Father Patrick de la Rocque of the SSPX has written an analysis of the ITC's recent document on limbo. De la Rocque's "Limbo: Victim of the New Theology of Universal Salvation" describes the Catholic doctrine of original sin, its punishment as deprivation of the beatific vision, and the necessity of baptism for salvation. He further presents the traditional teaching on infants who die without baptism. Interestingly, de la Rocque's presentation of the traditional teaching is the same as the ITC's. Both de la Rocque and the ITC identify the teaching of limbo as part of the Church's sententia communis, or common teaching. Indeed, one of the surprising facets of the ITC's attack on limbo is the commission's identification of limbo as part of the common teaching of the Church.
De la Rocque shows that because infants can't perform moral acts, they must be "united to Christ in a purely passive manner, by the reception of sacramental baptism." He further summarizes the prominent view that infants who die without baptism, although they can't enter heaven, enjoy natural happiness and "are not aware of having missed any supernatural end." This point, however, deserves serious consideration. Ignorance is an evil. Therefore, to say, as de la Rocque does, that infants who die unbaptized remain in ignorance and consequently derive happiness from this ignorance is false. It's more likely that infants who die without baptism recognize their exclusion from the beatific vision, suffer from this deprivation, but nevertheless enjoy a certain happiness in the knowledge that their deprivation is just. While de la Rocque believes the infants would derive happiness from not knowing that they are deprived, I think it's more likely the infants would derive happiness from knowing their deprivation and its fairness, according to God's justice and Divine Providence. Ignorance isn't a boon. Ignorance is an evil, and it's always preferable to understand God's justice than to be ignorant of it.
Nonetheless, de la Rocque proceeds to show how the newfangled idea of universal salvation infects the commission's work. De la Rocque uncovers the simplicity and narrow-mindedness of the ITC. He summarizes their argument like this:
The reasoning is elementary: God wants to save everybody, and the only obstacle is personal sin; but infants do not have any personal sins, and so these infants are in heaven. Their logic is simple, yet it is false, because the major premise of the syllogism is false. It ignores original sin.
De la Rocque's analysis of the ITC's document provides a guide to the issue of unbaptized infants, and it also unmasks the imprudence of the ITC's methodology.
The SSPX is an order whose juridical status is currently under some scrutiny, but I don't think the diplomacy between the SSPX and the Vatican flavors de la Rocque's article. He gives a solid criticism of the ITC's document. In some places, he refrains from dismissing the commission on the basis of its structural impotence. For example, while he correctly explains that the ITC isn't a teaching organ of the Church but only an advisory committee, he passes up the obvious fact that some of the commission's members are women who have no magisterial authority as teachers of the faith. I mention this to urge judgment of the theological ideas on their merits, and not on the basis of the respective venues in which they appear.
