[Dr. Eckleburg]

The Church has NEVER suggested Limbo as anything more than a THEORY

LOLOL. Times change and so does Rome, eh?

Sorry, but Limbo was taught as doctrine by the Roman Catholic church for decades if not centuries.

Consider the Baltimore Catechism (keeping in mind you said Rome has "NEVER suggested Limbo as anything more than a THEORY"...)

BALTIMORE CATECHISM

Q. 402. Did Christ's soul descend into the hell of the damned?

A. The hell into which Christ's soul descended was not the hell of the dammed, but a place or state of rest called Limbo, where the souls of the just were waiting for Him.

Q. 403. Why did Christ descend into Limbo?

A. Christ descended into Limbo to preach to the souls who were in prison -- that is, to announce to them the joyful tidings of their redemption.

Q. 404. Where was Christ's body while His soul was in Limbo?

A. While Christ's soul was in Limbo His body was in the holy sepulchre.

YADA YADA YADA...

[Legatus]

The "Limbo of the Fathers" isn't the "Limbo of the Infants".

From the trusty Catholic Encyclopedia: "it may confidently be said that, as the result of centuries of speculation on the subject, we ought to believe that these souls enjoy and will eternally enjoy a state of perfect natural happiness; and this is what Catholics usually mean when they speak of the limbus infantium, the "children's limbo."

The citation you produced refers to the Limbo of the Fathers... the actual Limbo. As you can see the Limbo of the Infants isn't doctrinal.

[count-your-change]

Please take a look at the Catholic Encyclopedia, limbo is alive and well in Catholic belief.

[Alex Murphy]

Consider the Baltimore Catechism (keeping in mind you said Rome has "NEVER suggested Limbo as anything more than a THEORY"...)

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

Related threads:
A U-turn or just theological speculation? [Has the Church thrown out Original Sin with Limbo?]
The Limbo controversy: Time for reflection
Catholic parents aim for quick baptism of babies with or without limbo
Critiquing limbo: Vatican responds to changes in theological thought
Limbo reflects 'unduly restrictive view of salvation,' Vatican theological commission says
How Long Will Limbo Be in Limbo?
Pope: No Limbo for Babies, Only Heaven (dreadful misreporting of Catholic Traditional Beliefs)

[wagglebee]

LOLOL. Times change and so does Rome, eh?

Sorry, but Limbo was taught as doctrine by the Roman Catholic church for decades if not centuries.

Consider the Baltimore Catechism (keeping in mind you said Rome has "NEVER suggested Limbo as anything more than a THEORY"...)

BALTIMORE CATECHISM

Q. 402. Did Christ's soul descend into the hell of the damned?

A. The hell into which Christ's soul descended was not the hell of the dammed, but a place or state of rest called Limbo, where the souls of the just were waiting for Him.

Q. 403. Why did Christ descend into Limbo?

A. Christ descended into Limbo to preach to the souls who were in prison -- that is, to announce to them the joyful tidings of their redemption.

Q. 404. Where was Christ's body while His soul was in Limbo?

A. While Christ's soul was in Limbo His body was in the holy sepulchre.

YADA YADA YADA...

Fascinating, you've found what the Baltimore Catechism wrote about the Harrowing of Hell.

As best I can tell, the only thing standing between you and some sort of "gotcha moment" is the rather inconventient fact that this has NOTHING to do with what we were actually discussing.

Here is what you wrote in post #5620:

Sadly, Rome teaches that unbaptized babies do not go to heaven but to a fictional land called Limbo where they are deprived of the presence of God for eternity.

Here is what I wrote in post #5667 (you will notice that the Limbo I am talking about is in regards to unbaptized infants):

The Church has NEVER suggested Limbo as anything more than a THEORY. The Church has NEVER definitively stated that where the unborn/unbaptized are. And there has certainly NEVER been even a suggestion that they would be denied the presence of God for eternity.

Now, let's see what The Baltimore Catechism has to say about that:

Q. 632. Where will persons go who -- such as infants -- have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism?

A. Persons, such as infants, who have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism, cannot enter heaven; but it is the common belief they will go to some place similar to Limbo, where they will be free from suffering, though deprived of the happiness of heaven.

Now, a "common belief" IS NOT a doctrine and the phrase "similar to" certainly negates any presumption that it is a definitive statement.

[Cronos]

"A. Christ descended into Limbo to preach to the souls who were in prison -- that is, to announce to them the joyful tidings of their redemption. " --> That is the "limbo", the unknown place where the righteous who died were before Christ opened the gates of Heaven. This is separated from the "I don't know" place of unbaptised infants

The first "I don't know" place is because we do not believe that holy men like Samuel were/are in hell before Christ opened the gates of heaven and since Christ WENT there to preach to them, that was a definite "place". The second "I don't know" is to simply answer where do unbaptised infants go -- "I don't know, BUT I know that God is merciful and Kind and loves Children, so my belief is that they are in heaven"