Infants in Heaven?

04-20-2007, 09:31 PM

Catholic Church buries limbo after centuries - Yahoo! News

Catholic Church buries limbo after centuries
By Philip Pullella Fri Apr 20, 2:21 PM ET

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - The Roman Catholic Church has effectively buried the concept of limbo, the place where centuries of tradition and teaching held that babies who die without baptism went. reflected an "unduly restrictive view of salvation."
The 41-page document was published on Friday by Origins, the documentary service of the U.S.-based Catholic News Service, which is part of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. Pope Benedict, himself a top theologian who before his election in 2005 expressed doubts about limbo, authorized the publication of the document, called "The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptised."
The verdict that limbo could now rest in peace had been expected for years. The document was seen as most likely the final word since limbo was never part of Church doctrine, even though it was taught to Catholics well into the 20th century.
"The conclusion of this study is that there are theological and liturgical reasons to hope that infants who die without baptism may be saved and brought into eternal happiness even if there is not an explicit teaching on this question found in revelation," it said.
"There are reasons to hope that God will save these infants precisely because it was not possible (to baptize them)."
The Church teaches that baptism removes original sin which stains all souls since the fall from grace in the Garden of Eden.
"NO NEGATION OF BAPTISM"
The document stressed that its conclusions should not be interpreted as questioning original sin or "used to negate the necessity of baptism or delay the conferral of the sacrament."
Limbo, which comes from the Latin word meaning "border" or "edge," was considered by medieval theologians to be a state or place reserved for the unbaptized dead, including good people who lived before the coming of Christ.
"People find it increasingly difficult to accept that God is just and merciful if he excludes infants, who have no personal sins, from eternal happiness, whether they are Christian or non-Christian," the document said.
It said the study was made all the more pressing because "the number of nonbaptised infants has grown considerably, and therefore the reflection on the possibility of salvation for these infants has become urgent."
The commission's conclusions had been widely expected.
In writings before his election as Pope in 2005, the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger made it clear he believed the concept of limbo should be abandoned because it was "only a theological hypothesis" and "never a defined truth of faith."
In the Divine Comedy, Dante placed virtuous pagans and great classical philosophers, including Plato and Socrates, in limbo. The Catholic Church's official catechism, issued in 1992 after decades of work, dropped the mention of limbo.

I found this to be really interesting and also to be slightly hypocritical. I know it is saying that it should not negate baptism, but I think in some ways it does (at least for infants).

thomez · 04-20-2007, 10:56 PM

I'm not anything close to a Christian, but why on earth would an infant child be held responsible if it were not Baptized? it seems the "new" view of the church only makes perfect sense, as I never thought the "limbo" idea was very logical anyway

ballz2wallz · 04-21-2007, 01:43 PM

Originally Posted by thomez

I'm not anything close to a Christian, but why on earth would an infant child be held responsible if it were not Baptized?

According to the Bible, it's not.

Dumpy Dooby · 04-21-2007, 03:41 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

According to the Bible, it's not.

I didn't know that. I know that it's a common belief amongst Christian sects, but I wasn't sure if it was actually in the Bible or not. Do you know where it is in the Bible? I'd be curious to know.

lew · 04-21-2007, 06:11 PM

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

I didn't know that. I know that it's a common belief amongst Christian sects, but I wasn't sure if it was actually in the Bible or not. Do you know where it is in the Bible? I'd be curious to know.

It's not. There are a few Scriptures that hint towards what we call an "Age of accountability" but there is no definite Scripture that states that babies go to heaven.

04-21-2007, 06:17 PM

JaJae, what did you edit from my post?

thomez · 04-21-2007, 06:31 PM

Originally Posted by 03 white zx3

JaJae, what did you edit from my post?

probably fixed the link or the formatting (it was all jumbled looking if I remember right) - your comments didn't change from my memory

04-21-2007, 06:58 PM

Originally Posted by thomez

probably fixed the link or the formatting (it was all jumbled looking if I remember right) - your comments didn't change from my memory

Oh, I thought I fixed all of that. I couldn't see any changes in my comments either, I was just wondering what I did wrong

motivez · 04-21-2007, 07:20 PM

The quote and links were a bit messed up

Dumpy Dooby · 04-22-2007, 01:14 AM

Originally Posted by lew

It's not. There are a few Scriptures that hint towards what we call an "Age of accountability" but there is no definite Scripture that states that babies go to heaven.

Catholics have that Age of Accountability thing. Is it in Leviticus, or is it a NT thing? The reason I mention Leviticus is because Catholics are big on that book (it explains priestly traditions, which is why Documentary Hypothesis refers to it as the "Priestly Source").

04-22-2007, 10:23 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

According to the Bible, it's not.

I'm not Christian, so I can't quote the bible. But I was always under the impression that infants and heaven were not specifically mentioned in the bible?

What is the Age of Accountability?

DosEquis · 04-23-2007, 10:49 AM

I just think it is sweet that we can change the system of beliefs, even if it has existed for hundreds of years, to fit what makes us feel warm and fuzzy today.

It is just another problem i have with religion.

ballz2wallz · 04-23-2007, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

I just think it is sweet that we can change the system of beliefs, even if it has existed for hundreds of years, to fit what makes us feel warm and fuzzy today.

It is just another problem i have with religion.

I think it' sweet that we can believe in a God we don't fully understand, making him truly a god. I like that we don't have all the answers

DosEquis · 04-23-2007, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

I think it' sweet that we can believe in a God we don't fully understand, making him truly a god. I like that we don't have all the answers

You are right, we don't have all the answers. Nobody does. Not the athiests, scientists, jews, muslims, christians, etc. Which leads to another fundamental problem I have, besides changing the belief system around whenever it seems convenient, is the fact that people of religion feel like they have some moral superior high ground despite the fact they do not have all the answers.

Kytro · 04-23-2007, 08:40 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

... Which leads to another fundamental problem I have, besides changing the belief system around whenever it seems convenient, is the fact that people of religion feel like they have some moral superior high ground despite the fact they do not have all the answers.

What amuses me is the idea that beliefs systems are any more than a shot in the dark

ShadowMan_xv · 06-28-2007, 01:36 PM

Only Catholics believed in this appalling theory which is indeed beasd upon old testament retoric that we are all born with the "original sin" within us and need to be baptised to "cleanse" us from it.

The reformed churches could find no logic or scriptural reference to "Limbo" and so it was never indoctrinated into the belief system of any reformed churches from Anglican,Baptists,Lutherian,Prysbeterian,Pentecost al and so on