Baptism as a child or adult?

[puzzleannie]

Which do you think is better, being baptized as a child to stick to traditional Catholic norms or being baptized as an adult-and why? Is one better than the other?

I think being baptized whenever are led to the faith by the action and example of others, including parents and sponsors and clouds of Christian witnesses, is the right time to be baptized. There is no either/or, better/worse/best. The right time to be baptized is the right time for you, when you are called and you respond, or those who speak for you as an infant respond for you. The traditional Catholic norm encompasses both infant and adult baptism so using “traditional Catholic” as a benchmark ignores huge chunks of Catholic history and practice. If you want to speak tradition, in the early Church it is whole families being received together at no matter what age, and fully initiated in one celebration which I feel should be the norm. This practice is preserved in the Eastern Churches, is actually older, and IMO should be restored. Full initiation for infants and adults, then catechesis, formation and development and nourishment of the Faith.

 

[puzzleannie]

OK so, what I am trying to ask here before you all depress me haha IS: wouldn’t experiencing baptism as an adult, meaning being fully aware of Gods awesome love and grace upon us be more meaningful to an individual than say receiving it as a baby that even though you are pardoned of Original Sin you aren’t aware of it? ?

the meaning and effects of the sacrament come from the action of Christ through the Holy Spirit, not through the experience and awareness of the candidate. Yes, and that by the way is the meaning of mystagogy, throughout the individual’s growth and faith formation after baptism he should be maturing in understanding and awareness of God’s awesome love and grace, but it is not a prerequisite for initiation through baptism and confirmation. We are intiated in order to become holy and because we seek God, not because we have become holy and have found God.

 

[Pious_Mat]

OK so, what I am trying to ask here before you all depress me haha IS: wouldn’t experiencing baptism as an adult, meaning being fully aware of Gods awesome love and grace upon us be more meaningful to an individual than say receiving it as a baby that even though you are pardoned of Original Sin you aren’t aware of it? And yes, I am a Catholic and maybe I’m just trying to ask questions here to look for guidiance from wise folks. Thank you for all who understand and aren’t trying to put me down by questioning my whole system. Aren’t we all a work in progress?

Bella:

I don’t want to put you down, and I agree that experiencing Baptism as an adult would be an awesome experience, but baptism removes Original Sin whether we realize it or not.

Also, baptism is necessary for salvation. “Baptism . . . now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body, but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 3:21; cf. Acts 2:38, 22:16, Rom. 6:3–4, Col. 2:11–12). Only baptised persons (whether by water, desire, or blood) go to Heaven, and if an unbaptised person gets to Heaven, it is literally by an Act of God–a miracle that was not promised us.

So why risk going Hell by delaying Baptism? This is why it is mortally sinful for parents to wilfully delay a child’s baptism beyond a reasonable timeframe. Theologians say that it is best to have them baptised within 8 days of being born. Many are baptised the same day they were born. My father was, and so was the Pope.

So although I agree baptism would a wonderful adult experience, you’d be out of luck if you died before then.

Best Regards,

Mat.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Well I don’t know if I can express myself clearly but I’ll try.

To me, baptism --the sacrament which I know as a Catholic woman-- is a washing away of the stain of original sin, and an entrance into membership of the body of Christ.

Therefore, if a child is born into a Catholic family, the purpose of baptism is to cleanse that child and bring him/her into full membership of the body of Christ.

The purpose is NOT to have the child (the infant, really) ‘experience the feeling of being baptised’ or to have him or her be ‘fully aware’ or ‘fully engaged’.

I mean, what then of those who are born mentally challenged? Should they not be baptized because they ‘won’t understand it fully?’ I don’t think so. . .

And likewise, if a person for whatever reason has reached an adult age and has not been baptized, that person should neither feel ‘deprived’ at not having had the chance to be baptized earlier, nor should that person feel that, being an adult, he or she is somehow getting ‘more’ from the baptism simply by being an adult. It isn’t the ‘experience’ of being baptised that is most important but the fruits of the baptism itself–that is, being cleansed from original sin and entering into the body of Christ.

Or so I believe.

 

[CBS]

OK no one seems to be able to answer my question.

If I am adult capable of making decisions and I am sincerely choosing the Catholic Church to be my home, am I valued less than a child that cannot make those decisions?

Again, what I’m getting at is If I choose to become a member of the Catholic Church and they have invalidated my Protestant baptism then why is my baptism put on hold until the the end of RCIA? Not only do you have to wait for RCIA to begin, then get through it, then receive the sacraments, which can be up to a years time. Death could also be possible during this time.

