Baptizing an infant after death

  • Thread starter Thread starter BKD
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thank you. You are right. If the thief went to paradise, certainly babies have a good chance at it.
 
The Ratzinger Report (1985)
Limbo was never a defined truth of faith. Personally—and I am speaking more as a theologian and not as Prefect of the Congregation—I would abandon it since it was only a theological hypothesis. . . . One should not hesitate to give up the idea of limbo if need be, and it is worth noting that the very theologians who proposed “limbo” also said that parents could spare the child limbo by desiring its baptism and through prayer; but the concern behind it must not be surrendered. Baptism has never been a side issue for faith; it is not now, nor will it ever be.
Click to expand...
So even if Limbo exists, Christian parents would obtain Baptism for their unborn (or yet to be Baptized infant) child through their Baptismal desire for their child. Of cource, Baptism through water must always be sought, if possible.
 
The_Rock said:
The Ratzinger Report (1985)

So even if Limbo exists, Christian parents** would** obtain Baptism for their unborn (or yet to be Baptized infant) child through their Baptismal desire for their child. Of cource, Baptism through water must always be sought, if possible.
Click to expand...
That is more than God has revealed. I would replace “would” with “may be able to”.

Accepting that not all questions have an answer in this world is an important aspect of faith. Leave things up to God.

I have been reading Peter Kreeft’s book on ‘everything you want to know about heaven’ and at one point he describes Heaven Hell (and Limbo) as the same place.

If you are in Heaven, you experience the things around with with joy and see God’s hand in everything, the music, the vistas, the aromas, etc.

If you are in Hell, you experience the things around you with disgust. The noise, the horrible sights, the awful stenches, etc.

If you are in Limbo, you experience the things around you with happiness. The tunes, the sights, the smells.

Heaven is with supernatural grace, Hell with separation from God, Limbo with natural enjoyment. We are all there but our attitude toward God and his creation colors our experience.

So, your child would be there, you could enjoy the experience together, BUT your joy would far exceed the happiness of one who does no know God.

At least that is what I got from Kreeft’s book.
 
PLEASE correct me if I’m wrong.

Baptism is a rite that extends to the right of the Child through the parents. The parents have their child baptized so as to raise them in the faith with the grace to help the child walk towards salvation. Unless the parents participate in the child’s faith, there seems to be little to help the child walk towards God other than the mere fact that an indelible mark has been placed on the soul for when at some point the child begins to learn the faith, and participate in Christian faith that the grace has a better chance of helping them towards the desired salvation in the end.

In a side way look at this, it would seem to me (but I’m very unsure about this) that the baptism is not necessary for a child that dies, but helps them in their life towards the goal, eternal salvation with the Lord. In other words, it helps us resist sin growing up and once we reach the age of reason, it is then that we bare our own sins to term in this life. Original sin, is about the original sin committed by Adam and Eve. We bare the woundedness created from their sin and baptism restores us to resist sin. A baby can not commit sin and therefore has no reason to be baptized until the proper time with the parents as their mentors/trainers. I’m not saying that they should not be baptized. I’m saying that people misunderstand infant baptisms and their purpose. We need baptism for salvation, but I wonder if the biblical statement for baptism is like the circumcisms given to infants and for those who convert later as adults. In other words, I see a loving God not bound to condem an unbaptized child the the fires of eternity. I see a loving God who knows the true nature and purpose of the mystery of baptism. To worry so much about a child that has already died falls under scrupulosity, in other words.

So, pick it apart guys. Be gentle, I’m just trying to deepen my understanding.
 
