In my article
Mystical Baptism and Limbo, I discuss the different ideas about Limbo. The term 'limbo' means 'fringe,' an edge of something. There are four sheer possibilities concerning Limbo:
1. Limbo as a fringe of Purgatory -- also called the Limbo of the Fathers; this is where those who died in a state of grace prior to Christ wait for Him to open the gates of Heaven, as it were. This existence of this place is implied by the teaching of Pope Benedict XII, in Benedictus Deus.
2. Limbo as a fringe of Hell -- a place of lesser punishment in Hell; those who die in a state of original sin only, without any other actual mortal sins on their consciences, are punished by God in this part of Hell, but less so than other souls.
3. Limbo as a third final resting place (which is neither Heaven nor Hell) -- This idea was condemned by Pope Pius VI, in Auctorem Fidei, as "false, rash, injurious to Catholic schools." It was a theological idea that held some sway for a time, but has fallen out of favor.
4. Limbo as a fringe of Heaven -- this is not possible because Pope Benedict XII, in Benedictus Deus, infallibly taught that all the souls in Heaven have the Beatific Vision continually, as soon as they enter Heaven.
Many Catholics have said that they know in their hearts that God would never condemn prenatals, infants, and young children, who die at that young age, to any place in Hell, nor to any final resting place other than eternal bliss in Heaven. But many also do not how to support this idea with a theological argument.
My theological position is that all prenatals, infants, and young children who die at that young age, receive from Christ on the Cross a mystical (non-formal) Baptism, which is a type of Baptism of blood. So they do NOT die in a state of original sin. They die in a state of grace, and they will certainly be happy forever in Heaven.
My full theological argument is found in my book:
Forgiveness and Salvation for Everyone
Baptism is absolutely required for entrance into Heaven. But there are three types of Baptism:
1. baptism of water -- this is the formal Sacrament of Baptism, by water and the words: "I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."
2. baptism of desire -- this desire for Baptism can be implicit or explicit. A non-Christian of any religion, or even an agnostic or atheist, can obtain such a baptism by implicitly desiring the state of grace given by Baptism, which is essentially the state of continually loving God and neighbor. This love of God can also be implicit, allowing even an atheist to be saved.
3. baptism of blood -- the classical example of this type of baptism is the adult catechumen who is preparing for baptism, but is martyred before he can be baptized. Another common example of baptism of blood is the young children called the Holy Innocents.
Baptism is the only way to receive the state of grace. All those who die in a state of grace are sent by God to Heaven (perhaps by way of Purgatory). All those who die NOT in a state of grace are sent by God to Hell.
Grave Doctrinal Error
But what I would like to refute in this article is a grave doctrinal error on the Limbo of Hell. This error is expressed by Fr. Ryan Erlenbush (Reginaldus) of the New Theological Movement blog in this post:
The Nativity of St. John the Baptist and the limbo of the children.
Fr. Ryan says that prenatals, infants, and young children, who die without formal Baptism, die in a state of original sin, and so they are sent by God to the Limbo of Hell.
He says that they cannot have a baptism of desire; he does not explain why. He suggests that St. John the Baptist received a baptism of desire, even though he was prenatal at the time. (My view is that any human person who is too young to understand, cannot have the full desire needed for this type of baptism.) He says that they cannot have a baptism of blood; he does not explain why. He admits the possibility of a baptism of blood, but then he casts that possibility aside. So he is willing to reject eternal salvation for these children, without explaining why they cannot receive a baptism of desire or a baptism of blood.
His position is that prenatals, infants, and young children, who die without formal Baptism, are probably sent to 'the limbo of the children' in Hell. But he adds that they will be very happy forever in that part of Hell. How does he solve the theological problem of infants who die without baptism? He sends them to Hell, but claims they are happy there.
How can he hold this position without considering in any depth at all the possibilities of baptism of desire and baptism of blood? As usual, Fr. Ryan is blindly following medieval theology, ignoring the development of doctrine, and treating most modern theology with contempt. Then he takes the errors resulting from this approach and teaches them, ignoring any magisterial teachings that contradict his position.
