Reclaiming Our Children: A Blog About Healing After Abortion

Despair Versus Hope

Part 3: Trusting God's Mercy for
Unborn Children

By David C.
Reardon, Ph.D.

Editor's Note: In previous issues of The Post-Abortion Review
(Spring 1995 and Fall 1995) we examined the role of despair in driving
women and men toward choosing abortion and then in holding them back from
healing after an abortion. I have been reminded by readers that I had promised
at that time to provide a third installment dealing with the issue of how we
can have Scriptural confidence in the belief that aborted children are not
deprived the joy of Heaven.

Aborted children have been deprived of baptism. They never had the
opportunity to know or accept Christ as their Lord. How sure can we be that
they are really in Heaven? Though seldom discussed, this is a theological
question that is extremely important to the parents of aborted children and to
pro-lifers in general. The answer to this question will shape how we view
ourselves, others, and our priorities in the pro-life movement.

As previously discussed in this series of articles, a history of abortion
can be a major stumbling block for women and men who turn back to God. At
first, Satan will seek to deprive women and men the peace of God's forgiveness
by aggravating their fear that God cannot forgive them.. If this temptation to
despair fails, Satan will attack the repentant parent's peace of mind with the
fear that even if God can forgive them, their aborted and unbaptized children
have been deprived of Heaven.

This fear that unbaptized infants will be denied Heaven is also used by
Satan to build a wall of separation and prejudice between pro-lifers and women
and men with a history of abortion. Not a few Christians have coldly turned
their backs on women and men who have had abortions, believing that by their
sins they have forever deprived God of the souls of their unborn children. Such
Christians do not wish these parents ill, but they cannot quite bring
themselves to offer them comfort, either. Their hearts are simply so burdened
with dismay over the "lost souls" of aborted children that they have
no sympathy left over for their guilty parents. It is important for such
believers to open their hearts to the possibility, or even the convincing
evidence that God has saved the unborn victims of abortion.

A greater faith among believers in God's salvation of aborted babies is
important for two reasons. First, once all members of Christ's Body accept that
aborted babies "live in the arms of Christ," the lingering sense of
anger and resentment toward those who have aborted will finally be dissipated.
Second, as the dead are entrusted to God's providence, there will be a renewed
concern for the living–for those women and men who suffer the guilt of
abortion. It is then that our efforts to promote post-abortion healing will not
only be easier, they will also be more compelling.

The Issue: The Necessity of Baptism

The question of salvation for the unborn arises from an
interpretation of Christ's solemn pronouncement to Nicodemus that "no one
can enter into God's kingdom without being begotten of water and the
Spirit" (John 3:5). The necessity of baptism is further supported by
Christ's statement, "The man who believes in it [the good news] and
accepts baptism will be saved; the man who refuses to believe will be condemned"
(Mark 16:16). Note, however, that condemnation is pronounced for those who refuse
to believe. Nothing is said regarding those who have not had the opportunity to
believe. Indeed, we are also told that no one will be judged guilty simply
because of his or her ignorance (John 9:41).

What are we to make of this, then? Baptism by water is clearly the way God
has given the Church for bringing new members into His Body. When it can be
done, it ought to be done. However, God's mercy is not limited by human
failings, nor are His means limited by the physical reality which defines human
interaction. Indeed, it is clear in Scripture that God has at least one other
way of bringing sanctifying grace to those who have died without having the
opportunity to receive baptism by water.

The most obvious example of unbaptized persons who were saved is that of the
Old Testament saints, including the patriarchs, the prophets, and untold
others. For the sake of these departed, Christ went in death to preach to them
"in prison" (1 Peter 3:19) so that they "might live in the
spirit in the eyes of God" (1 Peter 4:6). Yet another example is shown in
the good thief, who followed Jesus into Paradise
(Luke 23:42-44) without the benefit of baptism by water.

In fact, early Christians generally recognized that martyrs who died for the
faith before they have the opportunity to be baptized are reborn in a baptism
by blood rather than water.⁽¹⁾
Baptism by either water or blood was recognized as having the same efficacy and
the same source. This view was defended by the prominent Christian apologist
Tertullian around 203 A.D., who wrote:

We have one and only one Baptism in accord with the Gospel (Eph. 4:4-6)….
[But there is] a second font, one with the former [water]: namely, that of
blood, of which the Lord says: "I am to be baptized with a baptism"
(Luke 12:50, Mark 10:38-39), when He had already been baptized [by water]. For
He had come through water and blood, as John wrote (1 John 5:6), so that He
might be baptized with water and glorified with blood. He sent out these two
Baptisms from the wound in His pierced side (John 19:34), that we might in like
manner be called by water and chosen by blood, and so that they who believed in
His blood might be washed by the water. If they might be washed in the water,
they must necessarily be so by blood. This is the Baptism which replaces that
of the fountain, when it has not been received, and restores it when it
has been lost.⁽²⁾
[Italics added.]

