I am not Catholic so I have never really understood the concept of limbo though I am familiar with it. On what basis did Catholics determine there was a limbo? From the Bible?
Isn't that a redundacy?
Good idea. I've strained my back doing the limbo a few times.
I'm so confused!
I am a Lutheran, but I've always thought that the Lutheran (and Christian generally, for that matter) teaching on Baptism is a little strange. I've always thought that it makes God into a lover of technicalities, when I don't get that sense at all from the Bible. Certainly the Bible says that Baptism is important, but where does it give us exact guidance as to what constitutes "Baptism"? My guess is that "Limbo" was a concept devised in order to get around the discomforting possibility that a baby could be condemned because his parents didn't have a Priest pour water on his head.
Suspend Limbaugh?
(Oh...nevermind.)
All right! Purgatory next. It's existence in not supportable.
It can't be the cash cow nopw that it was in the 1500s before Martin blew the whistle.
That was my preview. Here's my comment.
All right! Purgatory next. It's existence is not supportable.
It can't be the cash cow now that it was in the 1500s before Martin blew the whistle.
I've got a good idea.
He should teach this verse:
Ephesians 2:8-9 (American Standard Version)
8 For by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
9 not of works, that no man should glory.
And this one:
John 3:3
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
American Standard Version (ASV)
Copyright © 1901 Public Domain
Jesus said we must be as little children to enter the kingdom of Heaven, so obviously the little ones are innocent and not tainted by sin. Why wouldn't they go to Heaven? Little children who are too young to discern the difference between right and wrong are innocent in God's eyes, regardless of their parents spiritual status. There is a verse in the OT that a son does not inherit the sins of his father. To say at what age a child becomes knowledgeable enough and responsible for his/her sins is purely speculative -- I think it varies by the individual.
"We've got to limbo, Jimbo!"
Just wanted to add--to everyone here on this thread--to keep in mind that the Catholic Church existed before the New Testament was written, and therefore sometimes Catholics don't immediately rush to see what the Bible says on a topic and proclaim that the Bible=Christianity.
Protestants have a tendency to do so.
A Catholic might point out that he worships God/Christ/Holy Spirit, not the Bible.
read later
"The Catholic Church teaches that babies who die before they can be baptized go to limbo, whose name comes from the Latin for "border" or "edge," because they deserve neither heaven nor hell."
Water baptism is for those who believe. "He who believes and is baptised shall be saved." (Mark 16:16). No promise is made to those who are baptised without believing. Many people are "baptised" as babies, by immersion in the Orthodox Tradition or by sprinkling in the Catholic, Anglican and Reformed traditions. However, there is no example in the New Testament of babies being baptised. A baby, as yet without understanding, cannot believe the gospel, cannot repent, cannot confess its sin. It is not yet responsible for its actions, and God, who is infinitely just, does not condemn to damnation babies who die. "Let the little children come to me, and do not forbid them, for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven." (Matthew 19:14). Innocent babies and very small children belong to God. "Take heed that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that in heaven their angels always see the face of my Father who is in heaven." (Matthew 18:10).
The doctrine of purgatory also merits attention.
Church doctrines on Limbo have always been vague and never definitively defined.
Baptism is required for salvation, and there can be no salvation except through the saving grace of Jesus Christ. Normally that grace is channeled through the Sacraments of the Church. But it has long been believed that Jesus has the power to save whom He will.
The ancient story of the Harrowing of Hell is not official either, but it suggests that Jesus went down to Hell between Good Friday and Easter and raised up Abraham, the Patriarchs, and the Prophets. Also usually Adam and Eve. It was long taught, as well, that grace could be extended to righteous gentiles who lived before the time of Jesus or had no means of knowing about them. Oddly, in the Divine Comedy Virgil is excluded from Heaven, but Cato is admitted.
Just as ancient pagans could be saved, the Church teaches that Protestants and others not in full communion with the Church can be saved, provided that they follow what they consider to be God's will. Moreover, most Protestant baptisms are considered valid by the Catholic Church, because they make use of the two essentials: water, and the words, "I baptize you [name] in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." (By way of illustration, I was baptized as an Episcopalian, and was conditionally baptized again when I became a Catholic, just in case, but there was no real doubt that the first, infant baptism was valid.)
The Church also teaches that there can be a "baptism of desire." Even though a sacramental baptism has not taken place, if there was an intention or desire for baptism that can suffice.
So, this would not be a reversal of prior teaching, but a development of ideas that have been around for a long time. I'm not sure what to think about it. I think we can leave it up to Pope Benedict to decide what, if anything, should be done. It is already accepted that some unbaptized babies go to heaven. Whether all of them do is probably unknowable, and might better be left to God, would be my present view.