R
- Status
M
misslollipops
Guest
Thanks all for the help.
Already used it on ‘Noah and his Ark’ thread
D
djrakowski
Guest
Hey, Miss L… just a little more advice on online Bible search utilities. I prefer biblegateway.com, even though it doesn’t list any Catholic translations. It allows you to search several translations side-by-side for comparison - very nice!
R
rlg94086
Guest
Did you float any good ideas, or just flood the thread with a lot of Scripture?
M
Mt_28_19_20
Guest
drakowski,
I’m not saying you are questioning, I am assuming you know the answer and can point out the catechism paragraphs and Scripture references pertinent to infant Baptism, and/or Baptism of those not capable of rational reason and faith. I did not see your post with relevant Scripture, is it in this thread or another?
Actually, relevant scripture passages have been posted a number of times, right here on this thread - Mark 16:16, 1 Peter 3:20-21, Acts 2:38, Matthew 28:19-20 and others speak of the necessity of baptism for salvation.
Thank your for the verses. I also would have looked if you pointed where they were in other posts.
Mk 16:16 “He who has **believed and has been baptized **shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.
1 Peter 3:20-21 “who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you–not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience–through (I)the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
Acts 2:38 “Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”
Mt 28:19-20 “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, **teaching them to observe **all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”
I am not disagreeing with the necessity of baptism. (Notice my handle Mt 28 19_20?). Three verses associates baptism with something : believe, repent, observe. Thus, how can these be the basis to support Baptism of infants and those not capable of rational reason and faith?
Other passages mention the baptism of entire households, and such households were likely to include children (Acts 16:15, 18:8, 1 Corinthians 1:16).
Acts 16:15 “And when she and her household had been baptized, she urged us, saying, “If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and stay.” And she prevailed upon us.
Acts 18:8 “Crispus, the leader of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his household, and many of the Corinthians when they heard were believing and being baptized.
1 Cor 1:16 “Now I did baptize also the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized any other.
These three verses are referenced in CCC 1252:
1252 The practice of infant Baptism is an immemorial tradition of the Church. There is **explicit testimony to this practice from the second century **on, and it is **quite possible **that, from the beginning of the apostolic preaching, when whole “households” received baptism, infants may also have been baptized.53
We see that the Church says there is testimony of infant Baptism from the second century. Notice that concerning “households” from the Scripture verses, the Church chooses to use the words “quite possible” and “may also have been”. While it may have occurred, or whether it was likely, we do not have explicit testimony from Scripture, per our Church.
continued…
God bless,
Michael
M
Mt_28_19_20
Guest
drakowski,
Baptism parallels the means by which Jewish boys were made members of the Old Covenant community (Colossians 2:10-12), and since this New Covenant is better than the Old Covenant (Hebrews 7:22, 8:6-13) –
Code:
True, there is a parallel, and I agree that Baptism makes infants and adults members of the New Covenant. For infants the faith of their parents/the community stands in their place until they are of the age of reason, capable of faith. At that point they can fall away. However, can we say that Col 2:10-12 is pertaining to infants? **Was Paul speaking to infants or adults?** Notice the preceding verses: Col 2:6-9 “**so walk in Him, having been firmly rooted and not being built up in Him and established in your faith, just as you were instructed.** Surely this context is Baptism of those of the age of reason. So this is not directly pertinent to infant Baptism, or those incapable of reason/faith/instruction.Col 2:6-9 “Therefore as you have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him, having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith, just as you were instructed, and overflowing with gratitude. See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ. For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form,
Hebrews 7:22 “so much the more also Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant.
True, Baptism is a better covenant. Says nothing particular to infants and those not capable of reason/faith. In fact, the next verses mentions those who draw near to God. Can this be viewed as those growing in faith, developing their faith, as is mention in the catechism about maturing our faith after Baptism?
Hebrews 7:23-25 “The former priests, on the one hand, existed in greater numbers because they were prevented by death from continuing, but Jesus, on the other hand, because He continues forever, holds His priesthood permanently. Therefore He is able also to save forever **those who draw near to God **through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.
Code:
Hebrews 8:6-13 “But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second. For finding fault with them, He says, "BEHOLD, DAYS ARE COMING, SAYS THE LORD, WHEN I WILL EFFECT A NEW COVENANT WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH; NOT LIKE THE COVENANT WHICH I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS ON THE DAY WHEN I TOOK THEM BY THE HAND TO LEAD THEM OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT; FOR THEY DID NOT CONTINUE IN MY COVENANT, AND I DID NOT CARE FOR THEM, SAYS THE LORD. FOR THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: **I WILL PUT MY LAWS INTO THEIR MINDS, AND I WILL WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS. AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD,** AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.AND THEY SHALL NOT TEACH EVERYONE HIS FELLOW CITIZEN, AND EVERYONE HIS BROTHER, SAYING, 'KNOW THE LORD,' FOR ALL WILL KNOW ME, FROM THE LEAST TO THE GREATEST OF THEM.FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR INIQUITIES, AND I WILL REMEMBER THEIR SINS NO MORE." When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.
