|
Issue: What is
Limbo? What does the Church teach concerning Limbo?
Response:
Theologians developed the concept of limbo to explain the destiny of
those who die without Baptism yet who have not committed actual sin.
This concept is applied primarily to infants and children (including
the unborn) who die before they are baptized. St. Thomas Aquinas
taught that limbo is a place of perfect natural happiness, but
without the supernatural vision of God (the “beatific vision”), to
which no creature has a natural right.
Limbo has never been a formally
defined doctrine of the faith, but rather is a theological opinion
used to harmonize (a) the necessity of Baptism; (b) God’s universal
salvific will (cf. 1 Tim. 2:4); and (c) the fact that such children
are without actual sin. Despite contemporary ridicule, limbo remains
a respectable theological opinion that may be held by the faithful.
The Catechism of the Catholic
Church does not use the term “limbo.” However, in paragraph
1261 the Catechism does address the status of children who
die without Baptism:
As regards children who
have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them
to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them.
Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should
be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him
to say: “Let the children come to me, do not hinder them” (Mk.
10:14), allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for
children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is
the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to
Christ through the gift of holy Baptism (original emphasis).
Discussion: We
are conceived and born in a state of sin and separation from God
(cf. Catechism, no. 404).Our Lord said to Nicodemus,
“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the
Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (Jn. 3:5). In addition,
at the conclusion of St. Matthew’s Gospel He instructs the remaining
eleven apostles to go to all the nations, “baptizing them in the
name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Mt.
28:19).
Based on Jesus’ clear teaching,
the Church has always emphasized the need to be reborn as a child of
God through Baptism in order to be able to experience the glory of
heaven. Further, two Church Councils (Florence, 1439-45 and Trent,
1545-63) have affirmed that one cannot go to heaven “without the
waters of regeneration or the desire for it.” What about those,
especially infants, who, through no fault of their own, are unable
to receive or even desire (at least in the ordinary sense of the
word) Baptism before their death? This is the question that led to
the theory of limbo.
After all, God created man in His
image and likeness, and wills that all men be saved and come to
knowledge of truth (1 Tim. 2:4). He takes no pleasure in eternal
torments inflicted upon man, and does not predestine anyone for hell
(cf. Catechism, no. 1037). Yet consigning infants to the
eternal torments of hell seems arbitrary and not necessarily the
result of one’s free choice against God.
Historical Overview
Limbo has sometimes been used in
reference to the “Limbo of the Fathers,” meaning the abode of the
just men and women of the Old Testament who were awaiting their
promised deliverance by Our Lord when He “descended to the dead.”
More typically, however, limbo, or the “Limbo of the Infants,” is
used in reference to unbaptized children who died without committing
actual sin.
The idea of limbo, or the state of
natural beatitude for infants dying without the Sacrament of
Baptism, has been a universally recognized concept since the time of
St. Thomas Aquinas and other medieval theologians. St. Thomas
(1224-74) taught that in limbo there would be a pain of loss (i.e.,
the effect of not experiencing the beatific vision), but not the
pain of sense (i.e., they experience natural beatitude rather than
the torments of hell).
The only time the Church has
addressed the subject was in a 1794 document by Pope Pius VI
entitled Auctorem Fidei. This document did not affirm the
existence of limbo, but rather condemned the Jansenists as teaching
something “false, rash, and injurious to Catholic education” when
they taught that limbo was a heretical fable and that the eternal
damnation of infants who die without Baptism was revealed doctrine.
In other words, this papal document was issued to defend a common
teaching from slander, and not to defend the existence of limbo.
Limbo remained at that time--as it remains to this day--an open
question that one may accept or reject so long as one’s beliefs do
not conflict with other Church teachings. The Jansenists’ rejection
of limbo was tolerated, but their public statements concerning those
who held views different from theirs were censored.
There have been no magisterial
pronouncement concerning limbo since Auctorem Fidei in
1794. Since that time, there have been relatively few theologians
who have held the opinion that infants who die without Baptism are
condemned to the fires of hell. Especially during the last century,
more theologians have expressed their dissatisfaction with limbo and
have formulated theories as to how such infants may be saved. Such
speculation is legitimate to the extent revealed truths (i.e., the
necessity of Baptism for salvation) are respected. Yet we need to
understand that while limbo is only a theory, it’s going to come
under attack in an age that downplays the importance of organized
religion and the need to be Catholic in favor of a universalist
approach to salvation. The theory of limbo at least recognizes the
need to address realistically, yet sympathetically and
compassionately, the truth that we enter into the world in a state
of enmity, not union, with God.
At the 2001 Synod of Bishops,
Archbishop George Pell of Sidney spoke on the need to develop an
authentic Christian hope. He said:
One could say that there is
considerable silence and some confusion on such Christian hope
especially as it touches the last things, death and judgment,
heaven and hell. Limbo seems to have disappeared, purgatory has
slipped into limbo, hell is left unmentioned, except perhaps for
terrorists and infamous criminals, while heaven is the final and
universal human right; or perhaps just a consoling myth.
