Baptism in the womb?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nominefili
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nominefili

Guest
I was reading the Ask an Apologist section and came across this:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=391048

I was a little put off by the priest’s assertion that it was ‘crazy’ to want to baptize a child before he/she is aborted. If you as a church body believe that life begins at conception, and that baptism is necessary for salvation, than how can you theologically justify this attitude? Obviously there are practical considerations that would prevent such a baptism, but in theory, is it really all that different from an infant baptism? What are your thoughts?
 
Someone who has the ability to baptize the baby must also have at least some chance to prevent the abortion.
The unborn are in sacs filled with fluid.
Just pray for them.
 
Probably, the apologist is responding to the argument that “Oh, it’s better for a child to be aborted and go to heaven than to be born of a single parent and live in poverty and suffering on earth.” Which is sick, sick logic.

That’s my guess.

❤️ Love is Patient
 
Nominefili said:
I was a little put off by the priest’s assertion that it was ‘crazy’ to want to baptize a child before he/she is aborted. If you as a church body believe that life begins at conception, and that baptism is necessary for salvation, than how can you theologically justify this attitude? Obviously there are practical considerations that would prevent such a baptism, but in theory, is it really all that different from an infant baptism? What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
I think what is crazy is that a mother wants to kill her baby in the first place. Whatever she has done or hasn’t done that has made her unready to have a child…is not the child’s fault! Why should the child pay for her mistakes with his/her life? Someone else commits the crime (sin) and the baby gets the death penalty - that’s what’s crazy.

If a woman is intelligent enough to realize that her child should be baptized, then it only further compounds the weight of her sin of murder of her own child when she does abort him or her.
 
SingleMomMonica said:
I think what is crazy is that a mother wants to kill her baby in the first place. Whatever she has done or hasn’t done that has made her unready to have a child…is not the child’s fault! Why should the child pay for her mistakes with his/her life? Someone else commits the crime (sin) and the baby gets the death penalty - that’s what’s crazy.

If a woman is intelligent enough to realize that her child should be baptized, then it only further compounds the weight of her sin of murder of her own child when she does abort him or her.
Click to expand...
Edit: never mind i was thinking about something else. 🤷
 
I believe the goal was to try to help the unborn pass to heaven if they’re aborted. Thats a worthy goal, but it due to the 3 ways of being baptized requiring certain criteria, it’s unfortunately not possible.

I believe they are:
Baptism by desire. Requires babies consent. Frankly, thats not possible in utero

Baptism by water. Requires the priest to physically dunk the baby. Being in utero again prevents it. Not to mention, the woman has to be willing and most at that stage are too emotionally conflicted to allow it. not to mention its legally assault and the priest would be arrested. This WOULD bring scandal and the CHURCH fears that above all else. Shame really.

I forgot the third way to baptise someone. I thought it was fire but I think I’m mistaken.

In reality making abortion illegal won’t even stop it and puts more women’s lives at risk as it did in the past through medical neglect.

The only way to truly lower the amount as it can never really be completely ended is through education, at home, school, and yes even church. The women that have it done and I’ve known 2 didn’t want to do it initially, but, when they became stressed and felt backed into a corner they took that way out.

Education my friends that’s the answer.
 
Nominefili said:
I was reading the Ask an Apologist section and came across this:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=391048

I was a little put off by the priest’s assertion that it was ‘crazy’ to want to baptize a child before he/she is aborted. If you as a church body believe that life begins at conception, and that baptism is necessary for salvation, than how can you theologically justify this attitude? Obviously there are practical considerations that would prevent such a baptism, but in theory, is it really all that different from an infant baptism? What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
I’m a little put off that some one would look for a way to try and legitimize abortion in this way.
 
It is purely hypothetical and the issue of Baptism does not arise in the first place. Not to mention it was simply crazy and sinful. My personal opinion is that the priest should have nothing to do with it at all.

In theory it might make not much different than an infant Baptism; in practice it is yes. A fetus in the womb is different than a baby in your arm. Beside we do not interfere with the proses of life and that process includes it to be nine months (more or less) in the mother’s womb before it comes into the world.
 
Just to remind each other again - infant Baptism is not to prepare the baby for death per se. Baptism signifies new beginning and how beautiful it is for the baby to begin life this way.

God bless. 🙂
 
Reuben_J said:
Just to remind each other again - infant Baptism is not to prepare the baby for death per se. Baptism signifies new beginning and how beautiful it is for the baby to begin life this way.

God bless. 🙂
Click to expand...
It is also to prepare the baby for death. That’s why Catholics and Lutherans often baptize in the hospital when a child is born less than perfectly healthy.

This is one of those strange situations where we allow someone to dominate us simply by asking, “why not?” and switching the burden to us to defend our practice. God simply made the natural order of things birth and then baptism. We don’t have to prove that it is a just order just because things are so twisted and wicked right now in the medical and sociological fields. That’s why the priest rightly said the practice is crazy.
 
spoiltvictorian said:
It is also to prepare the baby for death. That’s why Catholics and Lutherans often baptize in the hospital when a child is born less than perfectly healthy.

This is one of those strange situations where we allow someone to dominate us simply by asking, “why not?” and switching the burden to us to defend our practice. God simply made the natural order of things birth and then baptism. We don’t have to prove that it is a just order just because things are so twisted and wicked right now in the medical and sociological fields. That’s why the priest rightly said the practice is crazy.
Click to expand...
We do not baptise counting on the child to die, but we do baptise to make them a member of Christ’s body as early as possible. This just makes plain sense, there is no morbid sense of preparing the child for death.

More over, baptising specifically because you know the child is going to die, that it is going to be killed by it’s parents is just plain wrong, plain evil. It would be an immense victory for Satan in the Church.
 
crazzeto said:
We do not baptise counting on the child to die, but we do baptise to make them a member of Christ’s body as early as possible. This just makes plain sense, there is no morbid sense of preparing the child for death.

More over, baptising specifically because you know the child is going to die, that it is going to be killed by it’s parents is just plain wrong, plain evil. It would be an immense victory for Satan in the Church.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is an important distinction I should have made more clear.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top