This does this speak of the better covenant, yet not specifically about infants and those incapable of reason/faith. Do we think that at infant baptism God has “: PUT MY LAWS INTO THEIR MINDS, AND I WILL WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS”? Or do they still need instruction? If the laws were are in their minds, and on their hearts, what need for instruction? Or is this meant toward those of the age of reason? I would answer yes, God puts His laws in their minds and on their hearts as infants, however they need to be nurtured in faith, and instructed, so that as they reach the age of reason and faith, they embrace and believe the laws, instead of just know that they are there. That said, these passages do not necessarily teach infant baptism explicitly, nor do they teach that infant baptism guarantees a response of faith later in life.Michael
R
rpp
Guest
Can we minimize the red text, please. It is hard on the eyes.
D
djrakowski
Guest
Nevertheless, we have no explicit testimony that the practice was ever forbidden in the early church, and as the Catechism states, we have pretty early evidence of it as an accepted practice from the second century onward (which could be as early as the year 101 A.D., the first year of the 2nd century).
So I would say that we indeed DO have explicit testimony from it in our Church. I’m not sure how much earlier you’d like to look for evidence
Scripture was never intended to be an exhaustive catalog of each and every validly Christian practice. In fact, scripture explicitly points to the Church as final arbiter, and emphasized the authority of oral, sacred Tradition.
I’m a bit surprised that you, a brother Catholic, would be so concerned about finding explicit scriptural references for infant baptism. I would contend that our challengers have the burden of proving that it’s NOT compatible with scripture, and that it wasn’t understood to be a valid practice from the beginning. You’re going to have an awfully hard time proving either one of those points.
D
djrakowski
Guest
Michael, I’m sure there’s a point you’re attempting to make, but I’m not clear on what it is. I’m surprised at your seeming attempt to derail this thread in apparent support of certain practices in Protestant theology. Please forgive me if I’ve misunderstood, but it seems that you’ve done little but muddy the waters even further with these last several posts.
D
djrakowski
Guest
Indeed!Can we minimize the red text, please. It is hard on the eyes.
For your sake, Michael, let me sum this up briefly:
- We see from scripture that baptism is necessary for salvation
- We see from scripture and Church teaching that everyone comes into the world tainted by original sin
- We see parallels between baptism as the means of entrance into the New Covenant and the practice of circumcision as entrance into the Old Covenant for infant Hebrew males
- We know from Hebrews that the New Covenant is better than the Old Covenant
- We also see Jesus chastizing those who would forbid little children from coming to him
- There’s scriptural record of entire households, presumably containing infants, that were baptized
- And we know that the Church can provide witness of the practice of infant baptism from the 2nd century onward.
- Furthermore, nowhere in scripture is the practice explictly condemned
- Of course, when the apostles were speaking to adult audiences, they were speaking largely to adults who were converting from Judaism or pagan religions. Having reached adulthood, and thus the ‘age of reason,’ the necessity of faith, repentance and then baptism is evident
M
Miserissima
Guest
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
Bible Gateway has the Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition. In Preferences you can indicate that you wish to see versions that include the Deuterocanon.
M
misslollipops
Guest
M
misslollipops
Guest
How about the thief on the cross Lk23:43?
M
Miserissima
Guest
Baptism of/by desire.
“That the place of baptism is sometimes supplied by suffering is supported by a substantial argument …Considering this over and over again, I find that not only suffering for the name of Christ can supply for that which is lacking by way of baptism, but even faith and conversion of heart * if, perhaps, because of the circumstances of the time, recourse cannot be had to the celebration of the mystery of baptism” (ibid., 4:22:29).
(Necessity of Baptism)*
T
Teflon93
Guest
Baptism of blood or baptism of desire. The Catholic Church does allow for alternatives where baptism of water is simply impossible, as for the thief on the cross or some of the martyrs.
Or for unborn babies.
M
misslollipops
Guest
If you have never had a conversion you have never been born again.I
Ironically, misslollipops finally answered my question, citing scripture, in another thread. And the quote from scripture supports being brought up in the Faith, without a moment of epiphany.
Just gotta love it!
You don’t necessarily have to have a Damascus road experience.
But you will definitely know the difference from living in the flesh and living in the Spirit. That is the conversion. That is what it means to be born again.
M
misslollipops
Guest
M
mikeledes
Guest
Before I comment on any of this, what do you believe regarding the following:
- Original Sin
- The nature of baptism: what does it do? regenerative or not?
Michael
D
djrakowski
Guest
From the Catechism, with references to scripture (with what I believe to be the key passage underlined):
The thief on the cross didn’t have the capacity to receive the sacrament (obviously), but his desire to do could be regarded as a baptism of desire.
- Status