Hello and welcome. In this article, we'll analyze and critique a particular conclusion within the original sin perspective of the fall and its consequences. To look at all of our articles about original sin, see here.
OVERVIEW OF VIEWS WITHIN THE ORIGINAL SIN PERSPECTIVE
When it comes to perspectives on the fall and its consequences, the main distinct premise of original sin that is not shared by other perspectives like ancestral sin is that all humans from conception are held personally guilty in God's sight for Adam's sin. As McFarland summarizes:
“Stated summarily, the Western (or Augustinian) doctrines of the fall and original sin affirm (1) that Adam and Eve’s violation of God’s primordial commandment against eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2:16 – 17; 3:6) caused a fundamental deformation in humanity’s relationship to God, each other, and the rest of creation; and (2) that this “fall”includes among its consequences that all human beings thereafter are born into a state of estrangement from God –an “original” sin that condemns all individuals prior to and apart from their committing any “actual ”sins in time and space.” - McFarland, In Adam’s Fall, p. 29-30
With this in mind, we must ask what conclusions are formed from this premise.
1. Classical Original Sin View
- All humans from conception are held personally guilty in God's sight for Adam's sin. Babies must be baptized to remit the inherited guilt from Adam otherwise they’re damned to hell if they die.
The classical view is the most historically prevalent view of original sin, clearly articulated between the late 4th century AD and the Middle Ages. Our article here demonstrates this with historical sources. In the modern day, it is affirmed by some Roman Catholics and any other group or person who is committed to the historical Augustinian view of original sin.
2. Limbo View
- All humans from conception are held personally guilty in God's sight for Adam's sin. Unbaptized babies are not damned if they die, but they aren’t necessarily saved either. They go to a 3rd place for eternity that’s in between called limbo. Opinions on precise details vary.
The limbo view is largely seen as a development in thought from the classical view which gained prominence in the late medieval period. In the modern day, it is mostly affirmed by some Roman Catholics but is not dogma.
3. Covenant Household View
- All humans from conception are held personally guilty in God's sight for Adam's sin. But the children of believers are spared from being damned to hell if they die. However, the children of unbelievers are damned if they die because they’re guilty of Adam’s sins.
The covenant household view became prominent during the Protestant Reformation. In the modern day, this view is primarily affirmed among some Reformed groups but is by no means a dominant view.
4. Guilty but not Condemned View
- All humans from conception are held personally guilty in God's sight for Adam's sin. But this doesn’t condemn anyone if they die. All infants who die go to heaven.
The guilty but not condemned view has become prominent and widely articulated within the original sin perspective since the late 19th century. We critiqued this view in our article here.
In this article, we will critique the limbo view.
DEFINING INFANT LIMBO FURTHER
“In theological usage the name is applied to (a) the temporary place or state of the souls of the just who, although purified from sin, were excluded from the beatific vision until Christ's triumphant ascension into Heaven (the "limbus patrum"); or (b) to the permanent place or state of those unbaptized children and others who, dying without grievous personal sin, are excluded from the beatific vision on account of original sin alone (the "limbus infantium" or "puerorum”).” - New Advent, Catholic Encyclopedia, Limbo
“The Limbo of Infants (Latin limbus infantium or limbus puerorum) is the hypothetical permanent status of the unbaptised who die in infancy, too young to have committed actual sins, but not having been freed from original sin.” - Wikipedia, Limbo, Limbo of Infants, Paragraph 1
"If heaven is a state of supernatural happiness and union with God, and Hell is understood as a state of torture and separation from God then, in this view, the Limbo of Infants, although technically part of hell (the outermost part, limbo meaning 'outer edge' or 'hem') is seen as a sort of intermediate state." - Wikipedia, Limbo, Medieval Theologians, Paragraph 2
To summarize these further comments on infant limbo, this is a permanent state for unbaptized infants who have not committed personal sins but are guilty of Adam's sin. This fate is distinct from the damnation experienced by those with personal sins. Limbo is an "intermediate" state between the damned on the one hand and the redeemed on the other.
WHAT HAS THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH SAID ABOUT LIMBO?
“The idea of Limbo, which the Church has used for many centuries to designate the destiny of infants who die without Baptism, has no clear foundation in revelation, even though it has long been used in traditional theological teaching. Moreover, the notion that infants who die without Baptism are deprived of the beatific vision, which has for so long been regarded as the common doctrine of the Church, gives rise to numerous pastoral problems, so much so that many pastors of souls have asked for a deeper reflection on the ways of salvation. The necessary reconsideration of the theological issues cannot ignore the tragic consequences of original sin. Original sin implies a state of separation from Christ, and that excludes the possibility of the vision of God for those who die in that state.” - International Theological Commission, The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptized, Introduction, Section 3
In 2007, the International Theological Commission of the Roman Catholic Church published a report on the hope of salvation for unbaptized infants. The commission acknowledged that the doctrine of limbo "has no clear foundation in revelation." Even so, it admitted that the doctrine has "long been used" in theological teaching by the church.
