Though at first sight this topic may seem to be peripheral to theological concerns, questions of great depth and complexity are involved in its proper explication, and such an explication is called for today by pressing pastoral needs.
In these times, the number of infants who die unbaptised is growing greatly. This is partly because of parents, influenced by cultural relativism and religious pluralism, who are non-practising, but it is also partly a consequence of in vitro fertilisation and abortion.
Given these developments, the question of the destiny of such infants is raised with new urgency. In such a situation, the ways by which salvation may be achieved appear ever more complex and problematic.
The Church, faithful guardian of the way of salvation, knows that salvation can be achieved only in Christ, by the Holy Spirit. Yet, as mother and teacher, she cannot fail to reflect on the destiny of all human beings, created in the image of God, [2] and especially of the weakest. Infants, however, who do not yet have the use of reason, conscience and freedom, cannot decide for themselves.
Parents experience great grief and feelings of guilt when they do not have the moral assurance of the salvation of their children, and people find it increasingly difficult to accept that God is just and merciful if he excludes infants, who have no personal sins, from eternal happiness, whether they are Christian or non-Christian. From a theological point of view, the development of a theology of hope and an ecclesiology of communion, together with a recognition of the greatness of divine mercy, challenge an unduly restrictive view of salvation.
In fact, the universal salvific will of God and the correspondingly universal mediation of Christ mean that all theological notions that ultimately call into question the very omnipotence of God, and his mercy in particular, are inadequate. 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. Reflecting on the question of the destiny of infants who die without Baptism, the ecclesial community must keep in mind the fact that God is more properly the subject than the object of theology.
The first task of theology is therefore to listen to the Word of God. Theology listens to the Word of God expressed in the Scriptures in order to communicate it lovingly to all people. However, with regard to the salvation of those who die without Baptism, the Word of God says little or nothing.
It is therefore necessary to interpret the reticence of Scripture on this issue in the light of texts concerning the universal plan of salvation and the ways of salvation. Mk ; Mt Secondly, taking account of the principle lex orandi lex credendi , the Christian community notes that there is no mention of Limbo in the liturgy. We do not pray for those who are damned. The Roman Missal of introduced a Funeral Mass for unbaptised infants whose parents intended to present them for Baptism.
The Gospel of Mark actually describes an occasion when the faith of some was effective for the salvation of another cf. Mk So, while knowing that the normal way to achieve salvation in Christ is by Baptism in re , the Church hopes that there may be other ways to achieve the same end. Finally, when reflecting theologically on the salvation of infants who die without Baptism, the Church respects the hierarchy of truths and therefore begins by clearly reaffirming the primacy of Christ and his grace, which has priority over Adam and sin.
Jesus Christ, in his existence for us and in the redemptive power of his sacrifice, died and rose again for all. By his whole life and teaching, he revealed the fatherhood of God and his universal love. While the necessity of Baptism is de fide , the tradition and the documents of the magisterium which have reaffirmed this necessity need to be interpreted. While it is true that the universal salvific will of God is not opposed to the necessity of Baptism, it is also true that infants, for their part, do not place any personal obstacle in the way of redemptive grace.
On the other hand, Baptism is administered to infants, who are free from personal sins, not only in order to free them from original sin, but also to insert them into the communion of salvation which is the Church, by means of communion in the death and resurrection of Christ cf. Rom Grace is totally free, because it is always a pure gift of God. Damnation, however, is deserved, because it is the consequence of free human choice.
It can be asked whether the infant who dies without Baptism, but for whom the Church in its prayer expresses the desire for salvation, can be deprived of the vision of God even without his or her cooperation. A sound theological enquiry should start with a study of the biblical foundations of any ecclesial doctrine or practice.
Hence, as regards the issue under discussion, the question should be asked whether the Holy Scriptures deal in one way or another with the question of the destiny of unbaptised children. When the New Testament mentions the practice of Baptism, it generally points to the Baptism of adults. But the New Testament evidence does not preclude the possibility of infants being baptised. In households oikos where Baptism is mentioned in the Book of Acts and 33 cf. The absence of positive evidence may be explained by the fact that the New Testament writings are concerned mainly with the initial spread of Christianity in the world.