Here is what Fr. Ryan says about salvation for children to die without baptism:
"The limbo of the children cannot be a third place somewhere between heaven and hell - rather, it must be part of hell itself. However, when theologians invoke the possibility of limbo for the children who die before baptism, they postulate a place within hell where the punishments are very light and, perhaps, consist solely in the lack of the beatific vision (which is the essence of hell).
"However, it is supposed that the children in limbo would enjoy a natural happiness and would even know and love God according to natural charity (though they lack supernatural charity). These children would have no participation in the life of grace, but would most certainly not be entirely separated from God - indeed, none in hell are entirely separated from God, since they at least receive existence from him.
"That there is a distinction between the essential punishment of hell which is the deprivation of the beatific vision (poena damni) and the additional punishments of hell which are the sensible torments (poena sensus) is affirmed by Pope Innocent III: "The punishment of original sin is the loss of the vision of God, the punishment of actual sin is the torment of the perpetual Gehenna." (Denz 410, DS 780) Therefore, in the supposition of the existence of a limbo of the children (which would necessarily be part of hell), the children who died without baptism would suffer only the loss of the beatific vision and not the sensible torments.
"St. Thomas Aquinas, Bl. Duns Scotus, and the other great doctors of the Scholastic period maintained that the children in limbo would not even know that they were missing out on heaven (nor that they were condemned to hell), but would be perfectly happy on a natural level; though, of course, without any shred of supernatural happiness. These children would know and love God with a natural knowledge and a natural love. The children would be entirely ignorant of the mysteries of salvation and, unlike the souls condemned to hell for actual mortal sin, these would suffer no existential pains from the lack of the beatific vision (for they would not know that they were missing this supernatural happiness, and would instead be very happy and perfectly fulfilled on the level of nature)."
Problems with this position:
1. The Church teaches that there are only three types of Baptism (water, desire, blood) by which humanity can be saved. Fr. Ryan rejects this magisterial teaching by claiming that John the Baptist and the Prophet Jeremiah were sanctified by "extraordinary and extremely special" graces, not given to other persons. This implies either: (a) a fourth means of baptism, contrary to Catholic teaching, or (b) salvation for some persons without any type of baptism, or (c) that baptism of desire is possible in the womb, and yet is denied by God to the vast majority of prenatals, infants, and young children. The first position (a) is a serious doctrinal error; the second position (b) is heresy; the third position essentially accuses God of a lack of mercy. If it is possible and fitting to save in the womb, why would God limit this means of salvation only to John and Jeremiah?
(I should add here that I do not agree that Jeremiah was given some type of baptism in the womb. Fr. Ryan is misinterpreting Sacred Scripture on this point.)
2. Another problem along these same lines is that Fr. Ryan seems to suggest that the Blessed Virgin Mary did not receive any type of Baptism. This contradicts the infallible teaching of the Church that Baptism is necessary for salvation.
My view is that the Blessed Virgin Mary received a baptism of blood in her Immaculate Conception. For her Immaculate Conception was effected by the suffering and death of Christ on the Cross, the source of all baptism. Although the classical form of baptism of blood involves martyrdom, no one is saved by their own merits. Therefore, no one is saved by their own blood, by only by their union with the blood of Christ. A Baptism of blood therefore need not include an heroic martyrdom on the part of the recipient of baptism. Therefore Mary, and John the Baptist, and in my view Saint Joseph, all received a baptism of blood. But of course Mary's baptism at conception was unique, and included graces above those of baptism.
3. The Magisterium teaches that those who die in original sin alone are punished.
Pope Innocent III: "The punishment of original sin is deprivation of the vision of God, but the punishment of actual sin is the torments of everlasting Hell…." (Denzinger, n. 410.)
Council of Florence: "But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains."
