Limbo

[dairygirl4u2c]

"Might one argue that the exclusion of unbaptized infants from the beatific vision has been infallibly taught by the ordinary magisterium of the Church? This is a plausible claim, yet to establish it one must not only demonstrate that this was a common, perhaps the common, opinion of the bishops of the Church, but also that they have taught it with a moral unanimity and dogmatic definitiveness. That such moral unanimity and dogmatic definitiveness was ever achieved seems unlikely, given Eastern understanding of original sin, baptism, and theosis. And within the second millenium Western Church there have always been those who have found problematic the automatic exclusion of unbaptized infants from Heaven."

my understanding is a teaching doesn't have to be unanimous by the bishops. ive heard it said bishiops must be in union with the pope, but ifthe pope teaches something it'd seem it's taught infallibly regardless of the biships, give it's also said "A is infallible if it's taught, by the pope, to the church, on faitha nd morals'

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote]For example, Baltimore Catechism No. 3 states, with its usual air of certainty: “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” (Q. 632).[/quote]

There's nothing false here. If you die without Baptism, you cannot enter heaven. Of course, God can apply the grace of Baptism to anyone He desires (i.e. Baptism by Blood and Baptism by Desire), thus allowing someone who was not physically baptized to enter Heaven.

Limbo is a theory and it is presented as such in the Baltimore Catechism.

I want to know by what miracle you find the time to do all this reading

[Luigi]

I second Louisville Fan, although I would call limbo a theological construct rather than a theory.

In other words, although there is no Biblical or traditional evidence for limbo (or purgatory), theologians speculated that "there must be a place where..." the souls of the just-but-unbaptized (or the just-and-baptized who still need some purification before entering Heaven) go. I remember hearing a priest explain this but I can't remember where. He maintained that these speculative constructs were posited in response to questions they really couldn't answer authoritatively - like good Catholic parents whose child died before baptism wanted to know if God was really going to beaver dam their child eternally (and that kind of thing happened a lot way back when).

The theological construct of limbo (or purgatory), however, is not completely made up. It's based on sound theological ideas - what we DO about God, his love for his children, and so forth.... if we know THIS is true, and we know THAT is true, then it may also be true that X, Y, and Z.

[sacredheartandbloodofjesus]

I look at Limbo as the realm where the Angels were tested. I beleive unbaptised babies and the such go here and their hearts are tested when their intellects come to know the Truth. Then they go to Heaven or Hell for all eternity according to their choice.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Luigi' date='02 May 2010 - 11:04 PM' timestamp='1272859447' post='2104012']
I second Louisville Fan, although I would call limbo a theological construct rather than a theory.

In other words, although there is no Biblical or traditional evidence for limbo (or purgatory), theologians speculated that "there must be a place where..." the souls of the just-but-unbaptized (or the just-and-baptized who still need some purification before entering Heaven) go. I remember hearing a priest explain this but I can't remember where. He maintained that these speculative constructs were posited in response to questions they really couldn't answer authoritatively - like good Catholic parents whose child died before baptism wanted to know if God was really going to beaver dam their child eternally (and that kind of thing happened a lot way back when).

The theological construct of limbo (or purgatory), however, is not completely made up. It's based on sound theological ideas - what we DO about God, his love for his children, and so forth.... if we know THIS is true, and we know THAT is true, then it may also be true that X, Y, and Z.
[/quote]

Purgatory is not just a theological construct. That purgatory exists is a divinely revealed dogma.

"Cum catholica Ecclesia, Spiritu Sancto edocta, ex sacris Litteris et antiqua Patrum traditione in sacris Conciliis et novissime in hac oecumenica Synodo docuerit, purgatorium esse, animasque ibi detentas fidelium suffragiis, potissimum vero acceptabili altaris sacrificio iuvari: praecipit sancta Synodus episcopis, ut sanam de purgatorio doctrinam, a sanctis Patribus et sacris Conciliis traditam, a Christifidelibus credi, teneri, doceri et ubique praedicari diligenter studeant."--"Whereas the Catholic Church, instructed by the Holy Ghost, has, from the sacred writings and the ancient tradition of the Fathers, taught, in sacred councils, and very recently in this oecumenical Synod, that there is a Purgatory, and that the souls there detained are helped by the suffrages of the faithful, but principally by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar; the holy Synod enjoins on bishops that they diligently endeavour that the sound doctrine concerning Purgatory, transmitted by the holy Fathers and sacred councils, be believed, maintained, taught, and every where proclaimed by the faithful of Christ." (Ecumenical Council of Trent: Denzinger-Schonmetzer 1820)

