Limbo: Much ado about nothing

So. I finally managed to read “The Hope of Salvation,” the much bally-hooed statement of the International Theological Commission.

No one has mentioned this point:

41. Therefore, besides the theory of limbo (which remains a possible theological opinion), there can be otherways to integrate and safeguard the principles of the faith grounded in Scripture [that led to the development of that idea]…

So, limbo isn’t thrown out. It “remains a possible theological opinion.” The rest of the 40 page document merely repeats that the church “hopes” unbaptized children can be saved.

The statement affirms that limbo “has long been used in traditional theological teaching” even if it “has no clear foundation in revelation” (well, that’s true of lots of Catholic teachings). And that the bases for it, including “the notion that infants who die without baptism are deprived of the beatific vision,” have “long been regarded as the common doctrine of the church.” What is otherwise known as the sensus fidelium (3).

The document justifies its existence on the grounds that “in these times the number of infants who die unbaptized is growing greatly.” Really? Wasn’t this a problem when it was merely Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, or other children dying unbaptized? If this is such a concern, why not renew calls for evangelization and missions? Why not put emphasis on an evangelization that calls adults to make a decision for Christ?

The document claims to be “pastoral,” but it doesn’t grapple with the fact that limbo was taught as a near certainty to folks, and that, as noted in another post, babies were deprived of burial because of this teaching. It treats limbo as just an erudite theological theory, ignoring what such a casual dismissal says to those Christians who were treated so shabbily by the Catholic Church.