On The Necessity Of Limbo

How can you refuse it heaven?

After reading this article I felt the need to add my own considerations. Limbo is not only theologically necessary, but also logically so.

If murdering an innocent child were enough to merit him paradise, aborting a child would be the most merciful thing one can do to any soul. Nazi and Commie genocides were, unwittingly, the greatest benefactors. Every pregnant mother would have an influence on the soul of her boy of literally infinite importance, a power much bigger than the one of great saints in heaven. Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Planned Parenthood would be great benefactors, more relevant than any great saint.

Actually, a religion proposing the killing of the unborn with great success would be more efficacious in sending souls to heaven than the Church. Conversely, the desire to have a child born would be no more than this: the risk of the loss of infinite beatitude in heaven for the selfish desire to see one's own children grow, or to allow them to live a handful of decades in this imperfect vale of tears dominated by injustice, disease, decay and, of course, sin and the snares of the devil. Monstrous selfishness would this be.

The absurdity of the conclusion demonstrates the absurdity of the premise from a logical point of view alone; without even considering the dogma.

We live in time of such confusion that people spread heresy and blasphemy and feel that they are the good guys, because in their fantasy world God could never be, erm, the One the Church has taught us about for 2000 years. Their fake god is a strange mixture of satanical licence and sugary, effeminate, all-pervading fake love that, by denying all the rest (from justice to faith, to the obedience due to Christ) denies the very love it wants to upheld.

We must cut this rubbish and go back to Christianity.

Hell exists.

Original Sin is very real.

Baptism is extremely important.

The sins of the fathers shall be visited upon the sons.

All self-evident truths many are trying to forget.

This senseless good-ism is the work of the devil, and it has to stop.

M

 

Advertisements

Posted on June 29, 2017, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. 9 Comments.

  1. When I was younger I wondered why babies were only baptized after they were born. After all, if a mother miscarried early in the pregnancy, with the child very tiny,and not fully formed, but still with a soul, wouldn’t the mother want to see her child in heaven?

    I came to the conclusion that the child must have physical contact with the water of baptism….but still am not sure that that is the conclusion.

    • Meant to say correct conclusion at the end of my comment.

    • The conclusion is that God has decreed that baptism should happen after birth. We do not know why some, like the children of Caholic parents, would go to limbo. But we can imagine that this, for example, a grace made to the Catholic parents for children that would otherwise have been predestined for hell

  2. Gino Lollobrigido

    “If murdering an innocent child were enough to merit him paradise, aborting a child would be the most merciful thing one can do to any soul.

    If seems to me that this argument is weak, because if a man/woman kills his/her children right after Baptism he/she would “merit” Heaven for the child 100/100, because the child is baptize and he/she cannot lose the state of Grace before the age of reason.

    Anyway, i don’t know if the limbo exists, but even if it exists at the end of times those souls will be in Heaven according to the theologians.

    • On the contrary, you are right starting from the premises. The absurdity of the conclusion shows the absurdity of the premises.

      You know that Limbo exists because the Church has always said it does. Kindly stop posting these V II, “I make my own religion” statements.

    • And no, the one with the end of time is more rubbish that has nothing to do with Catholicism.

      Another one of these fake Catholic statements and I am done with you. Use your time to embrace Catholicism instead of making your own religion.

  3. I fully accept the Catholic and traditional doctrine about Limbo, but I think this argument is very weak, exactly because it implies that parents who choose not to murder their child right after the Baptism are selfish. One just needs to replace “born” with “alive after Baptism” and you get this:

    “The desire to have a child alive after Baptism would be no more than this: the risk of the loss of infinite beatitude in heaven for the selfish desire to see one’s own children grow, or to allow them to live a handful of decades in this imperfect vale of tears dominated by injustice, disease, decay and, of course, sin and the snares of the devil. Monstrous selfishness would this be.”

    How does one respond to this argument?

    • That it is not an argument. Life is made to be lived because this is what the Lord commanded. What is in the Lord’s design is not selfishness, is collaboration with God’s plan.

  1. Pingback: Canon212 Update: Pell Charged. Is FrancisPlanet Crucifying Yet Another Catholic? – The Stumbling Block

Leave a reply. Please be concise and to the point.

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: