...the question of the eternal destiny of infants who die unbaptised is “one of the most difficult to solve in the structure of theology”. It is a “limit-case” where vital tenets of faith, especially the need of Baptism for salvation and the universal salvific will of God, can easily appear to be in tension. (W)e have considered how the Spirit may be guiding the Church at this point in history to reflect anew on this exceptionally delicate issue. -The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die without Being Baptised
(Tim) Watch for Benedict XVI to lower the Roman Catholic Church’s commitment to limbo, soon. According to The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die without Being Baptised, a report recently released with Benedict XVI’s permission by the Vatican’s International Study Commission, limbo can’t be found in Scripture.
The internal debate has been heating up the past couple of years as traditionalists sensed what was coming and took their usual posture of opposing change. When papists go around claiming “No other church has the guarantee that it will always teach the truth” (Wanderer, 8/16/07), they back themselves into a corner that’s hard to escape. So the Vatican finds itself in an awkward position wanting to withdraw a doctrine they’ve taught for centuries...
If evangelicals’ commitment to the infallibility of Scripture during the twentieth century has been a story of shrinking implications, Rome’s commitment to her own infallibility has been the opposite. Try to explain that the church has been wrong concerning the present state of unborn children who died in the womb, and yet wrong in a way that doesn’t jeopardize the “guarantee” that the church “will always teach the truth,” and Rome’s dilemma becomes clear. It would be understandable if mothers who have had multiple miscarriages suffered a loss of confidence as Rome puts limbo in limbo.
Back at the beginning of the twentieth century, Pope Pius X declared: “Children who die without baptism go into limbo, where they do not enjoy God, but they do not suffer either.” But prior to becoming Pope Benedict XVI, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger disagreed: “Limbo has never been a definitive truth of the faith… Personally, I would let it drop, since it has always been only a theological hypothesis.”
Roman Catholics are fond of pointing out how vulnerable the Protestant Reformers’ commitment to sola Scriptura is to being reduced to the atomism of private interpretation, and they’re right. But the danger of being saddled with centuries of doctrinal error that can never be renounced without jeopardizing one’s entire ecclesiology is much worse. For the love of Jesus Christ, how many more centuries will Rome have to defend the curses pronounced by the Council of Trent against justification by faith alone?
What a privilege it is to be able to read Rome’s doctrinal work from the biblical foundation of the Reformers’ warnings that “The purest Churches under heaven are subject both to mixture and error…” (Westminster Confession of Faith). In that Protestant liberty, then, here are a few thoughts concerning the Commission’s findings on limbo.
First, I’m glad someone is concerned about the eternal destiny of the souls of the sixty million or so unborn children murdered around the world each year. This is why I love Roman Catholics. Can anyone imagine a PCA general assembly appointing an ad interim study committee on the future state of unborn children who are miscarried or murdered? Yes, we all agree that abortion is a Bad Thing. And yet, we don’t have much concern for the victims, do we?
Second, it’s fascinating how nonchalant the Commission is in acknowledging the paucity of biblical evidence for infant baptism. Sitting high atop church history and tradition, it appears Roman Catholics have the security to be more honest about the biblical record than those of us in the sola Scriptura trenches slugging it out with Baptists.
Third, is anyone else catching the whiff of universalism I’ve been smelling downwind from Rome this past decade or so? Consider the overwhelming emphasis this Commission places on God’s "universal salvific will," keeping in mind the Vatican’s aggressive rapprochement with Jews, even agreeing not to proselytize “our elder brothers.” I hope my Roman Catholic friends would understand my wondering whether the exclusivity of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the doctrine of Hell aren’t somewhat obscured by the Vatican's work in recent years.
Fourth, thank God Rome continues to believe and teach the doctrine of original sin.
Fifth, it’s quite interesting that, unless I’ve missed it, the Commission never mentions David’s prophetic statement on the death of his newborn son: “I will go to him, but he will not return to me” (2Samuel 12:23).
Sixth, remembering that the Federal Vision is "all about the children," I'd like to see F-V proponents critically engage the Commission's report. For instance, would they condemn the Commission's declaration that the absence of baptism these littles ones suffer is a central factor in the consideration of their eternal destiny?
And seventh, if only Rome would move on to purgatory, next.
Any other thoughts?
