You know, in all the recent “limbo debate,” it never dawned on me that I should be discussing it, in honor of the one for whom this website is named.
Now, I have a lot of problems with this recent statement from the Vatican. First of all, it really doesn’t say anything new. What it says, that there is a difference between “ordinary” and “extraordinary” means of salvation, is already established Catholic teaching.
However, it basically encourages parents not to have their kids baptized. On the other hand again, in this day and age, that’s probably a good thing. Why, you ask? Because those who are baptized and go to Hell suffer far worse than those who are unbaptized, plus they scandalize the Church. The Church says you’re only supposed to baptize an infant if you, as the parent, have the intention of doing everything possible to raise that child as a good Catholic, which most “Catholic” parents these days have no intention of.
But in the “mercy” and “making people feel good” department, the “trust God’s mercy” attitude is one of the main reasons we started the Lewis Crusade, and why we named it that.
When Little Lew died, we wanted to give our baby a Christian burial. That that would be possible is, in and of itself is one “post-Vatican II” change in this regard.
When Mary was going through the miscarriage, I put holy water everywhere I could in the hopes of baptizing the baby.
The response we got from the Church, though, was that it didn’t *matter*. It didn’t *matter* if the baby was baptized. It didn’t *matter* if the baby was formally buried. It didn’t *matter* if we had some kind of funeral service for the baby. Trust God’s mercy was what we were told.
But God’s mercy wasn’t the issue: recognizing our dead baby as a real baby in a society that said he was just a “blob of tissue” was the issue, and the Church wouldn’t help us get that kind of formal recognition.
Meanwhile, the article linked above makes the following claim:
The issue behind such ungraceful teaching is rooted in the arrogance of the
church, both Catholic and Evangelical, that it holds exclusive rights to the
gates of heaven.
Actually, it’s the “arrogance” of God Himself, who said,
Although, the question becomes whether “born anew” or “born from above” requires being “born” to begin with?