The lack of any positive teaching within the New Testament with respect to the destiny of unbaptised children does not mean that the theological discussion of this question is not informed by a number of fundamental biblical doctrines.
These include:. Eph ; Phil ; Rom ; 1 Cor ;. Gen ; ; 1 Kings ; Ps , and their being born in sin cf. Ps ; Sir since Adam, and therefore their being destined to death cf. Rom ; 1 Cor ;. Rom , on the one hand, and of Baptism cf. Mk ; Mt ; Acts ; and the Eucharist cf. Jn administered by the Church, on the other hand;. Rom ; Christian hope is that the living God, the Saviour of all humanity cf. There seems to be a tension between two of the biblical doctrines just mentioned: the universal salvific will of God on the one side, and the necessity of sacramental Baptism on the other.
Hence a hermeneutical reflection is needed about how the witnesses of tradition Church Fathers, the magisterium, theologians read and used biblical texts and doctrines with respect to the problem being dealt with. In what follows, we will be attentive to the way scriptural witnesses have been used in the tradition.
Moreover, in dealing with theological principles Chapter 2 and with our reasons for hope Chapter 3 , we will discuss in greater detail the biblical doctrines and texts involved. Very few Greek Fathers dealt with the destiny of infants who die without Baptism because there was no controversy about this issue in the East. Furthermore, they had a different view of the present condition of humanity.
For the Greek Fathers, as the consequence of Adam's sin, human beings inherited corruption, possibility, and mortality, from which they could be restored by a process of deification made possible through the redemptive work of Christ.
The idea of an inheritance of sin or guilt - common in Western tradition - was foreign to this perspective, since in their view sin could only be a free, personal act. They do, however, discuss the status or situation - but not the place - of these infants after their death.
Pseudo-Athanasios says clearly that an unbaptised person cannot enter the Kingdom of God. He also asserts that unbaptised children will not enter the Kingdom, but neither will they be lost, for they have not sinned. Alone among the Greek Fathers, Gregory of Nyssa wrote a work specifically on the destiny of infants who die , De infantibus praemature abreptis libellum. Virtue is not worth anything if those who depart this life prematurely without having practised virtue are immediately welcomed into blessedness.
Is he worthy of a reward? Since the innocent infant does not need purification from personal sins, he shares in this life corresponding to his nature in a sort of regular progress, according to his capacity.
Gregory of Nyssa distinguishes between the destiny of infants and that of adults who lived a virtuous life. Gregory of Nazianzus does not write about the place and status after death of infants who die without sacramental Baptism, but he enlarges the subject with another consideration. He writes, namely, that these children receive neither praise nor punishment from the Just Judge, because they have suffered injury rather than provoked it. On the one hand, these Greek Fathers teach that children who die without Baptism do not suffer eternal damnation, though they do not attain the same state as those who have been baptised.
On the other hand, they do not explain what their state is like or where they go. In this matter, the Greek Fathers display their characteristic apophatic sensitivity. The fate of unbaptised infants first became the subject of sustained theological reflection in the West during the anti-Pelagian controversies of the early 5th century.
Augustine addressed the question because Pelagius was teaching that infants could be saved without Baptism. Pelagius questioned whether St. In countering Pelagius, Augustine was led to state that infants who die without Baptism are consigned to hell.
Why are little children brought to the baptismal font, especially infants in danger of death, if not to assure them entrance into the Kingdom of God? Why are they subjected to exorcisms and exsufflations if they do not have to be delivered from the devil?
Liturgical practice confirms the Church's belief that all inherit Adam's sin and must be transferred from the power of darkness into the kingdom of light Col In Augustine's judgement, Pelagius undermined belief in Jesus Christ, the one Mediator 1 Tim , and in the need for the saving grace he won for us on the Cross. Christ came to save sinners. Those who are not baptized cannot enter the Kingdom of God. At the judgement, those who do not enter the Kingdom Mt will be condemned to hell Mt God is just.
