Posted on 11/29/2005 3:42:52 PM PST by Claud
Vatican considers dropping 'limbo'
Theologians meet to look again at fate of unbaptised tots
(ANSA) - Vatican City, November 29 - The Catholic Church appears set to definitively drop the concept of limbo, the place where it has traditionally said children's souls go if they die before being baptised .
Limbo has been part of Catholic teaching since the 13th century and is depicted in paintings by artists such as Giotto and in important works of literature such as Dante's Divine Comedy .
But an international commission of Catholic theologians is meeting in the Vatican this week to draw up a new report for Pope Benedict XVI on the question. The report is widely expected to advise dropping it from Catholic teaching .
The pope made known his doubts about limbo in an interview published in 1984, when he was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, head of the Vatican's doctrinal department .
"Limbo has never been a defined truth of faith," he said. "Personally, speaking as a theologian and not as head of the Congregation, I would drop something that has always been only a theological hypothesis." According to Italian Vatican watchers, the reluctance of theologians to even use the word limbo was clear in the way the Vatican referred in its official statement to the question up for discussion .
The statement referred merely to "the Fate of Children who Die Without Baptism" .
Benedict's predecessor, John Paul II, gave the commission the task of looking at the issue again in 2004. He asked experts to come up with a "theological synthesis" able to make the Church's approach "more coherent and illuminated" .
In fact, when John Paul II promulgated the updated version of the Catholic Church's catechism in 1992 there was no mention of the word limbo .
That document gave no clear answer to the question of what happened to children who died before being baptised .
It said: "The Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God...In fact the great mercy of God, who wants all men to be saved, and the tenderness of Jesus towards children... allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who die without baptism." This view is in stark contrast to what Pope Pius X said in an important document in 1905: "Children who die without baptism go into limbo, where they do not enjoy God, but they do not suffer either, because having original sin, and only that, they do not deserve paradise, but neither hell or purgatory." According to teaching from the 13th century on, limbo was also populated by the prophets and patriarchs of Israel who lived in the time before Jesus Christ .
The answer is YES, and he was NOT baptised, and if you were more familiar with Catholic teaching you would understand the axiom that while we are bound by the Sacraments, God is not. Therefore, God can choose to bring someone to heaven who is *not* baptized, but it will be an extraordinary manifestation of His divine prerogative and does not by any means take away the fact that Baptism by water and the Spirit remains the *ordinary* means of bringing one into the Church. St. Emerentiana is in heaven, and she was never baptized with water either. One can also be baptized by desire, and by blood--and that is well-established Catholic theology.
And yet the Catholic Church recognizes the Holy Innocents -- none of whom could have been much more than two years old -- as saints in heaven, and assigns them their own special feast day during the Octave of Christmas (on December 28th).
Why don't you ask Jesus Christ about that? You know -- the One who went to the Jordan River to be baptized Himself by John the Baptist?
And von Balthasar said exactly the same thing on that point. He did think we could hope and pray that everyone repented. Chrysostom would not say that but he also would not be so stupid as to say for sure that hell is full, only that all the evidence points toward that conclusion. Von Balthasar agrees that all the evidence points toward that conclusion so that it's reasonable to think that hell is full of sinners but despite that reasonable but qualified conclusion, von Balthasar then says, we can hope that the reasonable conclusion proves to be false. It's a very small difference, really--what Von B. was concerned with is the temptation to self-righteousness when one quickly, casually proclaims how full hell is or readily consigns this or that gross sinner to hell.
It's true that gross, public sinners deserve to have their sins denounced in the strongest terms, but von B. wants us to realize that we can easily send ourselves to hell if we do that without ourselves being full of humility and repentance. He didn't like the "us" versus "them" attitude, the attitude of the publican in the temple. So, fine, quote Chrysostom on this but do it with the humble attitude of the "have mercy on me a sinner."
Von B's strategy for guarding against self-righteous condemnation of others that risks hell for the condemner may not be the best strategy--Chrysostom's strategy may be better, but they actually agree on the main point: we can't be sure whether someone repented before death or not and it's best to be humble about it.
And John Paul II did not agree with von Balthasar on this point--he distances himself from his favorite theologian preciesly on that point in _Crossing the Threshold_. So let's take it easy in denouncing JPII, please.
There is also the Baptism of Desire, which is more problematic, but is the vehicle to heaven for those who sincerely seek God with a pure heart but who, through no fault of their own, are never actually baptized.