If the Catholic Church believes baptism is required for Salvation then why are adult converts capable of decision put on hold, but infants get baptism instantly?

 

[Pixie_Dust]

OK no one seems to be able to answer my question.

If I am adult capable of making decisions and I am sincerely choosing the Catholic Church to be my home, am I valued less than a child that cannot make those decisions?

Again, what I’m getting at is If I choose to become a member of the Catholic Church and they have invalidated my Protestant baptism then why is my baptism put on hold until the the end of RCIA? Not only do you have to wait for RCIA to begin, then get through it, then receive the sacraments, which can be up to a years time. Death could also be possible during this time.

If the Catholic Church believes baptism is required for Salvation then why are adult converts capable of decision put on hold, but infants get baptism instantly?

If you happen to die while you are in the process of seeking baptism, the Church calls that the “Baptism of Desire” and you would likely go to Heaven.

Most Protestant baptisms are considered valid by the Catholic Church, so long as water is used and the Triune formula - “I baptize you in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”

 

[canne]

OK no one seems to be able to answer my question.

If I am adult capable of making decisions and I am sincerely choosing the Catholic Church to be my home, am I valued less than a child that cannot make those decisions?

Again, what I’m getting at is If I choose to become a member of the Catholic Church and they have invalidated my Protestant baptism then why is my baptism put on hold until the the end of RCIA? Not only do you have to wait for RCIA to begin, then get through it, then receive the sacraments, which can be up to a years time. Death could also be possible during this time.

If the Catholic Church believes baptism is required for Salvation then why are adult converts capable of decision put on hold, but infants get baptism instantly?

If your protestant Baptism was done in the correct form it would not be invalidated. For a sacrament to be valid, three things have to be present: the correct form, the correct matter, and the correct intention. With baptism, the correct intention is to do what the Church does, the correct matter is water, and the correct form is the baptizing “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19).
There are exceptions to water baptism: It is possible to be saved through “baptism of blood,” martyrdom for Christ, or through “baptism of desire”, that is, an explicit or even implicit desire for baptism.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: “Those who die for the faith, those who are catechumens, and all those who, without knowing of the Church but acting under the inspiration of grace, seek God sincerely and strive to fulfill his will, are saved even if they have not been baptized” (CCC 1281; the salvation of unbaptized infants is also possible under this system; cf. CCC 1260–1, 1283).

 

[CBS]

Thank you for the answers.

I appreciate it.

 

[down_under]

Do you even know what you are talking about, regarding confirmation or infant baptism? I am FOR infant baptism- also infant confirmation, and infant First Communion.

okay I don’t know about this tirade you just went on or the personal insults to my intelligence. I don’t much care. nor am I part of, or concerned with, any other rite of the church. that sort of thinking has been behind the justification of many abuses in the Latin rite. the most notable in the married priest area. I am not trying to be inflamatory. but you insulted me. we are talking about baptism for infants or not for infants. the apostles said it was for infants just like the sign of the old covenant. Now I realize I mentioned confirmation in there. I did not intend to go way off topic to discuss it. I did however give the traditional view in the Latin rite. Which is what I thought we were discussing. Have a good day.

 

[down_under]

And here is a parish in Australia, all Catholic even though it is Maronite, where the initation sacraments are kept together or not deferred until the child is almost old enough to head to a tavern after to celebrate:
saintjoseph.org.au/Services.php?cat=show&id=37



And in the Diocese of Wollongong , children are confirmed at Year Six, which would be abut ten or eleven years old- not teenagers for sure.

And here is an article on confirmation from Catholic Weekly in Australia. it states that, indeed, confirmation and baptism were conferred on infants, and that confirmation and baptism are “double sacraments.”

the fact the confirmation and baptism are both sacraments of initiation is not an issue. baptism and confirmation being administered at the same time has never been the norm in the Latin rite. which is what we are disscussing. confirmation can be given to children at a younger age in the Latin rite if they prove they have a basic understanding of the faith. I don’t know about wollongong that is in another part of the country. and like I said it is not the NORM in the Latin rite. These days you can find a pairsh or two to support any idea so that does not prove anything. it did not make the women ordained on a boat priests. Nor does the support of a bishop make homosexual relationships a moral good. frankly I am interested in the norm of the Latin rite and so was the OP. have a nice day.

