Automatic Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter KindredSoul
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

KindredSoul

Guest
I was just thinking…

So far as I know, the Church doesn’t normally baptize someone who doesn’t wish to be Catholic, even if that person (for whatever reason) really wanted to be baptized in the Catholic Church but somehow didn’t want to be Catholic.

However, by the same token, the Church teaches that baptism is normative for salvation. Therefore, in refusing someone a baptism, the person’s salvation might be seriously hindered, especially if they are never baptized as a result (can we really say baptism of desire counts when the person has no intention of ever becoming Catholic or getting baptized elsewhere? I know this situation is strongly hypothetical, but it’s not impossible).

I trust the Church’s policy, now and forever. However, my question is this:

Is this policy a rule, or a simple fact? I was thinking of something…the Church teaches that baptism in the Trinitarian formula automatically puts one in imperfect communion with the Church. Perhaps, then, we can say that baptism, when administered by a Catholic, simply automatically brings the baptized into full communion with the Church (maybe by virtue of the fact that the Catholic baptizer knows the full meaning of baptism). In other words, for a Catholic refuse baptism to someone who refused to become Catholic would be for his/her own good, as in being baptized they simply would become fully Catholic (whether they or the baptizer realized it) and thus be responsable for all the Church’s teachings…and therefore would not be in a very good spot if they go on with life not knowing they are responsable for those things.

As you can see, this makes it a supernatural fact (much in the same way as the male Priesthood) as opposed to a rule. I’m fairly certain that the Church hasn’t declared this; but does the theology of the Church at this point leave this open as a possible explanation for the Church’s policy?
 
Huh? Why would someone want to be baptized in the Catholic Church if he/she didn’t want to be a Catholic? Did I miss something?

Peace,
Linda
 
maybe they want to be baptised in a beautiful gothic church that happens to be a Catholic (ha). I know TONS of people who don’t want to be Catholic but have asked to use our church for weddings because of its beauty. Of course the answer is always Sure you can get married in our church. RCIA starts soon! As soon as you are fully recieved into the church well then marriage prep can begin!!! usually they leave so fast the door doesn’t close before they are in their car.
 
KindredSoul said:
I was just thinking…

So far as I know, the Church doesn’t normally baptize someone who doesn’t wish to be Catholic, even if that person (for whatever reason) really wanted to be baptized in the Catholic Church but somehow didn’t want to be Catholic.
Click to expand...
Explain to the person that, regardless of where they are baptized, they are being baptized into the Catholic Church.

The advantage of doing it inside an actual Catholic church is that you are taught the meaning of this great Sacrament, and you become eligible to receive the other Sacraments, too.
However, by the same token, the Church teaches that baptism is normative for salvation.
Click to expand...
Yes.
Therefore, in refusing someone a baptism, the person’s salvation might be seriously hindered, especially if they are never baptized as a result (can we really say baptism of desire counts when the person has no intention of ever becoming Catholic or getting baptized elsewhere? I know this situation is strongly hypothetical, but it’s not impossible).
Click to expand...
It would be very, very wrong to trick or coerce someone into being baptized, even though it is the normal means to get to Heaven. They (adults, or children over 7) have to understand what is going on, give their free consent, and be freely willing to live the Catholic life afterwards.
 
LindaS said:
Huh? Why would someone want to be baptized in the Catholic Church if he/she didn’t want to be a Catholic? Did I miss something?

Peace,
Linda
Click to expand...
That’s why it’s a very hypothetical situation. decn2b actually gave one very good common reason. Aside from that it’s not very uncommon for a nondenominational Protestant, who believes in the Protestant Invisible Church, to think it doesn’t matter where he or she is baptized, because all churches are the same in their view. Such a person would think it acceptable for any church to baptize them even if they wouldn’t join…which makes a large degree of sense within Protestantism, in most cases. One runs into a brick wall when speaking of crossing between the three “branches” of Christianity, since they’ve different understandings of what it means to be in Truth; hence of course the Church’s policy is not only right, but makes sense…I’m just trying to find a legitimate way to explain it to the satisfaction of such a person.

Jmcrae, I believe that your answer is perfectly suitable. So, let me make sure first I know what you mean. If I understand you correctly, then we can deduce that:
  1. Legitimate baptism anywhere makes a person Catholic by default…even though thanks to that person’s limited knowledge they may not realize it or live at all the Catholic Christian life (though they live the Christian life according to what they know it to be).
  2. Whenever someone doesn’t realize that fact, as a non-Catholic usually wouldn’t, they aren’t sinfully accountable for the error when they baptize someone and let them think they’re not thus Catholic, even though it is in fact still an error (you can’t be accused of deception when you don’t know you’re wrong, I suppose is what I’m saying).
BUT
  1. Whenever someone does realize that fact, as a Catholic would (or else is fully responsable for learning, I presume) then it would be the sin of major deception to baptize someone, allowing them to think it didn’t bring them into the Catholic Church, because in fact it does. Thus it would be wrong for a Catholic to apply baptism to such a person until they fully understand and believe the Truth, because to baptize them before then (even if they know the Catholic’s opinion but just disagree) is to legitimize their incorrect point of view.
Is is reasonable to say that what you’re saying yields these three points to be true, Jmcrae?
 
Thanks! I think that makes the most sense of all the ways anyone has explained it to me before! :clapping:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top