I think you may have incorrect information. I have honestly never heard any theologian say that, and I've read up on this somewhat intently, though certainly I'm no expert and am eager to be corrected.
Dante quite clearly sets Limbo in his "Inferno", and every theological treatise I've read on it, unquestionably defines Limbo as part of Hell. It has to be: the Limbo of the Fathers was postulated to exist before Heaven was even opened.
Is Jesus your God?
John 3:5Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit."
Matthew 28:19
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit
Augustine was wrong about very little. This was one of them--that unbaptized infants go to hell. He was corrected on this matter by Anselm and Innocent III etc. But it's one of the few things he was wrong about. Blaming him for angst and guilt is typical Enlightenment nonsense, reading Augustine through Calvin's and Jansenius's eyes and repudiating Calvin and Jansenius rather than Augustine. Augustine is made to be the whipping boy for a lot of the modern folks' own stupidities. No theologian offers a greater emphasis on the healing that grace brings to the guilt-ridden soul than Augustine--though many equal him none surpasses him. If you are not aware of that, you don't know Augustine's theology very well. You know caricatures of it, which are a dime-a-dozen.
So what's the big deal with limbo? If God can use His extraordinary Divine Power on the Thief on the Cross, He can certainly use His Extraordinary Divine Power on the infants.
I believe He uses His Extraordinary Divine Power to send His Only Begotten Son to the Cross to take OUR SINS on Himself so we might be saved. It was His Extraordinary Divine power to turn His Face on Christ casusing Christ to cry out "My God, My God why have You forsaken Me?"
*Naturally* happy. Enjoying pleasure in all one's senses, having the company of friends and fellows. In other words, what the pagans conceived as Elysium.
Which is a far cry, however, from the beatific vision and the *supernatural* happiness of sharing in the Divine Nature. Which no human being properly deserves, and which is a free unmerited gift of God's.
I think the problem nowadays is that most people think we are *entitled* to heaven unless we do something to merit otherwise. Not so.
That's closer to the LDS theology. Person who die before age 8 were never accountable for sin and have no need of baptism. Age 8 and up are considered capable of recognizing the good or evil nature of a decision. They can choose baptism as a "fresh start". If they die after age 8, but before baptism, they can be baptized "by proxy" in the Temple. They must still decide whether to accept that baptism done on their behalf and choose to follow God. Persons who never had a chance to hear the gospel are treated as unaccountable. The principle is, "where there is no law, there can be no transgression". That is the answer for what happens to all those people trapped in inaccessible places that will never be visited by anyone with the gospel message.
Non sequitur.
-A8
No, you're confused. The whole point is that an infant cannot commit a sin because he does not yet know right from wrong. And for goodness sake, don't ever accuse me of seeing things through Protestant eyes.
The term "Baptism by Blood" refers to martyrdom -- which is technically what applies in the case of the Holy Innocents even though these children were too young to make a conscious admission of faith under normal circumstances.
We are forbidden to seek our own salvation in a selfish and egotistical way. We are keepers of our brothers and sisters. The more we work for their salvation, the more of God’s favor we can expect for ourselves. Those of us who believe and make use of the means that God has provided for the forgiveness of sins and the reform of life have no reason to fear. We can be sure that Christ, who died on the Cross for us, will not fail to give us the grace we need. We know that in all things God works for the good of those who love Him, and that if we persevere in that love, nothing whatever can separate us from Christ (cf. Romans 8:28-39). That is all the assurance we can have, and it should be enough.
Apparently you have never taken or taught kindergarten math.
-A8
"Dante quite clearly sets Limbo in his "Inferno", and every theological treatise I've read on it, unquestionably defines Limbo as part of Hell. It has to be: the Limbo of the Fathers was postulated to exist before Heaven was even opened."
Are you real sure that Limbo didn't have its actual origins in a painting? I mean, so many Roman Catholics and others really depend a lot on paintings, don't they. Maybe the mural of Limbo was painted from the imagination of a painter, and later some "theologian" saw it and said, "Hey! Here's a new way we can get money! People, who think the priests would never lie can have people PAY MONEY for masses to get their unbaptized infants who die out of Limbo."
Exactly. Which is why no one should say that God *must* assign an unbaptized baby to hell, or heaven, or anywhere else. Limbo et al are theological speculations, perhaps right or perhaps wrong, but worth discussing.
Well, if they eliminate everything they've made up over the years, we'll really be getting somewhere.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.