‘Is My Baby in Hell?’ A New Book on Limbo
As far as I can discern by all of the Catholic Faith out in the open and none of it held in secret by a select few in the gnosis, the Catholic Church has no definitive, dogmatic or doctrinal teaching that babies who are not baptized who die are definitely in hell, limbo or heaven. Could there be a 4th option, nothingness?As limbo has been debated on this blog in the past, I found an interesting commentary of a book about limbo from 1Peter5.
Here is an excerpt:
Lofton reviews numerous Fathers and scholastics one by one, showing the range of opinion among the saints on the question of unbaptized infants. On the one hand, there is the view that unbaptized infants go to eternal punishment but suffer only the most minimal sufferings. This is the view of Augustine, Gregory the Great, Anselm, and Bellarmine.
Another view also has a great deal of weight. This view holds that infants go to a place called Limbo, which is neither punishment nor reward. Here some hold that Limbo includes a purely natural happiness; others hold there is a suffering in the loss of the beatific vision. Lofton shows this as Augustine’s earlier view, shared by Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory Nazianzen, Anastasios of Sinai, Abelard, Lombard, Innocent III, Aquinas, and Alphonsus, with Bellarmine, too, taking it up later. It was a proposition also written in one of the Vatican I schemae.
A minority view is held by Cajetan, Durandus, Biel, Gerson, Toletus, and Klee, who assert that a child could receive the grace of baptism and enjoy the beatific vision by an extraordinary baptism of desire. Lofton discusses that this teaching by Cajetan is based on a dubious text but argues reasonably that it should not be dismissed.
Read the rest there.
35 comments:
Could a God who is Love not be merciful to an innocent baby? All these arguments and trying to figure it out almost seems futile. There is not one ounce of me that does not believe that God would not take action on the little ones soul and bring it into Union with Himself.
So I'm ready to be slammed on this thread, but anything else would be God going against His own Nature, for a lack of a better way of putting it. I don't have the theological knowledge to express it any other way.
I felt compelled to see what our Orthodox brothers and sisters say on this matter, and offer the below linked for consideration. I'm not going to pull quotes out, as to do so takes them somewhat out of context given the thoughts that precede and succeed. Any mother who was, is and will be unfortunate enough to experience such an excruciating tragedy, would perhaps find this to be comforting.
http://www.pravmir.com/where-do-departed-unbaptized-infants-go/
Bee here:
If I were a mom whose baby died before he or she could be baptized, I would pray very earnestly to Our Lord, telling Him of my intense desire for my child's baptism.
If I did not have the child baptized for a long time, say years, and the child died, and I realized the consequences of them not being baptized much later, I would go to confession for this sin, and then I would pray very earnestly to Our Lord, repenting profusely for my negligence, and telling Him of my intense desire for my child's baptism.
I would then have confidence that my child would be in heaven, since the fault was mine, and I repented, and would have rectified the condition if I had been able.
God bless.
Bee
Thanks for the clarity, Father.
Where would Dante fall in? the second, most likely?
It is ironic that Aquinas taught there is a region of hell, limbo, which is a much 'better place' than here.
Bee,
As always, a voice of charity and commonsense
Byzrc,
Thank you. A beautiful comforting article indeed.
Inasmuch as we were created for supernatural happiness in the life to come, a state of "natural" happiness (limbo) is, de facto, a place of suffering, incompleteness, lack. This is insufficient to fulfill the expectation and the promise that a child who dies without baptism will encounter no suffering since he/she committed no personal sin.
Limbo is insufficient.
What happens to those children who die in the womb or at childbirth or who are aborted and so are not baptized? This presents a dilemma in the mind of some. Are they denied salvation and a place in the Eternal heaven?
Is there anything that presents a dilemma for God? He does not know dilemmas. Let it not be said of us Christians that we don't acknowledge and believe in the power of God. Would God deny a just resolution to these innocents if He has the power to do so? Certainly, God at times refrains from exercising His power to act, that is true. But He also in the person of His Son performed miracles and has done so down through the ages through His Holy Church and its members. And what is a miracle but God intervening in the natural order of those things he himself created. God can likewise operate as he sees fit in the spiritual order.
Why would He not do so in the case of these children? Though incomplete physically, were they not living human beings who God endowed an everlasting soul who through no fault of their own did not come among us?
Our Merciful and Just God can always be counted on to bring all things to a just resolution. Were not the righteous people of the Old Testament, though unbaptized, saved through the merits of Christ's redemptive suffering and death? And what of the children murdered by Herod? Do we not refer to the children as the Holy Innocents? The Good Lord does not impose obligations on those who are, through no fault of their own, denied the means to grace.
