When the Catholic Church floated the idea of abolishing the doctrine of limbo, I didn’t realize that it weakens the ritualistic underpinnings of baptism.

Yet in the absence of limbo, some theologians have noticed, the rite of baptism may not seem as imperative to many Catholics as it once appeared. Despite its continued centrality as the sacramental entry to the body of Christ, some of its ASAP urgency will presumably fade. Indeed, the expected limbo ruling comes in addition to an older decision that appeared to downgrade baptism’s gatekeeping role. The Second Vatican Council of 1962-65 ruled that in the case of some adult seekers of God–even non-Christians–the desire for the divine could take the place of the rite. Or, as the author of the 2002 book God and the World noted, “men who are seeking for God and who are inwardly striving toward that which constitutes baptism will also receive salvation.” The writer was, again, [former Cardinal, and now Pope Benedict XVI,] Ratzinger.

In the scheme of this belief system, it makes sense. If an unbaptized innocent is going to heaven anyway, then there’s no “limbo-guarding” necessary.

Then again, there is original sin, which would consign an unbaptized newborn to hell. But it can’t be that simple, or else the concept of limbo would never have come about in the first place. I’m sure the notion of infant damnation was unsentimental enough to prod theologians into devising an alternative.