Limbo under threat from Vatican theologians

Catholic News ^ | October, 2006

[NYer]

Rome reports indicate that the Holy See's International Theological Commission is examining the notion of limbo at a meeting this week and may be on the verge of scrapping it.

Ad Kronos International (AKI) reports that the Vatican reportedly appears set to abolish the Catholic tradition that holds that the souls of children who die before being baptised going to limbo.

Citing a report in Turin, Italy newspaper, La Stampa, AKI says that the issue is being discussed this weeke by the International Theological Commission, a body of Catholic theologians from around the world that advises the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

According to the 1904 catechism published by Pope St Pius X in 1904, "children who died without baptism go to the limbo where they do not enjoy God but don't suffer either as having the original sin, and only that, they do not deserve Paradise nor Hell or Purgatory".

The Church however has for a long time stopped referring to the concept Limbo and in 1984 theologian Joseph Ratzinger, elected Pope Benedict XVI in April last year, said that Limbo "was never a truth of the faith."

"I would let it drop as this has always only been a theological hypothesis," he said.

According to the Fathers of the Church, the concept limbo is that people who lived good lives but died before the Resurrection did not go to heaven, but rather had to wait for Christ to open the gates of heaven.

The term limbo does not appear in the Bible. In Holy Scripture, limbo is referred to as the term bosom of Abraham, appearing twice in it.

The bosom of Abraham represents the blissful state where the righteous dead await their eternal reward.

As such, this concept corresponds to the concept of limbo of the fathers in that it is neither heaven nor hell and the people there are waiting to enter paradise.


SOURCE
Vatican: Limbo for children likely to be scrapped (AdKronos International, 3/10/06)

[SoothingDave]

Nope, just wondering what other pieces of doctrine are optional.

You have some evidence where limbo for unbaptized infants was proclaimed and declared infallibly as a dogma of the Catholic faith?

Or are you just talking out of ignorance?

Limbo for infants was and is a theological speculation. We have no Divine Revelation on this subject. We are free to have ideas about the subject, but none has been declared as revealed truth.

SD

[B Knotts]

And again, it's just a theoretical possibility that they may be ultimately saved. We don't know definitively one way or another.

Obviously, the ordinary means of salvation would involve being a Catholic.

[kerryusama04]

Every time stuff like this comes up, that infalliblilty sphere gets smaller and smaller. If I were to send this article to my 70 year old Catholic parents, they would think it was a lie.

[B Knotts]

Also, I admit that the possibility of adults going into limbo is problematic at best.

[SoothingDave]

Every time stuff like this comes up, that infalliblilty sphere gets smaller and smaller.

It's inversely proportional to the ignorance sphere of the Church's critics.

If I were to send this article to my 70 year old Catholic parents, they would think it was a lie.

Your parents are theologians?

Do you understand that the Church can and does teach what it understands to be true and reasonable, but it is not adverse to re-consideration of speculative ideas?

SD

[theFIRMbss]

>the Vatican reportedly appears set to abolish the Catholic tradition that...

There won't be trouble until the Pope tells people it isn't really Jesus on their toast or Mary on the wet wall . . . Then the fur will fly!

[Jaded]

Even their favorite Apostle spoke about Purgatory. How'd they miss that?

[marshmallow]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth" are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements." Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."

Thankfully, the Church now distinguishes between those responsible for heresy, schism and division, and those born into the resulting chaos, who sincerely seek the Truth.

The term "joined with her" is also conferred on the latter category.

[NYer]

An orthodox Jew who is observant and God-fearing his whole life would never be baptized. Would this Jewish person also go to Limbo? If not, why not?

An excellent question that also applies to Buddhists, Muslims, etc. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church ......

---

The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.⁶⁰ He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.⁶¹ Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.⁶² The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit." God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

---

This paragraph tells us that Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whome the Gospel has been proclaimed and whohave had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. It says that while the Church does not know of any other way than Baptism to get to Heaven, she does recognize that God is not bound by His sacraments and may have some other way of saving those who were never baptized. Paragraph 1260 of the Catechism elaborates on this:

---

"Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery."⁶³ Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.

---

We can't say with certainty who is saved and who isn't; only God know that, and we are more than happy to leave such matters in His merciful hands.

[Aquinasfan]

the Vatican reportedly appears set to abolish the Catholic tradition

It's not part of Sacred Tradition, it's always been a theological speculation. Even if the media understood the issue, they wouldn't report it correctly.

[NYer]

that photo reminds me of that black and white "Aw geez, not this s**t again" photo that always pops up around here.

Wish I had a hosting site so I could download the image and tweak it accordingly ;-)

[SoothingDave]

CCC 839

The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People, 326 "the first to hear the Word of God." 327 The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God's revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews "belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ", 328 "for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable." 329

[wagglebee]

Limbo has never been defined as dogmatic.

[WWEG]

Guys,

I think the so called "infallibility sphere getting smaller and smaller" is based upon a faulty notion of the extent to which these beliefs must be held. The fathers were not unanimous on limbo, Augustine differed from most and there has been different takes on down the line.

A quick perusal of Ott's Fundamentals Of Catholic Dogma gives the severity with which a teaching must be held. I am traveling and don't have my copy here or I would post. The Catholic Encyclopedia at new advent.org is also a great resource.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Limbo is not a defined doctrine of the Church. As for "optional," there are all kinds of theological theories or speculations that are optional. Anything that's just a "theory" is optional, come to think of it.

For instance;"Angels exist": this is a dogma of the Church.

"An angel appeared at Fatima, Portugal in 1917": A private revelation --- approved (as having nothing contrary to Faith and morals) by the Church, but, like all private revelations, not a binding doctrine.

"It's good to thank your Guardian Angel for guarding over you": a widespread pious practice, not a religious obligation.

I admit it can be somewhat confusing until you look into it further. I've got to look stuff up in the Catechism all the time.

[wagglebee]

Can you refresh my memory, where are the doctrines of "sola scriptura" and "sola fide" in the Bible?

[jkl1122]

Please explain this comment.

[amihow]

A Bull is not necessarily an infallible pronouncement.

[utahagen]

Thank for the post. Does this mean -- and I'm not trying to be contentious -- that a one month old, non-Jewish baby who dies unbaptized would go to Limbo, but that a one month old, Jewish baby who dies (obviously, unbaptized) would go to Heaven?

[SoothingDave]

Does this mean -- and I'm not trying to be contentious -- that a one month old, non-Jewish baby who dies unbaptized would go to Limbo, but that a one month old, Jewish baby who dies (obviously, unbaptized) would go to Heaven?

I don't believe there is a Limbo for infants.

I believe that we can only speculate and in my estimation it is unbecoming of a merciful God to deny those free of personal sin (indeed free of the capacity to choose at all) from eternity in His Presence.

But I can not know if God has a different plan. If He made these sould for damnation or for something else, that is His business.

SD