E
Elzee
Guest
Where is infant dedication in the bible? I’ve never understood the biblical basis for this practice.
- Status
E
Evan
Guest
If they die before the age of discression (6 years old or so) I would assume the same thing happens to them as happens to unborn children who die.
We don’t know. There seem to be 2 theorys. (Franciscan and Thomistic ? ). Either they never enter heaven, but don’t suffer the pains of hell (Limbo), or they are informed as to the Gospel at death and make a choice like the angels and then head for heaven or hell.
CCC 1261 * As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: “Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,” allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.*
J
John_Paul_III
Guest
Baptist do not believe in original sin. They do believe that we all fall short of the glory of God, therefore we need Jesus Christ in our lives. They believe that when a person accepts Jesus Christ into their lives that they will be saved and go to Heaven. Many teach the once saved always saved message. But when it comes to the Eucharist their faith falls short, they do not accept Jesus’ own words from a literal view point, like they do throughout the bible, “kinda interesting”.
The Baptist are big believers in dunking, because after all John the Baptist dunked Jesus so they too should be dunked. John the Baptist was preaching about the coming of the Messiah, converting the Jews over and baptizing them, and this is where the founders of the Baptist church base their faith on, this voluntary public baptism.
The Church believes in Baptism by water, blood and desire.
You should not worry about how the Baptist do it or do not do it, at the end of time it is not our call anyway, but perhaps with our daily prayers of the Rosary, and in each and every Mass, God will listen to us and the Saints in Heaven. And either in this life or the next “purgatory” they will find the truth and accept the gift of salvation from God.
The Baptist are big believers in dunking, because after all John the Baptist dunked Jesus so they too should be dunked. John the Baptist was preaching about the coming of the Messiah, converting the Jews over and baptizing them, and this is where the founders of the Baptist church base their faith on, this voluntary public baptism.
The Church believes in Baptism by water, blood and desire.
You should not worry about how the Baptist do it or do not do it, at the end of time it is not our call anyway, but perhaps with our daily prayers of the Rosary, and in each and every Mass, God will listen to us and the Saints in Heaven. And either in this life or the next “purgatory” they will find the truth and accept the gift of salvation from God.
M
Mickey
Guest
John Paul III:
I know baptists who do believe in original sin.
R
RCCDefender
Guest
John Paul III:
Actually, I don’t think the Bible explicitly states that Jesus was fully immersed…
J
Joseph_Kopsho
Guest
I consider Infant Baptism and Infant Dedication to be one and the same because I consider Infant Baptism to be just a dedication of infants to Jesus. I do not believe that Infant Baptism imparts salvation to the infant.
M
MariaG
Guest
I completely missed post #15.Sorry Cheddarsox.
He did say keep not the little Children from Him.
And early Church Fathers spoke out on this also.
Early Teachings on Infant Baptism
I said that it was not OSAS to avoid confusion by those who mistakenly think this.
You actually will still be part of the family, just one who will find themselves in Hell if you choose not to continue to follow Christ. Since in Baptism God leaves an indelible mark on our soul, that would mean we can choose to walk away from our family, but we become the “black sheep”.
As far as I am aware. I know of not one group who will not baptize children but think there is some sort of miracle from God involved. It is just a public declaration. I do know some who once the decision is made, if the believer walks away, they are shunned for their actions and not let back into the community of believers, but it is not connected to the belief that God did anything during the baptism.
Yep. Like I said, you don’t have to agree to understand.
God Bless,
Maria
A
ahimsaman72
Guest
John Paul III:
http://www.sbc.net/bfm/bfmcomparison.asp
Gen. 1:27; Gen. 2:7; John 1:23; Gen. 3:4-7; Gen. 3:22-24; Rom. 5:12,14,19, 21; Rom. 7:23-25; Rom. 11:18,22,32-33; Col. 1:21.
Baptists by and large believe in original sin. Here is an excerpt from the 1925 Southern Baptist Faith and Message:
http://www.sbc.net/bfm/bfmcomparison.asp
are under condemnation, and as soon as they are capable of moral action, become actual transgressors.
Gen. 1:27; Gen. 2:7; John 1:23; Gen. 3:4-7; Gen. 3:22-24; Rom. 5:12,14,19, 21; Rom. 7:23-25; Rom. 11:18,22,32-33; Col. 1:21.
M
MariaG
Guest
Is this really original sin? I think the baptist goes more for the “completely corrupt” and the Catholic view is it is just damaged.
Or maybe it is original sin with a different definition?
If this is so, why do baptists not believe in baptism anything happens?
God Bless,
Maria
Or maybe it is original sin with a different definition?