Tertullian's argument that baptism by blood can be a substitute for baptism
by water is further supported by the fact that Christ offered the sons of
Zebedee the baptism of suffering as one with the cup of salvation (Mark
10:38-39). Furthermore, Scripture tells us that before Christ's death, John's
baptism by water was only a baptism of repentance (Acts 19:4, Luke 3:3). It was
only after Christ's baptism in blood that the baptism of water was raised up to
become a baptism with the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5, John 16:7).

Clearly, then, the understanding that God has a means to save those who
through no fault of their own have been denied the opportunity of baptism by
water is not novel. Indeed, it is revealed by Scripture. Therefore, if we are
to properly interpret Christ's insistence on baptism by water, we must admit
that it is a binding command on the living, while recognizing that this precept
does not preclude God from offering some other spiritual means of rebirth for
those who die without this opportunity. What this way is has not been fully
revealed. On the other hand, since it is a spiritual baptism which is outside
the responsibilities of believers on earth, it is not something about which we
need to know the details. It is enough for us to know that it is possible. Once
this truth is recognized, we can
then confidently trust God's mercy and justice.

God's Special Love for Children

We know as part of our revealed faith that God desires the
salvation of all (1 Tim. 2:4, Rom. 8:32) and that His mercy endures forever
(Psalm 136). Though all are stained by original sin, all whom Christ claims for
Himself will live in Him (1 Cor. 15:22-23). That Christ should not claim the
unborn as His own is unimaginable, contrary to both reason and revelation.
Furthermore, Paul teaches that God's mercy and providence extend even to the
unborn, who have done neither good nor evil (Rom. 9:11), and Christ himself
repeatedly expressed His special love of infants and children.

And they brought unto him also infants, that he would touch them: but when
his disciples saw it, they rebuked them. But Jesus called them, and said,
"Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of
such is the kingdom of God" (Luke 18:15-16).

See how Jesus describes Heaven; it is filled with infants such as these! And
are not His words a warning against those who would forbid these children entry
into His heavenly kingdom? And look at yet another occasion:

[The disciples asked Jesus:] "Who is of greatest importance in the
kingdom of God?" He called a little child over and stood him in their
midst and said: "I assure you, unless you change and become like little
children, you will not enter the kingdom of God…. See that you never despise
one of these little ones. I assure you, their angels in Heaven constantly
behold my heavenly Father's face…. Just so, it is no part of your heavenly
Father's plan that a single one of these little ones shall ever come to
grief" (Matt. 18:1-2, 10, 14).

Other renderings of this last line are that none of these little ones should
ever "perish" or be "lost." These passages suggest a
promise of universal salvation for the innocents, for (1) they are numbered
among those of greatest importance in God's kingdom, (2) their angels pray for
them before the Father, and (3) the Father wills that none of them should be
lost. Notice also that the small child standing before Christ, to whom He
pointed as an example, was unbaptized.

Reason, too, demands our acknowledgment of God's saving grace for the
unborn. Christ's love is so great that He died to bring salvation to sinners
who deserve nothing (Romans 5:6-9). Yet, if He would save sinners like us,
would He not do at least as much, if not more, for the unborn who have not
sinned?⁽³⁾
Of course He would. Those who doubt it must defend the absurd notion that God's
judgments are less merciful than human judgments.

Theories of Salvation

While the method of salvation for the unborn is not
revealed, there are some theories which are useful to consider, remembering
always that these are only theories. Some Christian theologians speculate that
at the moment of death, God enlightens the minds of the "incompetent"
so that they can freely choose for or against Him. This possibility would be
analogous to the free choice for or against God which the angels made at the
time of their creation.

Others believe that children who die without formal baptism, or other
incompetents who are incapable of understanding or freely choosing baptism,
acquire salvation through a "vicarious baptism of desire"–that is,
through the desire of their parents, the Church, or someone else. Along these
lines, it is a common practice within the post-abortion healing movement to
encourage mothers and fathers of aborted children to offer a solemn prayer in
which they entrust their children to the care of Jesus. This is an important
part of the healing experience for many women and men. There have also been
reports of mystical experiences in which the dedication of the aborted child
was prompted by an interior voice of the Holy Spirit.⁽⁴⁾
Others who have prayerfully dedicated an aborted child to God have reported
remarkable healing for the mother, father, siblings or other relatives of the
aborted child who were not even aware that the prayer was made.⁽⁵⁾

The End of Limbo?

Another theory, which was once widely taught in Catholic
parochial schools, is that of Limbo. Contrary to popular belief, this theory
has never been a dogma of the Catholic Church. It has always been nothing more
than a theological speculation which offers one possible solution to the puzzle
of God's judgment of unbaptized innocents. Still, the idea of their aborted
children being confined to Limbo can be very troubling to Catholics and former
Catholics who were raised with this teaching. It is an important issue to
address then, even for many former Catholics.

