Infant vs. Believer's Baptism

[Phil12123]

Christians have also always realized that the necessity of water baptism is a normative rather than an absolute necessity. There are exceptions to water baptism: It is possible to be saved through “baptism of blood,” martyrdom for Christ, or through “baptism of desire”, that is, an explicit or even implicit desire for baptism. thus the Catechism of the Catholic Church states: “Those who die for the faith, those who are catechumens, and all those who, without knowing of the Church but acting under the inspiration of grace, seek God sincerely and strive to fulfill his will, are saved even if they have not been baptized” (CCC 1281; the salvation of unbaptized infants is also possible under this system)

Is there any scriptural support for either of the above “exceptions”? And how do the millions of aborted babies fit under either of them?

Several things happen at baptism. First, the spiritual (though not physical) effects of original sin are removed from the soul. This removal is accompanied by an infusion of sanctifying grace, which makes the soul spiritually alive. The soul receives an indelible character that irrevocably identifies it as a member of the heavenly family. Also, all punishment due to pre-baptismal actual sins is completely remitted.

Is there any scriptural support for any of the above? Where does Jesus or any Apostle speak of baptism removing the effects of original sin or of “an infusion of sanctifying grace” or of baptism making the soul spiritually alive?

 

[Phil12123]

Children are born into Original Sin. Unless at some point they become Christians, they cannot be saved by Christ any more than an adult who does not become a Christian could be saved by Christ (ie: it is possible that they could be saved in an extraordinary manner that neither the Scriptures nor the Apostolic Tradition tell us anything about - but the ordinary means of salvation is to become a Christian, and the normal way to become a Christian is to get baptized).

So, are you saying, a person who repents and believes the Gospel that Jesus died for his sins and rose again, accepting Him as Savior and Lord, is not a Christian until he is baptized? The jailor who believed what Paul said was not a Christian, though a believer, until he was baptized? Is that what Paul told him in Acts 16:31?

Again, if we are born “saved” and then we lose our salvation by our own actions, then it is perfectly possible to retain our salvation by our own actions, as well - meaning that we don’t need Jesus.

**I will state my opinion (for what’s its worth—maybe nothing): A person is not born “saved” but “safe” until the age of reason and accountability. At that age (whenever it is), when he commits personal sins for which he is accountable, he is no longer “safe” but “in danger of the judgment” or “in danger of hell fire” (Matt. 5:22), until he gets saved by repentance and faith in Christ.

It is not “possible to retain our salvation [or safeness] by our own actions,” as you say, because we are all sinners by nature and will all inevitably commit personal sins, so we will all always need Jesus and the payment He made for those sins.**

 

[jmcrae]

So, are you saying, a person who repents and believes the Gospel that Jesus died for his sins and rose again, accepting Him as Savior and Lord, is not a Christian until he is baptized? The jailor who believed what Paul said was not a Christian, though a believer, until he was baptized? Is that what Paul told him in Acts 16:31?

Yes, not in so many words, but by the action of baptizing him and his household immediately.

The Church is not a thought in one’s mind - it’s an actual organization. Like any organization, it has a procedure for becoming a member.

If you want to go to work for a company, you go through a procedure of interviews, and then once you pass the interviews, you give your name, contact information, and social security information. Without going through this ritual, you will not become an employee of that company.

If you want to join a service club, you have to be a “tenderfoot” for a few weeks until you get your callouses, and then you have to make the moose call while wearing the funny hat (or some equivalent to that). Those who don’t do that, don’t become members of the service club. They may be perfectly nice people, but they are not members of the club.

To become a Christian, you get baptized. Without baptism, you are not a member of Christ’s Church.

I will state my opinion (for what’s its worth—maybe nothing): A person is not born “saved” but “safe” until the age of reason and accountability. At that age (whenever it is), when he commits personal sins for which he is accountable, he is no longer “safe” but “in danger of the judgment” or “in danger of hell fire” (Matt. 5:22), until he gets saved by repentance and faith in Christ.

This is true, but it’s true of everyone who has already become a Christian, too. If sin is not inevitable after we become Christians, then why would it be inevitable before then? (Unless we are born into sin, to begin with?)

It is not “possible to retain our salvation [or safeness] by our own actions,” as you say, because we are all sinners by nature and will all inevitably commit personal sins, so we will all always need Jesus and the payment He made for those sins.

If we are born without sin, how is it inevitable that we would sin? Surely it’s up to us, whether we sin or not, if we have reached the age of reason and accountability? If we are making a conscious choice, then sure we have the ability to make a conscious choice not to sin?

 

[NotWorthy]

Originally Posted by NotWorthy forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
As the Gospel plainly says, Water is the Means that Christ uses to wash away our sins in His Blood.

Where does the Gospel say that?

The Gospel that Peter preaches in his epistle makes it clear:

in which a few persons, eight in all, were saved through water. This prefigured baptism, which saves you now

This fully supports Jesus’ words to Nicodemus:

“Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit.”

And please, PLEASE don’t try to tell me that Jesus is talking of amniotic fluid.

