Baptism Confusion

[kathlyn_egbert]

I was baptised as an infant in METHODIST church, then again as an adult in the BAPTIST church (which does not recognize infant baptism). Both were Trinitarian, but the Baptist church does NOT believe it is for remission on sin. I believe BOTH are recognized as valid by the Catholic church. Here’s my problem: at CONFESSION i have only confessed my sins since my ADULT baptism. Should i be confession by sins since my INFANT baptism? OR maybe be baptised again in the Church? There is a serious sin on m conscience that i have THOUGHT was covered in my adult baptism, but now i wonder if it isn’t…
thanks so much

 

[FrDavid96]

I was baptised as an infant in METHODIST church, then again as an adult in the BAPTIST church (which does not recognize infant baptism). Both were Trinitarian, but the Baptist church does NOT believe it is for remission on sin. I believe BOTH are recognized as valid by the Catholic church. Here’s my problem: at CONFESSION i have only confessed my sins since my ADULT baptism. Should i be confession by sins since my INFANT baptism? OR maybe be baptised again in the Church? There is a serious sin on m conscience that i have THOUGHT was covered in my adult baptism, but now i wonder if it isn’t…
thanks so much

Since Baptism cannot be repeated, the second attempt at baptism meant nothing. A first-time baptism in a Baptist community is usually a valid baptism, but a second baptism is never valid.

Simply mention the sin in your next confession. Since you did not intentionally hold it back, but instead held it back because of a misunderstanding that the Baptist attempt at baptism had some kind of effect, it was not a problem before. Remember that when you go to confession, and receive absolution, all past sins are forgiven and absolved. Only if it’s a serious sin, and you later remember it (or in this case, later learn that you needed to confess it) should you mention sins from before past-confessions.

 

[Mintaka]

Re: no effect

It’s always possible that the OP had perfect contrition with regard to her sins before her adult “baptism”, since she was seeking to have forgiveness of sin. God works with whatever humans give Him.

So don’t worry yourself sick about your old sin, but do bring it up at your next Confession. And since it’s bothering you, go to Confession soon and get it off your chest. That way, you know for sure that you’ve dealt with it.

 

[sckcd]

I am sort of in the same boat. I was baptized in a First Christian Church at age 11. I chose to be, but did it because I felt like I “was supposed to”. I remember feeling nothing about it. It seemed more like a rite of passage than anything. You could say that I didn’t really understand the whole meaning of it. Years later as an adult, I felt like I needed a more “valid” baptism. I talked with my pastor and explained how I didn’t feel that my baptism was valid, as I felt like I had just gone through the motions. So I asked to be baptized again since I know knew what it meant and was ready to really live as a Christian. I had also backslid as a Christian in my teen years until around age 25, so I felt like I needed to start anew with a real sense of repentance and forgiveness.

I feel like my 2nd baptism was more valid to me, personally, bc/ I understood better what forgiveness, sin, and being a Christian stood for (in a Protestant sense). While the CC recognizes 1 baptism, it’s not uncommon for some Protestants to be baptized twice if they didn’t feel like they really understood what it was about the 1st time around, which therefore makes it invalid since baptism to us means a conscience decision to repent, accept Jesus as your savior, and identify yourself as a Christian. I have heard of other people (various denominations) who also felt this way. I guess that’s why many Protestants encourage baptism at older ages so they don’t second guess it and feel confident they understand it.

And of course, since baptism is viewed by most Protestant churches in a different way than the Catholic church, I think it would just be clearer to be properly baptized in the Catholic church upon converting. However, I have been told the CC holds any baptism valid as long as it’s done in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, no matter who performs it.

If I choose to convert this year after completing RCIA, I feel conflicted, too, on which baptism to “use” as my real one. If having full knowledge and consent doesn’t matter to the CC, then my first one at age 11 is valid. If it’s the one that I feel meant something, the 2nd one is okay. So I don’t know which one I’d have to confess as far back to, either.

I am pretty confused about it, I admit.

