My daughters baptism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Adamski
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
TotheHeights said:

“I strongly disagree. The salvation of his daughter’s soul is infinitely important than his marriage. Additionally, taking a strong stance on such an important matter is the only chance he has of conveying the truth to his wife. If he rolls over on it, it looks like he doesn’t believe it’s that important. Where does it end? What about the other sacraments? He must do what is right, and do it now.”

Baptism is not a get-into-heaven-free card.

If they wind up getting divorced over this, it’s going to permanently scar the daughter. That is exactly the sort of thing that would make an adult turn completely and permanently against all religion, if she blamed religion for costing her her family.
 
Xantippe said:
If they wind up getting divorced over this, it’s going to permanently scar the daughter. That is exactly the sort of thing that would make an adult turn completely and permanently against all religion, if she blamed religion for costing her her family.
Click to expand...
I don’t agree with this. Baptism is a command. One does not go against the Will of God to keep the peace with a mere human.🤷
 
HoosierDaddy said:

“How is it not?”

Baptism does not provide assurance of salvation.
 
Xantippe said:
TotheHeights said:

“I strongly disagree. The salvation of his daughter’s soul is infinitely important than his marriage. Additionally, taking a strong stance on such an important matter is the only chance he has of conveying the truth to his wife. If he rolls over on it, it looks like he doesn’t believe it’s that important. Where does it end? What about the other sacraments? He must do what is right, and do it now.”

Baptism is not a get-into-heaven-free card.

If they wind up getting divorced over this, it’s going to permanently scar the daughter. That is exactly the sort of thing that would make an adult turn completely and permanently against all religion, if she blamed religion for costing her her family.
Click to expand...
I don’t think you have a very good understanding of the sacrament, friend.

You can play the hypothetical game all you want, but that doesn’t prove anything. It’s also possible that her father’s willingness to risk losing his wife, who he loves, so that his daughter may be baptized and raised in the Church would prove to her how important Catholicism is. Neither of us can predict the future. This is why we must always do the right thing and trust in God’s providence. In this case, that is taking a stand, baptizing his daughter, and establishing NOW that she will be raised in the Church.
 
If I may appeal to a higher authority:

"For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s foes will be those of his own household. He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. " Matthew chapter 10

God’s Command > Wife’s Preferences
 
ToTheHeights said:

“It’s also possible that her father’s willingness to risk losing his wife, who he loves, so that his daughter may be baptized and raised in the Church would prove to her how important Catholicism is.”

That’s not how these things work. Nobody ever said, “Thanks for wrecking our happy home, daddy, so you could get your way.” Furthermore, if they were to divorce and she were to get custody, his chance of successfully raising them Catholic would be vanishingly small.

This is a situation calling for lots of pastoral advice and finesse.
 
Xantippe said:
HoosierDaddy said:

“How is it not?”

Baptism does not provide assurance of salvation.
Click to expand...
For the little girl it would. She would be saved from original sin with Baptism, and is not at the age of reason for mortal sin.

Just saying.🤷
 
Also, a previous poster quoted an official document stating that it is OK to delay baptism in difficult situations with mixed marriages.

If you page back, you’ll see it.

I think the OP should set all necessary groundwork, but unilaterally baptizing the kids would be very unwise.
 
ToTheHeights said:
If I may appeal to a higher authority:

"For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s foes will be those of his own household. He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. " Matthew chapter 10

God’s Command > Wife’s Preferences
Click to expand...
Did you read the article from the Directory on Ecumenism I quoted earlier?
 
Xantippe said:
ToTheHeights said:

“It’s also possible that her father’s willingness to risk losing his wife, who he loves, so that his daughter may be baptized and raised in the Church would prove to her how important Catholicism is.”

That’s not how these things work. Nobody ever said, “Thanks for wrecking our happy home, daddy, so you could get your way.” Furthermore, if they were to divorce and she were to get custody, his chance of successfully raising them Catholic would be vanishingly small.

This is a situation calling for lots of pastoral advice and finesse.
Click to expand...
It could go either way, hence the point of my post. We can’t predict the future, thus we must do the right thing always and hope for the best.

And to this specific point, if his wife left him because he wanted to baptize their daughter in the Church, it would not be he who wrecked the family.
 
Xantippe said:
HoosierDaddy said:

“How is it not?”