If this is so, why do baptists not believe in baptism anything happens?
God Bless,
Maria
L
Loboto-Me
Guest
I would suppose dedication would make sense to non-catholics since unlike Catholics they don’t have the sacrament of confirmation to do the conscious “I do” to Christ. The “I do’s” are said throughout our lives, not just through our parents and confirmation, but as our faith grows we “renew” our vows.
God most certainly is all merciful, but considering the Apostles baptised whole households, I would have a problem going against the early Church.
God most certainly is all merciful, but considering the Apostles baptised whole households, I would have a problem going against the early Church.
A
ahimsaman72
Guest
I think the one line that is most important is this one from my previous post:
"his posterity inherit a nature corrupt and in bondage to sin"
So, here you see inherited sin (original sin) which is corrupt and in bondage (total depravity) so that there are two linked doctrines in one sentence. This was deleted by the updated confession in the 1960’s.
What is your definition of original sin?
Believing that baptism saves you from judgement 1) seems to be salvation based on works rather than on faith and 2) the Baptists use passages from Scripture that speak of people who come to faith in Christ and then are baptized as the supreme example for us all.
Peace…
P
Philthy
Guest
Baptisms primary role as a public profession of faith is quite a stretch if you ask me. A baby dedication has absolutely no salvific effect according to its proponents - that would be a direct contradiction of Sola Fide.
Lets investigate this “public profession of faith” concept. First, when you look at the account of Philip and the Eunoch from acts:
"As they travelled along the road they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, there is water. What is to prevent my being baptized?" Then he ordered the chariot to stop, and Philip and the eunuch both went down into the water, and he baptized him. when they came out of the water the spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away…”
So, what was to prevent his being baptized? The answer is NOTHING! Certainly not the fact that there was no “public” there to profess to - that was irrelevent. The more I think about baby dedications, and one of my children had one, the more it seems like a pure invention of man to ease the conscience of those whose church has denied them the security of baptizing their infants. Just my thoughts, though.
As far as the logic for baptism for infants, and the remission of sin which it accomplishes, several biblical truths converge to validate it:
Jesus Christ was baptized. Why? “…to fulfill all righteousness” Complete righteousness requires baptism evidently.
Jesus said in John 3:5 “Unless you are born of WATER AND SPIRIT you have no life in you” which fundamentalists desperately attempt to disconnect from baptism by claiming the “water” in this verse refers to the breaking of water which occurs in childbirth. Man, that is desperate. Anyhow, when you look at Paul’s words in Titus 3:5 “…he saved us through the bath of rebirth and renewal by the holy spirit.” Here we have this same WATER and SPIRIT entity specifically effecting salvation. Can anyone in good conscience actually claim that “born of water” and “bath of rebirth” which (together with the spirit) produce “life” and “salvation” are not one and the same? Katolikos taught me that - thanks Jay.
Lastly, Jesus specifically rebukes his disciples when they attempted to stop parents from bringing infants to him - here is the CA Sacraments tract:
"Now Fundamentalists say this event does not apply to young children or infants since it implies the children to which Christ was referring were able to approach him on their own. (Older translations have, “Suffer the little children to come unto me,” which seems to suggest they could do so under their own power.) Fundamentalists conclude the passage refers only to children old enough to walk, and, presumably, capable of sinning.
But the text in Luke 18:15 says, “Now they were bringing even infants to him” (Greek, Prosepheron de auto kai ta brepha). The Greek word *brepha *means “infants”—children who are quite unable to approach Christ on their own and who could not possibly make a conscious decision to “accept Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior.” And that is precisely the problem. Fundamentalists refuse to permit the baptism of infants and young children, because they are not yet capable of making such a conscious act. But notice what Jesus said: “to such as these [referring to the infants and children who had been brought to him by their mothers] belongs the kingdom of heaven.” The Lord did not require them to make a conscious decision. He says that they are precisely the kind of people who can come to him and receive the kingdom. So on what basis, Fundamentalists should be asked, can infants and young children be excluded from the sacrament of baptism? If Jesus said “let them come unto me,” who are we to say “no,” and withhold baptism from them?
I agree, and all this without a peep from the ECFs who bolster the Catholic position.
Phil
Lets investigate this “public profession of faith” concept. First, when you look at the account of Philip and the Eunoch from acts:
"As they travelled along the road they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, there is water. What is to prevent my being baptized?" Then he ordered the chariot to stop, and Philip and the eunuch both went down into the water, and he baptized him. when they came out of the water the spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away…”
So, what was to prevent his being baptized? The answer is NOTHING! Certainly not the fact that there was no “public” there to profess to - that was irrelevent. The more I think about baby dedications, and one of my children had one, the more it seems like a pure invention of man to ease the conscience of those whose church has denied them the security of baptizing their infants. Just my thoughts, though.
