I have long proposed the notion that there's a theoretical possibility of a Limbo-like state for even adults even in the New Testament.

I distinguish between the undeserved gift of the Beatific Vision (the supernatural state) and the natural punishment for actual sin.

In re-reading St. Gregory nαzιanzen in rejecting Baptism of Desire, I find the following:

For not everyone who is not bad enough to be punished is good enough to be honored; just as not everyone who is not good enough to be honored is bad enough to be punished.
...
If desire in your opinion has equal power with actual baptism, then judge in the same way in regard to glory, and you may be content with longing for it, as if that were itself glory.

St. Gregory refers to the Beatific Vision as the "glory" and the "honor" ... as they are above our ability to merit and beyond our natural capacity.  So it's an honor above and beyond anything that can be merited by justice.

Notice how he says that not everyone who is not good enough to be honored is bad enough to be punished.

In my next post I will cite St. Ambrose on Valentinian.

So both St. Gregory and St Ambrose distinguish between:

glory vs lack of punishment

AND

crowning vs. washing

That's the same distinction I am making.  While the Beatific Vision cannot be earned and is beyond the created capacity of human nature to experience, it is given as a free gift by God irrespective of merit.  It cannot be earned, but is a pure honor, a pure glory.

Meanwhile, actual sin is punished, while actual virtue rewarded.

So much so that a martyr is completely washed.

So here's Ladislausian soteriology in a nutshell.

The Sacrament of Baptism has two aspects to it:  1) the forgiveness and cleansing of sins and 2) entry into the Kingdom of God, the beatific vision as adopted sons of God into the family of the Holy Trinity.

#1 is effected by the graces of the Sacrament, but #2 is conferred in receiving the character of Baptism (the crown and the glory)

#1 deals with actual sin vs. actual virtue, the reward and punishment fitting each in justice, while #2 refers to unmerited grace that is owed to no one

#1 pertains to justification, and #2 to salvation.  But BOTH #2 and #1 must be had for salvation, as someone with the character is lost if dying in a state of grave sin.

#1 is the NATURAL aspect and #2 the SUPERnatural

Recall how Our Lord taught that St. John the Baptist was the greatest of all born of women (in the natural respect, #1) but was less than the LEAST member of the Kingdom (note that word again).  Ladislausianism also addresses the enigma of what Our Lord meant by that puzzling statement.  Those born of women refers to nature, whereas those born again of God refers to super-nature.  So as great as one could be naturally, that can't come close to the least bit of supernatural goodness.

So a martyred catechumen receives the Baptism of Blood, a perfect washing, and enters a state of justification and goes to Limbo, to enjoy perfect natural happiness for this act of perfect natural virtue.

But a martyred baptized person goes straight to heaven, since all their actual / natural sins are washed also.

Those who have the character but have some actual sin to cleanse go to Purgatory until they are cleansed so that they can enter the Kingdom.

Those who ardently desire Baptism and live virtuously will also have some (or even all) of their actual sin and punishment due to sin remitted as well (which seems to be what St. Ambrose is hoping for Valentinian).

So there IS in fact a baptism of desire and a baptism of blood, but these are only effective toward the cleansing or the washing part of Baptism, but not the glory or honor or crowning part ... which requires the character of Baptism and therefore the Sacrament.

Here's another quote from St. Ambrose in Duties of the Clergy:

..for no one ascends into the kingdom of heaven except through the Sacrament of Baptism.

Since the greatest pain of the souls in Hell is the deprivation of the Beatific Vision, it would make more sense to put them in the "upper part" of Hell, where the suffering from the fire would be minimum than in Limbo with the infants who have no personal sin.
It sounds strange that those who die with personal and original sin should have a similar fate to those who have only original sin.
Highly speculative talk anyway.

It sounds strange that those who die with personal and original sin should have a similar fate to those who have only original sin.

A justified, unbaptized would have no personal sin, so the similar fate makes sense.

But, apparently, for BOD'ers, the hour of death is a walk in the park.  And any old non-catholic can "wish upon a star" for heaven, and be granted it, whether a priest is present or not.  Whether they've been baptized or not.

Pax, how are you any different than a Protestant? You are distorting the doctrine of baptism of desire and attacking a straw man. That is the same tactics Protestants use. 

Christ gave us an entire sacrament wholly dedicated to the last hours, yet a non-catholic can waltz into heaven, just based on a desire for God.

What catechism or theologian ever taught that "a desire for God" suffices for salvation?

Salvific-BOD theology has more holes than swiss cheese.  Sure, BOD can justify.  But can it save the unbaptized?  No, it just doesn't stand the test of catholic sanity.

What doesn't pass the Catholic sanity test is saying BOD can justify, but cannot save. What do you think it means to be justified?    

Notice, also, that St. Ambrose specifically limits this washing to martyred CATECHUMENS.