgatory proper where they suffered the temporal punishment due sin - their suffering is also like the suffering of a lover, but it is not as pure, since their love is still tainted with selfishness. Their suffering has a certain torment about it since they are aware of how they have been dishonorable with their selfishness - yet they also know that they will ultimately be with their beloved, so they accept their suffering as being just.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

The righteous dead that were only in a state of original sin were waiting for Christ in Abraham’s bosom

I disagree that those in limbus patrum were in a state of original sin. They were made righteous before death, which is incompatible with original sin.

The Catholic Encyclopedia states of those in limbus patrum: “Actual possession of the beatific vision was postponed, even for those already purified from sin, until the Redemption should have been historically completed by Christ’s visible ascendancy* into Heaven.*”
( newadvent.org/cathen/09256a.htm )

 

[itsjustdave1988]

From another Catholic Encyclopedia article:

the limbo of the Fathers (limbus patrum), in which the souls of the just who died before Christ awaited their admission to heaven; for in the meantime heaven was closed against them in punishment for the sin of Adam …

…as the limbo of the Fathers ended at the time of Christ’s Ascension, hades (Vulg. infernus) in the New Testament always designates the hell of the damned.

newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm

Thus, when Lyons II and Florence speak of “hell,” they connote the hell of the damned. Some of the damned eternally suffer only from poena damni (lack of beatific vision), while other’s also suffer from poena sensus (torment).

I just don’t see how all this doctrine can be set aside for something new. The only way I understand, proposed even before Trent, is that there is a possibility of sanctification of infants extra-sacramentally before death.

 

[Matt16_18]

itsjustdave1988:

No matter how many times you imply it, I am not limiting God’s power.

I am not trying to put words in your mouth. I apologise if that is what you think.

I’ve been consistent in asserting that it is possible–that is, within God’s power–to sanctify after death. … I’m saying that it is against Catholic doctrine that a person who dies without justification will be justified after death. There’s a difference.

I understand that many Protestants separate sanctification from justification. Many Protestants believe that one can be justified without being sanctified. But I have never known that the Catholic Church has taught that sanctification is something that can be separated from justification.

Would you please explain to me how an infant that died before Christ was crucified was justified? How did the infant receive the grace of initial justification before the infant died? And how did that infant become sanctified after he was dead? I truly don’t understand what you are trying to say as regards infants that died before Christ.

The OT fathers were made righteous BEFORE death, just as every human after the advent of Christ.

For adults, yes, since they could manifest faith, and they could do good works aided by grace. But could you please explain to me how infants were made righteous before Christ’s death?

God could have redeemed us many number of ways …

I disagree with that, but that should be discussed on a different thread. “[Christ] showed me the whole plan of Redemption with the way in which it was to be effected, as also all that He Himself had done. I saw that it is not right to say that God need not have become man, that he need not have died for us on the Cross; that He could, by virtue of His omnipotence, have redeemed us otherwise. I saw that He did what He did in conformity with His own infinite perfection, His mercy, and His justice; that there is indeed no necessity in God, He does what He does, He is what He is!”

• • Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich*

 

[Matt16_18]

itsjustdave1988:

I disagree that those in limbus patrum were in a state of original sin. They were made righteous before death, which is incompatible with original sin.

The Catholic Encyclopedia states of those in limbus patrum: “Actual possession of the beatific vision was postponed, even for those already purified from sin, until the Redemption should have been historically completed by Christ’s visible ascendancy* into Heaven.*”
( newadvent.org/cathen/09256a.htm )

Job was righteous while he was living in a state of original sin. Same with Abraham.

To be sure the OT saints in Abraham’s bosom were purified from the effects of personal sin, but they still lacked the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, since the indwelling of the Holy Spirit could not be given to men until Christ rose from the dead. I suppose they could have been in a state of grace that was not unlike Adam in Original Justice while they waited for Christ to descend to the limbus patrum.

 

[Matt16_18]

itsjustdave1988:

Thus, when Lyons II and Florence speak of “hell,” they connote the hell of the damned.

I don’t agree that in the decrees of Lyons II and Florence that that “hell” must mean exclusively the hell of the damned, and not merely the abode of the dead that includes both the hell of damned and purgatory.SESSION 6 6 July 1439
[Definition of the holy ecumenical synod of Florence]

[URL='http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum14.htm']Second Council of Lyons - 1274

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Would you please explain to me how an infant that died before Christ was crucified was justified? How did the infant receive the grace of initial justification before the infant died? And how did that infant become sanctified after he was dead? I truly don’t understand what you are trying to say as regards infants that died before Christ.

Infants, like all humanity that died before Christ, are either among the elect or among the reprobate. If among the elect, they were justified by God before death in the same way that Abraham was, through the grace of Christ. Yet, the just who died prior to Christ, although they died in a state of grace, they had to await Christ’s ascension before entering heaven. Abraham’s bosom is where the elect who died before Christ, whether infant or adult, after having been justified by God before death, awaited Christ’s ascension into heaven. They did not die in original sin or mortal sin, because they were made righteous. When Scripture says Abraham was made righteous, he really was. When one is made righteous, they are washed from all of their sins, actual and original.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

I have never known that the Catholic Church has taught that sanctification is something that can be separated from justification.

I have never known this either. Nor is this what I’m asserting. If God sanctifies anyone, he also justifies them. Even OT figures like Abraham were justified before death, which washed them of original and actual sin and made them holy (sanctified).

It is within God’s power to sanctify & justify after death, as he is all-powerful. Yet, according to Catholic teaching, he doesn’t.

According to Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma,
*

***The definition of the doctrine of the impossibility of justification after death was projected at the [First] Vatican Council (Coll. Lac. VII 567)." ***(pg. 474)
*
Can you provide a source text which asserts that the fathers in limbus patrum died in a state of original sin? The Catholic Encyclopedia states that they were purified from their sins, and that limbus patrum was the place where the just who died prior to Christ went until heaven was opened.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the souls in Abraham’s bosom were “holy” and “just” even before Christ delivered them, as the “holy souls” are said to have “awaited” their Savior.

It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Savior in Abraham’s bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell." … to free the just who had gone before him. (CCC 633)

 

[Matt16_18]

itsjustdave1988:

Infants, like all humanity that died before Christ, are either among the elect or among the reprobate.

God reprobates some infants to damnation? Why? I know hyper-Calvinists believe that God reprobates some infants without regard to their demerits (demerits which infants don’t have since they are not culpable of personal sin). Hyper-Calvinists believe that these reprobated infants were simply created by God for torment in the eternal fires of hell, and that in some unexplained way, this brings glory to God.

When has the Catholic Church ever taught that God reprobates infants?

Abraham’s bosom is where the elect who died before Christ, whether infant or adult, after having been justified by God before death, awaited Christ’s ascension into heaven.

You have yet to explain how the infants in Abraham’s bosom were justified apart from the Sacrament of Baptism.