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 .
So, where do you go to wash yourself in this blood?
Are you equating water with Blood? The Bible never does. But if the Bible ever did equate water with Blood, then IMMERSION in water would be the better mode of baptism, would it not?
Aquinasfan & mike182d: St. Anselm & Innocent III did not teach what Dionysiusdecordealcis says they taught. See Post #274.
No, I don't believe infants go to hell when they die. I don't have all the answers, but "Limbo" isn't one of them.
I agree with you, apparently I am having extreme difficulty in conveying my actual thoughts.
Surely you understand this.>>>>>>>>>
I understand this perfectly, my point is that some on this thread consider the act of baptism itself to have some power, without going into all the other aspects of belief, it should be obvious to anyone that a mere physical act confers nothing. Baptism is a mere outward symbol.
Jesus went to be baptized on his own accord, this has nothing to do with the apparent belief of some that the baptism of an infant who is too young to decide anything on his own can be cleansed by a mere physical act.
Didn't Jesus say, "Suffer the little children to come unto Me?" What more do you need? He meant that the innocent should not be deprived of His presence, not even for a moment, much less a subset of eternity such as limbo.
Try the stock market.
No. The "Limbo of the Fathers" is different from the Limbo of infants who die without baptism.
The "Limbo of the Fathers" was the temporary place or state of those people who were bound for heaven yet died before Christ opened the gates of heaven.
Thanks Dajjal. I thought that sounded funny. Then I'm going back to my original position.
This can't be repeated often enough, although it's important to remember that this is a Church discipline and not a Church dogma. Nevertheless, the discipline is deserving of obedience.
That's for sure.
So what happens to the babies now in Limbo? Do they get a "Never mind" sort of pass?
We need to reconcile this statement with another statement of Jesus. "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit."
There is a tension here that is not easily resolved, which is why the Church leaves the fate of infants who die without baptism as an open question.
Historically, Limbo has been offered as a theological speculation regarding the fate of infants who die without baptism. It's not unreasonable speculation. Today, the Church is simply saying that theologians are gradually moving away from this speculation, and the Church is stating with greater force that the fate of infants dying without baptism is an open question.
Yup, remember the thief on the cross.
Luke.23 [43] And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
He who makes the rules, makes the rules.
wow...that's a bit creepy. Same scripture posted at the same time... :-)
Perhaps meaningful. I was thinking about it myself as I read through the thread, but then it's one of my favorite arguments against "no salvation for unbaptized infants".
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.