I'm Catholic and my wife is Born Again Christian, how should we baptize our first born?

  • Thread starter Thread starter KennethMaeChua
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It seems to happen with some regularity. I wonder what the record number of subsequent posts on such a thread is?
 
After my mother remarried a Protestant man, I was rebaptized in his, Disciples of Christ church at age 12. No worries. When I came back to Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church as an adult, the priest told me that only my infant baptism in the RCC counted.
 
Last edited:
KennethMaeChua said:
Hi! So as i said, I’m Catholic and my wife is Born Again Christian [this is an American folk tradition (they reject the Creeds = not Christian)], and we are having trouble either our first born son should be baptized to Roman Catholic…
Click to expand...
Yes they should certainly be baptized Catholic ASAP absolutely NO EXCEPTIONS.

If you do NOT do baptize them Catholic, you can lose your salvation because you have denied the validity of the promise below:

Acts 2:38-39 let EVERY ONE of you be BAPTIZED…This PROMISE is to YOU [ADULTS] AND to YOUR CHILDREN …AND as many as the Lord our God WILL CALL (confirms baptism of CHILDREN is the parents responsibility)

Your parents baptized YOU, now it’s your turn to uphold the promise and baptize your kids. It’s only in modern times people are breaking these familial lines. It would be unthinkable just 50 years ago. Don’t be a victim. Remember you could be EASILY be breaking a familial line that is +1000 years old.

Mark 16:15-16 “Go into all the world and PREACH THE GOSPEL… He who BELIEVES and IS BAPTIZED shall be SAVED; but he who DISBELIEVES shall be DAMNED (they denied the baptism and became DAMNED - they are warning YOU right now.).

ONE CATHOLIC PARENT IS GOOD ENOUGH! IF YOU DON’T BAPTIZE YOUR KIDS, YOU ARE NO LONGER A BELIEVER:

1 Cor 7:14 [If BOTH PARENTS were UNBELIEVERS] your CHILDREN would be UNCLEAN [UNBAPTIZED], but NOW they are HOLY (BECAUSE ONE PARENT BAPTIZED THEIR CHILDREN.)

It’s the ACTION OF BAPTIZING in our Church that solidify’s YOU as a Christian. But look what happened when you wait too long:

Exodus 4:22-27 ‘Thus SAYS THE LORD: “Israel [your current baby] is MY SON So…LET MY SON GO [by BAPTIZING him] that he may serve Me [be a CHRISTIAN]… and it came to pass, on the way, at the encampment, that the LORD MET HIM [MOSES] and sought to KILL HIM… then Moses WIFE took a sharp stone and CUT OFF THE FORESKIN of HER SON [read: baptism] and cast it at Moses’ feet, and said, “Surely you are a husband of blood to me!” So He let him go. Then she said, “You are a husband of blood!

MARTIN LUTHER: “The GOSPEL PROMISE is offered AND received by FAITH ALONE IN BAPTISM” -thegospelcoalition .org

MARTIN LUTHER: BAPTISM is…strictly commanded that we MUST be baptized or we shall NOT BE SAVED.” (Large Catechism 4:6)

MARTIN LUTHER: “BAPTISM is GOD’S WORK; and “GOD’S WORKS are salutary and NECESSARY FOR SALVATION” --Luther’s Large Catechism

MARTIN LUTHER: “THE INFANT becomes a SAINT in the HANDS of THE PRIEST’” - Luther’s Works 13:303 on Ps 110:3

JESUS CONSIDERS PARENTS PHYSICALLY BRINGING INFANTS THE SAME AS INFANTS/CHILDREN THEMSELVES COMING TO HIM:

Luke 18:15–17 PARENTS brought THEIR INFANTS to JESUS so he would TOUCH (bless/anoint) them… the DISCIPLES… SCOLDED THE PARENTS for bothering him. But Jesus… said to the disciples “LET THE LITTLE CHILDREN COME TO ME , and DO NOT FORBID THEM
 
Last edited:
His_helpmeet said:
A “repeat Baptism” is meaningless.
Click to expand...
Don’t assume! It can be seen as an act to REJECT their Christian Faith and God Himself. I don’t think most here understand the severity of the OP’s question. It means life or death (in my opinion - and I’m talking the OP let alone the baby).
Q: A friend of mine just got re-baptized. He was baptized as an infant and just got re-baptized by another church. I think that he may have sinned against the Holy Spirit.

A: yes, he did commit a sin against the Holy Spirit. By being re-baptized, he implied by his actions that what the Holy Spirit did in his first baptism was not sufficient. catholic.com
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
otjm said:
In the Catholic Church, with very rare exceptions, everyone is to be baptized at the Church.
Click to expand...
Sure. In a Happy, Rainbow-Filled Catholic World, that’s what would happen.

