October 7th, 2006

Pope Agrees with Mormon


For several centuries, Catholocism has decreed that unbaptized infants go to limbo, a quasi-hell that some believers think is temporary while others consider permanent.

Regarding infant baptism, Mormon has said:

Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is done away in me.
And after this manner did the Holy Ghost manifest the word of God unto me; wherefore, my beloved son, I know that it is solemn mockery before God, that ye should baptize little children.
Behold I say unto you that this thing shall ye teach—repentance and baptism unto those who are accountable and capable of committing sin; yea, teach parents that they must repent and be baptized, and humble themselves as their little children, and they shall all be saved with their little children.
And their little children need no repentance, neither baptism. Behold, baptism is unto repentance to the fulfilling the commandments unto the remission of sins. (Moroni 8:8-15,19-23)

And now, Pope Benedict XVI will be announcing that the Catholic church is to support such a doctrine:

[Limbo] was a widespread and influential teaching for centuries. But Pope Benedict XVI is expected today to reject the concept, endorsing the conclusions of a theological commission that said unbaptized children who die before reaching the age of reason go to heaven.


9 Responses to “Pope Agrees with Mormon”

  1. Robert
    October 7, 2006 at 7:02 pm #

    I hope I am not invading private cyberspace!!! I am not a member of the LDS Church, but I certainly have had LDS friends over the years, and when I was a teenager, a member of an LDS Boy Scout Troop. I tried to find a blog on Mormons and Mormonism, and this one was the only one listed that was not done by a disgruntled former member.

    I am an Episcopalian who taught in Roman Catholic Schools for years. And, of course, theological issues used to come up all the time. Due to the similarity of our faiths, I was allowed to prepare children for First Communion, which happens in the 2nd grade. The concept of purgatory and limbo have not been taught in Cathecism for over a generation now. No serious theologian in the Roman Church still believes in those concepts. They were dumped in the early 1960s as Vatican II began and the Catholic Church re-evaluated its place in the modern world.

    Even the topic of hell is pretty much avoided in formal Catholic religious education. The concept of infant baptism, which is still performed in both the Anglican and the Roman traditions, is viewed now as more of an entrance into the Christian family and tradition.

  2. Connor
    October 7, 2006 at 7:06 pm #


    Your comment is no intrusion at all! In fact, I thank you for helping to clarify the Catholic church’s history on this doctrinal issue. I was not aware that had been abandoned previously. Thanks for your input!

  3. Robert
    October 7, 2006 at 7:27 pm #

    Yes, those doctrines of purgatory and limbo really had their beginnings in the early middle ages. My church, the Episcopal Church (Church of England), commented they were “vain and foolish teachings, rather repugnant to the mind of God” in the First Book of Common Prayer. The early Christian Church radically changed after the reign of Constatine. During the First Century, we know that baptism was done only once a year, on Holy Saturday, the Saturday before Easter. It had to be done in “aquae vitae” (living water), which was interpreted as a river or ocean, or other moving water. It was considered so sacred, that converts were baptised only after a rigorous examination by a bishop; Constantine was not baptised until shortly before his death. The “sprinkling” we do became popular as infants were baptised and done as a practical matter.

    We do know from secular writings that converts studied for at least a year prior to baptism, and that every hair on their head had to be immersed in water. There’s a trend in the Episcopal church to return to baptism by immersion, and the conversion process had returned to long study and baptism for adults only on Holy Saturday..

  4. Dustin Davis
    October 9, 2006 at 8:21 am #

    I tried to find a blog on Mormons and Mormonism, and this one was the only one listed that was not done by a disgruntled former member.

    This is sad! Good LDS blogs can’t be found? We need to do some better SEO perhaps.

    It’s time to add to my blogroll I guess.

  5. Robert
    October 9, 2006 at 9:27 pm #

    Speaking of Mormon apostates, there was an Episcopal priest from Utah who spoke at a parish in Albany (California). He said he loved living around the Mormons, or “behind the Zion Curtain”. He did make one hilarious remark,though.

    “If you think Mromon Missionaries can be annoying, wait until you meet some of their apostates. ” It does amaze me how much rage some of your former members have.

  6. Connor
    October 9, 2006 at 9:37 pm #


    Yes, some people have an axe to grind when they leave the Church. On this note, I find Elder Parley P. Pratt‘s discourse humorous and significant:

    People have the privilege of apostatizing from this Church, and of worshipping devils, snakes, toads, or geese, if they please, and only let their neighbors alone. But they have not the privilege to disturb the peace, nor to endanger life or liberty; that is the idea. If they will take that privilege, I need not repeat their doom, it has been told here today, they have been faithfully warned.

    Why is it that these apostates wish to cram down people’s stomachs that which they loathe? That which they have no wish either to hear, think about,or digest? If the people of a neighborhood, ward, or city, wish to speak, hear, or worship, or to discuss any subject, they have public and private buildings, school houses, churches, or assembly rooms in abundance. Why, then, are our streets disturbed by tumults, railings, slanderous, abusive and treasonable language, under the name of preaching?

  7. Steve M.
    October 14, 2006 at 8:32 pm #

    I realize this is an older post (in internet time), but what the heck.

    Why can’t we be like the Catholics and just come out and say, “Hey, this doctrine isn’t really true, so we’re going to go on the record and make it officially false” about the black skin = curse teachings, Adam-God doctrine, etc.?

    I’m not trying to be smart or negative or critical. I’m just saying, why can’t we get an announcement at conference or a FP letter that officially puts such teachings in the “uninspired” category? That way at least anti-Mormons couldn’t say that we actually believe such stuff. Officially denouncing uninspired teachings seems like a better policy than just ignoring them and hoping that everybody forgets about them.

  8. Sarah
    April 18, 2009 at 8:21 pm #

    Actually, limbo was never officially “decreed” in the Catholic Church. It was a hypothesis, part of a theological debate that some taught as truth, but was never made doctrine. Also, in regards to the Episcopal religious ed teacher – I am sorry to hear your experience was so watered down. The Church, in fact, does teach clearly that hell exists and that baptism is a Sacrament necessary for salvation (not merely an entrance into the Christian family). It’s all in the catechism which can be read online: http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/ccc_toc.htm. I too am involved in religious ed, and in my location this is made clear. It’s important to remember that the way some schools or parishes may practice or emphasize different aspects of the faith is not necessarily reflective of the official doctrine or dogma of the faith.

  9. Cristofer Urlaub
    October 11, 2011 at 9:24 pm #

    Your link to the Chicago Tribune only leads me to the home page. Google just shows some quotes in forums. Did the article get retracted? Did the pope go through with rejecting this idea?

Leave a Reply

Leave your opinion here. Please be nice. Your Email address will be kept private.