As far as the logic for baptism for infants, and the remission of sin which it accomplishes, several biblical truths converge to validate it:
Jesus Christ was baptized. Why? “…to fulfill all righteousness” Complete righteousness requires baptism evidently.
Jesus said in John 3:5 “Unless you are born of WATER AND SPIRIT you have no life in you” which fundamentalists desperately attempt to disconnect from baptism by claiming the “water” in this verse refers to the breaking of water which occurs in childbirth. Man, that is desperate. Anyhow, when you look at Paul’s words in Titus 3:5 “…he saved us through the bath of rebirth and renewal by the holy spirit.” Here we have this same WATER and SPIRIT entity specifically effecting salvation. Can anyone in good conscience actually claim that “born of water” and “bath of rebirth” which (together with the spirit) produce “life” and “salvation” are not one and the same? Katolikos taught me that - thanks Jay.
Lastly, Jesus specifically rebukes his disciples when they attempted to stop parents from bringing infants to him - here is the CA Sacraments tract:
"Now Fundamentalists say this event does not apply to young children or infants since it implies the children to which Christ was referring were able to approach him on their own. (Older translations have, “Suffer the little children to come unto me,” which seems to suggest they could do so under their own power.) Fundamentalists conclude the passage refers only to children old enough to walk, and, presumably, capable of sinning.
But the text in Luke 18:15 says, “Now they were bringing even infants to him” (Greek, Prosepheron de auto kai ta brepha). The Greek word *brepha *means “infants”—children who are quite unable to approach Christ on their own and who could not possibly make a conscious decision to “accept Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior.” And that is precisely the problem. Fundamentalists refuse to permit the baptism of infants and young children, because they are not yet capable of making such a conscious act. But notice what Jesus said: “to such as these [referring to the infants and children who had been brought to him by their mothers] belongs the kingdom of heaven.” The Lord did not require them to make a conscious decision. He says that they are precisely the kind of people who can come to him and receive the kingdom. So on what basis, Fundamentalists should be asked, can infants and young children be excluded from the sacrament of baptism? If Jesus said “let them come unto me,” who are we to say “no,” and withhold baptism from them?
I agree, and all this without a peep from the ECFs who bolster the Catholic position.
Phil
P
Philthy
Guest
and 2) the Baptists use passages from Scripture that speak of people who come to faith in Christ and then are baptized as the supreme example for us all.
Peace…
First off, there is nothing wrong with being baptized as an adult - its done in the Catholic Church all the time. That is not the issue.
Limiting Baptism to adults is Scripturally selective and oblivious of historical context. Of course most of the people in Christs time were being baptized as adults - there was no other choice - they couldnt go back in time.
That supreme example can be viewed a number of ways. One way is to say that they were baptized “after coming to faith”. Another equally valid way of describing it would be to say that they were baptized as soon as possible. For an adult that would require faith. For an infant the faith of the parents suffices, like the healing of the child based on the faith of the parents, and there is no reason to wait. The horse is before the cart in my opinion, all based on perspective.
Phil
C
captaincoog
Guest
One for the many factors in deciding to leave the Baptist denomination was the issue of infant baptism. We had had two of our children, neither of whom was baptised because we held to believer-only baptism, as taught by the Baptist religion. As I began looking further afield into the bigger picture of Christian belief and practice, I realised that it was not only the Catholic Church that taught the necessity of baptism, especially for infants.
If other protestant denoms practiced infant baptism, and not just the CC, then the issue may have more weight behind it. (You can see how I was very prejudiced against the CC!)
I began to wonder if I could possibly be endangering the state of my childrens’ souls in any way because of one denomination’s interpretation of a few verses of the Bible. I had now begun to doubt Baptist theology at it’s very core. “What if they were wrong on this one point? Could they be wrong on other points as well?? This is my childrens’ souls I am gambling with.” These thoughts were what partly started our journey to the greatest thing in the world - the Catholic Church. Needless to say, our two boys were baptised within a week or so of our coming into the Church, and number three was washed clean in the waters of baptism at four weeks.
As far as I can gather from the CCC, Baptism is necessary for salvation, and in the case of an unbaptised infant, we entrust them to the mercy of God. I think the difference between a baptised infant and a non baptised infant is that in the case of a baptised baby, we are absolutely certain of where they are, and in the other case we can carry a confidence but we will not have that certain knowledge until we hopefully get to heaven ourselves. We are bound to obey everything that God commands, but He is not bound to His own decrees.