 

[puzzleannie]

the fact the confirmation and baptism are both sacraments of initiation is not an issue. baptism and confirmation being administered at the same time has never been the norm in the Latin rite. which is what we are disscussing. confirmation can be given to children at a younger age in the Latin rite if they prove they have a basic understanding of the faith. .

just a point of clarification, yes in the early Church baptism and confirmation at the same time, for infants or adults, was always the norm. the divorce between the timing–not the theology–of the sacraments had varying historical reasons at times and places in the Western Church.

I am still not clear if OP is questioning in general the Catholic practice of infant baptism as opposed to the practice of a few, not all, non-Catholic denominations of recognizing only adult baptism as valid. I am trying to address OP’s actual issues, but not sure they have been expressed or understood.

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

just a point of clarification, yes in the early Church baptism and confirmation at the same time, for infants or adults, was always the norm. the divorce between the timing–not the theology–of the sacraments had varying historical reasons at times and places in the Western Church.

I am still not clear if OP is questioning in general the Catholic practice of infant baptism as opposed to the practice of a few, not all, non-Catholic denominations of recognizing only adult baptism as valid. I am trying to address OP’s actual issues, but not sure they have been expressed or understood.

You are right, annie.

down under, you flamed me and you attacked me, by dismissing me with your statement that if the pope decides to change infant baptism, he will let me know. You said I did not agree with infant baptism- not true, I wholeheartedly support it. You said that the Latin Church never administered confirmation and baptism together. Your very own newspaper right there in Sydney said baptism and confirmation used to be administered together. I gave you the facts, and quoted my sources, in regards to infant confirmation. You could not supply me with facts for your assertion that the Latin Church never administered bapitsm and confirmation together for infants.

Please, let’s stick to the topic of the thread- Which is the OP’s question on adult vs. infant bapitsm.

 

[AHapka]

yes it would be that is why the catholic church (read the apostles) came up with confirmation.

Actually, the church didn’t come up with any of the Sacraments.

All Sacraments come from God alone. The church has no power to add new ones or subtract from the existing ones.

Also worth noting: while God is not bound by the Sacraments, we are. That’s why I come down on the side of infant baptism. After all, my daughter died five minutes after being baptised. If I would have said “let’s wait till she’s an adult, in case she lives that long” I would have had many sleepless nights…

 

[Tracy07]

Hi all i would say infant baptism as i did with my children though i had to wait until my children were around 18 months of age because father was ill and could not physically do much i would have preferred them to be baptised very very small but this was out of my control.
In my case however i wish my parents had waited so i could choose purely because i was baptised CofE and brought up catholic, as my mother remarried into a catholic family and this is the way ive been brought up.
I went to a CofE school but attended a catholic church for mass every week so as you can imagine at times it could get very confusing for me, i always knew however i wanted to become a catholic and this year i achieved this, i finally made it home this easter.
My children have been brought up in the catholic faith from day one so their is no confusion on their part, when i was around 8 i wanted to become catholic but the priest at the time said no you need to wait to decide later when you can fully understand what it means, i was so upset at the time but now understand what he did was the best thing possible, because going through my RCIA classes and finally becoming who i wanted to be means so much more because i fully understand how precious it is.x

 

[down_under]

You are right, annie.

down under, you flamed me and you attacked me, by dismissing me with your statement that if the pope decides to change infant baptism, he will let me know. You said I did not agree with infant baptism- not true, I wholeheartedly support it. You said that the Latin Church never administered confirmation and baptism together. Your very own newspaper right there in Sydney said baptism and confirmation used to be administered together. I gave you the facts, and quoted my sources, in regards to infant confirmation. You could not supply me with facts for your assertion that the Latin Church never administered bapitsm and confirmation together for infants.

Please, let’s stick to the topic of the thread- Which is the OP’s question on adult vs. infant bapitsm.

okay now you are getting emotional and a little out of control. I am not flaming you. you flamed me. no I have never know anytime when in the Latin rite baptism and confirmation were adminstered together. even in biblical times they were seperate things. How am I suspose to quote a source for something that never happened. come on now. you are getting real excited over nothing here. P.S. I have never put to much stock in news papers and magizine articles. They tend to be history from the eye of the writer who tends to make history say whatever he wants. If you have another source something a little more trust worthy I am all ears. and as to sticking to topic YOU brought us down this road. I mentioned that a while back as I recall. I am not angry or even emotional so I suggest you calm down a notch. peace

 

[down_under]

Actually, the church didn’t come up with any of the Sacraments.