Pope Pius VI: "that place of the lower regions (which the faithful generally designate by the name of the limbo of children) in which the souls of those departing with the sole guilt of original sin are punished with the punishment of the condemned, exclusive of the punishment of fire" (Auctorem Fidei)
Pope Pius VI says that those souls in 'the limbo of the children,' as the faithful call it, suffer 'the punishment of the condemned.' The Council of Florence states that anyone who dies in original sin only goes straight to Hell to be punished, though with unequal, that is, lesser pains. Notice the wording used in these magisterial teachings: 'punishment' and 'pains' and 'punishment of the condemned'. The Magisterium clearly and definitively teaches that anyone who dies in a state of original sin only suffers in Hell.
But Fr. Ryan openly rejects these magisterial teachings and instead claims that these souls are 'perfectly happy', 'very happy and perfectly fulfilled', as if they were not being punished at all. His claim directly contradicts the teachings of both Pope Innocent III and the Ecumenical Council of Florence that even the souls in Hell who die in original sin receive a punishment. Their punishment is less than other souls in Hell, but they are punished. The teaching of the Ecumenical Council of Florence is an infallible dogma; therefore, the faithful must hold that all the souls in Hell are punished, and that some are punished more or less than others.
4. The idea of Limbo as a place of natural, but not supernatural, happiness ought to apply only to the theological proposition of Limbo as a third final resting place -- not as a fringe of Hell. Some theologians, in the past, proposed that children who die without Baptism go to Limbo as a third final resting place, to have perfect natural happiness, while other theologians proposed that they go to a fringe of Hell to be punished. But the position is absurd which claims both that unbaptized children go to Hell, and that they have perfect natural happiness there.
5. The teachings of Jesus Christ in the Gospel about Hell are entirely ignored by Fr. Ryan. Jesus taught that Hell is a place of punishment. The idea that Hell is a place where some souls can be 'very happy and perfectly fulfilled' directly contradicts the teaching of Jesus in the Gospels.
[Matthew]
{5:29} And if your right eye causes you to sin, root it out and cast it away from you. For it is better for you that one of your members perish, than that your whole body be cast into Hell.
{5:30} And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it away from you. For it is better for you that one of your members perish, than that your whole body go into Hell.
If some souls are 'very happy and perfectly fulfilled' in Hell, then why would it be better to lose an eye or a hand than to go there? If it is better to lose an eye or a hand than to go to Hell, then Hell must be a terrible place.
{10:28} And do not be afraid of those who kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul. But instead fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Hell.
Christ taught that soul and body are destroyed in Hell. The body is in Hell after the general Resurrection. The destruction of Hell is never-ending. If it is better to suffer murder than to be sent to Hell, it cannot be a place where anyone is 'very happy and perfectly fulfilled'.
{23:15} Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! For you travel around by sea and by land, in order to make one convert. And when he has been converted, you make him twice the son of Hell that you are yourselves.
{23:33} You serpents, you brood of vipers! How will you escape from the judgment of Hell?
Do these references to Hell by Christ sound compatible with the theological position that some souls in Hell are 'very happy'?
[Mark]
{9:41} And whoever will have scandalized one of these little ones who believe in me: it would be better for him if a great millstone were placed around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.
{9:42} And if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off: it is better for you to enter into life disabled, than having two hands to go into Hell, into the unquenchable fire,
{9:43} where their worm does not die, and the fire is not extinguished.
{9:44} But if your foot causes you to sin, chop it off: it is better for you to enter into eternal life lame, than having two feet to be cast into the Hell of unquenchable fire,
{9:45} where their worm does not die, and the fire is not extinguished.
{9:46} But if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out: it is better for you to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into the Hell of fire,
{9:47} where their worm does not die, and the fire is not extinguished.
It is better to have a great millstone hung around your neck and be thrown into the sea, than to sin gravely and end up in Hell. For in that place "their worm does not die, and the fire is not extinguished." This is not a description of a place of happiness for anyone.
[Luke]
{16:22} Then it happened that the beggar died, and he was carried by the Angels into the bosom of Abraham. Now the wealthy man also died, and he was entombed in Hell.
{16:23} Then lifting up his eyes, while he was in torments, he saw Abraham far away, and Lazarus in his bosom.
