Critiquing limbo: Vatican responds to changes in theological thought

CNS ^ | April 25, 2007 | John Thavis

[NYer]

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- In its recent document on unbaptized children, the Vatican's International Theological Commission demonstrated how church teaching can be responsive to changes in theological thought, Christian beliefs and the "signs of the times."

The document, published April 20, critiqued the traditional understanding of limbo, arguing instead that there was good reason to hope unbaptized babies who die go to heaven.

Some people saw that as a reversal of a centuries-old Catholic principle. But rather than announcing a radical break with the past, the commission said it was assessing an issue in theological evolution.

The very first sentence of the document signaled an important distinction when it spoke of the "hierarchy of truths" in Catholic doctrine. The teaching on limbo was among those never addressed by Scripture and never defined as dogma and is therefore subject to theological development, it said.

"When the question of infants who die without baptism was first taken up in the history of Christian thought, it is possible that the doctrinal nature of the question or its implications were not fully understood," it said.

More specifically, the commission said the theological tradition of the past, specifically the Augustinian tradition, seems to have a "restricted conception of the universality of God's saving will."

That's an extremely sensitive issue today, one that goes beyond the fate of unbaptized babies and has implications for the church's relations with non-Christian religions.

The new document repeats traditional Catholic teaching that all salvation is through Christ and has a relationship with the church. But it emphasizes more than once that God's saving ways are ultimately mysterious and that the holiness that resides in the church can reach people outside "the visible bounds of the church."

The modern theologians cited by the document include the late Jesuit Father Karl Rahner and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, both of whom had presented arguments for abandoning the concept of limbo.

It also cited a collection of Catholic doctrinal documents edited by the late Jesuit Father Jacques Dupuis, recipient of some criticism by the Vatican's doctrinal congregation in the late 1990s when Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, was its head.

But the document goes beyond strictly theological opinions. It repeatedly refers to the "sensus fidelium" -- the sense of the faithful -- to illustrate how Christians increasingly reject the idea that the vision of God would be denied to innocent babies.

One reason the Second Vatican Council rejected attempts to strengthen teaching against the salvation of unbaptized infants was that bishops felt it was "not the faith of their people," the document said.

It referred to an important teaching of Vatican II, which said that the whole body of the faithful shares in Christ's prophetic office and "cannot err in matters of belief."

To support its conclusions on limbo, the theological commission's document also cited the need for the church to read the "signs of the times" in order to better understand the Gospel.

In unusual detail, it listed several such signs that support the idea of hope for the salvation of unbaptized infants: the warfare and turmoil of the international scene and the church's awareness of its mission as a bearer of hope; greater emphasis on God's love and mercy in a world of suffering people; renewed concern for the welfare of infants in societies that are scandalized by the suffering of children; and increased dialogue with people of other faiths, which encourages the church to have greater appreciation for the "manifold and mysterious ways of God."

Perhaps the clearest instance of the commission's ranging outside traditional theological boundaries was when it cited in a footnote the Live Aid and Live 8 charity rock concerts of 1985 and 2005 as examples of global concern for children.

The International Theological Commission, which acts as an advisory body to the Vatican, has always had a predominantly European membership, but this document was prepared by a drafting committee made up of nine theologians from five continents. Father Dominic Veliath, a Salesian from India, headed the committee.

[NYer]

Some additional insight into this document.

[tsowellfan]

So this means “no more limbo”?

That’s great! Even when traveling I hate layovers. I like to just get to where Im going.

[Coleus]

you mean Rush Limbo?

[theFIRMbss]

>it was assessing an issue in theological evolution

Oh-oh. I wonder
if "evolution" also
will take Catholics

to declare Mary
"Co-Redemptrix" with Jesus . . .
If things can change, then . . .

[Alex Murphy]

So this means “no more limbo”? That’s great! Even when traveling I hate layovers. I like to just get to where Im going.

Yes, but if there's "no more limbo", does that mean I'll be getting all my lost socks and luggage back now?

[Frank Sheed]

From the Rorate Caeli website (a link to Seattle Catholic, RIP+):

Limbo is here to stay!

http://www.seattlecatholic.com/a051207.html

[wideawake]

(1) "Limbo", more accurately the limbus patrum "border of the fathers", exists and is an irreformable part of Church doctrine.

(2) It has continually been an open theological question, never resolved definitively, as to what happens to the souls of children who died unbaptized. One commonplace suggestion among theologians has been that such souls go to the limbus patrum - the place where the Hebrew patriarchs waited after death for the coming of the Messiah.

(3) There have always been other opinions, one of them being that (a) since pedobaptism exists and (b) since baptism of desire exists, then (c) it is possible that unborn infants can have been baptized by desire.

An even stronger version points out that amniotic fuid itself can be matter for baptism.

[pjr12345]

No more limbo?!!

Drat!

I’ll have to schedule a different event for this year’s Luau.

[sandhills]

Live Aid and Live 8 Rock concerts??? In a theological document? This can’t be real.