All Sacraments come from God alone. The church has no power to add new ones or subtract from the existing ones.

Also worth noting: while God is not bound by the Sacraments, we are. That’s why I come down on the side of infant baptism. After all, my daughter died five minutes after being baptised. If I would have said “let’s wait till she’s an adult, in case she lives that long” I would have had many sleepless nights…

amen. I agree. and thank you for splitting such a fine hair just to cut me once before you put in your two sense. It was the church who had to define and clarify through the power and athority of the holy spirit exactly what they were and how they were used. Christ established them and the apostles with the help of the Holy Spirit fleshed them out, and brought them into the fullness of being we see today. Glad to here you baby is in heaven.

 

[down_under]

Hi all i would say infant baptism as i did with my children though i had to wait until my children were around 18 months of age because father was ill and could not physically do much i would have preferred them to be baptised very very small but this was out of my control.
In my case however i wish my parents had waited so i could choose purely because i was baptised CofE and brought up catholic, as my mother remarried into a catholic family and this is the way ive been brought up.
I went to a CofE school but attended a catholic church for mass every week so as you can imagine at times it could get very confusing for me, i always knew however i wanted to become a catholic and this year i achieved this, i finally made it home this easter.
My children have been brought up in the catholic faith from day one so their is no confusion on their part, when i was around 8 i wanted to become catholic but the priest at the time said no you need to wait to decide later when you can fully understand what it means, i was so upset at the time but now understand what he did was the best thing possible, because going through my RCIA classes and finally becoming who i wanted to be means so much more because i fully understand how precious it is.x

welcome home. glad you came.

 

[Tracy07]

welcome home. glad you came.

Thankyou so much thats really nice of you im very glad im home at last.
x

 

[athenaluvsdoves]

I have a 5 year old son who hasn’t been baptized yet. I am not yet a Catholic. Can I have my son baptized or would I have to wait until I take RCIA classes and then Easter 2009?

Also, I was baptized Catholic as a baby but my parents become Protestants when I was four. I got baptized again in the Protestant church a few years ago. Do I have to show proof of one of these baptisms before I become Catholic?If so,which one?

Thank you for your help!

 

[EasterJoy]

OK so, what I am trying to ask here before you all depress me haha IS: wouldn’t experiencing baptism as an adult, meaning being fully aware of Gods awesome love and grace upon us be more meaningful to an individual than say receiving it as a baby that even though you are pardoned of Original Sin you aren’t aware of it? And yes, I am a Catholic and maybe I’m just trying to ask questions here to look for guidiance from wise folks. Thank you for all who understand and aren’t trying to put me down by questioning my whole system. Aren’t we all a work in progress?

I think this would be a little like gaining vision and sight as an adult, having been born blind and deaf. It would be tremendously moving, but you would have also missed your formative years, years when you would have learned to visually recognize letters and shapes and picked up oral language and music, not to mention missing out on all the other beauties discernible through eyesight and hearing. They would be cut off from a whole world. A child who could have been baptized, but was not, might well ask: Mom! Dad! What were you thinking?

Likewise, a Catholic child baptized shortly after birth gains the advantage of living our faith during our formative years, when our faith is not so much all in our heads. We learn by living that faith is life. Faith is not something that adults do. It is not something in the head. It is in the soul. Even though it develops, faith is something we are capable of living from our baptism. By Jesus’ admonition that we all must become like children, it could be argued that children know how to live it better than older people do. I know that there are Protestants who think it is better that this be the child’s decision, but this makes the assumption that there is some other life to choose, whereas the choice in baptism is between grace and sin: which is to say, between life and death.

Now, it is sadly true that there are parents who have their child baptized at birth and then do nothing to nurture or nourish that faith. This is like taking a child with vision and hearing and throwing them in a dark silent room to grow up, and never talking to them. Just as you can ruin the development of normal eyesight and hearing by neglect and deprivation, so it is with faith. If a child like this were to awaken to his or her faith as an adult, they might be like someone gaining their sight for the first time. If they don’t, they might assume that sight and hearing are not senses that they need, that having had those senses is pointless. This is tragic, but it happens.

This is not a great analogy, since faith is more than eyesight or hearing, but rather life itself…but if you extrapolate, you can get my meaning. A child should not just be baptized in infancy, but should be surrounded by life saturated in faith from infancy, too.