{16:24} And crying out, he said: 'Father Abraham, take pity on me and send Lazarus, so that he may dip the tip of his finger in water to refresh my tongue. For I am tortured in this fire.'
{16:25} And Abraham said to him: 'Son, recall that you received good things in your life, and in comparison, Lazarus received bad things. But now he is consoled, and truly you are tormented.
[Revelation]
{20:9} And fire from God descended from heaven and devoured them. And the devil, who seduced them, was cast into the pool of fire and sulphur,
{20:10} where both the beast and the false prophetess shall be tortured, day and night, forever and ever.
Hell is a place of torment. Jesus in no way and at no time gave any indication at all that Hell might be a place of happiness of any kind for anyone. Such an idea treats the words of Jesus on Hell with utter disregard.
In the parable of the King separating the sheep from the goats, the nations are separated into only two groups. One group goes to eternal life and the other goes to eternal punishment.
[Matthew]
{25:34} Then the King shall say to those who will be on his right: 'Come, you blessed of my Father. Possess the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
{25:41} Then he shall also say, to those who will be on his left: 'Depart from me, you accursed ones, into the eternal fire, which was prepared for the devil and his angels.
{25:46} And these shall go into eternal punishment, but the just shall go into eternal life."
There is no third final destination of perfect natural happiness, but without supernatural happiness. And there can be no happiness in "the eternal fire, which was prepared for the devil and his angels," for it is a place of "eternal punishment".
6. Fr. Ryan admits that the souls in the limbo of Hell are deprived of the Beatific Vision of God, but he claims that they can be perfectly happy anyway.
To the contrary, the Magisterium teaches that the worst punishment of Hell is the deprivation of the Beatific Vision of God.
"The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs." (CCC, n. 1035).
But Fr. Ryan contradicts this teaching by claiming that the souls in the limbo of Hell suffer the chief punishment of Hell, the deprivation of the Beatific Vision of God, and yet they are happy forever. He even claims that they "would most certainly not be entirely separated from God". So how can these souls receive the worst punishment of Hell, and yet be perfectly happy? How can they suffer the punishment of eternal separation from God, as the Catechism teaches, and yet not be entirely separated from God? They cannot. The claim is absurd and contrary to the clear and definitive teaching of the Magisterium.
7. But the punishments of Hell, even for those who suffer the least in Hell, must certainly include not only the deprivation of the Beatific Vision of God, but also the deprivation of the company of the holy Angels and the Blessed in Heaven. So how can these infants and children be in the limbo of Hell, separated not only from God but from all of their family members who went to Heaven, and still be happy? What child can be happy, even on a natural level, if he is separated from his parents? Either the parents are in Heaven, or worse, they are in Hell, suffering immensely. The claim that children can be happy in the limbo of Hell is an example of astoundingly bad theology.
And who do the children in the limbo of Hell have for company, since they lack the company of the hosts of Heaven? They have only other souls who died in a state of original sin only. These souls have no grace and no supernatural virtues; these souls are not holy. Who could be happy when surrounded by persons, all of whom are not in a state of grace? No one. Therefore, no one is happy in Hell, not even in the 'best neighborhood' of Hell, called the limbo of the children.
8. Original sin and its consequences are not removed from those who die in a state of original sin only. For Baptism is needed to take away original sin. So the souls who die in a state of original sin only suffer from original sin. The Council of Trent taught that original sin changes us "in body and soul, for the worse" and that the sin of Adam injured not only himself, but his posterity as well (Fifth Session, Decree on Original Sin). The souls who are in Hell in a state of original sin suffer from being in that worsened state.
Therefore, they cannot be very happy and perfectly fulfilled, even on a natural level, for their human nature has been worsened and injured by original sin. And that sin was not taken away by Baptism.
9. Fr. Ryan goes so far as to claim that the souls in the limbo of Hell know and love God. But he also claims that they have no idea that there is a Heaven and no knowledge of God's plan of salvation.