If he condemns unbaptised children to hell, it is because they are sinners. God does no injustice to those who are not elected, for all deserve hell. He can only exclaim with St. We shall discover the justice of God's will in the next world. The Council of Carthage of rejected the teaching of Pelagius. So great was Augustine's authority in the West, however, that the Latin Fathers e. Augustine was the point of reference for Latin theologians throughout the Middle Ages on this matter.
Anselm of Canterbury is a good example: he believes that little children who die without Baptism are damned on account of original sin and in keeping with God's justice. Victor: infants who die unbaptised cannot be saved because 1 they have not received the sacrament, and 2 they cannot make a personal act of faith that would supply for the sacrament.
Death puts an end to the possibility of choosing to accept or reject grace, that is, to adhere to God or turn away from him; after death, a person's fundamental dispositions before God receive no further modification. Augustine, was disseminated by Peter Lombard: little children suffer no penalty except the privation of the vision of God.
This did not prevent the medieval theologians from holding the existence of two and not three possible outcomes for human existence: the happiness of heaven for the saints, and the privation of this celestial happiness for the damned and for infants who died unbaptised.
Because children below the age of reason did not commit actual sin, theologians came to the common view that these unbaptised children feel no pain at all, or even that they enjoy a full natural happiness through their union with God in all natural goods Thomas Aquinas, Duns Scotus. Thomas Aquinas, for instance, insisted that faith alone allows us to know that the supernatural end of human life consists in the glory of the saints, that is, in participation in the life of the Triune God through the beatific vision.
Since this supernatural end transcends natural human knowledge, and since unbaptised children lack the sacrament that would have given them the seed of such supernatural knowledge, Aquinas concluded that infants who die without Baptism do not know what they are deprived of, and hence do not suffer from the privation of the beatific vision. The theologians who held this thesis of a natural happiness for children who died without Baptism manifest a very lively sense of the gratuity of salvation and of the mystery of God's will that human thought cannot fully grasp.
The theologians who taught, in one form or another, that unbaptised children are deprived of the vision of God generally held at the same time a double affirmation: a God wills that everyone be saved, and b God, who wills that all be saved, wills equally the dispensations and the means that he himself has established for this salvation and that he has made known to us by his revelation. The second affirmation, of itself, does not exclude other dispositions of the divine economy as is clear, for example, in the witness of the Holy Innocents.
The main affirmation of these doctrines is that those who were not capable of a free act by which they could consent to grace, and who died without having been regenerated by the sacrament of Baptism, are deprived of the vision of God because of original sin which they inherit through human generation. Augustine's thought enjoyed a revival in the 16th century, and with it his theory regarding the fate of unbaptised infants, as Robert Bellarmine, for example, bears witness.
Together with Catholic theologians of the Augustinian school, the Jansenists vigorously opposed the theory of Limbo. They did not endorse the theory of Limbo as a doctrine of faith. Limbo, however, was the common Catholic teaching until the midth century. Prior to the First Vatican Council, and again prior to the Second Vatican Council, there was a strong interest in some quarters in defining Catholic doctrine on this matter.
In the preparatory phase of Vatican II, there was a desire on the part of some that the Council affirm the common doctrine that unbaptised infants cannot attain the Beatific Vision, and thereby close the question.
The Central Preparatory Commission, which was aware of many arguments against the traditional doctrine and of the need to propose a solution in better accordance with the developing sensus fidelium , opposed this move.
Because it was thought that theological reflection on the issue was not mature enough, the question was not included in the Council's agenda; it did not enter into the Council's deliberations and was left open for further investigation. However, the Church has also traditionally recognized some substitutions for Baptism of water which is the sacramental incorporation into the mystery of Christ dead and risen , namely, Baptism of blood incorporation into Christ by witness of martyrdom for Christ and Baptism of desire incorporation into Christ by the desire or longing for sacramental Baptism.