But the kid’s mom isn’t Catholic. In this situation, 99.9% of the importance is attached to the kids simply being baptized - I don’t care where and by whom. 00.1% of the importance is making sure that it is performed with the desired Catholic paperwork. And I think assigning 00.1% importance is very, very generous.

This ring doubly true if you’re an older-school Catholic who holds that an unbaptized child is doomed to everlasting torment.

Someone sprinkle some water on that kid in the Trinitarian formula! NOW!!! (as would be the view of my older sister’s very Catholic father-in-law). Nothing less than the destiny of his immortal soul is in peril! - per his view.
Should the father do it himself, there is no record, and that record is critical to future life issues.
Click to expand...
No it isn’t. When I did Catholic RCIA as an adult, I wrote down when and where my baptism was done and if it was done using a Trinitarian formula. That was it. No biggie.
 
Vonsalza said:
No it isn’t. When I did Catholic RCIA as an adult, I wrote down when and where my baptism was done and if it was done using a Trinitarian formula. That was it. No biggie.
Click to expand...
Your one experience is not the overwhelming norm, the Church has laws and those laws are important. One of those laws regards baptism and sacramental records.

When I came into the Church I had been baptized as a “past age of reason” child in a non Catholic Christian Church. It was a valid baptism, so yes I simply “wrote down the when” etc.

We are talking here about the duties of a Catholic parent. When a Catholic marries a non Catholic, again, there are Canon Laws that govern the Catholic party. One of those is to promise to do their best to raise their child Catholic. This begins with baptism shortly after birth.
 
I believe that baptism by a layperson should only be done under extremely necessary circumstance (imminent death, etc.). This is in accord with Cannon Law, which I have cited in an earlier response. The father is Catholic and, therefore, should abide by Cannon Law.

By the way, I’ve been waiting for the CCC reference I believe you said you could produce… That was you, wasn’t it?
 
TheLittleLady said:
We are talking here about the duties of a Catholic parent. When a Catholic marries a non Catholic, again, there are Canon Laws that govern the Catholic party. One of those is to promise to do their best to raise their child Catholic. This begins with baptism shortly after birth.
Click to expand...
Issue here (so far, because #sarcasm…surprisingly OP hasn’t come back to clarify), we don’t know if the OP was married in the church so we don’t know who promised what to whom and who was made aware of anything.
 
Well, I’m Catholic. Protestant and ‘Born again’ theology leaves me wanting, and seems lacking, so I’m going to vote Catholic.

but the imperative thing I would think would be to get them baptized. If it’s a Trinitarian baptism I don’t believe it matters, I might go with first available, but be very clear to my spouse that I intend to raise the child Catholic.

This of course doesn’t apply if by ‘Born again baptism’ you mean something other than Trinitarian baptism.
 
Kind of sensing that the OP was scared off. I think I would have been!
 
In the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Since Baptists generally don’t believe in paedobaptism, my vote would be Catholic, but you and your wife will have to work that out.
 
Actually, I’m not sure that’s true - that Baptists don’t believe in paedobaptism. My wife was baptized Methodist in the trinity.
 
Baptists are not methodists, and baptists basically by definition dont believe in infant baptism.
 
jvickers said:
By the way, I’ve been waiting for the CCC reference I believe you said you could produce… That was you, wasn’t it?
Click to expand...
Sure. I just didn’t think you’d actually need it. Here we go;

So can dad baptize his kid if wifey doesn’t want to do it in the RCC? Is the baptism valid?

Yep and Yep.

[1256] The ordinary ministers of Baptism are the bishop and priest and, in the Latin Church, also the deacon.57 In case of necessity, anyone, even a non-baptized person, with the required intention, can baptize58 , by using the Trinitarian baptismal formula. The intention required is to will to do what the Church does when she baptizes. The Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of Baptism for salvation.59
(bold mine)

Further echoed in Canon Law, if you require more information.


Happy to illuminate!
 
TheLittleLady said:
40.png
Vonsalza:
No it isn’t. When I did Catholic RCIA as an adult, I wrote down when and where my baptism was done and if it was done using a Trinitarian formula. That was it. No biggie.
Click to expand...
Your one experience is not the overwhelming norm…

…so yes I simply “wrote down the when” etc.
Click to expand...
Then you mean our experience is not the norm, yes? 🙂
 
“In case of necessity” just furthers my point. This is not a case of necessary. Well, it is to you, but you seem to be alone…
 
jvickers said:
“In case of necessity” just furthers my point. This is not a case of necessary. Well, it is to you, but you seem to be alone…
Click to expand...
You don’t get to determine necessity.

Catholic dad and his conscience does.

Period.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top