HOW AND WHEN DID INFANT LIMBO DEVELOP?
“As for the expression “Limbo of Infants”, it was forged at the turn of the 12th-13th century to name the “resting place” of such infants (the "border" of the inferior region). Theologians could discuss this question, however, without using the word “Limbo”. Their doctrines should not be confused with the use of the word “Limbo”.” - International Theological Commission, The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptized, 1.4
“Limbo, however, was the common Catholic teaching until the mid-20th century.” - International Theological Commission, The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptized, 1.5
The 2007 report from the Commission put forward a rough timeline for the development and prevalence of infant limbo. According to the Commission, the 12th-13th century is when the doctrine was forged and the mid-20th century is when the doctrine began losing popularity among Roman Catholics.
"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," 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." - Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1261
HISTORICAL SOURCES ON INFANT LIMBO
As we previously quoted, section 1.4 of the 2007 report from the International Theological Commission says that infant limbo was "forged at the turn of the 12th-13th century." In the same section, they name Abelard and Aquinas as historical witnesses to this doctrine. In this section, we will show quotes from both Abelard and Aquinas on infant limbo.
.jpg/440px-Piotr_Abelard_(cropped).jpg)
“But because it does not suffice for the commendation of divine dispensation to absolve God from injustice in this damnation of children, unless we are able to demonstrate in some degree the grace of his goodness, it seems to us that that also is done by the dispensation of his manifold grace that abounds both to those children and the others. For we know that this is the most lenient punishment…I do not think that this punishment is anything other than to endure darkness, that is, to lake the vision of the divine majesty without any hope of recovery.” - Commentary on Romans, p. 221-222
“Every man who has the use of free-will is adapted to obtain eternal life, because he can prepare himself for grace whereby to merit eternal life; so that if he fails in this, his grief will be very great, since he has lost what he was able to possess. But children were never adapted to possess eternal life, since neither was this due to them by virtue of their natural principles, for it surpasses the entire faculty of nature, nor could they perform acts of their own whereby to obtain so great a good. Hence, they will nowise grieve for being deprived of the divine vision; nay, rather will they rejoice for that they will have a large share of God's goodness and their own natural perfections. Nor can it be said that they were adapted to obtain eternal life, not indeed by their own action, but by the actions of others around them, since they could be baptised by others, like other children of the same condition who have been baptised and obtained eternal life: for this is of superabundant grace that one should be rewarded without any act of one's own. Wherefore the lack of such a grace will not cause sorrow in children who die without Baptism, any more than the lack of many graces accorded to others of the same condition makes a wise man to grieve.” - Summa Theologica, Supplement 1 to the Third Part, Article 2
CRITIQUING INFANT LIMBO
When critiquing the unique conclusion of infant limbo within the original sin perspective of the fall, we will focus on what we call the "two fates" texts in scripture. The Bible as a whole does not clearly identify an eternal intermediate place between eternal life on the one hand, and eternal damnation on the other where an entire category of humans spend eternity with a categorially different experience from the two fates previously mentioned. Let's take a look at some of the relevant verses for this critique.
Two fates in the Old Testament:
Dan 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
Mal 4:1-3 For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall. And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts.
Two fates in the Gospels:
Mat 7:13-14 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Mat 13:40-43 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.
Mat 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
Jhn 3:16-18 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Jhn 5:28-29 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
Two fates in the Pauline corpus:
Rom 2:6-9 Who will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
Php 3:18-21 (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.) For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.
Gal 6:8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
Two fates in Revelation:
Rev 20:11-15 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
Rev 21:1-8 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son. But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
In summary, the theme of two ultimate fates is consistent across both testaments which seems to plainly contradict the idea that there is a categorically distinct third fate for deceased infants and others. This is likely one of the primary reasons why the International Theological Commission makes the following admission:
“The idea of Limbo, which the Church has used for many centuries to designate the destiny of infants who die without Baptism, has no clear foundation in revelation,” - International Theological Commission, The Hope of Salvation for Infants who die without being baptized, Introduction, Section 3
CONCLUSION
In this article, we have briefly covered the doctrine of infant limbo as it has been articulated by the Roman Catholic Church as well as the historical development of the doctrine. We also covered the "two fates" texts in scripture as a primary critique of infant limbo. With the recent decline of the doctrine in the last century it has become less central to the discussion of the fall and its consequences for humanity along with the fate of deceased infants. In recent times, Christians have largely sided with the view that all deceased infants are saved by God and included in His kingdom irrespective of if this conclusion is consistent and logically flows with prior established premises and doctrines. But this has not always been the case, as we've shown in other articles on our blog here and here, the affirmation of inherited guilt from Adam as one of the consequences of the fall was normatively tied to the conclusion that the default fate of deceased infants is eternal damnation. To conclude, we do not believe the doctrine of infant limbo accurately reflects the data we are given in scripture. It's an error formed partly from faulty and incorrect premises about the fall and its consequences.
Thanks for reading. That concludes this article.
No comments:
Post a Comment