Edited May 3, 2010 by Resurrexi

[dairygirl4u2c]

the truth of whether the catholic church contradicted itself, lies in deep academic research. it's too easy to say 'see, it's easy, the general rule is baptism is required and is often state as such... but it's easily fixed via an exception etc'
if the church taught that the 'mansions' quote doesn't mean limbo is false, but the 'depart from me evildooer' verse is applicable, that gives much credence to the idea that infants were taught to be not saved at all. how catholics acted is important, as is the case with 'extra nulla', given so many in the case of limbo, the overwhelming majority, blieved in limbo. that shows evidence of intention to make it infallible.

i know the best argument per 'extra nulla' is that the rule of no salvation is like mortal sins, a mortal sin can be stated unequivically, given they implicitly require 'intention' and 'knowledge' to sin, and so does lacking salvation via the 'extra nulla' rules. this might work with 'extra nulla' (which i think history tends to show otherwise), but it's harder to argue this with limbo etc, given 'intention' isn't an issue with original sin etc. with limbo, you have to make the weaker argument that a "but" was always implied in the unequivical sounding statments.

overanalyze much, yes.

Edited May 3, 2010 by dairygirl4u2c

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Luigi' date='03 May 2010 - 01:04 AM' timestamp='1272859447' post='2104012']
I second Louisville Fan, although I would call limbo a theological construct rather than a theory.

In other words, although there is no Biblical or traditional evidence for limbo (or purgatory), theologians speculated that "there must be a place where..." the souls of the just-but-unbaptized (or the just-and-baptized who still need some purification before entering Heaven) go. I remember hearing a priest explain this but I can't remember where. He maintained that these speculative constructs were posited in response to questions they really couldn't answer authoritatively - like good Catholic parents whose child died before baptism wanted to know if God was really going to beaver dam their child eternally (and that kind of thing happened a lot way back when).

The theological construct of limbo (or purgatory), however, is not completely made up. It's based on sound theological ideas - what we DO about God, his love for his children, and so forth.... if we know THIS is true, and we know THAT is true, then it may also be true that X, Y, and Z.
[/quote]

As a Lost fan, I believe theories require more intellectual investment than mere theological constructs

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='03 May 2010 - 01:24 AM' timestamp='1272860657' post='2104030']
the truth of whether the catholic church contradicted itself, lies in deep academic research. it's too easy to say 'see, it's easy, the general rule is baptism is required and is often state as such... but it's easily fixed via an exception etc'
[/quote]

It really is that simple. Baptism is absolutely required for salvation -- it's not a "general rule." That's why Baptism by Blood and Baptism by Desire are necessary to satisfy God's justice and mercy: His justice requires Baptism to be saved, but His mercy demands than the grace of Baptism be applied to those who die for Christ or die with the desire for Baptism.

It's as simple as grace. Nothing more.

[Apotheoun]

Below is an interesting document issued by one of the Vatican's theological commissions:

[url="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html"]INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION: The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptised[/url]

Edited May 3, 2010 by Apotheoun

[dairygirl4u2c]

candle

[Apotheoun]

light

[dairygirl4u2c]

extra ... no salvation outside

quotes from non popes that bolster the idea that the CC contradicted itself, by showing more proof of what was intended by those popes who seemed to have the 'rigid view'

[quote]Saint Charles Borromeo, Founder, (died A.D. 1584): "I wish to die in the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church in which all the saints since Jesus Christ have died, and out of which there is no salvation." (Prayer to Guardian Angel)



Saint Peter Canisius S.J., Doctor, (died A.D. 1597): "Outside of this communion, as outside of the ark of Noah, there is absolutely no salvation for mortals: not for Jews or pagans who never received the faith of the Church, nor for heretics who, having received it, corrupted it; not for schismatics who left the peace and unity of the Church; and finally neither for the excommunicated or those who for any other serious cause deserve to be put away and separated from the body of the Church like pernicious members. For the rule of Cyprian and Augustine is certain: he will not have God for his Father who would not have the Church for his mother." (Catechismi Latini et Germanici)



Saint Robert Bellarmine S.J., Doctor, (died A.D. 1621): "Outside the Church there is no salvation [...] therefore in the symbol [Apostles Creed] we join together the Church with the remission of sins: "I believe in the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of Saints, the forgiveness of sins" [...] For this reason the Church is compared with the ark of Noah, because just as during the deluge, everyone perished who was not in the ark, so now those perish who are not in the Church." (On the Sacrament of Baptism)



"I believe that for the good Christians there is eternal life full of every happiness and free from every sort of evil; as, on the contrary, for the infidels and bad Christians, there is eternal death full of every misery and deprived of every good." (Compendium)



Saint Francis de Sales, Doctor, Founder, (died A.D. 1622): "Neither faith without the Church nor the Church without the faith can save you, any more than the eye without the head or the head without the eye could see light."