According to the Limbo theory, God's justice precludes punishment of the
innocent, but the requirement of baptism precludes the unbaptized from enjoying
the actual presence of God, Heaven. Given these two constraints, one can
conclude that God must at least supply these souls with a place where they
enjoy a state of natural happiness, free of all suffering, where they would
lack only the beatific vision of God. This place would be analogous to the
place where the faithful who died before the coming of Christ awaited the
salvation of the Messiah. In theory, Limbo would be the same or a similar place
to that where Abraham and Lazarus were at rest (Luke 16:22) and to where to,
after his death, Christ went to preach and to bring the faithful who had gone
before into heavenly life (1 Peter 3:19, 4:6).

While Catholics are free to believe in Limbo, the official Catechism
encourages believers to hope for more, trusting that God has another means for
admitting unbaptized innocents into Heaven.⁽⁶⁾
Indeed, the teaching documents of the Catholic Church exclude any theory which
would hold that salvation of unbaptized innocents is not possible.⁽⁷⁾ Most
recently, in fact, Pope John Paul II has written in a major encyclical on abortion
that "nothing is definitively lost and you [the women and men who
have procured abortions] will also be able to ask forgiveness from your child, who
is now living in the Lord."⁽⁸⁾
[Italics added.] In short, while the Catholic Church does not teach the
salvation of aborted children as a dogmatic certainty, it strongly
encourages believers to hope for this, confident in God's mercy.

Finally, for those Catholics who might still choose to hold to the theory of
Limbo, I would offer two more observations. First, the story of Lazarus and
Abraham who communicating with the rich man in his place of torment (Luke
16:20-31) provides ample reason to believe that it is possible for the departed
souls to communicate with each other even if they are not in the same place.
This suggests that even if aborted children were confined to a
"Limbo," this would not necessarily mean that the parents of aborted
children could not communicate with, or even to visit, their unbaptized
children in Limbo.

Second, it is clear that Christ Himself is not confined to Heaven. This is
proven by the example of Christ's birth into the world and also by His
subsequent spiritual journey to preach in "prison" where the souls of
the faithful resided before His death on the cross (1 Peter 4:6). Christ has
personally attended to sinners and even the unsaved, both before and after
their deaths. Thus, while theologians might argue that unbaptized persons must
be denied entry into Heaven, they can never argue that Christ can be deprived
entry into Limbo.

Thus, even if God's justice somehow demands that unbaptized babies must be
denied the fullness of Heaven, in God's mercy these same souls could still rest
in the arms of Christ, if it is His desire to be with them. Furthermore, if
these aborted children are confined to Limbo yet "living in the
Lord," because Christ comes to them, we must also remember that, as
Christ told his apostles, "whoever has seen me, has seen the Father"
(John 14:9). So, even if the unbaptized are unable to see our Triune God, in
all his glory, face-to-face like the sun blazing in the fullness of the day, it
appears likely that in the face of Jesus they can at least enjoy the glory of
the dawn.

In short, we have circled back to our original argument: if the unbaptized
cannot go to Heaven to be with Christ, Christ can go to them . . . and in doing
so, bring Heaven with Him. And is this not the way in everyone's salvation? No
one is saved by the merits of his own deeds, not even by the act of baptism.
Our faith and salvation are always gifts from God. Baptism is one of His gifts.
In the final analysis, it is extremely hard to imagine that our Lord– who
Himself came into the world as an innocent baby– would have no gifts to offer
the innocent babies who have died to abortion.

The Holy Innocents

Nancyjo Mann, the founder of Women Exploited by Abortion,
once suggested that the slaughter of infants has always preceded the coming of
a savior. Infant boys were slaughtered by Pharaoh before the coming of Moses.
The infants of Bethlehem were slaughtered by Herod, who sought to prevent the
Messiah from gaining his throne. Perhaps, she speculated, the slaughter of
millions of babies by abortion throughout the world is a precursor to Christ's
return.

No one knows when the Second Coming will be (Mark 13:32). This prophecy
suggests that the moment we begin to feel certain that we do know, we are
almost certainly wrong (Mark 13:33). Throughout the ages, Christians have
looked at the world's sinfulness and said, "Certainly He will come to
judge us now." Our age is no different

Few Christians would doubt that the horrors of our generation demand
judgment. But while we should all pray for Christ's return tomorrow, we must
never neglect our task of building up His Kingdom today. Unfortunately, it is
not unusual to find some Christians who are so convinced that the Second Coming
is just around the corner that they have become complacent. Sadly, more than a
few Christians who support pro-life principles neglect to take a stand, much
less to make sacrifices, for the pro-life cause because they believe the world
is condemned. They feel we are powerless; therefore, we might just as well wait
for Christ's return. With the approach of the numerically significant year
2000, we sadly see more and more people submitting to the temptation to sit
down at the sidelines.