"would not even know that they were missing out on heaven (nor that they were condemned to hell), but would be perfectly happy on a natural level; though, of course, without any shred of supernatural happiness. These children would know and love God with a natural knowledge and a natural love. The children would be entirely ignorant of the mysteries of salvation"
So these children know God and love God, but they have no sanctifying grace, and no idea that Heaven exists? And they do not even know that they are in Hell? So how does all this add up to knowing God?
Our Father, who art in Heaven -- no, they supposedly don't know that Heaven exists. So they can't pray the our Father. Can they pray at all? No, for this requires grace, and they have none.
"Every time we begin to pray to Jesus it is the Holy Spirit who draws us on the way of prayer by his prevenient grace." (CCC, n. 2670).
They love God, but they don't pray to Him. They know God, but they have no idea that there is a Heaven or a Hell. But they are also very happy. This set of claims is insane.
What about those children who died knowing about God and Heaven, but without baptism (e.g. Mormon children, Jehovah's Witness children, Jewish children, Muslim children)? Does someone lie to them in the limbo of Hell and tell them that there is no Heaven, contrary to their instruction on earth?
Or how can anyone know God and not know that He dwells in Heaven. And how can anyone be perfectly fulfilled, without any grace, while still in a state of original sin? Oh happy fault of Adam that gave us so great a happiness in Hell!
This set of claims made by Fr. Ryan Erlenbush on his blog is not compatible with reason, not compatible with Scripture, not compatible with the teachings of the Roman Catholic Magisterium.
10. Fr. Ryan ends by saying that the existence of a limbo of Hell is only probable, not certain. But the Magisterium has definitively taught that the limbo of Hell exists (see #3 above). So his claim that its existence is only probable is yet another rejection of magisterial teaching.
But the Magisterium has NEVER taught that prenatals, infants, or children, who die without formal Baptism, are sent by God to Hell.
In fact, the International Theological Commission, in its document titled, The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptised, which was approved for publication by Pope Benedict XVI, states that some modern theologians "developing certain more ancient theological theses, proposed to recognize for little children either some kind of Baptism of blood (by taking into consideration the suffering and death of these infants)...." or a type of baptism of desire. (ITC, The Hope of Salvation, n. 29).
And the Catechism of the Catholic Church offers this hope:
"Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: 'Let the children come to me, do not hinder them' (Mk 10:14; cf. 1 Tim 2:4), allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism."
But Fr. Ryan sees no way for them to be saved, except by the bizarre theological claim that they are sent to Hell to be happy forever.
11. The Magisterium teaches that we cannot be happy and fulfilled without supernatural happiness. Therefore, no one can be happy in the limbo of Hell.
"Human beings cannot completely fulfill themselves, they cannot be truly happy without God." (Pope Benedict XVI)
"Without God, man cannot fully find himself, nor can he find his true happiness." (Pope John Paul II)
Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II taught that human beings cannot be truly happy without God. The Catechism teaches that Hell is eternal separation from God (CCC, n. 1035). Therefore, no one can be happy in Hell.
"It is a divine law that those only attain everlasting happiness who have by such faithful following reproduced in themselves the form of the patience and sanctity of Jesus Christ: 'for whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be made conformable to the image of His Son; that He might be the first-born amongst many brethren' (Romans viii., 29)." (Pope Pius X).
Pope Pius X taught that it is a Divine law of God that no one can attain everlasting happiness, except by being conformed to the image of Christ, having in themselves the sanctity of Christ. But this sanctity is only found in sanctifying grace by baptism. Therefore, souls who die without any form of baptism, even if in a state of original sin only, cannot have everlasting happiness in Hell, nor in any form of Limbo.
"But without Christ's help, fallen man is incapable of directing himself to the supernatural goods which constitute his total fulfillment and salvation." (Pope John Paul II).
Pope John Paul II taught that our total fulfillment can only occur by supernatural goods. Therefore, no one can be very happy and perfectly fulfilled solely on a natural level of happiness.
"Man can no more create for himself a life free from suffering and filled with all happiness that he can abrogate the decrees of his Divine Maker, who has willed that the consequences of original sin should be perpetual." (Pope Leo XIII)
The consequences of original sin are perpetual, for those who are not freed from original sin by baptism. Therefore, souls who die in a state of original sin cannot be happy; original sin perpetually prevents their happiness and fulfillment because they lack baptism.
