Baptism question

[PoorKnight]

Had a thought occur to me while listening to a Patrick Madrid debate in which Infant Baptism was brought up:

Might it be helpful for us, as Catholics, to point out that the Church requires someone to repent before being baptized only when they have something to repent of?

This thought is still formulating so I might be stating it wrong so let me try to clarify.

Baptism removes sin, both original and personal. A person above the age of reason would have both personal and original sin. The “repent” part would only apply to the personal sin; we cannot “repent” from original sin.

A baby does not have personal sin to repent from and as St. Augustine (I believe) said, that which was contracted without permission can be removed without permission.

Does this make sense and would pointing this out be a helpful part of explaining Infant Baptism? Can someone help flesh this out please?

God Bless
PoorKnight of Christ and His Church

 

[dronald]

Had a thought occur to me while listening to a Patrick Madrid debate in which Infant Baptism was brought up:

Might it be helpful for us, as Catholics, to point out that the Church requires someone to repent before being baptized only when they have something to repent of?

This thought is still formulating so I might be stating it wrong so let me try to clarify.

Baptism removes sin, both original and personal. A person above the age of reason would have both personal and original sin. The “repent” part would only apply to the personal sin; we cannot “repent” from original sin.

A baby does not have personal sin to repent from and as St. Augustine (I believe) said, that which was contracted without permission can be removed without permission.

Does this make sense and would pointing this out be a helpful part of explaining Infant Baptism? Can someone help flesh this out please?

God Bless

PoorKnight of Christ and His Church

The issue with us silly Evangelicals is that the water isn’t what removes the sin, rather the desire to be Baptized which comes with repentance. Similarly in Catholicism, “The Baptism of desire” no water is used.

We believe that such Baptism can apply to infants and we highly doubt any chance of damnation or limbo for them.

 

[PoorKnight]

Limbo was never taught by the Catholic Church; it was proposed as a theoretical possibility by some theologians but never picked up in any official teaching.

Also it is only certain “silly Evangelicals” that don’t believe in baptismal regeneration. I have an evangelical church in my area that teaches baptismal regeneration and necessity and it is for infants. They also claim to be “Bible Alone”.

Also, Evangelicals do not agree on the necessity of Baptism for salvation, nor on Baptism for infants. Hence the reason “baptism” is considered a “non-Essential” by most Evangelicals (not all) so that the appearance of unity (but only the appearance) that Paul told us we must have and Christ prayed for, could still be claimed while disputes over salvation continue.

Back to my original question, then please.

Thank you and God Bless
Poor Knight of Christ and His Church

 

[dronald]

Limbo was never taught by the Catholic Church; it was proposed as a theoretical possibility by some theologians but never picked up in any official teaching.

Also it is only certain “silly Evangelicals” that don’t believe in baptismal regeneration. I have an evangelical church in my area that teaches baptismal regeneration and necessity and it is for infants. They also claim to be “Bible Alone”.

Also, Evangelicals do not agree on the necessity of Baptism for salvation, nor on Baptism for infants. Hence the reason “baptism” is considered a “non-Essential” by most Evangelicals (not all) so that the appearance of unity (but only the appearance) that Paul told us we must have and Christ prayed for, could still be claimed while disputes over salvation continue.

Back to my original question, then please.

Thank you and God Bless
Poor Knight of Christ and His Church

I’m not saying Limbo was ever officially taught by the CC, I’m saying that it’s outright denied by Evangelicals; also we deny that an infant can go to Hell.

We don’t agree Baptism saves you in the sense that the water saves you, rather the coming to Christ, etc, etc. Again, this line of thinking when it comes to infants is similar to your, “Baptism of desire.” We simply hold that infants can be saved apart from the water.

 

[adrift]

The issue with us silly Evangelicals is that the water isn’t what removes the sin, rather the desire to be Baptized which comes with repentance. Similarly in Catholicism, “The Baptism of desire” no water is used.

We believe that such Baptism can apply to infants and we highly doubt any chance of damnation or limbo for them.

What do you do with Peter 1 3:21

21

This prefigured baptism, which saves you now. It is not a removal of dirt from the body but an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

 

[dronald]

What do you do with Peter 1 3:21

I think what Peter is saying is what I’ve been saying the whole time… what do you do with it?