On the one hand, the adult's act of desire for Baptism can hardly be attributed to children. The case of sacramental Baptism, instead, is quite different because sacramental Baptism, administered to infants, obtains grace in virtue of that which is specifically proper to the sacrament as such, that is, the certain gift of regeneration by the power of Christ himself.
It is equally necessary to note, among the debated questions with a bearing on this matter, that of the gratuity of the supernatural order. Before the Second Vatican Council, in other circumstances and regarding other questions, Pius XII had vigorously brought this to the consciousness of the Church by explaining that one destroys the gratuity of the supernatural order if one asserts that God could not create intelligent beings without ordaining and calling them to the Beatific Vision.
Among theologians, then, reflection on the destiny of unbaptised infants involved from that time onwards a renewed consideration of the absolute gratuity of grace, and of the ordination of all human beings to Christ and to the redemption that he won for us.
Without responding directly to the question of the destiny of unbaptised infants, the Second Vatican Council marked out many paths to guide theological reflection. The Council recalled many times the universality of God's saving will which extends to all people 1 Tim LG This same constitution proclaims with vigour that only in the mystery of the Incarnate Word does the mystery of the human being take on light. Although the Council did not expressly apply this teaching to children who die without Baptism, these passages open a way to account for hope in their favour.
The study of history shows an evolution and a development of Catholic teaching concerning the destiny of infants who die without Baptism. This progress engages some foundational doctrinal principles which remain permanent, and some secondary elements of unequal value. In effect, revelation does not communicate directly in an explicit fashion knowledge of God's plan for unbaptised children, but it enlightens the Church regarding the principles of faith which must guide her thought and her practice.
A theological reading of the history of Catholic teaching up to Vatican II shows in particular that three main affirmations which belong to the faith of the Church appear at the core of the problem of the fate of unbaptised infants. Human beings, including infants, cannot be saved apart from the grace of Christ poured out by the Holy Spirit. The history of theology and of magisterial teaching show in particular a development concerning the manner of understanding the universal saving will of God.
At the level of the magisterium, this larger perception was progressively affirmed. This common doctrine followed upon a certain way of reconciling the received principles of revelation, but it did not possess the certitude of a statement of faith, or the same certitude as other affirmations whose rejection would entail the denial of a divinely revealed dogma or of a teaching proclaimed by a definitive act of the magisterium.
The study of the history of the Church's reflection on this subject shows that it is necessary to make distinctions. In this summary we distinguish first, statements of faith and what pertains to the faith; second, common doctrine; and third, theological opinion.
Grace is necessary in order to be purified of original sin and to be raised to communion with God so as to be able to enter into eternal life and enjoy the vision of God. Historically, the common doctrine applied this affirmation to the fate of unbaptised infants and concluded that these infants lack the beatific vision.
Historically, these affirmations have certainly been applied to unbaptised infants, with the conclusion that these infants suffer punishment for original sin. It must be observed however that, in a general way, the focus of these Church pronouncements was not on the lack of salvation for unbaptised infants, but on the immediacy of the particular judgment after death and the assignment of souls to heaven or hell.
These magisterial statements do not oblige us to think that these infants necessarily die with original sin, so that there would be no way of salvation for them. Pius VI did not condemn the Jansenists because they denied Limbo, but because they held that the defenders of Limbo were guilty of the heresy of Pelagius. By maintaining the freedom of the Catholic Schools to propose different solutions to the problem of the fate of unbaptised infants, the Holy See defended the common teaching as an acceptable and legitimate option, without endorsing it.
Pius XII rather recalled the limits within which the debate must take place and reasserted firmly the moral obligation to provide Baptism to infants in danger of death. In summary: the affirmation that infants who die without Baptism suffer the privation of the beatific vision has long been the common doctrine of the Church, which must be distinguished from the faith of the Church.
As for the theory that the privation of the beatific vision is their sole punishment, to the exclusion of any other pain, this is a theological opinion, despite its long acceptance in the West.
