Infant Baptism

[veegriffin]

What is the reasoning behind the Catholic Church choosing to perform infant baptisms? My husband seems very adamant that Baptism should be self-proclaimed and that we shouldn’t baptize our child until they can make the conscious decision to follow Christ themselves. I am Catholic but he is Protestant, so I realize that he was baptized later in life and therefore views it differently. He has no qualms about our child being baptized in the Catholic Church, he just wants our child to proclaim themselves that they choose to follow Christ.

I know that baptism is performed with the Godparents and Parents speaking for the child, but at Conformation the child will renew their baptismal vows as an adult to confirm their faith in Christ and the Church and will speak for themselves. I’ve tried explaining this to him, but he still doesn’t seem comfortable with the idea of infant baptism. Does anyone have advice or better reasoning? Or is it okay to wait and baptize our child when they’re a little older? Thank you for any help.

 

[cdodge]

Baptism “marks” us as belonging to Christ, and enters us in to the Body of Christ. Who wouldn’t want that as soon as possible? Also, for believing Catholics, Baptism is necessary for salvation. I don’t have the CCC with me, but its in there!

 

[BabyFang]

“People were bringing even infants to him that he might touch them, and when the disciples saw this, they rebuked them. Jesus, however, called the children to himself and said, 'Let the children come to me and do not prevent them.”
Luke 18:15-16

 

[Texas_Roofer]

You are asking very different questions

What is the reasoning behind the Catholic Church choosing to perform infant baptisms?

The baptism is aligning the child with the teachings of Christ, as opposed to the sin now and we will try to clean it up later philosophy

My husband seems very adamant that Baptism should be self-proclaimed and that we shouldn’t baptize our child until they can make the conscious decision to follow Christ themselves. I am Catholic but he is Protestant, so I realize that he was baptized later in life and therefore views it differently. He has no qualms about our child being baptized in the Catholic Church, he just wants our child to proclaim themselves that they choose to follow Christ.

I know that baptism is performed with the Godparents and Parents speaking for the child, but at Conformation the child will renew their baptismal vows as an adult to confirm their faith in Christ and the Church and will speak for themselves. I’ve tried explaining this to him, but he still doesn’t seem comfortable with the idea of infant baptism. Does anyone have advice or better reasoning?

I would ask him to consider how many other decisions he expects you and he to make for the child? (circumcision, vaccinations, attend school, eat healthy, no playing in the street, etc…) I will promise you the child will not always make the best decision, yet in all other cases he wants to intervene and do what is best however on this issue why exclude the best option?

Or is it okay to wait and baptize our child when they’re a little older? Thank you for any help.

 

[Will_B]

Baptism is just as much an entry into the Church as circumcision was entry into the the Jewish faith… It was decreed by God to be done on the 8th day… Parents didn’t wait and ask their son in his teen years “Do you want to become Jewish?” Now this is what you have to do.

Being baptised marks and seals a child as Christ own forever. The graces obtained at baptism are countless, because you are Christ’s.

I know several ex Baptist ministers who have converted and now see the truth in infant baptism.

Pray for your spouse… With study in this area he will know the truth.

 

[Seatuck]

Baptism replaced circumcision. Babies were circumcised.

 

[kubuck]

I would also ask the question at what point is the child able to make that decision? What does a little older mean? Most protestants are baptized in their pre or early teen years and I’d argue that they aren’t of sound mind or judgement in most cases there either; at least the law doesn’t think so - they can’t drink, vote, drive, join the army, etc.

As parents, we are told that the first duty of education lies with us. It is our responsibility to educate and morally form our children and if we can’t bring them into communion with the Church, we can’t truly do that. They won’t be able to receive the sacramental graces that we need for life and salvation with out the cleansing waters of baptism.

Besides, what is he afraid of? Baptism doesn’t take away free choice - if the child, when it is of sound mind decides to shun God, he’ll still be able to do that regardless of Baptism.

 

[japhy]

If you have a little time to read what the Church has to say on the matter, I strongly suggest you read Pastoralis Actio, the Instruction on Infant Baptism from 1980.