Baptism does not provide assurance of salvation.
Click to expand...
I disagree. When you baptize a human you take away Original Sin. If that human is incapable of sin, then salvation would be assured. What exactly do you think God Judges in infants? The Church has declared that before the age of reason one cannot sin. Without original sin (removed through baptism) they are as pure as the Virgin Mary.

This is why the explanation of modern theologians falls short in the intellectual hole left after the last statement about Limbo.

This is why baptism of desire in infants or the unborn does not make sense. They have no intellectual mature free will.

God would have to save outside of the normative means of baptism. (which He could do)

But that is a whole other can of worms.

For now,
You cannot show me where either infants or mentally handicapped people need do ANYTHING more than baptism to go to heaven.

The Church has made this clear.
 
For the time being, yes, but within a couple years, the older child will be as capable of sin as any of us.
 
It basically comes down to this: should this man just give in any time his wife has a hissy fit about matters of the faith and threatens to leave? What if she threatens to leave if their daughter receives any of the other sacraments? Does the man have absolutely zero authority here? She may ruin the family so he has to just do whatever she says, or else? Come on! This is yet another example of COMPROMISING on the Truth for the sake of getting along. That’s completely unacceptable. He is the head of the family. The Catholic Church is correct. His daughter needs to be baptized. Period.
 
TotheHeights said:

“So in your view, baptism is pretty much just a formality?”

No, just not a get-into-heaven-free card, as I said.
 
Xantippe said:
TotheHeights said:

“So in your view, baptism is pretty much just a formality?”

No, just not a get-into-heaven-free card, as I said.
Click to expand...
This seems like a strange point to argue. No one said “if you’re baptized, you’re good to go regardless of the future”. Simply that, as the Church and Jesus and St. Paul instruct us, baptism removes original sin and all children should be baptized. John 3:5, Mark 16:16, Romans 5:18-19, Mark 10:14, etc.
 
Xantippe said:
TotheHeights said:

“So in your view, baptism is pretty much just a formality?”

No, just not a get-into-heaven-free card, as I said.
Click to expand...
Actually it is.

By your own admission.

Though you put an expiration date on it.

I don’t know about you but I’d take a couple of years of heaven insurance if I were the OP.

Baptism is the single most important sacrament.

It most indeed is a get out of jail free card with the baptized who are not capable of sin.

You can just say “Oops I was wrong.” “My bad”

I’ve done that with you a few times…😉
 
I think this is a pastoral issue more than a doctrinal issue. The doctrine is presumably that the child ought to be baptized as soon as is reasonably possible, and the question is, when is it reasonable? Figuring out when it is reasonable is a pastoral problem requiring a deep knowledge of the persons involved.

Not knowing the OP’s wife, I would hesitate to encourage him to have the children baptized against her will. This could be the first move in a destructive game of marital tit-for-tat that won’t end until their home is broken and he only gets to see his kids on alternate weekends.

Also, if we are concerned about the children being baptized, the wife is willing to have the oldest baptized–in her church.

I would encourage the OP to talk to his Catholic pastor and see if he could set up a follow-up appointment with his wife and the Catholic pastor.
 
Xantippe said:
HoosierDaddy said:

“How is it not?”

Baptism does not provide assurance of salvation.
Click to expand...
Baptism alone is not sufficient, but it ought to be considered to be normally necessary. The Church does not teach that none of those not baptized can ever go to Heaven, because we do not have the office to judge. We do have the duty to teach all who hope to be saved that baptism is necessary. IOW, those who presume to refuse baptism have not been given some reason to hope that exceptions will be made to cover obstinance or presumption. The little girl should not be taught to presume that baptism is not necessary, but only that she will not be punished for pursuing baptism and failing to receive it because she also acted so as to follow the commandment of honoring her mother and following the rule of those with authority over her.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church (boldface mine):

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.61 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.62 **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. **(1129, 161, 846)

1258 The Church has always held the firm conviction that those who suffer death for the sake of the faith without having received Baptism are baptized by their death for and with Christ. This Baptism of blood, like the desire for Baptism, brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament. (2473)

1259 For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit desire to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament. (1249)

60 Cf. Jn 3:5.

61 Cf. Mt 28:19-20; cf. Council of Trent (1547) DS 1618; LG 14; AG 5.

62 Cf. Mk 16:16.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top