Water Baptism

[Publisher]

I have a question. The whole “pagan” thread got me thinking.

Let’s suppose I was swimming with some Catholic Christian or Protestant Christian friends. My never having been baptized in water was just eating at one of them and they snuck up behind me and recited the appropriate words/formula over me and dunked me…would I be considered “baptized”?

Most of those I know who were baptized as children or babies had no conscious awareness or at least understanding about what a baptismal covenant in water meant, nor did they give consent, yet as I understand it, they are considered “baptized”.

In some of the other threads on CAF, people sneak around and baptize their grandchildren or their nieces and nephews to make sure their souls aren’t in jeapordy should they die before they reach some “age of accountability”…which in itself is strange to me…if one isn’t at an age of accountability what’s the difference if one is sprinkled with water and an incantation is spoken over the unwary child.

The whole issue that if one is baptized in water they can never be a “pagan”…I suspect they can only a “heretic”…a distinction I’m sure has some value to someone, but I’m curious…am I now “safe” in my hypotheical scenario in God’s eyes now that I have been dunked in water with the appropriate words spoken over me with our without my approval?

I await the responses.

 

[teancum79]

Most of the Protestant I’ve known deny any value in water baptism at all. To them you are just swimming (though some put vale in singing a prewritten prayer).

I’ll put forth a few concepts that I’m sure not all will agree with.

1. Baptism must be done by someone with God’s authority. Not just knowledge and good intentions.
2. If you don’t stick to the path back to God baptism is just a bath.

3.Therefore baptism can only be of value if it is what you want. God is not fooled by people who just make outwardly sings and don’t want to change.

 

[mercygate]

I have a question. The whole “pagan” thread got me thinking.

Let’s suppose I was swimming with some Catholic Christian or Protestant Christian friends. My never having been baptized in water was just eating at one of them and they snuck up behind me and recited the appropriate words/formula over me and dunked me…would I be considered “baptized”?

Most of those I know who were baptized as children or babies had no conscious awareness or at least understanding about what a baptismal covenant in water meant, nor did they give consent, yet as I understand it, they are considered “baptized”.

In some of the other threads on CAF, people sneak around and baptize their grandchildren or their nieces and nephews to make sure their souls aren’t in jeapordy should they die before they reach some “age of accountability”…which in itself is strange to me…if one isn’t at an age of accountability what’s the difference if one is sprinkled with water and an incantation is spoken over the unwary child.

The whole issue that if one is baptized in water they can never be a “pagan”…I suspect they can only a “heretic”…a distinction I’m sure has some value to someone, but I’m curious…am I now “safe” in my hypotheical scenario in God’s eyes now that I have been dunked in water with the appropriate words spoken over me with our without my approval?

I await the responses.

Since you are an adult, your knowledge, conversiion of heart, and consent would be required.

 

[Publisher]

Oh well, I’ll have to be content with the Spirit Baptism.

Teancum79, since it is Christ Himself who Baptized me, I guess He has the authortiy you spoke of.

Since it requires my “consent as an adult”, why is there no consent required for a child? I have no real investment in the whole water baptism issue, I’m just trying to get my mind around why water insures some spiritual significance to the adult or child sprinkled, doused or dunked.

So I guess “technically” I’m still “pagan” and will always be so…I’m ok with that.

 

[ibkc]

Publisher, different Christians have different views about baptism so there is no one answer. From the Catholic standpoint, infant baptism removes the stain of original sin. Some of the more “high church” Protestants, like the Anglicans etc. also believe this. Baptists, evangelicals, Pentecostals think that water baptism is just a symbol. In the Catholic Church, very little is just a symbol. Everything has deep meaning.

I must admit, I bristled a bit when you called baptism an “incantation” and it is getting tiresome reading about how the beliefs of the majority of Christians in this world are so “strange” to you. For a Quaker, you sure can be mighty disrespectful and dismissive of the beliefs of others.

 

[mercygate]

Oh well, I’ll have to be content with the Spirit Baptism.

Teancum79, since it is Christ Himself who Baptized me, I guess He has the authortiy you spoke of.

Since it requires my “consent as an adult”, why is there no consent required for a child? I have no real investment in the whole water baptism issue, I’m just trying to get my mind around why water insures some spiritual significance to the adult or child sprinkled, doused or dunked.

So I guess “technically” I’m still “pagan” and will always be so…I’m ok with that.

As with the Jews and circumcision, the faith of the parents substitutes for consent. Paul equates baptism with circumcision: 8th day, y’know! The baptized child is expected to appropriate the graces of his baptism as he grows in a life of ongoing conversion and repentance. That is why in Catholic churches, infants will not be baptized if it is doubtful that they will be brought up in a Catholic home.