 

[SMHW]

What is the reasoning behind the Catholic Church choosing to perform infant baptisms? My husband seems very adamant that Baptism should be self-proclaimed and that we shouldn’t baptize our child until they can make the conscious decision to follow Christ themselves. I am Catholic but he is Protestant, so I realize that he was baptized later in life and therefore views it differently. He has no qualms about our child being baptized in the Catholic Church, he just wants our child to proclaim themselves that they choose to follow Christ.

I don’t know your husband’s background but I’m guessing he comes from a tradition that considers baptism an obedient sign of an internal conversion but doesn’t believe baptism has any actual effect on the person being baptized. He probably considers baptism a response to grace.

Our Catholic understanding of baptism is very different. We believe baptism effects a change to the soul of the person being baptized. We believe baptism is a source of grace and that parents would be negligent to deny those graces to their infant children.

 

[Lancer]

First…here is what the CCC says about what baptism actually is…does (all emphasis is mine):

1213 Holy Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit (vitae spiritualis ianua),4 and the door which gives access to the other sacraments. Through Baptism** we are freed from sin** and reborn as sons of God; we become** members of Christ**, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mission: "Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration through water in the
word."5

**VI. THE NECESSITY OF BAPTISM **
1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.60 He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.6162 The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are **“reborn of water and the Spirit.” **God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.

MOST IMPORTANT–Note that your child will be really changed…in the sacrament of baptism…its not a “ceremony”…but a “reality”… a reality that is real yet unseen (think of something like gravity…unseen…can’t touch it…is it real or just culturally accepted?). The child you brought into the world and into the Church for baptism…dies in Christ’s death and is raised in his resurrection…as a new person…as an adopted child of God the Father. The child you leave the Church with is not the same child you brought into the Church…in a really, really big and important way.

Regarding infants…will you and your husband wait for your child to decide if he/she needs to get the shots to ward off diseases (measles, mumps, etc,)?..why not wait for the child to decide how healthy a lifestyle he/she wants to live…why force the child to undergo anything like this medical treatment? Also, the Jewish covenant with God required circumcision on the eighth day…who made that decision?..Infant baptism is much more…but if God used parents once before for a child to be bought into his covenant family…why would he not do so again… into the everlasting covenant in his Son?

Second…here is what the CCC says on infant baptism:

The Baptism of infants
1250 Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which all men are called.50 The sheer gratuitousness of the grace of salvation is particularly manifest in infant Baptism. The Church and the parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth.51

1251 Christian parents will recognize that this practice also accords with their role as nurturers of the life that God has entrusted to them.52

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

53. Cf. Acts 16:15,33; 18:8; 1 Cor 1:16;(look up these passages)
​

​

Lastly, what if you (and The Church) are 100 percent right about the necessity of baptism for salvation…but…your husband prevails…and your child is NOT baptized…and (God forbid) dies…your child loses…he/she does not have the sanctifying grace to enter heaven…can’t see, breath or exist without it in heaven But what if your husband is 100 percent right about no necessity of baptism for infants…but…you prevail and your child IS baptized and you (and The Church) are 100 percent wrong…what harm is there to the child who was baptized as an infant?
As an adult…can’t he/she renounce their faith that you proclaimed and accepted for them as a baby…at their baptism? If God honors a parents’ …“Yes, I believe” for a baby child…don’t you think that he will honor that same grown child’s “No, I don’t believe”??
Also, were you married in the Catholic Church?..Did your husband give “his word” that he would let your children be raised in the Catholic Church? If so…what about “his word”…what does it really mean as a man?..as a husband?..as a father?
My prayers for you and your family…for the Holy Spirit’s guidance in making this decision…and that charity and peace prevail…no matter what you decide.

Pax Christi

 

[jmcrae]

Why would you not want your children to be able to go to Heaven, even from the earliest age? I mean, of course we hope and believe that they will live to be old enough to make their own choices, but God forbid, what happens if they don’t? Why would you even consider taking such a chance, with their souls?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

What is the reasoning behind the Catholic Church choosing to perform infant baptisms? My husband seems very adamant that Baptism should be self-proclaimed and that we shouldn’t baptize our child until they can make the conscious decision to follow Christ themselves. I am Catholic but he is Protestant, so I realize that he was baptized later in life and therefore views it differently. He has no qualms about our child being baptized in the Catholic Church, he just wants our child to proclaim themselves that they choose to follow Christ.

