Lay baptism vs. no baptism

  • Thread starter Thread starter amoiesu
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

amoiesu

Guest
my younger unwed sister just had her baby a month or so ago. she used to be Catholic but is no longer practicing. i’ve tried suggesting Church baptism, but it doesn’t sound like she’s gonna go for it. since baptism is necessary for salvation, i certainly don’t want my sweet baby niece to go unbaptized. what if something were to happen to her before she was old enough to get herself baptized? i know that there are cases where a lay person can baptize, so if i could talk my sister into letting me baptize the baby, is that something i’d be able to get permission for? some websites said that baptism is to be put off anyway if the child’s parents don’t intend to raise her Catholic, but that doesn’t sound right. why should the child’s soul be endangered because of the negligence of her parents? obviously i can’t guarantee that my sister will be interested in teaching her the faith but i would certainly try to step in for that as much as i could. it seems an unfair situation to be told that a child needs baptism to be saved and then be told she can’t have that baptism she needs even though the situation is not the child’s fault.
 
Last edited:
amoiesu said:
is that something i’d be able to get permission for?
Click to expand...
No.

It is not an emergency situation, and your sister has no intention of raising her child Catholic.

Trust in the mercy of God, and continue to pray for your family.

Baptism isn’t magic, so don’t treat it that way.

The Church does in fact teach that baptism requires the well founded hope that the child will be raised in the faith— baptism binds the child to Catholic law and establishes both rights and responsibilities. If your sister isn’t going to fulfill her obligations the pastor will delay baptism.
 
that doesn’t make sense though. is baptism necessary or not? if it is, why gamble the child’s soul by indefinitely putting it off? i’ve read stories about catechists and other pious laypersons being commissioned to baptize by priests in communist countries and other situations where it is not easy to get people to church, so were the priests wrong to give that permission because the threat of death wasn’t immediate? protestant baptisms are considered valid as long as they use the trinitarian formula and those preachers are laypeople too. if someone else close to the child is willing to do her best to help the child find the Catholic Faith, why should she be put in danger of not going to Heaven rather than welcomed into the Church? why would the Church teach something that sounds so contradictory to her other teachings?
 
i never said “magic”. i’m quoting the teaching of the Church herself when she says Baptism is absolutely necessary for a child to be able to enter Heaven as stated in the catechism and countless other authoritative sources. why can’t i do my best as her aunt to help her learn the Faith?
 
It’s not contradictory. This law exists to prevent someone from incurring the obligations inherent in being a member of the Church if they have no hope of ever fulfilling them. If someone was baptized Catholic, but never really raised to practice, it could prove complicated later on when it came to marriage, for example. The Church simply is trying to keep people from being burdened by laws they aren’t even aware they’re bound by.

Baptism creates a relationship with the Church, not only spiritual but legal as well. Imagine that someone got married to someone they had no intention of living with. But then there would be legal consequences to living as though they aren’t married. It’s the same thing. Why enter into a relationship you have no intention of living out?

-Fr ACEGC
 
Last edited:
i understand that but it still sounds unfair to deny an innocent child the means of salvation based on "what if"s about a very distant future. it creates a very unhealthy spirit of anxiety among close Catholic relatives if they have to live with the uncertainty of whether the baby will ever see Heaven if something goes wrong.
 
It’s not the Church denying the child the means of salvation. It’s the parents who don’t have their child baptized and raised Catholic.

Keep praying and being a good example. You might be the channel of grace that the family needs.
 
Last edited:
amoiesu said:
. it creates a very unhealthy spirit of anxiety among close Catholic relatives if they have to live with the uncertainty of whether the baby will ever see Heaven if something goes wrong.
Click to expand...
I understand this is how you feel, but a baptism is about the child, not their relatives.
 
amoiesu said:
she says Baptism is absolutely necessary for a child to be able to enter Heaven
Click to expand...
The Church does not teach what you wrote.

I encourage you to read the Catechism section that talks both of the necessity of salvation and the mercy of God vis-a-vis unbaptized children.
 
From the Catechism:

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.
 
I’d encourage you to talk about your fears with your pastor.

He can explain to you why it is not permissible for you to baptize your niece.
 
See no.15:
Although the Church is truly aware of the efficacy of her faith operating in the Baptism of children, and aware of the validity of the sacrament that she confers on them, she recognizes limits to her practice, since, apart from cases of danger of death, she does not admit a child to Baptism without its parents’ consent and a serious assurance that after Baptism it will be given a Catholic upbringing.[27] This is because she is concerned both for the natural rights of the parents and for the requirements of the development of faith in the child.
Click to expand...
See also 17 and 18.
Noting that in the New Testament writings Baptism follows the preaching of the Gospel, presupposes conversion and goes with a profession of faith, and furthermore that the effects of grace (forgiveness of sins, justification, rebirth and sharing in divine life) are generally linked with faith rather than with the sacrament,[28] some people propose that the order “preaching, faith, sacrament” should become the rule. Apart from cases of danger of death, they would apply this rule to children, and would institute an obligatory catechumenate for them.
  1. It is beyond doubt that the preaching of the Apostles was normally directed to adults, and the first to be baptized were people converted to the Christian Faith. As these facts are related in the books of the New Testament, they could give rise to the opinion that it is only the faith of adults that is considered in these texts. However, as was mentioned above, the practice of baptizing children rests on an immemorial tradition originating from the Apostles, the importance of which cannot be ignored; besides, Baptism is never administered without faith: in the case of infants, it is the faith of the Church.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You need to stop and listen to what knowledgeable people, including a priest, are telling you.
THAT is part of being a Christian, especially a young Christian. Docility is important.
 
The priest on here said no. You and your sister need to speak to your parish priest together.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top