My problem with church teaching on baptism

[RiderOnTheClouds]

I was baptised as a Catholic as a baby, and though I remain CatholIc (after a period of staunch atheism), and accept most of what the church teaches, I have serious disagreements with what the church teaches regarding baptism. I think there are clear parallels between Baptism and circumcision. What we say about one we must be able to say about the other, and I think it is clear from reading the OT that circumcision did not remove original sin, the Jews often were seduced into worshipping other gods. So how could Baptism remove original sin? Also does the church teach baptism is necessary for salvation? Because I believe that all that is required is faith showing itself through love.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

How do you understand original sin?

And BTW, yes, we are to have faith and live in lovingkindness, but Jesus did state baptism as a requirement for salvation to Niccodemus, and then told the Apostles to baptize all nations.

But your correct that our spiritual journey should not be entirely rooted in mere ritual.

 

[Benadam]

We are Baptized into the life of Christ. Christ’s life is without original sin.
People were baptized into the life of John the Baptist and his baptism was a baptism of repentance. John was conceived with original sin but was cleansed in the womb. He remained sin free and so his baptism didn’t remove original sin but enabled people to be cleansed of their sin.

We are baptized into Jesus’ life.

Correction. Replaced the word ‘born’ with ‘conceived’.

 

[RiderOnTheClouds]

How do you understand original sin?

In my view it is the natural inclination of the heart to be seduced into evil

 

[MT1926]

I think there are clear parallels between Baptism and circumcision.

Great this helps a lot that you can see the parallels.

What we say about one we must be able to say about the other

What you are talking about here is Typology. But you are not giving it a proper definition.

A type is a person, thing, or event in the Old Testament that foreshadows something in the New Testament. It is like a taste or a hint of something that will be fulfilled or realized. Types are like pictures that come alive in a new and exciting way when seen through the eyes of Christ’s revelation.

Augustine said that “the Old Testament is the New concealed, but the New Testament is the Old revealed” ( Catechizing of the Uninstructed 4:8).

For instance St. Paul who told us that circumcision foreshadowed Christian Baptism in Col 2:11-12 also told us in Rom 5:14 that Adam was a type of Christ. We would never say we that means they must be the same and since Adam sinned Christ must have sinned also.

In Typology the New Testament realities are always greater than their Old Testament Types.

Jesus, the new Adam being greater than Adam.

Baptism, the NT sign of the New Covenant is greater (does more) than it’s OT type circumcision.

Does that make sense?

So how could Baptism remove original sin?

Because Jesus promised it would. Jesus instituted the sacrament of Baptism when he entered the water to be baptized. He instructed the Apostles to Baptize every nation (Matthew 28:19)

I heard once an easy way to think of the Sacraments is they are actions of the Holy Spirit who brings about the very reality they signify. Basically, God said you get wet I’ll give you grace and remove original sin. It’s not some work we do to force God’s hand. That’s the way He set it up He gave us a Sacrament so we can have assurance that when we perform the Sacrament(worthily) He will give us the Grace.

The Church teaches…

"At Baptism all sins are forgiven, original sin and personal sin, as well as all punishment for sin." CCC1263

Also does the church teach baptism is necessary for salvation?

The Church teaches…

God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism…He himself is not bound by His sacraments." CCC1257

Basically, in a nut shell yes. Why because Jesus wants us to be Baptized. Now if we aren’t Baptized sure God can still save us if He so desires, but wouldn’t you rather do what God asks instead of what you want.

Because I believe that all that is required is faith showing itself through love.

Yes this is very important by you need to ask yourself why you believe this is ALL that is required?

After all if Jesus asks you to be Baptized and you say to Jesus nah I’ll pass, don’t really agree with that, do you believe your faith is showing through you love of Christ.

Hope this helps,

God Bless

 

[Vico]

…So how could Baptism remove original sin? Also does the church teach baptism is necessary for salvation? Because I believe that all that is required is faith showing itself through love.

There are three forms of baptism: water, desire, and blood. Also grace may be received without the sacrament. Catechism

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.

There is a difference between receiving a sacrament and its fruitfulness based upon voluntary cooperation with the grace given. Since infants cannot sin there is only original sin to deal with for their baptism, however the grace given is a help for the time when the use of reason occurs - which allows for avoiding all mortal sin. Actual salvation is proven at the persons death, but the gifts of actual grace and the state of sanctifying grace manifests throughout life.

Catechism

1229 From the time of the apostles, becoming a Christian has been accomplished by a journey and initiation in several stages. This journey can be covered rapidly or slowly, but certain essential elements will always have to be present: proclamation of the Word, acceptance of the Gospel entailing conversion, profession of faith, Baptism itself, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and admission to Eucharistic communion.

1231 Where infant Baptism has become the form in which this sacrament is usually celebrated, it has become a single act encapsulating the preparatory stages of Christian initiation in a very abridged way. By its very nature infant Baptism requires a post-baptismal catechumenate . Not only is there a need for instruction after Baptism, but also for the necessary flowering of baptismal grace in personal growth. The catechism has its proper place here.

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

1255 For the grace of Baptism to unfold, the parents’ help is important. So too is the role of the godfather and godmother , who must be firm believers, able and ready to help the newly baptized - child or adult on the road of Christian life.55 Their task is a truly ecclesial function ( officium ).56 The whole ecclesial community bears some responsibility for the development and safeguarding of the grace given at Baptism.

