Infant Baptism - Laying out the facts

[JimG]

Honestly… The Catholic Church should just make a declaration from the seat of Peter once and for all on what happens to unbaptized babies and stillborn children then call it a night.

This is obviously a very important topic and the CC won’t touch it for obvious reasons. It needs to happen.

There are some matters which were not clarified by Jesus, nor had definitive teachings handed down. Theological reasoning is often quite valid but it is still not divine revelation.

 

[zz912]

Honestly… The Catholic Church should just make a declaration from the seat of Peter once and for all on what happens to unbaptized babies and stillborn children then call it a night.

This is obviously a very important topic and the CC won’t touch it for obvious reasons. It needs to happen.

If and when the Holy Spirit wishes the Catholic Church to make a final pronouncement on this topic, only THEN will the Church make such a pronouncement.

For my money, I would believe that the Church will never definitively declare the topic simply because it is something Christ will decide on His own authority. I imagine the Holy Spirit doesn’t want to make the declaration for a very good reason. If the Church declares that unbaptized children will not go to Heaven, it would discourage and hurt many people needlessly. If the Church declares that unbaptized children will go to Heaven, then people will neglect to have their children baptized in direct contradiction to Christ’s command.

Your comment though seems to stem from a fundamental misunderstanding about the teachings of the Church. On matters of faith and morals, the Church is not making up the teaching, it is merely transmitting what has been given to the Church by God. The Church has no authority to create teachings.

 

[po18guy]

Not trying to pick a fight or point fingers. Just laying out the facts.

Reflecting on this as well as the thread title, I just had to chuckle. Going into a room filled with Catholics and calling them all wrong “'seems” to be intended to point fingers as well as pick a fight. You Irish or something?

 

[dronald]

If the Church declares that unbaptized children will not go to Heaven, it would discourage and hurt many people needlessly. If the Church declares that unbaptized children will go to Heaven, then people will neglect to have their children baptized in direct contradiction to Christ’s command.

These were the, “obvious reasons” I was speaking of.

 

[Church_Militant]

These were the, “obvious reasons” I was speaking of.

That’s a kind of fundamentalist thinking though.

Why should we define something that we have no definitive information on? If Our Lord, the apostles and Sacred Tradition are silent on it then isn’t it better to remain silent as well?

The idea that we must have all the answers, IMO, is a mark of a less than healthy religion.

 

[po18guy]

These were the, “obvious reasons” I was speaking of.

Rather than being concerned with what the Church has declared, we must also consider what she has not declared, and why. The converse is also true.

For those (present company excepted) who endlessly claim that the Catholic Church makes things up, why are there so many areas of mystery in her teaching; so many areas in which, after 2,000 years, the Church has somehow failed to make things up? Is there the slightest chance that this is because God has chosen not to reveal such things?

 

[dronald]

Rather than being concerned with what the Church has declared, we must also consider what she has not declared, and why. The converse is also true.

For those (present company excepted) who endlessly claim that the Catholic Church makes things up, why are there so many areas of mystery in her teaching; so many areas in which, after 2,000 years, the Church has somehow failed to make things up? Is there the slightest chance that this is because God has chosen not to reveal such things?

Because as stated by a Catholic here, the teaching would cause controversy. No matter what the CC officially states as truth in regards to infant Baptism it’s going to cause a lot of conflict. I’m not sure if God would be silent on a matter of truth for the sake of human reasoning. If it’s true that an unbaptized baby is destined for eternal damnation or some type of limbo, then God would reveal that without apology. If however an unbaptized baby goes to Heaven (as most Protestants believe) then the Protestants were right all along, and that would be just terrible.

I fully understand the human reasoning that it has never been defined.

 

[AnimalSpirits]

Honestly… The Catholic Church should just make a declaration from the seat of Peter once and for all on what happens to unbaptized babies and stillborn children then call it a night.

This is obviously a very important topic and the CC won’t touch it for obvious reasons. It needs to happen.

This seems to assume that the church just makes up what they proclaim, rather than acting on “revealed” information- which is what the two of us beleive (I suspect), but not something the church/Catholics would agree with.