Jack_Bauer said:
Baptism is a rite that extends to the right of the Child through the parents. The parents have their child baptized so as to raise them in the faith with the grace to help the child walk towards salvation. Unless the parents participate in the child’s faith, there seems to be little to help the child walk towards God other than the mere fact that an indelible mark has been placed on the soul for when at some point the child begins to learn the faith, and participate in Christian faith that the grace has a better chance of helping them towards the desired salvation in the end.
Click to expand...
Indeed. That is why Baptism will be denied if there is sufficient reason to doubt the child would be raised in the Faith.
So, pick it apart guys. Be gentle, I’m just trying to deepen my understanding.
Click to expand...
Gentle? Here at CAF? 😃

I’ll take a little longer to examine your other remarks before responding so I can give them due thought (hopefully, someone more seasoned will respond in the meantime ;))
 
Will_S said:
Traditional Catholic theology says that all people are conceived in original sin and from the first moments of their life are naturally enemies of God and slaves of the devil.So even a person who lives in the jungles of Africa, and never has an opportunity to hear the Gospel, no fault of his own, is destined for hell. You will not find this in Catholic Doctrine, maybe in theory or in man’s tradition. But you will not find this in Tradition and Doctrine.

It is exactly this fact that makes the immaculate conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary noteworthy and important.

An unbaptized infant, therefore, being naturally an enemy of God and slave of the devil, cannot enter into Heaven upon death.can you provide the Church Doctrine that covers your beliefs here?
Click to expand...
This is a really sad way to live. Do you really believe that the devil has more power and controlls the well being of the soul of a creation of God than God Himself? “I knew you before you were formed in the womb.” God creates each and every one of us, for Him; why would He leave the most vulnerable to the controll and care of satan, untill we mortal men “do” this action to save these little ones? So what was the meaning of the Incarnation, death and resserection again?

As has been pointed out, “limbo” has been a theory, not dogma. Also pointed out, Jesus told the thief that he would be in paradise with Him that very day, was there a baptism on the cross?
 
BKD said:
I have a friend who is training to be a lay hospital chaplain. A non-Catholic couple approached her and asked her to baptize their deceased infant. The child had not recently died but had been dead for some hours. She baptized the child.

I told her I thought this was not correct. I’ve heard different things from different priests though. For example, I have heard that once medical death has been declared, the child is not to be baptized. I have also heard that if it is right after the baby has been declared dead, then it is acceptable to baptize. The argument was that we don’t know how long the soul hangs around the body after death. I have never heard it said that if the child has been deceased for a number of hours that it was acceptable to baptize.

She just went and talked to a priest, one who works as a hospital chaplain, who told her that he didn’t see a problem with what she did. He was arguing that you meet people where they are and you meet their pastoral needs.

I need some definitive documentation references on this. Any suggestions? Any universal or local (diocesan) pastoral guidelines would be appreciated.
Click to expand...
As a lay minister, there is absolutely nothing wrong with doing this. Evan as a priest or deacon this may have been the right thing to do. If not for the deceased person, for the living, the parents sake.

I’ve been in the emergency room trauma center on a couple of occasions where young children were either already gone or on life support. In one case a 14 year old was involved in a hot tub accident and pronounced dead an hour or so before the priest arrived. The parents were close friends of ours and he was one of our youth ministry kids. He was baptised but was not annointed before death. The mother was distraught, so the priest rightfully annointed the child after death any way. The healing process started right there in that room, he did the correct thing. Just as a person in this situation you speak of in this situation.

On another occassion, I was there because of an accident that included two students of the schooll where my wife teaches. These two brothers were both drowned and rececitated some time after they stopped breathing, severe brain damage was expected because of the time without oxegen. They were both on life support when we went into the trauma room, of one of the kids. The father wanted no part of a Catholic service or baptism, but he allowed me to give a blessing and pray with the one whom we were with. In this case I believe I did the correct thing, I wanted so much to baptise this young man because I know he wasn’t baptised. But it was the father’s will that I not, so I didn’t.

Both situations are very different, I believe the priest and I did what was correct, as did the lay minister you refer to here. The action of me, the priest or this lay minister may do nothing for the deceased, but all of the actions comforted and showed love to the living, which is what we are to do, love our neighbors. It is called pastoral care.
 
