Baptism by Force?

  • Thread starter Thread starter metal1633
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

metal1633

Guest
An evangelical I was speaking to equated infant baptism with performing a baptism by force on an adult because no free will is involved in the recipient. I honestly dont know how to answer. They are inherantly differant situations but he argues they are not.

What should I say??
 
40.png
metal1633:
An evangelical I was speaking to equated infant baptism with performing a baptism by force on an adult because no free will is involved in the recipient. I honestly dont know how to answer. They are inherantly differant situations but he argues they are not.

What should I say??
Click to expand...
MEMBERSHIP IN THE CHURCH

The Sacrament of Baptism incorporates a person into the Church founded by Christ. What does this mean? In the words of the Second Vatican Council, it means that “All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church.”

Here we must distinguish. Every validly baptized person belongs to the Catholic Church no matter how unaware the person may be of belonging to the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church militant here on earth. However, we distinguish between belonging to the Church and being a member of the Church founded by Jesus Christ. To be an actual member of the Catholic Church, the baptized person must also be ready to profess what the Catholic Church teaches, and accept her laws and obligations with an open heart.

To belong to the Catholic Church further means that Baptism is the door to obtaining such graces as only baptized persons have a claim to. Certainly the Church is the universal sacrament of salvation and sanctification. All the graces that anyone receives from God are channeled through the Catholic Church. Those who are baptized have a special right to these graces to which no one else has a claim.

stole this from…catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0285.html
 
During the Crusades, some captured infidels were forcibly held down and baptized against their will; these baptisms were later held to be invalid. Other captured infidels were threatened with death unless they agreed to be baptized; in this case, the baptisms of those who agreed were held to be valid.
 
I enjoy responding to this with:

“Why aren’t you going around complaining that we are cutting babies’ umbilical cords without their free consent? Shouldn’t we wait until they’re old enough to decide for themselves?”

“That’s a matter of basic care for the health and well being of the baby.”

“So is this.”

Josh
 
Where as I fully agree with SG, I also understand that your friend will not listen to that argument. I know this because I am the only Catholic among my brothers and sisters.

First of all, with Evangelicals love to argue and (of the ones I have delt with) feel they must prove their point and if you do not agree with them then you are going to Hell. Here is what you should do next time.

Start off by saying, “I can understand how you might feel that way.” This will work for most evangelicals arguments and take the wind out of their sails.

On the issue of baptism, I explain it like this,“The Infant Baptism Ceremony is not for the child, it is for the parents and God-parents. The adults stand before the Church and and promise to raise the child in the Catholic faith and Christian love teaching the child the lessons that Christ has taught us all.”

Lets stop and peal Space Ghost off the ceiling …😃 continue…

John the Baptist said, "I baptise with water, the one who will come after me will baptise with the Holy Spirit.

It is though the Scrament of Conformation that the individual decides to follow the teachings of the Church and asks the Lord for the Baptism (anointing) of the Holy Spirit.
 
A Church of Christ friend of mine said something similar. She stated that when she reads the Gospels, she does not see where Christ imposed Himself on anyone, and therefore infant baptism rubs against her gospel-formed conscience. My response to her was that Christ DID impose Himself on people in the Gospels. He imposed both his MERCY as evidenced by the woman taken in adultery, as well as His JUDGMENT, as evidenced by his thorwing the money chargers out of the temple. Plus, He imposed both that mercy and judgment whether the sinner asked for it or not. The Sacrament of baptism offers that same mercy, but it does not negate our cooperation with the sacrament, and our cooperation does entail free will. Someone else can probably offer a better explanation, but my answer seemed to satisfy my friend.

In Christ
Fiat
 
Ok Good replies so far. BUT…

The Church teaches Baptismal Regeneration and also teaches that the Sacraments are in and of themselves Efficacious in imparting Gods Grace. So when Baptism is performed on an Infant, Grace is imparted apart from the willful consent of the child. When an adult is baptized against their willful consent, WHY is Grace NOT imparted?