Christian teaching on the resurrection of the body and the
establishment of a new heavens and earth, the heavenly
Jerusalem, are a vindication of the values of ordinary decent
living, while the final judgment, the separation of the good
from the evil, marks the establishment of universal justice not
found in this life.
Parental Desire
While Baptism is ordinarily
required for salvation, the Church recognizes that God is not bound
by His sacraments and can still bring about the salvation of the
unbaptized.[1] In this vein, the Church has recognized Baptism of
blood (dying for the faith) and Baptism of desire (when catechumens
die before they actually receive the sacrament, or others who would
have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity) as
having the same effects as sacramental Baptism (cf. Catechism,
nos. 1258-60).
The Catechism summarizes
the necessity of Baptism in paragraph 1257:
The Lord himself affirms that
Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his
disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize
them. 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. 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 (original emphasis, footnotes omitted).
Just as an adult who is invincibly
ignorant of the need for Baptism may be saved through an implicit
Baptism of desire, even more can we hope that an infant who died
without Baptism may be saved. St. Bernard of Clairveaux, a
12th-century doctor of the Church, proposed that an unbaptized baby
could aspire to heaven because of the faith of his or her parents.
This seems consistent with the fact that it is the parents’ faith
that brings about the child’s Baptism and even with the larger
reality of the Communion of Saints, through which our faith and
prayers can help bring about others’ salvation (cf. Lk. 5:18-20; 1
Cor. 7:12-14). And so the way of the Church, beautifully summarized
in Catechism, no. 1261, above, is to confidently entrust
these little ones to the mercy and loving providence of Our Heavenly
Father.
Pastoral Concern
The Church’s teaching is very
compassionate and consoling toward those who have had miscarriages
or who have suffered the deaths of young children before they were
baptized. The Church’s pastoral concern is especially needed in the
context of embracing women whose children have died through
abortion. Unfortunately, the Church’s outreach in this area has been
unnecessarily confused by a mistranslation of Pope John Paul II’s
encyclical Evangelium Vitae (“The Gospel of Life”). The
English translation of paragraph 99, addressed to women who had an
abortion, provides as follows:
The Father of mercies is ready
to give you His forgiveness and His peace in the Sacrament of
reconciliation. You will come to understand that nothing is
definitively lost, and you will also be able to ask forgiveness
from your child, who is now living in the Lord. With the
friendly and expert help and advice of other people and as a
result of your own painful experience, you can be among the most
eloquent defenders of everyone’s right to life (emphasis added).
The italicized material is not
found in the official Latin text, which instead provides as follows:
“You can entrust your infant with hope to the same Father and to His
Mercy” (Infantem autem vestrum potestis Eidem Patri Eiusque
misericordiae cum spe committere).
The official translation, without
saying more than what we know about the state of departed infants,
again expresses the confident entrustment of these little ones to
our merciful Father as provided in Catechism, no. 1261.
Those who struggle with the death of an unbaptized infant, or a
miscarriage, or are seeking healing from the pain of an abortion
should take comfort in the position of the Church. God is merciful,
and Jesus desired all children to come unto Him (cf. Mt. 19:13-14).
The Church entrusts such children to the mercy of God.
Why the Wait?
One consequence of a more
presumptuous approach to the necessity of infant Baptism that we see
today is the putting off of the celebration of the Sacrament of
Baptism. Yet the Holy Office (now the Congregation for the Doctrine
of the Faith) in 1958 provided as follows:
The practice has arisen in
some places of delaying the conferring of Baptism for so-called
reasons of convenience or of a liturgical nature--a practice
favored by some opinions, lacking solid foundation, concerning
the eternal salvation of infants who die without Baptism.
Therefore this Supreme
Congregation, with the approval of the Holy Father, warns the
faithful that infants are to be baptized as soon as possible. .
. . Pastors and preachers are exhorted to urge the fulfillment
of this obligation.
The current Code of Canon Law
(canon 867) affirms that parents should have their children baptized
within the first weeks after birth, and without delay if there is
danger of death. This seems to counter the view that we can simply
presume with certainty that unbaptized children will go to heaven.
Research and discussion on the
subject of limbo and the state of unbaptized babies are not closed.
In the meantime, let us put all our hope in the Lord, trusting in
His infinite mercy and His immense love for His little ones.
Recommended Reading:
Holy Bible (Catholic Edition)
Catechism of the Catholic Church
Précis of Official Catholic
Teaching on The Church
Karl Keating, Catholicism and
Fundamentalism
Patrick Madrid, Surprised by
Truth
David Currie, Born
Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic
|