I know that baptism is performed with the Godparents and Parents speaking for the child, but at Conformation the child will renew their baptismal vows as an adult to confirm their faith in Christ and the Church and will speak for themselves. I’ve tried explaining this to him, but he still doesn’t seem comfortable with the idea of infant baptism. Does anyone have advice or better reasoning? Or is it okay to wait and baptize our child when they’re a little older? Thank you for any help.

Because Christians did not feel that they should prohibit infants and children from receiving the Grace of Baptism and restrict them from becoming adopted children of God and members of Christ’s Mystical Body.

Remember that Jewish children were required to be presented in the temple on the 8th day after birth and males circumcised, thus becoming members of the people of God.

 

[Cluny]

I know all the arguments against infant baptism. I was raised a Southern Baptist, but I got saved and realized that these arguments were all traditions and precepts of men.

In Acts 2, the hearers at Pentecost were “pricked to the heart” by St. Peter’s proclamation of the Risen Christ. When asked, “What shall we do?”, he replied, “Repent and be baptised…for this promise is to you AND TO YOUR CHILDREN.”

In 1 Cor 10: 1 ff, St. Paul says that ALL the Israelites were “baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.” Does this “all” exclude the children? What would have happened to the children had their parents allowed them to decide for themselves whether to undergo this baptism?

BTW–it also says they ate the same spiritual food and drink! So there you have not only infant baptism, but infant communion.

Moreover, in a society where chlidren were under such authority of their parents that marriages were arranged for them when they were 2, 3, and 4 years old, do you actually think these same parents would “let their children decide for themselves when they were older?”

Furthermore, in the Jewish Rite of Mikveh (a ritual cleansing), this is part of the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. (You can look u p about the Mikveh yourself on the web.) You will find out that this is even required if a Jewish couple adopts a Gentile baby of either sex, and wants to raise the child as a Jew.

So, you see, infant baptism is not something invented by that nasty ole pope feller, but has precedent in pre-Christian Jewish practice.

 

[veegriffin]

Thank you all for your replies, I agree with everything you’ve said. With your help I’ve been able to better organize my thought so and now know where to look. Thank you for your help and your prayers. God bless.

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

Part1

Infant Baptism: Some (not all) Protestants are of the opinion that there is no scriptural evidence to back up infant baptism. But Catholics believe there is, and that church history and the early fathers bear this out. We believe that baptizing them brings them into the kingdom of God, and the faith of the parents stands for them until they are old enough to choose to continue their faith or turn away from it. But the seal is on them and they can always come home.

Let’s take this first passage in Matthew 19:13-14: “Then children were brought to him that he may lay his hands on them and pray. The disciples rebuked them, but Jesus said, 'Let the children come to me, and do not prevent them; for the kingdom to heaven belongs so such as these.”

Now the word for children used in Matthew for “children” is the Greek word “paidion,” which means “infants” or in some cases little children. Now since this word has a dual meaning, how do we figure out which one it is? Well, the story is also covered in Luke 18:15-16:“People were bringing even infants to Him that He might touch them, and when the disciples saw this, they rebuked them. Jesus however, called the children to himself and said, ‘Let the children come to me and do not prevent them; for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.’”

Now the word Luke specifically uses for these children is “brephos,” which means “infants” and “unborn children or children in the womb.” He then, in referring to these same infants, calls them the same Greek word as Matthew, “paidion.” This shows that of the two possible meanings of “aidon,” “infants” is the correct understanding.
Now why is this important? Because Jesus is laying hands on them. When Christ himself does this, this is obviously sacramental. More importantly, he is doing this to babies that have no concept of the protestant idea of “making an adult decision to be saved.” The parents’ faith substitutes for their children. He says “do not prevent them; for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.” So why would Protestants hinder their children by refusing them baptism until they are adults?

