The Theory of Limbo

There has been lots of blog articles lately about the recent conclusion of a Vatican Theological Commission regarding Limbo. There are a number of errors and misrepresentations of the theory, and I offer the following as a corrective.

First, Limbo is not purgatory, the state of souls destined for heaven (due to faith and no unforgiven sins) but lacking in perfect love. The theory of Limbo was just that... a theory. In the theological terms, it is a theological speculation or theological opinion, not a Dogma or doctrine which are to be held definitively (such as purgatory!). Because some in the Church taught it did not make it so, and just because the recent theological conclusion said that it is a theory that is not helpful did not 'bring the walls of Limbo' down. The Pope has to accept or reject the Commission's findings. All this is to to say that those that taught it, did so without creating it, and those that say that it is not a helpful theory to continue to teach did not destroy it. The official teaching of the Church is that those who die with only original sin are not automatically condemned to hell, nor are they automatically admitted to heaven. True, though, is that the some texts refer to a state of those who die with original sin but no personal sin, but there is not an explicit, definitive teaching on limbo's existence.

As such, Limbo was not the 'in-between' of heaven and hell but a different category that taught that those babies who died without baptism were given a state of 'natural happiness', but not the state of supernatural happiness that is in heaven. While not subscribing to the theory as particularly as helpful as relying on God's mercy (though I will fully submit to the Pope were he to declare Limbo a doctrine to be held), I understand the theory of Limbo as like that of a grade school rain-day recess - lots of laughter and joy but in the classroom, not on the playground enjoying the sun and open space. Such children are lacking nothing with such natural happiness because they know nothing of God and the supernatural happiness He gives.

There is power in the Sacrament of Baptism, but it comes from Christ. Baptism is a participation in the Death and Resurrection of Christ which results in removal of sin, both original and personal, and a rejuvenation of the human being. The conclusion of the commission is that indeed God the Father can (as in 'it is possible', but not 'necessarily will') save the unbaptized by other means as well, so that they can share in the supernatural happiness of heaven. The theory of Limbo relies heavily on medieval philosophical and theological principles (all of which are sound), in such things as evil is a privation of some good that ought be present, that those with sin (personal or original) cannot enter heaven, etc. The teaching against limbo is based a more deeply developed theology of grace and mercy - that one can be saved, but only through Christ, without knowing Him explicitly or being baptized (which is not to say we should not get to know Him, or be baptized). While the Sacraments of Baptism and Reconciliation are the ordinary means of experiencing God's Grace and forgiveness, God could work outside of them as well for the forgiveness of sins (such as the case of otherwise faithful Protestants who sinned but followed a well-formed conscience could experience forgiveness). There is a warning with all of this, though: we are not to presume God's mercy, and if at all able, we need to receive the Sacraments. The Church has taught that those who desire Baptism but die without it may experience the "baptism of desire" and experience God's mercy and have one's sins forgiven, for example.

Personally, I think the reason the press and so many have jumped on this is that they see it as a sign that the Church can change any of its teaching, which they tend to lump all together. The teaching against women priests, abortion, birth control, and such, gets regarded as equally changeable as the theory of Limbo, the application of the teachings of just war and capital punishment, and perhaps even the use of mercury thermometers, as suggested by Senator Durbin's score card for Catholic politicians. He actually suggested a pro-abortion politician could be more "Catholic" than a pro-life politician because they did not support the USCCB's suggestion to limit the use of mercury or other relatively 'minuscule' promptings of the US Bishops! If the Church's stance on some things can change, it can change in all things, is the thought. This, however, is not true.

Also, I think the pro-abortion, pro-contraception mentality is affecting this hype. I have actually heard at least one pro-abortion person say that if we are serious about the unborn child as such, it is better for a child to be killed in the womb and enter heaven than to be given birth and mistreated. The theory of limbo seems more cold and distant than this 'warm fuzzy' feeling of a sort of universal salvation of even those who are murdered in the womb. Do not misread me, though. Yes, if there is no Limbo, those that are aborted could also be entered into the beatific vision, but I reject the thought that this can be used to justify abortion! Abortion has no justification. To be born is always better than to be killed in the womb, and we must do everything we can to make the life of all, born and unborn, better. As good as life is, though, Heaven is even better yet!

All summed, the teaching of the Church is that all are invited to share in the beatific vision and to be saints in heaven. We are allowed there by God's grace. We are invited, in Baptism, to place our faith in Jesus Christ our savior, but know that He can also save those, who through no fault of their own die without Baptism and live in accordance to a well-formed conscience. Even little babes, are entrusted to the mercy of Christ and may be allowed into the eternal embrace of heaven, perhaps based on the faith of the child's parents. The vocation of all is to eternal, supernatural happiness, but this is no guarantee that we will all be given the gift. Are we going to respond in such a way that God will give us His grace?