St Therese of Lisieux:
“In this world, it is rare to find souls that do not measure God’s omnipotence by their own narrow thoughts. The world is always ready to admit exceptions. Only God is denied that liberty.”
George thank you. You said it so much better than I ever could.
Our Merciful God is the One we can count on to bring everything to a proper, just, and fair resolution. Can we not allow that our Benevolent and Omnipotent God in His Divine Wisdom knows how to do that? Nothing that can't be resolved in a fair and just way stands before Him. All Virtue, Wisdom, Goodness, Mercy, and Justice is within the nature of our God. We can wonder and speculate on the state of unbaptized infants, but their fate will be as God in His goodness determines it, and so it becomes as He desires it to be, and therefore as it should and ought to be.
The question everyone should be asking is what the heck were you doing reading the OnePeterFive (clearly schismatic) website?
Our Merciful God is the One we can count on to bring everything to a proper, just, and fair resolution. Can we not allow that our Benevolent and Omnipotent God in His Divine Wisdom knows how to do that? Nothing that can't be resolved in a fair and just way stands before Him. All Virtue, Wisdom, Goodness, Mercy, and Justice is within the nature of our God. We can wonder and speculate on the state of unbaptized infants, but their fate will be as God in His goodness determines it, and so it becomes as He desires it to be, and therefore as it should and ought to be.
Puritanical blog burning. Not very enlightened are you Nasone?
Nasone - Big Nose Kavanaugh
I don't know how I ended up with a duplicate post above. It wasn't intended.
I can’t imagine Pope Francis saying that infants who aren’t baptized go to hell. I can’t imagine him agreeing with that theology either.
Big Nose,
A lot of "priests" read the National Schismatic Reporter. I assume you do
I'm not a theology scholar or anything, my opinion is probably just based on feelings. After miscarrying our first child, I had a deep and intense sense that he or she was there at the first Mass we attended together afterwards. Like we were all together as a family. It was bizarre. It seems to me that if our baby could be present at Mass with the angels and saints, then it obviously isn't in Hell or anywhere other than Heaven.
Infants are innocent and incapable of committing sin, the only sin of theirs would be original sin. The infants on the feast of the holy innocents did not receive baptism by water, theirs was by blood, the first martyrs of the Christ Child. If they didn’t go to hell, even though they didn’t undergo a baptism of water, can that apply to other innocent infants and children who die before baptism? Doesn’t that allow for another type of baptism? Baptism by the Holy Spirit? One prays for the souls in purgatory to lift them from that place so that they might enter heaven. Wouldn’t the same prayers lift the soul of a child into heaven? I don’t know if a soul in hell has any option to enter heaven.
It is taught at my traditional parish from the pulpit and in the CCD program that unbaptized babies baby go to limbo.
To Lucky Horseshoe,
I am sorry for your loss, which I understand completely because I miscarried our first and only.
It is not bizarre that you felt your child's presence at mass. It took me a long time to understand that the souls of little ones are not doomed to this place called Limbo. That is what I was told at 8 yrs old when my sister was stillborn. That scared the hell out of me as a child, but as an adult, as my relationship with God grew and changed, I came to understand His mercy, and knew within my spirit that my sister was in heaven. That revelation was a blessing that comforted me when I lost my own. Please do read George's post which expresses perfectly what I could not. And just to add, we might not be theologians, but we are " mommy". A mother's instinct for her child is unbreakable.
Does 'Big Nose' have any evidence that 1Peter5 is 'clearly schismatic'? I don't often visit the blog, but I have trawled through a lengthy list of contributors and have failed to find one schismatic. No doubt a site that aims to rebuild Catholic culture and restore Catholic tradition is anathema to 'Big Nose' and his cronies, but that hardly makes it schismatic.
It's also inappropriate to refer to the 'National Schismatic Reporter'. By all means disagree wth it, even call it the Fishwrap, but it's by no stretch of the imagination in schism. Criticism of the pope by liberal or conservative Catholics is not evidence of schism. Indeed, it can be argued that if you're not in communion with the pope, there's little point in criticizing him.
Jacob, All of us who are Catholic attend traditional parishes. You attend a "traditionalist" parish.
So, what was the reason the Church always rushed to have a child baptized? If a child perishes before the age of reason and will go to heaven anyway, why baptize infants at all?
I’ve known many, many people who have suffered the unspeakable tragedy of an infant’s death before baptism, or had a miscarriage f(among them a son and his wife. It’s an awful thing. The consensus of the Fathers however, and the weight of papal opinion has supported the reality of limbo. I don’t doubt it a bit. It’s not necessary for me to know the details. Commending all to the mercy and justice of God suffices.
John Nolan,
You may not be aware of this, but years ago, the Bishop of Kansas City, where NCR is published, demanded that NCR remove the word "Catholic" from its name, because it was fairly heretical/non orthodox, in its publications. Not much has changed.