If you told the church to just declare their position, they would counter that they can’t, because they don’t know.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

This seems to assume that the church just makes up what they proclaim, rather than acting on “revealed” information- which is what the two of us beleive (I suspect), but not something the church/Catholics would agree with.

If you told the church to just declare their position, they would counter that they can’t, because they don’t know.

Is there something wrong with that?

Doesn’t this just prove that your previously stated belief is wrong?

 

[adrift]

Honestly… The Catholic Church should just make a declaration from the seat of Peter once and for all on what happens to unbaptized babies and stillborn children then call it a night.

This is obviously a very important topic and the CC won’t touch it for obvious reasons. It needs to happen.

You must remember that it is not our place to judge. Just like the Church cannot determine what happened to Judas so the Church cannot say what happens to children. I do not know why you said unbaptized babies and still born as if they are two separate occurrence. Still born are babies that are unbaptized. The Church doesn’t know and cannot say. The only way that it can be infallibly taught is if it always been taught. It can’t just make up new dogma. Shame on you for your sarcastic post. You are not being respectful. :tsktsk:

 

[dronald]

You must remember that it is not our place to judge. Just like the Church cannot determine what happened to Judas so the Church cannot say what happens to children. I do not know why you said unbaptized babies and still born as if they are two separate occurrence. Still born are babies that are unbaptized. The Church doesn’t know and cannot say. The only way that it can be infallibly taught is if it always been taught. It can’t just make up new dogma. Shame on you for your sarcastic post. You are not being respectful. :tsktsk:

I assure you that I’m very serious. How can the Church in one place declare that a infant must be baptized and not know why?

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

Because as stated by a Catholic here, the teaching would cause controversy. No matter what the CC officially states as truth in regards to infant Baptism it’s going to cause a lot of conflict. I’m not sure if God would be silent on a matter of truth for the sake of human reasoning. If it’s true that an unbaptized baby is destined for eternal damnation or some type of limbo, then God would reveal that without apology. If however an unbaptized baby goes to Heaven (as most Protestants believe) then the Protestants were right all along, and that would be just terrible.

I fully understand the human reasoning that it has never been defined.

That is not an accurate characterization. “Human reasoning” is not at work at all. The CC and EOC have not refused to pronounce on a subject because it is controversial or may cause dissension. Witness the Ecumenical Councils of the undivided church–the first eight–almost all fraught with controversy with some divisions lasting to this day. So were Humanae Vitae and Dominus Jesus in more recent times.

I would suggest reading The Hope Of Salvation For Infants Who Die Without Being Baptised (2007) by the International Theological Commission to get a real idea of the principles involved and what is at work in the history of the problem and a current attempt at solution. It’s lengthy and detailed. But if you’re going to ask a technical question, . . .

The doctrinal or moral pronouncements of the Magisterium are generally in the face of a heresy. Theological schools of thought on a subject within the bounds of orthodoxy are free to explore the issues to uncover latent truth in them. Since every effort–mostly appropriate–was made to baptize infants anyways both in the Christian territories and even in mission countries, the question of the exact state of unbaptized infants who died was generally a theoretical one and up to theological schools of thought to explore.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

I assure you that I’m very serious. How can the Church in one place declare that a infant must be baptized and not know why?

Because Christ commands it.

Christ didn’t exclude children when He said that unless we are born again of water and spirit, we would not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. John 3

And Later St. Peter said that this promise (Baptism) was for us and our children. Acts 2:38-39

What other compelling reason there is, other than our Lord commanding it?

 

[adrift]

I assure you that I’m very serious. How can the Church in one place declare that a infant must be baptized and not know why?

What makes you believe that the Church doesn’t know why?

Isaiah45_9 has laid out the reason so I don’t need to repeat it.

 

[po18guy]

Because as stated by a Catholic here, the teaching would cause controversy.

What does that have to do with anything? God has not revealed it. Period. Why is this so hard to accept?

I’m not sure if God would be silent on a matter of truth for the sake of human reasoning.

Based on…?

God would reveal that without apology.

Again, this is based on…?

If however an unbaptized baby goes to Heaven (as most Protestants believe) then the Protestants were right all along, and that would be just terrible.

