Infant Baptism

["Kyrie eleison"]

I know there is a not a definitive teaching on this subject, but if you could please give your opinion.

[CatherineM]

Having suffered miscarriages, I have a vested interest in the subject. When an infant is baptized, their parents and godparents are the ones desiring the sacrament for the infant. I have the belief that baptism of desire applies to our deceased children because we certainly desired for their baptism.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='"Kyrie eleison' post='1935542' date='Jul 30 2009, 10:04 AM']I know there is a not a definitive teaching on this subject, but if you could please give your opinion.[/quote]

I think that unbaptized infants go to infant's limbo.

[dairygirl4u2c]

they are either 'judged' by the standard they would have lived, or they go to a place, or something to that effect, where they can fulfill the standard themself.
you might call that a limbo of sorts.
i wouldn' say they go to heaven, necessarily. just cause they were before reason, and died, doesn't seem like God would let them into heaven. i mean, if heaven were simply a place you get get into on technicalities or random whims of God, as mainstream chrsitianity essentially thinks it to be-- then sure, anything's possible. just seems like there's be another alternative mroe in conformity to the way things are meant to be for everyone, as far as i can see.

[dairygirl4u2c]

“Babies dead without baptism go to Limbo, where they do not enjoy God, but neither do they suffer, because, having original sin alone, they do not deserve paradise, but neither do they merit hell or purgatory.” ~1905 Catechism of the Catholic Church

just thought i'd throw some good old controversy in here. couldn't resist. this is the debate board- just adding sizzle to the flames.
feel free to ignore it, or have the original poster disclaim talking about it, if 'ideas' more gnerally are sought.

[CatherineM]

Why would Got send babies that he knows are going to be aborted (just because we have free will doesn't mean he doesn't know what we are going to do with that free will) away from him into Limbo?

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1935788' date='Jul 30 2009, 03:19 PM']Why would Got send babies that he knows are going to be aborted (just because we have free will doesn't mean he doesn't know what we are going to do with that free will) away from him into Limbo?[/quote]

Sanctifying grace is necessary to enter heaven.

Edited July 30, 2009 by Resurrexi

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1935790' date='Jul 30 2009, 03:19 PM']Sanctifying grace is necessary to enter heaven.[/quote]

And I guess you are the ultimate arbiter of who is to receive that sanctifying grace, and who doesn't?

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1935796' date='Jul 30 2009, 03:22 PM']And I guess you are the ultimate arbiter of who is to receive that sanctifying grace, and who doesn't?[/quote]



"f anyone shall say that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation: let him be anathema" (The Ecumenical Council of Trent: Denzinger-Schonmetzer 1618)

God has revealed that baptism is necessary for salvation for all men. The Church has not taught that there exists a way other than baptism of [i]water[/i] for the unbaptized to be justified besides baptism of [i]blood[/i] and baptism of [i]desire[/i]. Although baptism of [i]blood[/i] can indeed be received by Christian martyrs without the use of reason, the Church has not taught that baptism of [i]desire[/i] can be received by those without the use of reason.

Thus, following the opinion that numerous Saints and Doctors of the Church have held throughout the ages, I feel that unbaptized infants go to limbo, a place of natural happiness.

Edited July 30, 2009 by Resurrexi

[dairygirl4u2c]

well, i mean, if a catholic were to believe that baptism provided sanctifying grace-- that's in a sense a technicality, like i had mentioned. i'd see no reason baptism by desire couldn't provide it. in fact, if the initial premise were held by me, i'd prob believe in baptism for desire by em. seems more consistent with itself, and a loving God.

[Hassan]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1935824' date='Jul 30 2009, 04:56 PM']well, i mean, if a catholic were to believe that baptism provided sanctifying grace-- that's in a sense a technicality, like i had mentioned. i'd see no reason baptism by desire couldn't provide it. in fact, if the initial premise were held by me, i'd prob believe in baptism for desire by em. seems more consistent with itself, and a loving God.[/quote]


I don't know how an unborn baby could have the cognitive powers to qualify for Baptism by Desire.

