[Mrs. Don-o]

If "limbo" were a dogma which implied any pain, punishment or deprivation of the souls of unbaptized infants and children, I'd see your point.

What so many people don't understand is that:

(1) limbo was never a "dogma," it was a speculation about a question that didn't seem to have a definitive answer. It was some theologians' way of saying, "Well, God is just, and this is what we think could be a just solution: eternal natural happiness of the innocent children."

(2) It implied no pain or punishment, but an eternal fulfillment of the childrens' natural capacities for satisfaction.

The idea was, they can't endure the Beatific Vision because they haven't been "born again," but simply as beings possessing a human nature, they could enjoy an eternity of natural joys.

It's a speculative idea, but not a bad idea.

It doesn't seem like anything to leave the Church about--- not if you understand that the Church was founded by Christ as a key part of His salvation plan for you and for the whole world.

[Claud]

Well said. :)

[armydoc]

limbo was never a "dogma," it was a speculation about a question that didn't seem to have a definitive answer. It was some theologians' way of saying, "Well, God is just, and this is what we think could be a just solution: eternal natural happiness of the innocent children."

Why wasn't the statement of Pius X concerning limbo infallible? It appears to me it concerned faith and morals, and was spoken ex cathedra.

Can anyone point me to a definitive list of infallible Catholic doctrine? Does it exist?