Since this is not in the bible, where did it come from? Nature (this world) abhors a vacuum, so man makes things up. The spirit ponders mystery.

I fully understand the human reasoning that it has never been defined.

You believe that the Catholic Church uses purely human reasonoinhg?

Frankly, your answers are beginning to sound shallow and/or insulting. Please refer to the forum conduct rules.

 

[dronald]

What does that have to do with anything? God has not revealed it. Period. Why is this so hard to accept?
Based on…?
Again, this is based on…?
Since this is not in the bible, where did it come from? Nature (this world) abhors a vacuum, so man makes things up. The spirit ponders mystery.
You believe that the Catholic Church uses purely human reasonoinhg?

Based on the quote that I was following up on here:

I imagine the Holy Spirit doesn’t want to make the declaration for a very good reason. If the Church declares that unbaptized children will not go to Heaven, it would discourage and hurt many people needlessly. If the Church declares that unbaptized children will go to Heaven, then people will neglect to have their children baptized in direct contradiction to Christ’s command.

I was defending that this is purely human reasoning as God would reveal truth without apology. This has been my suspicion on Baptism of infants, why in the world wouldn’t God want us to know the fate of our children?

Frankly, your answers are beginning to sound shallow and/or insulting. Please refer to the forum conduct rules.

Then I must humbly and sincerely ask for anyone’s forgiveness if I have offended anyone. But I do believe this to be true, why is it so hard to accept that Jesus always spoke positively of children and the kingdom of Heaven belongs to such as them?

Why not just make it official? Children who by no fault of their own went unbaptized are not going to Hell for all of eternity… Or some type of limbo. I don’t understand why God doesn’t want us to know?

 

[QNDNNDQDCE]

All men are in need of salvation, even infants. This is due to a doctrine called original sin. The denial of this is called Pelagianism.

 

[po18guy]

Based on the quote that I was following up on here:

Two opinions, then. OK.

I was defending that this is purely human reasoning as God would reveal truth without apology. This has been my suspicion on Baptism of infants, why in the world wouldn’t God want us to know the fate of our children?

You are the exception, rather than the rule! God did reveal that we should baptize our children. He did not leave us orphans. Not baptizing children traces only a short while back, and to certain men. Problem.

But I do believe this to be true, why is it so hard to accept that Jesus always spoke positively of children and the kingdom of Heaven belongs to such as them?

Your communion does not have the authority to hold the baptism of children as efficacious or as bound in heaven. The Catholic, Orthodox, and numerous protestant denominations do. Time to switch thinking and denomination.

Why not just make it official? Children who by no fault of their own went unbaptized are not going to Hell for all of eternity… Or some type of limbo. I don’t understand why God doesn’t want us to know?

When God reveals it, you will be among the first to know. Until then, we baptize our children first thing - just as the scales feel from Saul’s eyes and he rose and was baptized. As the Gentiles in Acts 10 were immediately baptized. Why wait and doubt?

Don’t live in fear or terror because of adhering to a 500-600 year old man-made doctrine of the “believer’s baptism”

 

[Porknpie]

Why not just make it official? Children who by no fault of their own went unbaptized are not going to Hell for all of eternity… Or some type of limbo.

DRonald, the Church can not make it “official” as there is nothing in the Deposit of Faith that we can draw upon: scripture does not address this question nor does the Tradition handed down from the apostles. It’s an area of theological speculation and my own speculation is that an all-loving God will take care of the most innocent.

I don’t understand why God doesn’t want us to know?

Neither do I but we need to do our part by baptzing infants as he directed us and trust in his love and mercy.

PnP

 

[zz912]

I was defending that this is purely human reasoning as God would reveal truth without apology.

Why not just make it official? Children who by no fault of their own went unbaptized are not going to Hell for all of eternity… Or some type of limbo. I don’t understand why God doesn’t want us to know?

God has not given mankind every bit of knowledge. Some things He has decided not to reveal to us as yet (like how Purgatory works, or the fate of unbaptised children), and some things we are incapable of understanding completely (like the Trinity).

Your claim that God has given us knowledge of everything that will happen in Heaven is the height of arrogance.