History in the church of Baptisms at the end of one's life?

[Beno]

Since the topic came up during a sermon at the non-Catholic church that I work at, I’ve got a question for you church history buffs.

In it’s history, did the Church ever promote or accept the idea of one waiting until one’s life was nearly over in order to be baptized? I thought I recall instances in the history of the Church where people would wait to be baptized until close to death. Wouldn’t this have always been an unacceptable practice in the Church?

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

Since the topic came up during a sermon at the non-Catholic church that I work at, I’ve got a question for you church history buffs.

In it’s history, did the Church ever promote or accept the idea of one waiting until one’s life was nearly over in order to be baptized? I thought I recall instances in the history of the Church where people would wait to be baptized until close to death. Wouldn’t this have always been an unacceptable practice in the Church?

I think you will find the Church did not encourage it, but that people waited to be baptized so that any possibility of sins would be washed away with bapitsm…when you research it. I believe it’s one of hte ways St. Augustine attempted to put off St. Moinca, his mother, during his life of debauchery, by promising her his deathbed baptism (didn’t work).

We’re the only two people up at this time, you and I, and my coffee hasn’t hit the nervous system yet. Interesting question, though.

 

[pigtown]

I don’t know about the church’s history regarding baptism at the end of life but I do have a comment. My Grandfather was not Catholic but he made sure that my Mom went to Mass. In 1927 he was on his deathbed when he asked to see a priest. Of course, I wasn’t around at the time (my Mom was only 11) but I had been told that everyone was shocked that he’d ask for a priest but one was sent for and he did visit my Grandfather. My Grandfather told the priest that he wanted to become a Catholic. This was taken care of and immediately afterwards he went into a coma and never awoke so the last thing he did on this earth was to become a Catholic.
Pigtown

 

[DiscerningDave]

The whole point for waiting, as stated in an earlier post, was that the sacrament of baptism rids one of all sins. So, argueably, if one waits til they are on their death bed, then anything they did in life, prior to being baptised, will be forgiven. Some state that this is why Constatine waited til on his death bed to be baptised.

I am not condoning the practice, just stating some history.

 

[Thursday1]

I believe it’s one of hte ways St. Augustine attempted to put off St. Moinca, his mother, during his life of debauchery, by promising her his deathbed baptism (didn’t work).

I don’t mean to sidetrack the thread, but Augustine was not living a debauched life. He was in a monogamous relationship with a concubine (which was legal). Many people give Augustine more sins than he committed, maybe partly due to his writing about how sinful he was. Augustine’s problems with Christianity were really more philosophical than moral.

Okay, please continue with the current thread.

Yours in Christ,
Thursday

 

[otjm]

There is, perhaps, a little more to it. The Church early on saw the Sacrament of Reconciliation as a one time event, and appears to have been reserved for major sins, such as adultery, murder, apostasy, etc. Penances were severe - on might be not allowed to attend Mass for as long as three years, and be required to do public penance.

Because it was a sacrament that could be received only once, and because life was a tad tumultous at the time, people who were entering the Church started to hedge their bets, putting off Baptism until death bed.

There were two immediate problems with that: some didn’t make it to Baptism before death; others waited, were baptized, and then recovered…

There was an additional problem, in that Confirmation was seen as more closely aligned with entrance to the Church (as in joining, not as in walking in…) and because fo the delay it almost fell into oblivion.

The start of this was after Constantine decided the Catholicism was to be the state religion. It wasn’t long before people began joining somewhat rapdily, in part becasue belongiong to the state religion could be seen as putting one in good stead with the government. It wwasn’t long from there to putting Baptism off until the death bed.

Much of the issue was cleaned up by the Irish monks, who moved Reconciliation to a more private matter, with the opportunity to receive more than once, and with private penances.

The net result is that it was not instituted by the Church, but rather by those joining. The Church does not baptize those who do not present themselves…

 

[Beno]

There is, perhaps, a little more to it. The Church early on saw the Sacrament of Reconciliation as a one time event, and appears to have been reserved for major sins, such as adultery, murder, apostasy, etc. Penances were severe - on might be not allowed to attend Mass for as long as three years, and be required to do public penance…

Much of the issue was cleaned up by the Irish monks, who moved Reconciliation to a more private matter, with the opportunity to receive more than once, and with private penances…

Man, talk about the church appearing to shoot itself in the foot in its early history.

What you are saying otjm, is probably illustrated in a section of the Reader’s Digest book titled “After Jesus - The Triumph of Christianity”. Regarding the Roman Emperor Theodosius and his baptism (around 380 A.D.), it reads: “When he recovered, he believed, as did most devout Christians at the time, that baptism had irrevocably committed him to a blameless life, in which further sins could lead to eternal punishment after death. (The church had not yet formulated a mechanism for regularly granting forgiveness and imposing penance.)”

Did it really take the church this long to develop the sacrament of Penance in a form as we know it today? Do you think this makes it difficult to defend some of our positions on Baptism and Reconciliation to those who do not hold our views? I can see someone believing that one Baptism is the same as saying “Once saved, always saved”. I can also see someone saying that a continual inner conversion is not worth fretting about since one’s Baptism pretty much eliminates all of one’s sins both past and future. Also the church’s teaching about Baptism being the gateway to spiritual life kind of goes out the window if it was not realistically practiced as such for at least 350 years, if not more.