 

[NotWorthy]

---

The only reason that my opinion is humble is that, except where it is only based on the clear words of Scripture (like Matt. 28:19), it is just my opinion, not a “Thus-saith-the-Lord”-kind-of declaration. On the other hand, the opinions stated by the Church are not given as its “opinion” but as dogma that must be accepted or you are not believing the truth. You can ignore what I say as opinion and express your own opinion, and I will not send you to hell because yours differs from mine. I don’t pronounce anathemas on anyone for disagreeing with my opinion.

So, Jesus was just joking when He told the Church, "He who hears you, hears me. He who rejects you, rejects me".?

Phil, who was the last person that the Church “sent to hell”.

You don’t pronounce anathemas?!? Well of course you don’t! Jesus didn’t commission you, Phil!

But, to your point about “pronouncing anathemas”, you skate dangerously close to “pronouncing anathemas” EVERY TIME YOU ACCUSE ME OF FIGHTING JESUS AND HIS WORDS!!!

 

[Mark_LePard]

The thief who died next to Christ on the cross was not baptized, yet he went to heaven.

Baptism is important, but not necessary for salvation.

"For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. Ephesians 2:8,9

 

[jmcrae]

The thief who died next to Christ on the cross was not baptized, yet he went to heaven.

We have been over and over that one. The thief did not need to be baptized in water in a Sacramental dying with Christ, because he was already dying with Christ, literally.

"For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. Ephesians 2:8,9

Grace comes to us through the Sacraments - think of Christ as the river, the Sacraments as the pipes, and grace as the water that comes into your kitchen sink.

The Sacraments are the conduits that bring the salvific effects of Christ’s blood from the Cross outside of Jerusalem at 3:00 pm on March 25, 33 AD to where you are, right now.

 

[NotWorthy]

The thief who died next to Christ on the cross was not baptized, yet he went to heaven.

Baptism is important, but not necessary for salvation.

"For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. Ephesians 2:8,9

Yes, he had a baptism of blood, which the Church teaches as well.

Besides, Jesus left instructions for the Church. The Church had not started yet. Jesus’ only other option would have been to say, "Ooooh, sorry. If you’d have waited 50 more days before accepting me, you could have been baptized and made it to heaven".

Remember, all things ARE possible with God.

But then again, maybe you’re right. We should change the Catechism to say, “Unless one is baptized in Christ, or is crucified with Christ, accepting him before dying, one cannot be saved”.

I’ll contact Pope Bene XVI and see if I can get it changed for you!

 

[NotWorthy]

We have been over and over that one. The thief did not need to be baptized in water in a Sacramental dying with Christ, because he was already dying with Christ, literally.

Grace comes to us through the Sacraments - think of Christ as the river, the Sacraments as the pipes, and grace as the water that comes into your kitchen sink.

The Sacraments are the conduits that bring the salvific effects of Christ’s blood from the Cross outside of Jerusalem at 3:00 pm on March 25, 33 AD to where you are, right now.

Well, I liked the answer I gave him, until I found that you had to go all technical on him. Rats!!!

Keep up the good work!!!

 

[jmcrae]

Well, I liked the answer I gave him, until I found that you had to go all technical on him. Rats!!!

Keep up the good work!!!

Thanks!!

 

[Grace_Seeker]

We have been over and over that one. The thief did not need to be baptized in water in a Sacramental dying with Christ, because he was already dying with Christ, literally.

To connect with our thoughts regarding sacramental and spiritual communion. What you are talking about here is a spiritual baptism. As you say, the theif did not need to be baptized with water in a Sacramental dying with Christ. However, though he died alongside Christ, it is not the fact that he died alongside Christ that saved him either (remember there was another thief that we don’t speak of being saved though he had the same experience). What saved him was his faith. There was a spiritual connection made between this thief and Christ that the other thief never made. And it is that faith, that spiritual connection not water which the thief who was saved did not experience, and not blood (which the thief who was not saved did experience), but the relationship that one had with Christ, in this case a purely spiritual experience because they never once touched each other, that save him.

 

[jmcrae]

To connect with our thoughts regarding sacramental and spiritual communion. What you are talking about here is a spiritual baptism. As you say, the theif did not need to be baptized with water in a Sacramental dying with Christ. However, though he died alongside Christ, it is not the fact that he died alongside Christ that saved him either (remember there was another thief that we don’t speak of being saved though he had the same experience). What saved him was his faith. There was a spiritual connection made between this thief and Christ that the other thief never made. And it is that faith, that spiritual connection not water which the thief who was saved did not experience, and not blood (which the thief who was not saved did experience), but the relationship that one had with Christ, in this case a purely spiritual experience because they never once touched each other, that save him.

If he had the belief, but did not die with Christ either for real or in Baptism, he also would not have been saved. It takes both the assent of faith and the Sacraments - it’s not an “either-or” situation.

 

[NotWorthy]

If he had the belief, but did not die with Christ either for real or in Baptism, he also would not have been saved. It takes both the assent of faith and the Sacraments - it’s not an “either-or” situation.

I have to repeat, since the Church wasn’t born yet, and since He is God, I think Christ could freely choose whoever He wants to go to Heaven.

 

[mercygate]

The thief who died next to Christ on the cross was not baptized, yet he went to heaven.

