Baptismal Advice for Unbaptized Protestant

  • Thread starter Thread starter JamesJr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Over the centuries, prior to 1054, there were several groups which broke union with the Pope, and thus with the Catholic Church. 1054 was the major break over the authority of the Pope, and the “start” of the Orthodox.

There have been groups which have reunited with Rome, often referred to as “uniates” they acknowledge the Pope as the supreme authority in matters of faith, but they maintain their own liturgy, discipline and rite.
 
Well, given that the Gospels tell us that Christ gave a command in Matthew 28:19, it is tie to get on with it.

I think the vast majority of people in these forums would hope that your faith journey would take you to the Catholic Church; but that journey is one step at a time.

Time for the next step - baptism.
 
Lovely words! I will get baptized as soon as possible. It may be encouraging to you all who are Catholics reading this that I am becoming more and more convinced by the Church teachings and arguments. I see myself possibly coming into full communion. But no matter what, you good Catholics are my brothers and sisters in Christ.
 
I now need baptismal advice as someone planning on becoming Catholic. Should I let the pastor of the Protestant church I attend baptize me, or should I wait and be baptized into the Church by a priest?
 
Out of the estimated 30,000+ Christian churches many having some or little ties to andy specific “parent” dnomination, your list of 36 valid is a misreading of the list you provide.

One minor example" your list notes “evangelical churches” (plural). Feel free to come up with a count of how many come under that one umbrealla, but actually having been involved in working with both people coming into the Church and with the diocese, the “40” invalid is a lot closer to those which the Church specifically rejects.

It is far, far more than 36.
 
If the pastor of your church uses the Trinitarian formula (In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" and baptizes you buy either pouring water over your head or by immersion, the Catholic Church sees the baptism as valid. And the Catholic Church holds that one is baptized only once in a lifetime. in other words, should you later seek to join the Church, you would not be “re-baptized”

Something like “the Creator, the Redeemer and the Sanctifier”, it does not. That is at best infrequent, or less than infrequent.
 
otjm said:
Out of the estimated 30,000+ Christian churches many having some or little ties to andy specific “parent” dnomination, your list of 36 valid is a misreading of the list you provide.

One minor example" your list notes “evangelical churches” (plural). Feel free to come up with a count of how many come under that one umbrealla, but actually having been involved in working with both people coming into the Church and with the diocese, the “40” invalid is a lot closer to those which the Church specifically rejects.

It is far, far more than 36.
Click to expand...
I stick with the word many. 40 is many!!

By the way the list IS a Church list. Why are being so snotty about this?
 
I have not been snotty. A lot of people read these posts, and I was trying to explain that the list is correct as to certain listed denominations which the Catholic Church considers having invalid baptisms. However, identifying those accepted as a low number is an incorrect reading of the list which you posted.

I have had to deal with the issue on a real world basis. And I used diocesan information, just as you did.

Evangelicals, being the one example I picked out, do not have a structure as tightly organized as do, say, Jehova’s Witnesses, or Seventh Day Adventists. Just as “Bible Churches” and Fundamental Churches" get somewhat lumped together, they have a far looser organizational structure and continue to engage in dividing and resulting in new churches, which is why we have an estimated 30,000 to 35,000 churches in the US.

For example, there is the “Evangelical Church of North America” had 133 local churches as of 2,000; but the fact that some church down the road uses the term "Evangelical " in their name has no particular reference to the ECNA; it is rather a generic type of name separating it from, for example “XYZ Bible Church” and the many permutations out there.

Anyone can get a degree from a bible college and set up a church; they may or may not have some formal or informal process of “ordination” or “calling”. A friend of mine when I was in grad school was going to start a non-denominational church as he styled himself as a “bible believer”, and he was by no means untypical. He was attending a Presbyterian college but was not studying to be a Presbyterian minister.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top