 

[FrDavid96]

I am sort of in the same boat. I was baptized in a First Christian Church at age 11. I chose to be, but did it because I felt like I “was supposed to”. I remember feeling nothing about it. It seemed more like a rite of passage than anything. You could say that I didn’t really understand the whole meaning of it. Years later as an adult, I felt like I needed a more “valid” baptism. I talked with my pastor and explained how I didn’t feel that my baptism was valid, as I felt like I had just gone through the motions. So I asked to be baptized again since I know knew what it meant and was ready to really live as a Christian. I had also backslid as a Christian in my teen years until around age 25, so I felt like I needed to start anew with a real sense of repentance and forgiveness.

I feel like my 2nd baptism was more valid to me, personally, bc/ I understood better what forgiveness, sin, and being a Christian stood for (in a Protestant sense). While the CC recognizes 1 baptism, it’s not uncommon for some Protestants to be baptized twice if they didn’t feel like they really understood what it was about the 1st time around, which therefore makes it invalid since baptism to us means a conscience decision to repent, accept Jesus as your savior, and identify yourself as a Christian. I have heard of other people (various denominations) who also felt this way. I guess that’s why many Protestants encourage baptism at older ages so they don’t second guess it and feel confident they understand it.

And of course, since baptism is viewed by most Protestant churches in a different way than the Catholic church, I think it would just be clearer to be properly baptized in the Catholic church upon converting. However, I have been told the CC holds any baptism valid as long as it’s done in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, no matter who performs it.

If I choose to convert this year after completing RCIA, I feel conflicted, too, on which baptism to “use” as my real one. If having full knowledge and consent doesn’t matter to the CC, then my first one at age 11 is valid. If it’s the one that I feel meant something, the 2nd one is okay. So I don’t know which one I’d have to confess as far back to, either.

I am pretty confused about it, I admit.

Remember that baptism cannot be repeated–no matter what certain non-Catholic groups might believe. Only the first baptism was a real and valid baptism. The second one was not a Sacrament, and in fact, it wasn’t even a baptism. It could not be since you were already baptised.

You won’t necessarily need to confess every sin since the first one–not in the sense of mentioning each sin individually. That would not even be possible. Instead you will need to have contrition for those sins and allow the graces of the Sacrament of Confession to truly free you from the sins through forgiveness & absolution. If you are conscious of any very serious sins (to give an extreme example: murder) you would need to confess them. But someone in your situation should not worry about mentioning each sin, but instead should mention them in a general way such as “for all the sins I committed since baptism at age 11.”

I do hope this helps a little.

 

[sckcd]

Thanks, I will be sure to discuss this with our priest.

 

[JohnMPhilomena]

Remember that baptism cannot be repeated–no matter what certain non-Catholic groups might believe. Only the first baptism was a real and valid baptism. The second one was not a Sacrament, and in fact, it wasn’t even a baptism. It could not be since you were already baptised.

You won’t necessarily need to confess every sin since the first one–not in the sense of mentioning each sin individually. That would not even be possible. Instead you will need to have contrition for those sins and allow the graces of the Sacrament of Confession to truly free you from the sins through forgiveness & absolution. If you are conscious of any very serious sins (to give an extreme example: murder) you would need to confess them. But someone in your situation should not worry about mentioning each sin, but instead should mention them in a general way such as “for all the sins I committed since baptism at age 11.”

I do hope this helps a little.

FrDavid96 is of course correct. I too was baptized as a Methodist at age 10. It doesn’t matter what I believed at the time, it is a valid baptism. Just like an infant does not need to understand in order to be baptized. A year ago at age 51 I converted to the catholic church thanks to the prayers of my wife and children (and the intercession of our Blessed Mother amd St Philomena.

I did my best at my first confession, but afterwards I thought of things I unintentionally missed. My heart told me I was already forgiven, but I still confessed them the next time anyway. I still think of things from the past to confess and so I do.

To me it’s all part of the purification of my soul.

John Marie Philomena

 

[kathlyn_egbert]

I sincerely THANK each one of you who responded to my confusion on the BAPTISM issue. Was happy to be clear on it, both DOCTRINALLLY and also subjectively. I feel total peace about what i need to do now. I plan to confess the two “biggies” that are on my conscience and GENERALLY, as suggested “those venial sins committed since baptism as an infant.” and continue in the future to do the same if others present themselves in the examination of m conscience.
Bless all of you…
kathy