What happens to the souls in limbo after the final judgment?

[Trying2overcome]

After the final judgment, the souls in purgatory are released and the souls in heaven amd hell are reunited with their bodies…but what happens to limbo? Does it disappear? And do the souls there go to the new earth or into the lake of fire?

 

[MarcoPolo]

All souls go to either heaven or hell. Limbo is not an official teaching of the Church anyway, so it may not even exist.

CCC#1022 Each man receives his eternal retribution in his immortal soul at the very moment of his death, in a particular judgment that refers his life to Christ: either entrance into the blessedness of heaven-through a purification or immediately, – or immediate and everlasting damnation.

 

[The_Wizard]

I think if you search here on Catholic Answers you will find that the concept of “limbo” is no longer part of Catholic teachings. Growing up in the Church in the 1950’s and 60’s I was taught that “limbo” was the place unbaptized infant went when they died. I believe the Church has refined that teaching.

You may want to read this: “Pope Benedict, himself a top theologian who before his election in 2005 expressed doubts about limbo, authorized the publication of the document, called “The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptised”.”

Here is the link: vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html

 

[Kenny_Kamel]

From my understanding limbo was a place certain souls went to upon death that was not heaven, hell, or purgatory. It was reserved for Holy Souls anticipated to enter into heaven upon either any of the death, resurrection, or ascension of Christ.

My understanding is that souls such as those of Sts. Anne & Joachim, St. Joseph, St. John the Baptist were in limbo prior to heaven. Nothing is 100% certain of course this is simply what I have read on the subject.

 

[captainrick]

Personally, I don’t believe that limbo exists… However, if it does, I think that to call it a “place” is misleading. I believe it would be more of a “state of existence.”

 

[The_Wizard]

Kenny, I do remember Sister Mary Jude explain “limbo” in terms that from the time from Adam and Eve’s sin until Jesus’s death and resurrection the gates of Heaven were closed. (As an aside see Apostle’s Creed - “He descended into hell”) I guess people asked the question if the gates of Heaven were closed what happen to all the righteous people who died from Adam and Eve until Jesus opened the gates? “Limbo” sounds like to good answer although maybe a simple one. I do believe that after Jesus’s resurrection the reason/need for “limbo” ceased to exist.

 

[1ke]

I think if you search here on Catholic Answers you will find that the concept of “limbo” is no longer part of Catholic teachings.

Limbo never was a Catholic teaching.

Limbo was a speculative exercise on the part of theologians-- that’s what theologians do.

Unfortunately there were those who read theologians’ works who then went on to teach this to others as if it were actual Catholic doctrine.

 

[1ke]

After the final judgment, the souls in purgatory are released and the souls in heaven amd hell are reunited with their bodies

Yep. Heaven or Hell, the only two destinations.

…but what happens to limbo?

No such thing.

Does it disappear?

Souls are eternal, they do not disappear.

And do the souls there go to the new earth or into the lake of fire?

There aren’t any souls “there” because it doesn’t exist.

When one dies, one’s soul goes either to Hell, Purgatory, or Heaven. That’s it.

 

[The_Wizard]

Limbo never was a Catholic teaching.

Limbo was a speculative exercise on the part of theologians-- that’s what theologians do.

Unfortunately there were those who read theologians’ works who then went on to teach this to others as if it were actual Catholic doctrine.

1ke,
From “THE HOPE OF SALVATION FOR INFANTS WHO DIE WITHOUT BEING BAPTISED” - “This theory, elaborated by theologians beginning in the Middle Ages, never entered into the dogmatic definitions of the Magisterium, even if that same Magisterium did at times mention the theory in its ordinary teaching up until the Second Vatican Council. It remains therefore a possible theological hypothesis.”.

Dogmatic Doctrine - NO! No longer taught - YES! Taught as a theory as to were souls went before the gates of were opened - WELL?

P. S. I went to Catholic School before Vatican II. Dominus vobiscum. Et cum spiritu tuo.

 

[laircy]

Limbo has been thought to be a part of hell, though not with punishment but with “natural happiness.”

(I’m not commenting on whether it exists or not, but clarifying that it is not proposed as some “third” final destination.)

 

[The_Wizard]

Another quote from “THE HOPE OF SALVATION FOR INFANTS WHO DIE WITHOUT BEING BAPTISED” - “3. The idea of Limbo, which the Church has used for many centuries to designate the destiny of infants who die without Baptism, has no clear foundation in revelation, even though it has long been used in traditional theological teaching.”

 

[Handsome_jack]

I think if you search here on Catholic Answers you will find that the concept of “limbo” is no longer part of Catholic teachings. Growing up in the Church in the 1950’s and 60’s I was taught that “limbo” was the place unbaptized infant went when they died. I believe the Church has refined that teaching.

You may want to read this: “Pope Benedict, himself a top theologian who before his election in 2005 expressed doubts about limbo, authorized the publication of the document, called “The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptised”.”

Here is the link: vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html

Are you a ****** lover or something becuase that’s the stupidest question I have ever heard of course limbo is infallible part of church teaching asswipe

 

[Tomdstone]

Limbo never was a Catholic teaching.

Limbo was a speculative exercise on the part of theologians-- that’s what theologians do.