Lapey said:
Will S:
Traditional Catholic theology says that all people are conceived in original sin and from the first moments of their life are naturally enemies of God and slaves of the devil
Click to expand...
So even a person who lives in the jungles of Africa, and never has an opportunity to hear the Gospel, no fault of his own, is destined for hell. You will not find this in Catholic Doctrine, maybe in theory or in man’s tradition. But you will not find this in Tradition and Doctrine.
Click to expand...
Trent Session V:
2. If any one asserts, that the prevarication of Adam injured himself alone, and not his posterity; and that the holiness and justice, received of God, which he lost, he lost for himself alone, and not for us also; or that he, being defiled by the sin of disobedience, has only transfused death, and pains of the body, into the whole human race, but not sin also, which is the death of the soul; let him be anathema:–whereas he contradicts the apostle who says; By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death, and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.

Trent Session VI:
The holy Synod declares first, that, for the correct and sound understanding of the doctrine of Justification, it is necessary that each one recognise and confess, that, whereas all men had lost their innocence in the prevarication of Adam -having become unclean, and, as the apostle says, by nature children of wrath, as (this Synod) has set forth in the decree on original sin,-they** were so far the servants of sin, and under the power of the devil and of death**, that not the Gentiles only by the force of nature, but not even the Jews by the very letter itself of the law of Moses, were able to be liberated, or to arise, therefrom; although free will, attenuated as it was in its powers, and bent down, was by no means extinguished in them.

If it were of benefit for a man in the jungles of Africa not to hear the Gospel, because, by not hearing, he remains innocent and is saved, then there would be no reason to preach the Gospel. But since, on the contrary, the man in the jungles of Africa who has not heard the Gospel is almost certainly damned, it is imperative that the Gospel be preached in all corners of the Earth.

I note that the Council of Trent, in the quotations above states explicitly that all persons are conceived in sin, without grace, and are “servants of sin” and “under the power of the devil”. Can it be that you have never heard of this before?

The Roman Catechism states:
the law of Baptism, as established by our Lord, extends to all, so that unless they are regenerated to God through the grace of Baptism, be their parents Christians or infidels, they are born to eternal misery and destruction.
Lapey said:
This is a really sad way to live. Do you really believe that the devil has more power and controlls the well being of the soul of a creation of God than God Himself?
Click to expand...
Your rhetorical question is false and misleading. It is not a matter of who has more power. It is a matter of the order of things and the free will of men. Because of the sin of Adam, all people are born without grace, in a state of original sin, with no right to Heaven. This is Catholic teaching. (CCC 403, 407)
Lapey said:
“I knew you before you were formed in the womb.” God creates each and every one of us, for Him; why would He leave the most vulnerable to the controll and care of satan, untill we mortal men “do” this action to save these little ones?
Click to expand...
It is a result of the sin of Adam, which Adam freely committed. When we abuse our free will to offend God, our sin has consequences that reach beyond ourselves. God respects our free will and permits the consequences of our actions to remain.

If you do not believe Catholic doctrine on this point, then I have to ask what you think of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin? What is the point of the Immaculate Conception of Mary if all children are immaculately conceived as you seem to suggest?
Lapey said:
Jesus told the thief that he would be in paradise with Him that very day, was there a baptism on the cross?
Click to expand...
The good thief died before the founding of the Church and the institution of the sacrament of baptism, so the situation is not directly comparable.

I’ll close with a quote from the Council of Florence:

Also, the souls of those who have incurred no stain of sin whatsoever after baptism, as well as souls who after incurring the stain of sin have been cleansed whether in their bodies or outside their bodies, as was stated above, are straightaway received into heaven and clearly behold the triune God as he is, yet one person more perfectly than another according to the difference of their merits. But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.
 
Will_S said:
Trent Session V:
2. If any one asserts, that the prevarication of Adam injured himself alone, and not his posterity; and that the holiness and justice, received of God, which he lost, he lost for himself alone, and not for us also; or that he, being defiled by the sin of disobedience, has only transfused death, and pains of the body, into the whole human race, but not sin also, which is the death of the soul; let him be anathema:–whereas he contradicts the apostle who says; By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death, and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.

Trent Session VI:
The holy Synod declares first, that, for the correct and sound understanding of the doctrine of Justification, it is necessary that each one recognise and confess, that, whereas all men had lost their innocence in the prevarication of Adam -having become unclean, and, as the apostle says, by nature children of wrath, as (this Synod) has set forth in the decree on original sin,-they** were so far the servants of sin, and under the power of the devil and of death**, that not the Gentiles only by the force of nature, but not even the Jews by the very letter itself of the law of Moses, were able to be liberated, or to arise, therefrom; although free will, attenuated as it was in its powers, and bent down, was by no means extinguished in them.