In Luke 7:2-8, The faith of the centurion that comes up to Jesus is what has his servant healed, all the way in his house. His servant has no idea what is going on. Or the mother that believes and because of her belief, her child is healed of a demon. The lack of faith or awareness in the infant is supplanted by the faith of the church until the child can decide for itself. We do not hinder the children from the kingdom of God, until they are old enough to leave it themselves.
Another very important passage is this one by Saint Paul. Colossians 2:11-12: “In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not administered by hand, by stripping off the carnal body, with the circumcision of Christ. You were buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised with Him through faith in the power of God, who raised Him from the dead.’”

This passage shows that Paul equates baptism of the New Covenant with the circumcision of the Old Covenant. The thing about circumcision is, Jews did it to their children at eight days old. They did not wait on this, for if their children were not circumcised they were NOT under the blessings of the Old Covenant. The people within the Church felt this meant that infants not baptized sacramentally would not enter Heaven, but go to “Limbo.” Limbo is not and never has been an official dogma of the Church, it was speculation on theologian’s part. The Church under the new Pope (Benedict) has stated that it believes unbaptized infants go to heaven, based on the statement by Christ that “the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.” Again, another case showing that God can save outside of His sacraments, but that doesn’t mean we should play with fire and not baptize our children, because who are you to know when the age of reason is? We trust in His mercy with our infants, but we also do what He commanded us, because baptism saves. Baptism is a sure thing, and it is the way He gave us, whereas not baptizing is a bit too much of an assumption.

Now I am going to show the same verse I showed further above, but with the next verse that comes after it.
Acts 2:38-39: “Peter said to them, ‘Repent and be baptized, every one of you,in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is made to you and to your children and to all those far off, whomever the Lord our God will call.’”

In the above, repentance and baptism is what gives salvation. That promise is given to the adults and their children. If salvation is for children too, and baptism is part of it, then children (infants also, as shown in the gospels) must be baptized.
Acts 16:15: “After she and her household had been baptized, she offered us an invitation, ‘If you consider me a bielever in the Lord, come and stay at my home,’ and she prevailed on us.”
Acts 16:33: " He took them in at that hour of the night and bathed their wounds; then he and all his family were baptized at once."

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

Part 2:

1 Corinthians 1:16: “I baptized the household of Stephanas also; beyond that I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.”
In the above three verses, you have three entire families, not just families but households which could be more than one family, in an ancient Jewish culture with no effective forms of birth control, and protestants expect to say that there were no tiny children or babies in them? And these are just three mentioned, of course there were probably more. I think infant baptism is strongly implied in the Bible.

A final objection from the protestant camp is that we are to imitate Jesus, and Jesus got baptized as an adult, as did many Christians. Well of course, as an adult is when Jesus started His ministry. That’s what’s important. And the first thing He did was get baptized. All the Christians that heard and believed got baptized IMMEDIATELY, and that is because they heard the message as adults. It is strongly implied they baptized their children as well, since they baptized their families as well. This is almost a non-argument.

Are we expected to believe that based on this argument, we should not only wait on baptism, but not be a good Christian AT ALL until we are adults since that is when Jesus started His ministry? It’s preposterous, and is quite illogical as I hope I have shown. True, there are some cases of early church fathers that waited until adulthood to get baptized. This is only because as one father said, since baptism actually forgives all your sins and gives you a clean slate, if people knew the seriousness of what they do when they continue to sin, they would not get baptized. With that logic, some played with fire and waited until later in life. The church does not play fire, as a whole, with our infants however, and the teaching is to baptize our children.

Hippolytus: “Where there is no scarcity of water the stream shall flow through the baptismal font or pour into it from above; but if water is scarce, whether on a constant condition or on occasion, then use whatever water is available. Let them remove their clothing. Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them” (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D.215]).

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

Oh and for another reference, Polycarp of Smyrna knew the apostle John, and his name means “much fruit.” Apparently he had Christian parents, and in a letter he stated “For 86 years I have served Him,” implying based off the age that he, also, was baptized as an infant.

 

[Randy_Carson]

What is the reasoning behind the Catholic Church choosing to perform infant baptisms? My husband seems very adamant that Baptism should be self-proclaimed and that we shouldn’t baptize our child until they can make the conscious decision to follow Christ themselves. I am Catholic but he is Protestant, so I realize that he was baptized later in life and therefore views it differently. He has no qualms about our child being baptized in the Catholic Church, he just wants our child to proclaim themselves that they choose to follow Christ.