[dairygirl4u2c]

good call.
if not by desire then, soemthing to that effect. baptism by God's mercy, much like baptism supposedly accomplishes.

[thessalonian]

There are several theories.

1) God automatically takes care of the original sin and it goes to heaven.
I lean toward this because the Church recognizes the feast day of the feast of the Holy Innocents in December when the babies were killed by Herod in attempt to kill Christ.

2) It may depend on the faith of the parents. The question of what happens to Moselm or Hindu for instance.

3) He may illuminate their minds and give them the opportunity to choose.

4) they may go to hell. (this I highly doudt but it would not be heretical I don't think).

5) Limbo is neither heretical.

Those are the options I know of and as I said I lean toward #1. Whatever the correct answer we can trust in God's mercy and justice and we know that when we meet him we will understand and so we place our trust in him.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='thessalonian' post='1935839' date='Jul 30 2009, 04:10 PM']5) Limbo is neither heretical.[/quote]

Far from being heretical, infant's limbo is the most popular theory amongst Catholic thinkers throughout the ages.

["Kyrie eleison"]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1935802' date='Jul 30 2009, 03:30 PM']Thus, following the opinion that numerous Saints and Doctors of the Church have held throughout the ages, I feel that unbaptized infants go to limbo, a place of natural happiness.[/quote]

So, would it suffice to say that those of us who make it to heaven may not commune with those who are in limbo?

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='"Kyrie eleison' post='1935848' date='Jul 30 2009, 04:23 PM']So, would it suffice to say that those of us who make it to heaven may not commune with those who are in limbo?[/quote]

According to the common theological opinion, the blessed are free to go about in the world. I am not sure whether or not that would include limbo.

[TeresaBenedicta]

Here's my view on it...

I know that baptism is required for salvation... but God is not restricted in His sacraments. Therefore He can work outside of them, if He so desires. I also know that God is a loving and merciful God. So I trust that He will be loving and merciful to these young children who never received baptism or had the opportunity for it. I tend to lean towards believing God will draw them into communion with Himself.

But, to be completely honest... this is a time when the Mormon doctrine on the afterlife appeals a lot to me. They teach about a place that those who never heard the Gospel can go after death. Kind of like a spiritual prison or something. There they can be taught the Gospel and can choose to accept it. If they do, they go to the third & lowest level of Heaven. If they don't... well, it's off to Hell with 'em.

I mean, I find a lot wrong with that, but at the same time.... it does account for these types of cases.

["Kyrie eleison"]

[quote]this is a time when the Mormon doctrine on the afterlife appeals a lot to me. They teach about a place that those who never heard the Gospel can go after death. Kind of like a spiritual prison or something. There they can be taught the Gospel and can choose to accept it. If they do, they go to the third & lowest level of Heaven. If they don't... well, it's off to Hell with 'em.[/quote].

This is very interesting!

[thessalonian]

I don't really think that opinion is too far off what Catholicism allows for. For those who have not had an opportunity to know Christ in this life, yet have done their best to follow God as they have been given the grace to know him, they may be saved. We again leave it to his judgement and mercy. Noone enters heaven without knowing Christ and certainly all are enlightened when they come to meet him at death so I think that assomplishes the same thing. God desires that all men be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. It would seem then that he gives grace sufficient for all men to do so and he is quite clear in Luke 12 that he only holds men accountable for what each has been given. A stern reminder to those who have been given much, such as us Catholics, in Luke 12. "To the one who knew, he will be treated with the unbleievers. But to him who did not know, he will recieve a light beating.".

Edited July 31, 2009 by thessalonian

[thessalonian]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1935844' date='Jul 30 2009, 05:15 PM']Far from being heretical, infant's limbo is the most popular theory amongst Catholic thinkers throughout the ages.[/quote]


Recent popes, including B16, have lessened it's influence with good reason. One cannot be happy for all eternity outside the prescence of God. Now certainly the beautific vision is lessened considerably for those who have not gone through life's trials and certainly there is some negative impact of not receiving full baptism. God only knows what that it. It has been pretty much cleared up that limbo has never been doctrine, has no chance of being dogma and is simply a speculation like the rest of the opinions on the matter. We'll find out on the other side.