Baptism is important, but not necessary for salvation.

"For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. Ephesians 2:8,9

Even the Catholic Church believes that in certain extraordinary circumstances, a person may be saved without Baptism. Sacraments are the ordinary means of grace. God provides them, and works through them, but he is not bound by them. The thief on the cross not only had the Lord Himself to make the promise, this was before the Great Commission.

The Catholic Church accepts the possibility of salvation without water baptism in circumstances where baptism is not possible. The martyrdom for Christ of an unbaptized believer is called the Baptism of Blood, and the untimely death of a believer, who has not yet received the Sacrament is referred to as the Baptism of Desire. The main point is that Our Lord tells us that water Baptism is necessary, so we take him at his word.

 

[mercygate]

To connect with our thoughts regarding sacramental and spiritual communion. What you are talking about here is a spiritual baptism. As you say, the theif did not need to be baptized with water in a Sacramental dying with Christ. However, though he died alongside Christ, it is not the fact that he died alongside Christ that saved him either (remember there was another thief that we don’t speak of being saved though he had the same experience). What saved him was his faith. There was a spiritual connection made between this thief and Christ that the other thief never made. And it is that faith, that spiritual connection not water which the thief who was saved did not experience, and not blood (which the thief who was not saved did experience), but the relationship that one had with Christ, in this case a purely spiritual experience because they never once touched each other, that save him.

Frankly, when I read that part of the Passion, I do not see such a terrific faith. The guy does NOT say: Yo! Jesus! You’re the Savior! Make that my *personal *Lord and Savior! All he says is that “this man has done nothing wrong.” Hardly a faith-statement. Nevertheless, Christ promised him Paradise, so we call him St. Dismas.

 

[NotWorthy]

Frankly, when I read that part of the Passion, I do not see such a terrific faith. The guy does NOT say: Yo! Jesus! You’re the Savior! Make that my *personal *Lord and Savior! All he says is that “this man has done nothing wrong.” Hardly a faith-statement. Nevertheless, Christ promised him Paradise, so we call him St. Dismas.

What?!?
“Jesus, remember me when you come into your Kingdom”.

Jesus hardly looked kingly nailed, naked and bleeding, on the Cross.

I think our good friend St. Dismas showed Faith in Jesus’ promise. “Blessed are you who haven’t seen and yet still believe”.

 

[guanophore]

I guess I just wasn’t as schooled in symbolism as my Catholic breathern are.

And my apologies for being a distraction from the original content of this thread.

On the contrary, your humility and teachable spirit are refreshing, and a great credit to Our Lord’s work in your heart.

Peace be with you.

 

[mercygate]

What?!?
“Jesus, remember me when you come into your Kingdom”.

Jesus hardly looked kingly nailed, naked and bleeding, on the Cross.

I think our good friend St. Dismas showed Faith in Jesus’ promise. “Blessed are you who haven’t seen and yet still believe”.

:tiphat:OK. Point taken.

 

[guanophore]

You’re right. We are born into sin, i.e., possessed of a sin nature that gives us the propensity to commit actual, personal sin. It is the latter sin that we need to repent of and be saved from. It doesn’t seem that we can “repent” of something we were born with (the sin nature), but the acts of sin that result from our following the sin nature (sins of the flesh) would need repentance and salvation.

It is this sin nature that the sanctifying grace of baptism will break. After that, we have a choice about whether or not we sin. Before that, we cannot choose. You are also right that we need to repent and be saved of personal sin, but we also must recognize that our fallen nature separates us from God, even apart from personal sin. Both are problems, original, and personal.

You’re also right that we have no ability to help ourselves and we therefore need the Savior and all He did at Calvary to pay for our sins, as our sin remedy.

Baptism provides the infusion of sanctifying grace that helps us to realize this, especially as maturity progresses.

**The question, however, was not concerning us, but children under the age of reason. The “innocence” of children is not that they do not possess a sin nature that leads them to commit personal sins. It is rather their nonaccountability until they reach the age of reason/discernment.
**

So, why not break the enslavement to the sin nature? As the Apostle says “who can withold water”?

With the recent understanding of child development, we realize that children are making decisions by the age of 18 months, and at that early age, can begin learning to prefer others before themselves (like learning to share) and avoid selfishness.

 

[guanophore]

I agree that John certainly referenced lots of symbolism in his gospel. And perhaps you want to infer something from the mentioning. But just because we infer it does not mean that it was actually implied. Sometimes we do not read the scriptures deeply enough and you may think I’m making that mistake in this passage. On the other hand, sometimes I think we can actually read to deeply, looking for things that are not there. And while I appreciate the sentiments expressed in the last two post, I still think we have stretched too far if we see in John’s description of Jesus’ death references having to do with baptism.

If we had any doubts about his meaning,we can see this cross referenced in John’s epistle

1 John 5:6-8

6 This is he who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ, not with the water only but with the water and the blood. 7 And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. 8 There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree.

How is the water a witness,if it is just plasma?

Rev 21:5-7
6 And he said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give from the fountain of the water of life without payment.”

Jesus is the source of that 'water of life". We enter into it through Baptism.