Unfortunately there were those who read theologians’ works who then went on to teach this to others as if it were actual Catholic doctrine.

Here is what the catechism of Pope St. Pius X says:
12 Q: Why such anxiety to have infants receive Baptism?
A: There should be the greatest anxiety to have infants baptized because, on account of their tender age, they are exposed to many dangers of death, and cannot be saved without Baptism.
13 Q: Do parents sin, then, who, through negligence, allow their children to die without Baptism, or who defer it?
A: Yes, fathers and mothers who, through negligence, allow their children to die without Baptism sin grievously, because they deprive their children of eternal life; and they also sin grievously by putting off Baptism for a long time, because they expose them to danger of dying without having received it.
cin.org/users/james/ebooks/master/pius/psacr-b.htm

 

[Gorgias]

Oh boy. So much to say, here…

From my understanding limbo was a place certain souls went to upon death that was not heaven, hell, or purgatory. It was reserved for Holy Souls anticipated to enter into heaven upon either any of the death, resurrection, or ascension of Christ.

My understanding is that souls such as those of Sts. Anne & Joachim, St. Joseph, St. John the Baptist were in limbo prior to heaven.

You’re confusing two notions – one that is doctrinal and another that never was doctrinal.

The “Limbo of the Fathers” is the description given to the state of those who were just, but who died prior to Jesus’ resurrection. They were unable to attain to heaven until Jesus’ sacrifice opened the gates of heaven (so to speak). The examples that you give are all of the notion of the “limbo of the fathers.” This is a doctrinal teaching of the Church; it shows up in Scripture (1 Peter 3:19).

“Limbo”, in common parlance, denotes the “limbo of the infants.” This was never a doctrinal teaching of the Church; rather, it was a theological opinion (which gained quite a wide dissemination). This ‘limbo’ was a description of the fate of the unbaptized who died without personal sin (e.g., infants). This notion theorized that, not having personal sin, these souls did not completely merit hell; but, having still the stain of original sin (i.e., having not received sanctifying grace through baptism of some sort), they did not merit heaven, either. Therefore, the idea was that they would be in a state without the punishments of hell, but without the joys of the Beatific Vision (i.e., the vision of God).

laircy:

Limbo has been thought to be a part of hell, though not with punishment but with “natural happiness.”

:nope: No, not “part of hell”. Rather, just not fully sharing in the joys of heaven. (If memory serves, the “part of hell” argument was part of the development of the idea of limbo, but it was rejected.)

 

[Kenny_Kamel]

Kenny, I do remember Sister Mary Jude explain “limbo” in terms that from the time from Adam and Eve’s sin until Jesus’s death and resurrection the gates of Heaven were closed. (As an aside see Apostle’s Creed - “He descended into hell”) I guess people asked the question if the gates of Heaven were closed what happen to all the righteous people who died from Adam and Eve until Jesus opened the gates? “Limbo” sounds like to good answer although maybe a simple one. I do believe that after Jesus’s resurrection the reason/need for “limbo” ceased to exist.

Actually this is darn near verbatim what I had been told too. I do want to mention that I should have added the part about it ceasing to exist to my original post, it was in my thoughts as I was writing. I’m simply relating information, no claim of expertise

 

[Tomdstone]

Limbo never was a Catholic teaching.

Baltimore catechism version 4 (updated)
154. Q. Is Baptism necessary to salvation?
A. Baptism is necessary to salvation, because without it we cannot enter into the kingdom of Heaven.
Those who through no fault of theirs die without Baptism, though they have never committed sin, cannot enter Heaven neither will they go to Hell. After the Last Judgment there will be no Purgatory. Where, then, will they go? God in His goodness will provide a place of rest for them, where they will not suffer and will be in a state of natural peace; but they will never see God or Heaven. God might have created us for a purely natural and material end, so that we would live forever upon the earth and be naturally happy with the good things God would give us. But then we would never have known of Heaven or God as we do now. Such happiness on earth would be nothing compared to the delights of Heaven and the presence of God; so that, now, since God has given us, through His holy revelations, a knowledge of Himself and Heaven, we would be miserable if left always upon the earth. Those, then, who die without Baptism do not know what they have lost, and are naturally happy; but we who know all they have lost for want of Baptism know how very unfortunate they are.
Think, then, what a terrible crime it is to willfully allow anyone to die without Baptism, or to deprive a little child of life before it can be baptized! Suppose all the members of a family but one little infant have been baptized; when the Day of Judgment comes, while all the other members of a family-father, mother, and children-may go into Heaven, that little one will have to remain out; that little brother or sister will be separated from its family forever, and never, never see God or Heaven. How heartless and cruel, then, must a person be who would deprive that little infant of happiness for all eternity-just that its mother or someone else might have a little less trouble or suffering here upon earth…
cin.org/users/james/ebooks/master/baltimore/bsacr-b.htm

 

[Gorgias]

1ke:

Limbo never was a Catholic teaching.

Baltimore catechism version 4 (updated)
154. Q. Is Baptism necessary to salvation?

Let’s be more precise, then: limbo was never official Catholic doctrine, and was not proclaimed as such by the magisterium.

Better?