It is true; this sinful age, with its own slaughter of innocents, will not
be allowed to go on forever. God will not be mocked. So there are only three
possibilities: (1) Christ will return; or (2) God, who is the Lord of History,
will crush our modern civilization, adding its dust to the ruins of all the
other proud empires which have gone before us; or (3) to glorify God's own
Mercy, the Holy Spirit will conquer our love affair with death by bringing
about a time of awakening, healing, and spiritual renewal.

I do not know which of these God has ordained, His return, our culture's
destruction, or our culture's spiritual renewal. I do know that we, His
followers, can only contribute to the latter. This is our task now, as it was
from the beginning, to spread the good news of God's mercy and forgiveness.

But I have strayed a bit. My real reason for bringing up the Holy Innocents
who were slaughtered by Herod is that these children have been traditionally
considered as assured of heavenly repose by virtue of the fact that they died
in an attack on Christ. This was a form of martyrdom. They did not die in
defense of their faith, for they did not know it, but rather as victims of mass
murder directed against the Messiah.

If we believe the Holy Innocents are in Heaven, then this belief, too,
should encourage us to believe in the salvation of the unborn who die by
abortion. For whether Christ's return is imminent or not, abortion in our
culture is clearly the result of a diabolical attack on Christian values. In
the larger scheme of things, it is an attempt by Satan to usurp the Lord of
Life and install a Cult of Death. It is an attack against the Body of Christ,
His Church, which includes the vast majority of aborting women and men, who
belong to the Church by virtue of their own baptisms. In this attack on
Christ's body, unborn children are the innocent casualties. It is therefore
reasonable to assume that, like the Holy Innocents, they too are baptized in
their own blood, and, in this way, will be brought into a share of Christ's own
bloody baptism.

Conclusion

We must be confident of God's mercy, not only toward us, but
also toward the unborn. If God has mercy on anyone, certainly He will be
merciful with them.

Those who seek post-abortion healing must recognize that fears about the
salvation of their unborn children are a temptation toward despair– a
temptation which must be resisted. If they desire to be reunited with their
aborted children, they must not worry about the salvation of their children,
but rather about their own salvation, to which end they must build up lives of
faith, hope, and charity. Of these, the virtue of hope precludes doubts
about whether God will have mercy on their unborn children.

For those who seek an end to abortion, confidence in God's mercy toward the
children killed by abortion should undergird our efforts to minister to those
who have lost their children to abortion. By helping them to find spiritual
healing, we will be helping them to become instruments of God's will. As His
instruments, it is they, speaking with the wisdom of their own experiences, who
will bring an end to abortion. We must remember that this is their battle even
more than ours. They will fight it to honor the memory of the children they
have lost and to redeem their own honor. By helping them, especially by our
acceptance, understanding, and compassion, we will be helping to restore
respect for all human life.

Originally published in The PostAbortion Review 5(3) Summer
1997. Copyright 1997 Elliot Institute
Major portions of this article were previously published in Making
Abortion Rare: A Healing Strategy for a Divided Nation, and in The
Jericho Plan: Breaking Down the Walls Which Prevent Post-Abortion Healing, both
by David C. Reardon.

NOTES

1.    Cyprian, Letters, 72[73]:22
(A.D. 255).

2.     Tertullian, On Baptism,
15:1; 16:1-2 (A.D. 203).

3.     This type of a fortiori
argument, "If Y is true, then how much more likely that Z is true,"
was frequently used for teaching and theological deduction by Jesus and Paul.
See Matt. 7:11, 10:25, 12:12, Luke 11:13, 12:24, 28, Romans 11:12, 24, 1 Cor.
6:3, Heb. 9:14.

4.     Jack Hayford, I'll Hold You
in Heaven (Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 1990), 47.

5.     Dr. Kenneth McAll, Healing
the Family Tree (London: Sheldon Press, 1986), 27, 33, 34, 48, 52. McAll, a
Protestant who was initially resistant to "prayers for the dead," provides
a good discussion on the practices of the early Church regarding prayerful
committal of the dead and how these accord with Scripture. See pages 88-97.

6.     Catechism of the Catholic
Church, 1261.

7.     Vatican II documents,
reflecting on God's saving will, include the dogmatic statement that
"since Christ died for all (Rom. 8:32) … we must hold that the Holy
Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to
God, in the paschal mystery" (Gaudium et Spes, 22). This statement
would seem to weigh against the theory of Limbo. If an unborn child is denied
the opportunity of baptism by water, then "the possibility of being made
partners" in Christ's redemption must mean that some other means of
sanctification is available.

8.     John Paul II, Evangelium
Vitae (The Gospel of Life), 99.