Whatever the deprivations of Limbo, they can’t possibly be as bad as having to listen to senseless theology. Puerile theology is cruel and unusual punishment.

[pjr12345]

SARCASM ALERT

The following post may contain irreverent humor. Please do not read this post if you lack a sense of humor and/or are easily offended.

-------------------------------

(1) "Limbo", more accurately the limbus patrum "border of the fathers", exists and is an irreformable part of Church doctrine.

Those popes have got to learn to keep their mouths shut when they're sitting on the throne!

(2) It has continually been an open theological question, never resolved definitively, as to what happens to the souls of children who died unbaptized.

Only if one buys into the unbiblical concept of "original sin". If you were to recognize the biblical position that each person is responsible for their own sins, and couple it with Jesus' admonition that we must be like little children to enter heaven... then you'd see that sin cannot be imputed until a person is capable of moral judgment. Hence, deceased babies go to heaven. (Save me the rebuttal. It's old hat.)

(3) There have always been other opinions, one of them being that (a) since pedobaptism exists and (b) since baptism of desire exists, then (c) it is possible that unborn infants can have been baptized by desire.

Huh? First of all, you're going to have to explain "pedobaptism". The best I can envision is a bicyclist fallen into a lake. Or, for you RCCers, a bicycle caught in a thunderstorm.

As for the unborn infants' "desire"... one word: Silly.

amniotic fuid itself can be matter for baptism.

Wow! The whole world's catholic!

[wideawake]

(Save me the rebuttal. It's old hat.)

It's disingenuous to claim one's post is purely humorous, then present a deeply flawed yet seriously-intended argument, and then expect not to be refuted.

Romans 5:18 crushes your personal speculation.

As for the unborn infants' "desire"... one word: Silly.

We are not talking about the unborn infant's desire.

Wow! The whole world's catholic!

The matter of a sacrament is not a sacrament.

[murphE]

the Vatican's International Theological Commission demonstrated how church teaching can be responsive to changes in theological thought, Christian beliefs and the "signs of the times."

St. Pius X pray for us.

PASCENDI DOMINICI GREGIS

[pjr12345]

Romans 5:18 crushes your personal speculation.

Yes, if taken out of context. Let's look at the entire passage:

Romans 5:12-21

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. 16 And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. 17 For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.) 18 Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. 19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous. 20 Moreover the law entered that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more, 21 so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

A reading of the entire passage in full context makes it quite clear that Paul is stating Adam brought sin and the consequence of sin - death - into the world. And because all men sin, all suffer death. Nowhere will you find Paul stating that I, or anyone else, am responsible for Adam's sin. I sin, I die.

Scripture speaks plainly.

We are not talking about the unborn infant's desire.

Whose desire are we talking about? Their parents? God? Sorry, your doctrine of "original sin" REQUIRES innocent children and unborn babies to burn in Hell. That's just another reason it can't be true; God is just. He holds people accountable for their own sin, not the sin of Adam.

The matter of a sacrament is not a sacrament.

I have no idea what you mean.

[theFIRMbss]

/*
SARCASM ALERT
The following post may contain irreverent humor.
Please do not read this post
if you lack a sense of humor
and/or are easily offended.
-------------------------------
*/

>amniotic fuid itself can be matter for baptism
>>Wow! The whole world's catholic!

-------------------------------------------------------------

There are Jews in the world, there are Buddhists,
There are Hindus and Mormons and then,
There are those that follow Mohammed,
But I've never been one of them...

I'm a Roman Catholic, and have been since the day I was born,
And the one thing they say about Catholics,
Is they'll take you as soon as you're warm...

You don't have to be a six-footer,
You don't have to have a great brain,
You don't have to have any clothes on -
You're a Catholic the moment dad came...

Because...

Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.

Let the heathen spill theirs, on the dusty ground,
God shall make them pay for each sperm that can't be found

Every sperm is wanted, every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed in your neighbourhood.

Hindu, Taoist, Mormon,
Spill theirs just anywhere,
But God loves those who treat their
Semen with more care.

Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.

Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed, in your neighbourhood.

Every sperm is useful, every sperm is fine,
God needs everybody's,
Mine
And mine
And mine

Let the Pagan spill theirs,
O'er mountain, hill and plain,
God shall strike them down for
Each sperm that's spilt in vain.

Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed in your neighbourhood.

Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.

[pjr12345]

Not sure what to make of that...

[pjr12345]

It's disingenuous to claim one's post is purely humorous,

BTW, I never said it was purely humorous.

[Bainbridge]

You are kidding, right?
Baptism by amniotic fluid. Now I’ve heard everything.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Yes, I caught that too :-(

[wideawake]

The question has arisen over the years: what if a dying man on a battlefield, for example, requests baptism and the only liquid to hand is muddy water from a puddle?

The answer is: use it, since there is access to nothing else and he is dying.

What liquids that are 99+% water are accessible to a dying unborn child?

An interesting question for the immersion-only set.