"So, what was the reason the Church always rushed to have a child baptized? If a child perishes before the age of reason and will go to heaven anyway, why baptize infants at all?"
The great benefit to anyone who is baptized (with the proper form and matter) is that sanctifying grace is received, and that person then becomes part of the Body of Christ and is able to receive additional graces. This is a great gift from God but unfortunately, there are circumstances in which this does not happen.
A child has no part in the decision to be baptized. It is the parent's hoped for desire and responsibility that enables it to happen. If parents eschew their spiritual obligation, is the child then to be punished? Unless there is some mitigating factor, not having the child baptized would fall on the parents. And if a child dies before or during birth, how is that the infant should be held responsible and condemned to an existence of suffering? It is not for us to speculate how or in what way God operates in resolving those things which are beyond our knowledge, only that He who is Love and Mercy itself can always be counted on to do what is right and just in bringing about what He desires.
“See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that their angels in heaven always look upon the face of my heavenly Father. Matthew 18:10
"In just the same way, it is not the will of your heavenly Father that one of these little ones perish." Matthew 18:14
Mr Bean
I don't like the term 'traditional parish' either, nor do I care for the the term 'traditionalist' parish, since it assumes that Catholics can be labelled and pigeon-holed.
Traditionally, Catholics frequented their territorial parish, and many still do. However, the wide spectrum of liturgical styles which prevails nowadays, and the fact that nearly everyone has access to a motor-car, means that people can be more selective.
The parish I attend most often is 29 miles distant in the next diocese. In this respect I am being decidedly untraditional.
To Anonymous: Thank you for the kind words. I feel a little embarrassed, as I realize my post wasn't specific - but I'm the father and the Mass was an experience for both of us. I wish we had met more people like you when the miscarriage occurred. Other than family, who were absolutely wonderful, many people either just wanted to relentlessly tell us to be happy ("Don't be sad because you have a little angel now!"), or didn't understand why a miscarriage would affect anyone at all ("It's been a week, you need to tell her to suck it up and get over it" - really, someone said those exact words). The hardest part for me was seeing my wife fall apart and not really being able to do anything about it. I also wrestled with the fears and worry about the child not being baptized (and guilt that I should have done more or should have been able to understand the warning signs in time to actually do something), which is why I think God gave that experience to me.
Hi Lucky Horseshoe,
Please don't be embarrassed. You are just as much a part of the experience as your wife although as you said, each of you suffers differently. My husband also felt that same sense of helplessness you describe.
I am so profoundly grateful that God gave you that experience. Cling to it. Be at peace knowing your baby is with Him. George's posts on this thread are also extraordinarily comforting and contain wisdom you don't often hear spoken.
There is as I am sure you realize, no timetable for this grief process.....it is so intensely personal between the two of you. The best thing my husband ever did for me was just to hold me and let me cry until I didn't need to. As I found other outlets for my grief he supported those as well. I know you will know by instinct what your wife needs. Please know that I will be praying for the both of you in a special way......
Sending Love to you both
Rose
So what happens to fundamentalists who don't have their children baptized (and their children dies before making an adult profession of faith)? Baptists believe that baptism can only happen after one has accepted Jesus as Lord and savior. No infant baptism. But doesn't infant baptism go back to the very early days of Christianity?
I thought my post was clear. There is no dogmatic teaching on this, just pious opinion. Thus a person, Catholic or not is free to believe three things.
1. The baby goes to heaven
2. The baby goes to Limbo
3. The baby goes to hell
I choose #1 until a definitive teaching is defined.
Father McDonald,
I think rational people go with # 1. I have not looked into Limbo in decades. Wasn't this theory (I am not sure it is a formal doctrine) come out of Greek philosophy?
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html
A@10:08
This link from the Vatican is pious theological musings and opinion with which I agree. But it isn’t defined doctrine let alone dogma. If the Church or a pope were to define limbo, which theoretically could occur, I would accept it. I doubt, though, given the theological arguments against an unbaptized baby going to hell, that hell for these poor souls would ever become doctrinal or dogmatic.
Anonymous @ July 23, 2020 at 4:57 PM
God does not answer to us and need not entertain our wonderings about those things of which He, and only He, is to be the judge. Do you not believe that our God who is Love, and is Divine Priest in the Person of His Son, that He who is Mercy does not know when and in what circumstances to show mercy?
Should we not expect that He who is eminently just, always judges every circumstance and decides every outcome in accordance with what is right and good? Can we not rest secure in knowing that He will always come to a just resolution? That he intimately knows all his creatures and all their circumstances? That only those who are responsible for a wrong, unless they repent and receive forgiveness, will be held responsible? Do you not believe that God knows how to be God?
Post a Comment