My answer is that for thoise who CAN make the choice then that choice is required. But for those who cannot make that choice then one who is responsible for those choices (parents, guardians) must make that choice for them.

But my freind insists there is still no distinction. He is either bing intentionally obtuse or he just doesnt see the differance. I would like to be able to make the distinction clear.
 
40.png
metal1633:
Ok Good replies so far. BUT…

The Church teaches Baptismal Regeneration and also teaches that the Sacraments are in and of themselves Efficacious in imparting Gods Grace. So when Baptism is performed on an Infant, Grace is imparted apart from the willful consent of the child. When an adult is baptized against their willful consent, WHY is Grace NOT imparted. Or is it?
Click to expand...
It would seem that, being beyond the age of reason and, presumably, more entrenched in personal sin, an adult would more have the will and inclination to resist grace, while a small infant would not.
 
Grace that is imparted in baptism may be rejected. It is a gift that can be refused.

The baptism hang-up by protestants is the contextual problem they have with other areas of the faith. And the baptism controversy is typically used in a derogratory way to undermine the Church.

Remember, every protestant must become their own expert interpreter of the Bible. They wobble around most issues of faith until they put their trust in the Church to guide understanding.
 
NAB LUKE 10:13

People were bringing their little children to him to have him touch them, but the disciples were scolding them for this. Jesus became indignant when he noticed it and said to them: "Let the children come to me and do not hinder them. It is to just such as these that the kingdom of God belongs."

Circumcision brought you into the Old Testment Covenant with God. Circumcision did not garantee you would Spiritually live after death. God was greatly offended if a child was not circumcised on the eight day of life.

Baptism brings you into the New Testament Covenant with God. Baptism does not garantee you will go to heaven. Let the babies come to Jesus. “It is to just such as these that the kingdom of God belongs.”

Peace in Christ
Steven Merten
ILOVEYOUGOD.com
 
I suppose you have to ask your Baptist friend is he beleives that faith can ever be vicarious.

We Catholics believe that, once one has atained the use of reason, he must supply his own faith to be baptized (this faith, of course, is itself a gift from God).

However, for someone below the age of reason, vicarious faith suffices. And, contrary to popular belief, this vicarious faith is not the faith of the parents or grandparents (since these can be imperfect or even absent at the moment of baptism), but of the Church herself.

The notion of vicarious faith is certainly a Biblical one.
 
I just ask if they take their own children to church. If so do they get their consent? Do they let their 10 year old say he won’t go? All parents then “force” their kids to go to church, go to school, eat their veggies, go to the doctor etc. It is not wrong for Catholics to raise their children as Catholics. In fact it sounds like they want to raise our children in their religion first.
 
40.png
Chuck:
Grace that is imparted in baptism may be rejected. It is a gift that can be refused.

The baptism hang-up by protestants is the contextual problem they have with other areas of the faith. And the baptism controversy is typically used in a derogratory way to undermine the Church.

Remember, every protestant must become their own expert interpreter of the Bible. They wobble around most issues of faith until they put their trust in the Church to guide understanding.
Click to expand...
I was born/rasied in a Lutheran church. They baptized infants, as do many other protestant churches. Some do not, but still christen or dedicate, which is using the exact same format, but using the word ‘dedicate’ instead of ‘baptize’.

The general thought is that one should be baptized after confession, much in the same way that priests would wash their hands and feet in the bronze laver, after a sacrifice at the bronze altar for repentance, symbolizing the cleansing. First confession, then a physical/public representation. John’s baptism is no different. ‘Repent’ and then ‘be baptized’ for repentance.

Many protestant view baptism found in such passages as Acts 2:38 to not equate Johns baptism by water, but Jesus baptism of Spirit when Spirit gives birth to spirit, and we are born again. (John 3, 1 Peter 1)

I cannot speak for all ‘protestants’ however, I can asure you that while there may be a difference in understanding, there is nothing derogatory in my heart towards you.

Also, your last paragraph leaves much to be desired. I will presume that the generalizations you made are not absolute in your heart.

Peace
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top