[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They taught us in Catholic school that unborn children get the benefit of the doubt. Seems a bit wishy-washy to me, but after the stuff about pedophile priests, they're trying to look good
[/ QUOTE ]
They taught you wrong. From
Answers
The Church also recognizes two other forms of baptism: "baptism of blood" and "baptism of desire." Baptism of blood refers to unbaptized individuals who are martyred for the Faith, while baptism of desire refers to catechumens who die before they can be baptized. The Catechism of the Catholic Church describes these two forms:
The Church has always held the firm conviction that those who suffer death for the sake of the faith without having received Baptism are baptized by their death for and with Christ. This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament. (1258)
For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit desire to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament. (1259)
As for unbaptized infants, the Church is unsure of thier fate; "the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God" (Catechism, 1261).
Stu
[/ QUOTE ]
As I see it, all possible actions create an issue that compromises God's integrity, or justice, or something in some way.
If the baby goes to hell, it was not given its fair chance to accept Christ. God created the soul with knowledge that it wouldn't even get to choose, and would burn. God is clearly malevolent in this condition.
If the baby goes to Heaven, it becomes strategically correct to abort babies to ensure their salvation. More fairness issues.
I think most people disagree the idea of limbo, and I'd like to call this a non-option. Same with reincarnation.