If it were of benefit for a man in the jungles of Africa not to hear the Gospel, because, by not hearing, he remains innocent and is saved, then there would be no reason to preach the Gospel. But since, on the contrary, the man in the jungles of Africa who has not heard the Gospel is almost certainly damned, it is imperative that the Gospel be preached in all corners of the Earth.

I note that the Council of Trent, in the quotations above states explicitly that all persons are conceived in sin, without grace, and are “servants of sin” and “under the power of the devil”. Can it be that you have never heard of this before?Yes it could, but its not.😛

The Roman Catechism states:
the law of Baptism, as established by our Lord, extends to all, so that unless they are regenerated to God through the grace of Baptism, be their parents Christians or infidels, they are born to eternal misery and destruction.

Your rhetorical question is false and misleading. It is not a matter of who has more power. It is a matter of the order of things and the free will of men. Because of the sin of Adam, all people are born without grace, in a state of original sin, with no right to Heaven. This is Catholic teaching. (CCC 403, 407)

It is a result of the sin of Adam, which Adam freely committed. When we abuse our free will to offend God, our sin has consequences that reach beyond ourselves. God respects our free will and permits the consequences of our actions to remain.

If you do not believe Catholic doctrine on this point, then I have to ask what you think of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin? What is the point of the Immaculate Conception of Mary if all children are immaculately conceived as you seem to suggest? I have neither suggested nor do I believe that the IC is of no importance, those are your words sir.

The good thief died before the founding of the Church and the institution of the sacrament of baptism, so the situation is not directly comparable.

I’ll close with a quote from the Council of Florence:

Also, the souls of those who have incurred no stain of sin whatsoever after baptism, as well as souls who after incurring the stain of sin have been cleansed whether in their bodies or outside their bodies, as was stated above, are straightaway received into heaven and clearly behold the triune God as he is, yet one person more perfectly than another according to the difference of their merits. But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.
Click to expand...
Wow, you realy took me to school…:rolleyes: 😦
 
BKD said:
Do you think Moses or Elijah are in heaven? They were never baptized…
Click to expand...
They were under the Old Covenant - they were circumcised, and they made the appropriate sacrifices for their Covenant. They didn’t go to Heaven when they died, either, though - they went to Heaven when Jesus died on the Cross for them, to complete the necessary sacrifices for sin.

We are under the New Covenant - which requires baptism in place of circumcision, and that we go to Mass on Sundays to enter into Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross, rather than make animal sacrifices.
 
sistermouse said:
…so where do unbaptized infants go??
Click to expand...
We have no way of knowing.

What is essential is that we make sure to baptize our babies in a reasonable amount of time after birth (2-3 months is reasonable) - and if it seems as if the baby is going to die, then we need to ramp up the timeline accordingly. Anyone can perform an emergency baptism - even the parents themselves, if there is no one else available.

If it is impossible to baptize the baby before death, even when every reasonable effort was made, then we trust in the mercy of God, we trust that God understands that we would have baptized the baby, had it been possible, and we know that God orders all things for good; not for evil. We trustingly place the fate of our child into His hands, and know that, whatever is best for our child, is what will happen.
 
How to Baptize in the Case of a Miscarriage
+JMJ​
Sincerely,

Shin

Inspirational Quotes from the Saints & Saints’ Forums
Sensus Traditionis & Audio Sancto: Holy Sermons Online
Holy Modesty and Purity Resources
Thank you for posting this. My wife miscarried 2 babies. She was only about 2 months with both. I tried to conditionally baptize them in our sink. However, I didn’t know how to find the fetus and I am not sure if I did it properly or not. I kind of new about conditional baptism and just tried to apply it to miscarriages. I feel so guilty. May God forgive me.I should have read up on that especially since it happened twice. I am so foolish. It really hurts. I am so sorry about it. Please pray for me and my babies. Thank you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top