I know that baptism is performed with the Godparents and Parents speaking for the child, but at Conformation the child will renew their baptismal vows as an adult to confirm their faith in Christ and the Church and will speak for themselves. I’ve tried explaining this to him, but he still doesn’t seem comfortable with the idea of infant baptism. Does anyone have advice or better reasoning? Or is it okay to wait and baptize our child when they’re a little older? Thank you for any help.

INFANT BAPTISM PROVED FROM SCRIPTURE

Old Covenant

Genesis 17:9-14
9 Then God said to Abraham, “As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. 10 This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. 12 For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner—those who are not your offspring. 13 Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. 14 Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”

Leviticus 12:3
3 On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised.

These texts show the circumcision of eight-day-old babies as the way of entering into the Old Covenant.

Connection to New Covenant

Col 2:11-12
In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of flesh in the circumcision of Christ; 12and you were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

Baptism is the new “circumcision of Christ” for all people of the New Covenant.

Do Infants Need Baptism?

Job 14:1-4
1 "Man born of woman is of few days and full of trouble. 2 He springs up like a flower and withers away; like a fleeting shadow, he does not endure. 3 Do you fix your eye on such a one? Will you bring him before you for judgment? 4 Who can bring what is pure from the impure? No one!

Psalm 51:5
5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

We are conceived in the iniquity of sin. This shows the need for baptism from the moment of conception.

Jesus Extols Child-like Faith

Matthew 18:2-5
2 He called a little child and had him stand among them. 3And he said: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus says unless we become like children, we cannot enter into heaven. So why would children be excluded from baptism?

Jesus Receives Little Children and Infants

Matt 19:13-15
13Then little children were brought to Jesus for him to place his hands on them and pray for them. But the disciples rebuked those who brought them. 14 Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” 15 When he had placed his hands on them, he went on from there.

Mark 10:13-16
13People were bringing little children to Jesus to have him touch them, but the disciples rebuked them. 14When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 15I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” 16And he took the children in his arms, put his hands on them and blessed them.

Jesus says to let the children come to Him for the kingdom of God also belongs to them. There is no age limit on entering the kingdom, and no age limit for being eligible for baptism.

Luke 18:15-17
15People were also bringing babies to Jesus to have him touch them. When the disciples saw this, they rebuked them. 16But Jesus called the children to him and said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 17I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.”

(cont.)

 

[Randy_Carson]

The Church Begins to Preach Baptism

Acts 2:38-39
38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”

Peter did not say, “Every one of you adults”; he said, “Every one of you” without qualification and added “the promise (of the Holy Spirit) is for you and your children”. Baptism and the Holy Spirit are frequently connected throughout the Bible (cf. Ez. 36:25-27, Mt. 3:16, Jn. 3:5).

Acts 10:47-48
Then Peter said, 47"Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have." 48So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days.

Peter baptized the entire house of Cornelius which probably included infants and young children. There is not one word in this passage (or any other in scripture) about baptism being limited to adults.

Acts 16:15
13On the Sabbath we went outside the city gate to the river, where we expected to find a place of prayer. We sat down and began to speak to the women who had gathered there. 14One of those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul’s message. 15When she and the members of her household were baptized, she invited us to her home.

Paul baptized Lydia and her entire household. The word “household” comes from the Greek word “oikos” which is a household that includes infants and children. Further, Paul baptizes the household based on Lydia’s faith, not the faith of the members of the household. This demonstrates that parents can present their children for baptism based on the parents’ faith, not the children’s faith.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

The Baptism of infants

1250 Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which all men are called.50 The sheer gratuitousness of the grace of salvation is particularly manifest in infant Baptism. The Church and the parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth.51

1251 Christian parents will recognize that this practice also accords with their role as nurturers of the life that God has entrusted to them.52

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

 

[jmcrae]

If he isn’t convinced by all of that, you can always print it all out and hit him over the head with it.

(I’m kidding, of course!!)