What does Fr. Ryan say about all of these teachings of the Popes? Nothing. He does not even bother to read what the Popes have said on this subject. He exalts the opinion of medieval theologians above the teaching of the Magisterium. His new theological movement is a disguised rejection of the Magisterium.
12. Fr. Ryan Erlenbush's theological position is contradicted by the teaching of the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
"Each man receives his eternal retribution in his immortal soul at the very moment of his death, in a particular judgment that refers his life to Christ: either entrance into the blessedness of heaven -- through a purification or immediately, -- or immediate and everlasting damnation." (CCC, n. 1022).
There are only two final destinations, Heaven or Hell. But Hell is a place of everlasting damnation. Therefore, Hell cannot also be a place of everlasting natural happiness. Such a claim contradicts the Catechism's teaching on Hell.
"The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, 'eternal fire.' The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs."(CCC, n. 1035).
Only in God can man possess the happiness for which he was created. The souls in Hell are eternally separated from God. Therefore, there can be no happiness in any part of Hell. Also, a perfect natural happiness is not possible, because man was created for supernatural happiness with God in Heaven. The soul of man can never be entirely happy or perfectly fulfilled without that supernatural happiness found in God alone.
"God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want 'any to perish, but all to come to repentance' "" (CCC, n. 1037).
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that both a willful turning away from God (by mortal sin), and persistence in that sin until the end of life, is necessary for anyone to be sent to Hell. Prenatals, infants, and young children, even those who lack the formal Sacrament of Baptism, cannot be sent to Hell, because they are too young to have committed a mortal sin. They do not have sufficient use of reason and free will to sin gravely (or at all, for the very youngest).
Also, prenatals who die in the womb have no chance of being baptized, even if their parents were Roman Catholic Saints. So if God sent all such souls to Hell, this choice by God would be equivalent to predestination to Hell. But the idea that God predestines anyone to Hell is a false doctrine rejected by the Church.
Such a claim also amounts to an accusation against the Church, that She is unable to save from Hell the hundreds of millions of prenatals who die in the womb. To the contrary, the Ark of Salvation is able to save all human persons; only those persons who knowingly choose mortal sin, and who refuse to repent through the last moment of life, are lost.
A Grave Offense Against Other Religions
What happens to children, who die at a young age without Baptism?
What happens to Jewish children, who die at a young age without Baptism?
What happens to Muslim children, who die at a young age without Baptism?
What happens to Mormon children, who die at a young age without Baptism?
What happens to Jehovah's Witness children, who die at a young age without Baptism?
What happens to Hindu children, who die at a young age without Baptism?
What happens to Buddhist children, who die at a young age without Baptism?
Fr. Ryan of the New Theological Movement blog
implies that they all go to Hell, where they will be very happy and perfectly fulfilled....
...unless they die after the age of seven. For he also states, in
a different post, that "most non-baptized children commit a mortal sin as their first rational action" when they reach the age of reason (at about 7 years of age). This would obviously include Jewish, Muslim, Mormon, Jehovah's Witness, Hindu, and Buddhist children. So these children would go to the limbo of Hell, unless they die after committing a mortal sin (supposedly about the age of 7), in which case they would go to the regular Hell, where would suffer more -- or at least that is what Fr. Ryan claims.
A summary of the theological errors taught by Roman Catholic priest, Father Ryan Erlenbush of the Diocese of Great Falls and Billings, Montana is
found on this page, with his background and contact information.
Note to Father Ryan Erlenbush
You do not teach sound Catholic theology. In many cases, you arrive at bizarre and ridiculous conclusions, because you base your theology on the work of medieval theologians. You show nothing but contempt for modern theology and for the development of doctrine. Your blog posts do not teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Your theological positions are contrary to the teachings of Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and the Magisterium, and often blatantly contrary to reason. The more bizarre are your theological conclusions, the more you seem to delight in promoting and teaching these claims to others. And your blind unthinking adherence to whatever theological position Saint Thomas Aquinas asserted, regardless of subsequent magisterial teaching, is the sin of idolatry.
