G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Universal Church, Bob posted the related catechism above.
Pope emphasizes: 'you cannot love God outside of the Church' [CWN]
- Status
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
I can’t speak for religions which I’m not part of.
I’m a Catholic and keep my criticism for the religion I’m a member of, and how I’ve seen the abuse of Baptism used.
Jim
E
estesbob
Guest
Abused in what way???
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
E
estesbob
Guest
You unsupported opinion that Catholics used Baptism as a social event translates into “centuries of abuse”?
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
It’s a fact, which any priest who is honest will tell you took place.
It’s why they now interview parents before Baptizing their infant child.
When I was Baptized in 1951, such interviews were non-existent.
Jim
P
ProVobis
Guest
My parents, one of which served in the Polish military, had to go through quite a lot of channels to get me baptized Catholic in the U.K. in 1947. Am not sure why “such interviews” are necessary.
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
Because as the Catechism states, Baptism is a Sacrament of “FAITH.”
It’s not just an social construct.
Jim
G
glendab
Guest
Hello Jim.
You said this: “A Baptism is probably invalid if a person agrees to be Baptized without faith, but with “just in case,” superstition.” It won’t go away if you ignore it. This isn’t a Catholic position. This is what you really believe about Baptism. But it doesn’t matter. The Sacrament is there if there is valid form and matter. You cannot change what you’ve already stated, so defend what you said.
Glenda
You said this: “A Baptism is probably invalid if a person agrees to be Baptized without faith, but with “just in case,” superstition.” It won’t go away if you ignore it. This isn’t a Catholic position. This is what you really believe about Baptism. But it doesn’t matter. The Sacrament is there if there is valid form and matter. You cannot change what you’ve already stated, so defend what you said.
Glenda
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
No, I won’t defend it.
You defend how a Baptism is valid when a person believes it on a superstition level.
Jim
P
ProVobis
Guest
So how do I know if my godparents had faith? What if my baptism had been invalid and I didn’t know it? If I have faith but doubt that my baptism was valid should I ask to be rebaptized? I doubt if the Church will do that.
The Church has a prescribed formula even for Protestants and as long as it’s followed, it is valid, even if the administrator is an atheist. AFAIK, a witness is desirable but not required to be valid.
I
irishpatrick
Guest
Superstition level–what does that mean? If a person is baptized with proper form and matter, they are baptized, no matter whether it is a social event or not. Faith, by the person being baptized, does NOT need to be present.
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
ProVobis
The formula for a Baptism can be correct, yet, no faith was present and reception of the other sacraments is neglected or treated as a social construct as Baptism was.
Again, the Sacrament was treated as a social construct more than a Sacrament by many in the Church.
Don’t believe that Baptism is a guarantee for salvation. It is necessary for salvation, but faith must be part of it.
Jim
They had to promise to raise you in the faith.
Parents, in fact all Baptized faithful, renew their Baptismal promises each year at Easter.
There is only one Baptism, but Baptism is only one of three Sacraments in the rite if initiation for Catholics. Confirmation and reception of the Holy Eucharist, are also part of becoming a Christian.
The formula for a Baptism can be correct, yet, no faith was present and reception of the other sacraments is neglected or treated as a social construct as Baptism was.
Valid in the technical sense, but meaningless as a Sacrament as far as Faith is concerned for the individual who does not have faith.
Again, the Sacrament was treated as a social construct more than a Sacrament by many in the Church.
Don’t believe that Baptism is a guarantee for salvation. It is necessary for salvation, but faith must be part of it.
Jim
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
The Church says faith must be present, however immature.
The Jesuit Missionaries in North American in the 17th century, refused to Baptized the Native Americans on request who did not have faith, but wanted to be Baptized out of superstitious reasons.
Read, “Saint Among Savages: The Life of St. Isaac Jogues,” by Francis Talbot
Unfortunately priests have Baptized infants of parents who’s reasons for having their child Baptized were no different than the superstitions of the Native Americans in St Jogues time.
Jim
T
Tom_Baum
Guest
You wrote, “The church has always said few are saved.”
Has it?
The “Church” has never said that “anyone” is in hell, I don’t think that the “Church” has definitively said what you said that the “church has always said” at all.
Did you make this up?
You also wrote, " Everyone must convert to the true church, the only church".
This is not even close to what the Church teaches.
T
Tom_Baum
Guest
We seem to be the ones who think of Jesus’s Church to not be one, could be that God looks at things differentlier than some of us.
Could also be that the “mission of Jesus’s Church” which is that “the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against It” will come to Fruition.
Could also be that Jesus died for His Church and His Church is to die for all of those that are not “in” His Church.
As it is written, “It is GOD’S WILL that ALL be saved”, that sure is something that is ponderable.
And this “ponderable” has to do with Jesus’s Church and with Jesus’s Church’s mission.
T
Tom_Baum
Guest
Well, if “Scriptures can be relied upon to show this”, then why don’t you “show this”?
I am not sure but I do not think that Jesus is said to have personally baptized anyone, He was baptized and He said how to baptize others but as far as personally doing it, where does Scripture say this?
The “focus” is you said “Scriptures can be relied upon to show this”, can it?
Another “ponderable”, some of us say “one baptism for the forgiveness of sins”, could this be why Jesus insisted on John baptizing Jesus?
T
Tom_Baum
Guest
You wrote, “Don’t believe that Baptism is a guarantee for salvation. It is necessary for salvation, but faith must be part of it.”
Why would you say that it, Baptism, “is necessary for salvation”?
I would say that there are plenty of people who have never been baptized and I would say that plenty of them have never even heard of Baptism so there are probably plenty who wouldn’t even have a chance at “Baptism of disire”, would you say that none of these have a “chance of salvation”?
Could be that the “one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins” has already been received by Jesus from John for humanity, something to “ponder”, could be why Jesus was so insistent on being baptized by John.
I
irishpatrick
Guest
From the Catechism:
*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
1251 Christian parents will recognize that this practice also accords with their role as nurturers of the life that God has entrusted to them.52
1252 The practice of infant Baptism is an immemorial tradition of the Church. There is explicit testimony to this practice from the second century on, and it is quite possible that, from the beginning of the apostolic preaching, when whole “households” received baptism, infants may also have been baptized.53 *
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
And the above Catechism reference is infants of Christian parents.
Again, Baptism is a Sacrament of Faith.
Jim
- Status