Therefore, besides the theory of Limbo which remains a possible theological opinion , there can be other ways to integrate and safeguard the principles of the faith grounded in Scripture: the creation of the human being in Christ and his vocation to communion with God; the universal salvific will of God; the transmission and the consequences of original sin; the necessity of grace in order to enter into the Kingdom of God and attain the vision of God; the uniqueness and universality of the saving mediation of Christ Jesus; and the necessity of Baptism for salvation.
These other ways are not achieved by modifying the principles of the faith, or by elaborating hypothetical theories; rather, they seek an integration and coherent reconciliation of the principles of the faith under the guidance of the ecclesial magisterium, by giving more weight to God's universal salvific will and to solidarity in Christ cf.
GS 22 in order to account for the hope that infants dying without Baptism could enjoy eternal life in the beatific vision. In keeping with a methodological principle that what is less known must be investigated by way of what is better known, it appears that the point of departure for considering the destiny of these children should be the salvific will of God, the mediation of Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit, and a consideration of the condition of children who receive Baptism and are saved through the action of the Church in the name of Christ.
The destiny of unbaptised infants remains, however, a limit-case as regards theological inquiry: theologians should keep in mind the apophatic perspective of the Greek Fathers.
Since the theme under consideration concerns a topic for which no explicit answer is directly forthcoming from Revelation as embodied in Sacred Scripture and Tradition, the Catholic believer must have recourse to certain underlying theological principles which the Church, and specifically the magisterium, the guardian of the deposit of the faith, has articulated with the assistance of the Holy Spirit.
The ordo tractandi we will adopt here follows the ordo salutis , with one exception: we have put the anthropological dimension between the trinitarian and the ecclesiological-sacramental dimensions. In the context of the discussion on the destiny of those infants who die without Baptism, the mystery of the universal salvific will of God is a fundamental and central principle.
This question is all the more poignant when we consider the millions, if not tens of millions, of abortions that happen worldwide each year. The great Doctor of the Church St. Although these souls will obviously not be sent to the hell of the damned, nevertheless, it seems certain that they will be deprived of the incalculable good of seeing the Beatific Vision in heaven. Here it only remains for us to answer the object which is drawn from children being lost when they die before baptism, and before they come to the use of reason.
If God wills all to be saved, it is objected, how is it that these children perish without any fault of their own, since God gives them no assistance to attain eternal salvation? There are two answers to this objection, the latter more correct than the former. In St. In this context, St.
Augustine ever considered a substitution to baptism by water, for example, baptism by desire. Catechumens who had shown a willingness to enter the Church, through baptism, perhaps could be saved. Also catechumens not baptized with water, but who suffered martyrdom for their faith in Christ, could undoubtedly be saved. In this case, the concept of baptism of blood is introduced. Q: St.
Thomas Aquinas proposes a view that is different from that of St. In what way does it change? Father Gumpel: Indeed. Thomas and the Scholastics abandon St. Father Gumpel: In I carried out an exhaustive study, in which I examined all the arguments in favor of the thesis expressed by the infallible magisterium done with authority. It is an opinion that has been repeated in the course of time, without carrying out a critical historical examination of the ecumenical councils.
When the plan reached the General Preparatory Commission, the most important commission for the preparation of the council, there were such objections, on the part of cardinals and other bishops, that it was decided to cancel this chapter. The commission referred explicitly to the study I had done, which was later published. It is an element of the greatest importance, which opens the way to a broader point of view, and it is a pronouncement of the ordinary magisterium of the Church.
We cannot say with certainty that they will be saved. We can hope, and the fact that we can hope, as the Catechism says, is an interpretative key. No one hopes or can hope legitimately for something one is certain is impossible. Father Gumpel: The first consideration that must be made is that, every human being, even if he was an embryo or fetus in the womb, is part of the human family and, ontologically, in his being, has a relationship with all people and, therefore, also with Jesus Christ, who is the head of the new humanity, the new Adam.
From sacred Scripture, we know the salvific will of God. Christ is theredeemer of all and wants all to be saved.
0コメント