Pope Innocent III , 1198-1216

"We say that a distinction must be made, that sin is twofold: namely, original and actual: original, which is contracted without consent; and actual which is committed with consent. Original, therefore, which is committed without consent, is remitted without consent through the power of the sacrament; but actual, which is contracted with consent, is not mitigated in the slightest without consent. . . . The punishment of original sin is deprivation of the vision of God, but the punishment of actual sin is the torments of everlasting hell" (DZ 410)

COUNCIL OF LYONS II 1274

Ecumenical XIV, Under Pope Gregory X

"The souls of those who die in mortal sin or with original sin only, however, immediately descend to hell, yet to be punished with different punishments" (DZ 464).

Pope John XXII in his letter "Nequaquam sine dolore" to the Armenians, 1321

"It (The Roman Church) teaches. . . . . that the souls . . . . . of those who die in mortal sin, or with only original sin descend immediately into hell; however, to be punished with different penalties and in different places" (DZ 493a).

COUNCIL OF FLORENCE 1438-1445

Ecumenical XVII, Under Pope Eugenius IV

"Moreover, the souls of those who depart in actual mortal sin or in original sin only, descend immediately into hell but to undergo punishments of different kinds" (DZ 693).

Pope Pius VI condemns the rejection of limbo by the Synod of Pistoia in the Constitution "Auctorem Fidei", 1794 saying

"The doctrine which rejects as a Pelagian fable, that place of the lower regions (which the faithful generally designate by the name of the limbo of children) in which the souls of those departing with the sole guilt of original sin are punished with the punishment of the condemned, exclusive of the punishment of fire, just as if, by this very fact, that these who remove the punishment of fire introduced that middle place and state free of guilt and of punishment between the kingdom of God and eternal damnation, such as that about which the Pelagians idly talk,--false, rash, injurious to Catholic schools" (DZ 1526).

My question is, if limbo is not a doctrine, then what weight do these pontifical and conciliar statements carry? Is the International Theological Commission's assesment of limbo superior in doctrinal authority to the words of two different Ecumenical Councils, and three Pontiffs?