If other protestant denoms practiced infant baptism, and not just the CC, then the issue may have more weight behind it. (You can see how I was very prejudiced against the CC!)
I began to wonder if I could possibly be endangering the state of my childrens’ souls in any way because of one denomination’s interpretation of a few verses of the Bible. I had now begun to doubt Baptist theology at it’s very core. “What if they were wrong on this one point? Could they be wrong on other points as well?? This is my childrens’ souls I am gambling with.” These thoughts were what partly started our journey to the greatest thing in the world - the Catholic Church. Needless to say, our two boys were baptised within a week or so of our coming into the Church, and number three was washed clean in the waters of baptism at four weeks.
As far as I can gather from the CCC, Baptism is necessary for salvation, and in the case of an unbaptised infant, we entrust them to the mercy of God. I think the difference between a baptised infant and a non baptised infant is that in the case of a baptised baby, we are absolutely certain of where they are, and in the other case we can carry a confidence but we will not have that certain knowledge until we hopefully get to heaven ourselves. We are bound to obey everything that God commands, but He is not bound to His own decrees.
A
ahimsaman72
Guest
First off, there is nothing wrong with being baptized as an adult - its done in the Catholic Church all the time. That is not the issue.
Limiting Baptism to adults is Scripturally selective and oblivious of historical context. Of course most of the people in Christs time were being baptized as adults - there was no other choice - they couldnt go back in time.
That supreme example can be viewed a number of ways. One way is to say that they were baptized “after coming to faith”. Another equally valid way of describing it would be to say that they were baptized as soon as possible. For an adult that would require faith. For an infant the faith of the parents suffices, like the healing of the child based on the faith of the parents, and there is no reason to wait. The horse is before the cart in my opinion, all based on perspective.
Phil
Phil,
I agree with what you are saying here. I was trying to show the Baptist viewpoint without defending it. Sometimes that comes off as odd. This is the hardest point of doctrine for me as a backslidden Baptist leaning towards Catholicism. I see only positives to baptizing children, although my children have not been.
Peace…
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
Baptism is not miraculous - it’s sacramental. Sacraments are ordinary things which are employed to produce effects beyond their own nature, through the action of God’s grace which employs them as means of conferring grace (obviously, that is not a definition of a sacrament).That is not miraculous though - IIRC.
I think we should return to believer’s baptism - though I think the dedication of infants is an excellent idea. There’s no reason not to have both. ##
M
Mickey
Guest
Gottle of Geer:
The Catholic Church does have both believer’s and infant baptism.
M
MariaG
Guest
Gottle of Geer said:
**Miracle -a marvellous event manifesting a supernatural act of God (dictionary.com)
**
If baptism is not a marvellous event manifesting a supernatural act of God I don’t know what is. We can define it more exactly in the Catholic Church, but we can generally catergorize it as a miracle.
Sacrament is frequently misunderstood by non-Catholics. Sometimes they think that the act of pouring water somehow does something, like a magic trick or a “work”. The word miracle clearly puts the “work” in God’s hand without having to explain sacramental.
God Bless,
Maria
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
Other Protestant denominations DO practice infant baptism: United Methodists, Lutherans, and Episcopalians…
O+
H
Harmony1911
Guest
I haven’t read the other posts, this is just what I have gained from researching infant baptism.
The difference between Catholic Baptism and Protestant Baptism is that Catholics believe that something supernatural happens when the baby is baptized. We believe that original sin is actually cleansed from the body, it’s not just ceremonial. Then, as the child grows older they begin going to confession to remove all of their sins that they have accumulated since baptism.
Protestants view Baptism to be a public witness of an inward change that has occured in them. Their baby dedications are not ona spiritual level, they are just presenting their baby to the locals and promising to give them a good Christian home.
Hope this helps? Let me know what your friends come up with after you discuss everyone’s responses with them. I’m in a similar position, defending Baptism to my current boyfriend who is not Catholic.
The difference between Catholic Baptism and Protestant Baptism is that Catholics believe that something supernatural happens when the baby is baptized. We believe that original sin is actually cleansed from the body, it’s not just ceremonial. Then, as the child grows older they begin going to confession to remove all of their sins that they have accumulated since baptism.
Protestants view Baptism to be a public witness of an inward change that has occured in them. Their baby dedications are not ona spiritual level, they are just presenting their baby to the locals and promising to give them a good Christian home.
Hope this helps? Let me know what your friends come up with after you discuss everyone’s responses with them. I’m in a similar position, defending Baptism to my current boyfriend who is not Catholic.
- Status