"Either you had the true Faith, or you had it not. If not, O unhappy ones, you are damned! ~ Or else men can be saved outside the true Church, which is impossible! Here is the definition of the Church: The Church is a holy university or general company of men united and collected together in the profession of the one same Christian Faith; in the participation of the same Sacraments and Sacrifice; and in obedience to the one same Vicar and lieutenant-General on earth of Our Lord Jesus Christ and Successor of St. Peter; under the charge of lawful bishops. Thank God we are not Jews; we are Catholics! [...] The Word of God is infallible; the Word of God declares that Baptism is necessary for salvation; therefore, Baptism is necessary for salvation." (Catholic Controversies)



“All Protestants will be damned.” (In, On the Church of Christ by Jacques Maritain)



Saint Peter Claver S.J. (died 1654): "Saint Ursula gave her life, together with that of all her friends, for the sake of that faith which I am now describing to you, and think how contrary is the religion you profess to that which they professed; and that Saint Lucius, King of England, was so obedient to the Roman Apostolic See, and had so great a respect for the Chair of Peter, that every year he sent to Rome rich gifts and jewels as tokens and tributes of his recognition. So too did all his descendants until Henry VIII and Ann Boleyn. And consider how that you and all your flock, misled, are following a road that ends in Hell!" (Peter Claver: Saint of the Slaves, Fr. Angel Valtierra, S.J. Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1954.)



Saint John Eudes (died A.D. 1680): "If I had died as a pagan, a heretic, or an apostate, you would have reason indeed to weep. [...] Weep! Weep! Burst into tears, tears of blood! For those are the people who are really dead. [...] It is for such a death that one must shed tears of blood, for those who have not lived as Christians. [...] Let infidels and heretics, let the relatives and the friends of bad Catholics weep without consolation and weep unceasingly for the death of their departed ones!"
[/quote]

[Groo the Wanderer]

Just as with the doctrine of the Trinity, the Church's understanding of this issue grows over time. As such, the way it is expressed changes as well. At risk of over-simplifying it, the word Limbo was used because it best described the situation. We don't know exactly what happens because God has not revealed it to us. We can only take what we do know of God's mercy and what He has taught and extrapolate from there. Now in the 21st century, the Church does not use the term Limbo anymore (why anyone has an objection to that is frankly beyond me) but the teaching is the same. We don;t know what happens, but we trust in God's love and mercy that He handles the situation in his way.




My question is why you open a debate thread then blather on endlessly to yourself with post after post after post? Methinks you are either trying to convince yourself of a fallacious position or are opening these threads and spamming them with distorted and out of context snippets to be a troll.

dunno

[dairygirl4u2c]

no one has properly addressed a blatant 'infallible' statement that infants go to hell, which contradicts current 'infallible' 'possibilities', and i'm the one doing loop de loops?
[quote][quote]
The teaching of Carthage was infallibly approved as a rule of the Faith by Pope Zosimus and Pope Innocent I and by the ecumenical councils, which were approved by other popes.

“It has been decided likewise that if anyone says that for this reason the Lord said: “In my house there are many mansions”: that it might be understood that in the kingdom of heaven there will be some middle place or some place anywhere where happy infants live who departed from this life without baptism, without which they cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven, which is life eternal, let him be anathema. For when the Lord says: “Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God” [John 3:5], what Catholic will doubt that he will be a partner of the devil who has not deserved to be a coheir of Christ? For he who lacks the right part will without doubt run into the left [cf. Matt. 25:41,46].”

“Then he shall say to them also that shall be on his left: Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels... And these shall go away into everlasting punishment.” ( Matthew 25:41, 46)

Pope Gregory the Great (-604) taught the eternal torment of infants in his Moralia on the Book of Job.



Gregory the Great: “For there be some that are withdrawn from the present light, before they attain to shew forth the good or evil deserts of an active life. And whereas the Sacraments of salvation do not free them from the sin of their birth, at the same time that here they never did aright by their own act; there they are brought to torment. And these have one wound, viz. to be born in corruption, and another, to die in the flesh. ....... As if reviewing the woes of mankind he said in plain words; ‘With what sort of visitation does the strict Judge mercilessly slay those, whom the guilt of their own deeds condemns, if He smites for all eternity even those, whom the guilt of deliberate choice does not impeach?’” (Moralia 9: [/quote][/quote]32)

[dairygirl4u2c]

there was no 'intention' to be lenient with limbo infants go to hell or non's go to hell, that's what it looks like. to say we now understand what 'church' means is like sayhing we now know what the definition of 'is' is, to quote bill clinton.
it's plausible to say that 'they go to hell' is like a mortal sin definition, 'masturbation and you go to hell', and a lack of undersatnding can mitigate... but, that's not what the intention looks like. and, the quotes of saints who said tings like 'all protestants go to hell' bolsters the idea that no leniency at all was intended. if there's proactive rejection of a lenient understanding, a lenient understanding cannot properly 'develop' without contradicting itself.
and everyone just ignores it
and i'm the one doing loop de loops?

Edited May 21, 2011 by dairygirl4u2c