How dare you claim that innocent little children are sent by God to Hell! How dare you claim that anyone in Hell can be very happy and perfectly fulfilled!
You are an example of what Christ called 'the blind leading the blind'. You are like the scribes and Pharisees, who spread grave doctrinal errors, leading many astray. You are harming many souls with your grave theological errors.
[Matthew]
{15:14} Leave them alone. They are blind, and they lead the blind. But if the blind are in charge of the blind, both will fall into the pit."
{23:13} So then: Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! For you close the kingdom of heaven before men. For you yourselves do not enter, and those who are entering, you would not permit to enter.
{23:28} So also, you certainly appear to men outwardly to be just. But inwardly you are filled with hypocrisy and iniquity.
{23:33} You serpents, you brood of vipers! How will you escape from the judgment of Hell?
You are willing to condemn the hundreds of millions of victims of abortion, and prenatals who die in the womb from natural causes, and millions of infants and young children who die from disease or other causes, throughout all of history, to Hell. Why? It is only because your narrow mind cannot see how they can be saved, therefore, of course they cannot be saved. You ignore the teaching of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on this question. You ignore the theological treatise on this question by the International Theological Commission (a document approved by Pope Benedict XVI). Your assertions that little children must be sent to Hell are based on your own blind acceptance and misunderstanding of medieval theology.
How is it that God can save great sinners, even turning them into great Saints, while being unable to save prenatals and infants who have not sinned? And if even little children are sent to Hell, then what chance do you stand to avoid the fires of Hell? And yet how happy and joyful you seem to be in proclaiming that innumerable little children are condemned to the punishments of Hell!
Blind guide! You close the kingdom of heaven -- not before men, but before little children -- making yourself worse than the Pharisees! But if you knew what this means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,' you would never have condemned the innocent. For the Son of man is Lord of salvation, and He does not desire little children to be condemned to the punishments of Hell. May God rebuke you for publicly proclaiming that our Lord and Savior refuses to save innocent little children and instead sends them to Hell.
No one is happy in Hell. No one is perfectly fulfilled in Hell. That's why they call it Hell, you hypocrite.
Sound Theology on Salvation for Children
Here is my theological position: The fringe of Hell exists as a place of eternal but lesser punishment for adults who die in a state of original sin alone. These adults died in that state because they committed the actual mortal sin of omission of never having found sanctifying grace in their lives, despite ample opportunity. So no one at all ever goes to Hell, except due to unrepentant actual mortal sin.
This fringe of Hell has been called 'the limbo of the children' ("limbus infantium" or "limbus puerorum"), but the term is a severe misnomer. No prenatals, no infants, no young children are ever sent by God to that place, nor to Hell at all, even if they die without a formal Baptism. For they receive a baptism of blood, just as the Holy Innocents did. So they die in a state of grace, and they will be very happy and perfectly fulfilled forever in Heaven.
Here is Jesus' theological position:
[Mark]
{10:13} And they brought to him the little children, so that he might touch them. But the disciples admonished those who brought them.
{10:14} But when Jesus saw this, he took offense, and he said to them: "Allow the little ones to come to me, and do not prohibit them. For of such as these is the kingdom of God.
{10:15} Amen I say to you, whoever will not accept the kingdom of God like a little child, will not enter into it."
Jesus takes offense when theologians claim that little children are sent by God to Hell.
Do all little children go to Heaven? Yes. But I say more. Only little children go to Heaven. For Jesus said:
"Amen I say to you, unless you change and become like little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." (Mt 18:3).
If anyone contradicts this teaching of Christ, let him be anathema. Let him be cast by God into Hell, so that he can see for himself that there are no little children there at all.
by Ronald L. Conte Jr.
Roman Catholic theologian and Bible translator
June 25-26, 2011 (updated July 30, 2011)
Articles on Catholic Ethics
My work with Sacred Scripture