 

[Cor_ad_Cor]

In my view it is the natural inclination of the heart to be seduced into evil

We remain human after baptism; it’s still possible that we might sin in the future. Having removed original sin, we are capable of receiving the grace needed to avoid sin and live a life of holiness. It just doesn’t eliminate free will.

 

[Dovekin]

I think it is clear from reading the OT that circumcision did not remove original sin, the Jews often were seduced into worshipping other gods. So how could Baptism remove original sin? Also does the church teach baptism is necessary for salvation? Because I believe that all that is required is faith showing itself through love.

Sin is portrayed in Genesis as disobedience and estrangement from God. Covenants otoh reflect a continuing relationship with God and obedience to the terms of the covenant. Abraham, once he accepts circumcision, is no longer estranged from God, but becomes the father of God’s chosen people.

The rest of the Hebrew scriptures show that no matter how often we fail, God does not become estranged from us. God led the Israelites hrough the Red Sea, led them for 40 years in the desert, led them through the Jordan River into the land flowing with mill and honey, he Promised Land. God made a covenant with Abraham and will not go back on it no matter how disobedient the Jews became, or we become.

Baptism is parallel to that. With Jesus we cross throuh the Red Sea, we wander for years, we cross the Jordan into the Promised Land. We may sin along the way, but God is always faithful, always forgiving because of the covenant we made at baptism.

 

[BartholomewB]

I think it is clear from reading the OT that circumcision did not remove original sin,

Is there such a thing as “original sin” in Judaism? I don’t think so, or not, at least, with the meaning it has for Christians. I’ll see if I can find something @Moses613 posted recently on the same subject.

[Add]

Here it is. Post #300 or 301 on this thread:

Answers from an Orthodox Jew Non-Catholic Religions

Hi @Kaninchen, haven’t seen you in awhile! Long story short, there is no original sin in the sense that someone is born already blameworthy due to Adam’s sin. Judaism teaches that children are blameless/innocent in the eyes of Heaven before the age of majority, which is 12 for a girl and 13 for a boy, after which they are held responsible for their actions.

 

[Dan_Defender]

John was born with original sin but was cleansed in the womb

I think you mean conceived not born.

 

[MPat]

I think there are clear parallels between Baptism and circumcision.

Good…

What we say about one we must be able to say about the other,

No. The claim as stated is just silly. We can certainly say that a knife is used in circumcision. If your claim was true, it would also be true that a knife is used in baptism, which is obviously false.

If your claim was true, “circumcision” and “baptism” would be just two names for the same rite.

Think how you can weaken this claim (and yes, it can be weakened to make it true), and maybe your problems will be solved?

 

[RiderOnTheClouds]

But what of John 3:16?

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

Belief (though I don’t think this entails what the Protestant thinks it does) is what causes us to be saved, not baptism, I ‘do’ think receiving communion is as well, but that is in my opinion an act of faith.

 

[Crusaderbear]

Removing ORIGINAL sin doesn’t mean you won’t commit more sins in the future…that pesky free will thing gets in the way…

 

[Benadam]

Thank you ! I did mean conceived.

 

[ShowersofRoses]

As stated above, cirumcision and baptism are not the same.

Circumcision was a sign that the Israelites were part of God’s family. But it was sign given to only the men and was not a grace-giving sacrament. It was a sign of the promise that God would one day send a Savior for mankind. The animal sacrifices did not actually wipe away or forgive the people of their sins…they needed a Messiah.

Baptism is a fulfillment of the promise of circumcision, that through baptism all of us, men and women, boys and girls, are brought into God’s family and washed clean from our sins, which is only possible because of Jesus’ atoning sacrifice for us. His triumph over death makes it possible for us to be washed clean in baptism, once and for all, unlike the unending animal sacrifices.

The OT is FULL of types and figures that foreshadow events or people to come in the NT. Don’t conflate the two…circumcision was a sign, but now we have the Sacraments, which are powerful and life-giving through the power of the Holy Spirit.

 

[MT1926]

Belief (though I don’t think this entails what the Protestant thinks it does) is what causes us to be saved, not baptism, I ‘do’ think receiving communion is as well, but that is in my opinion an act of faith.

I would say it comes down to how you define what it means to believe in Jesus.

For me if some tells you 100 things you need to do and you only believe 90 of them then you don’t really believe in the person, you just agree with 90% of what they tell you.

To believe in Jesus means to believe in everything He asks of us, which includes asking that we be baptized.

Does that make sense? It just seems people love to claim they believe in Jesus but seem to disagree with a lot of what He taught or claim He was just being symbolic.

For me to believe means 100% of what he taught.

Hope this helps,

God Bless

 

[Dovekin]

does the church teach baptism is necessary for salvation? Because I believe that all that is required is faith showing itself through love.

The Mother of God was never baptized, and did not need it to be saved.

God is not bound by the sacraments.

 

[Dan_Defender]

The good thief on the cross, was most likely, not baptized.

 

[RiderOnTheClouds]

I wouldn’t go quite as far, though as Paul says in Galatians 5:6, faith needs to express itself in love in order to be of avail (this is my disagreement with the Protestant view, which says faith alone will help). Note that the same verse says that circumcision does ‘not’ aid, so if Baptism is functionally the same as circumcision, then Baptism does not aid in salvation.

 

[StAugustine]

But he was a Jew with the sign of the covenant, circumcision.