“Water” is important because Our Lord says so. “Born from above [or again] by water and the spirit.” Nobody in the early Church ever suggested that “water” meant anything other than “water” or “water baptism.” And Jesus himself baptized. So in the normal course of events we believe water baptism to be necessary. (Start another thread about exceptions we understand to be “baptism of desire” or “baptism of blood” in the case of persons who, through no fault of their own CANNOT be properly baptized for some reason.)

 

[Publisher]

Publisher, different Christians have different views about baptism so there is no one answer. From the Catholic standpoint, infant baptism removes the stain of original sin. Some of the more “high church” Protestants, like the Anglicans etc. also believe this. Baptists, evangelicals, Pentecostals think that water baptism is just a symbol. In the Catholic Church, very little is just a symbol. Everything has deep meaning.

I must admit, I bristled a bit when you called baptism an “incantation” and it is getting tiresome reading about how the beliefs of the majority of Christians in this world are so “strange” to you. For a Quaker, you sure can be mighty disrespectful and dismissive of the beliefs of others.

ibkc,

If you were offended you have my apology. “Incantation” seemed right at the time since we were also discussing “pagan”…but I do see how it would be “offensive” to you since you do not equate “the words spoken” with “incantation”.

If I have been disrespectful, I apologize for that as well…I was trying to get my mind around a topic I found interesting as in the thread concerning “pagan”.

I am not dismissive of the beliefs of others however, they stem from the same Light as my own…just differnt human expressions of the same Unspeakable/Unknowable Mystery. Again, please forgive me if I have offended you. I will consider your counsel in the future and try to be less offensive in my posts.

 

[cheddarsox]

This is exactly the sort of thing that fascinated me as a child about Catholicism, the ins and outs and labrynthian theology. I thought it was amazing that over the centuries people had actually sat down and ferreted out answers for all these things and theology to go along with them.

So this is something I’ve thought a lot about, and done a bit of searching on.

Baptism can be done by anyone as long as they use the right form and intent. That is what I was taught growing up Catholic, and what has recently been confirmed to me by an apologetic priest.

So, If I witnessed a car accident or caught a baby at birth, I could baptize them, even if I don’t believe, if I used the proper form (words and water, spit will work in a pinch) and my intent was to initiate them into the kingdom of God.

I was taught NOT to do this outside of dire emergency, because if they lived, I was responsible to see that they were educated in the faith. Also, by baptising them, I was making them more attractive prey to the attacks of Satan, and if they were not in the church receiving the graces of Sacraments, I would actually have done their soul a diservice.

However, they would still be validly baptised. God has given this ability to confer baptism to humanity, and apparently agreed to be bound. Baptism causes and indelible change, so no matter what, once one is validly baptized thats’ it, for eternity.

I don’t think that I could validly baptize an entire pool of people at once, because that really wouldn’t be proper form. I think I would have to specifically attend to each person individually, pouring the water over them, saying the words over them.

Whether or not one can validly baptize an adult against their will, I am not certain. I’m sure theology exists on the subject, but I do not know. But if they are in a coma, etc, they can still be validly baptized (or so I was taught in Catholic school). So they don’t have to participate, but if they are actually opposed, it may affect the validity.

Recently an apologetic priest teaching on the subject said that it is wrong for a grandparent, or other well meaning believer to secretly baptize people. He did not say their baptisms were invalid, but that it was against the spirit of the Church to do so, and was inviting harm by making the baptized more vulnerable to the attack of Satan.

Things/people can be blessed against their will, for their own good,to be rid of nefarious energies that might be clinging to them from a former owner, or intent placed upon them by someone else…so that leads me to think maybe one could be baptized against their will.

Incantation is a correct term to use, except that many Catholics associate it only with magic/pagan use, but it is not specific to any tradition. Catholicism and other occult faiths evolved side by side and there are many similarities in the form of ritual, initiations and consecrations. They often mirror one another in practice, which is not to say they are honoring or accomplishing the same thing, just that they use similar rituals and understandings of spirituality in their practice.

For those of us who follow faiths based on a very different understanding of the nature of things, these practices and beliefs can seem very odd, but they must be considered in the context of their own system, in which they make logical sense.

 

[ralphinal]

This is exactly the sort of thing that fascinated me as a child about Catholicism, the ins and outs and labrynthian theology. I thought it was amazing that over the centuries people had actually sat down and ferreted out answers for all these things and theology to go along with them.

So this is something I’ve thought a lot about, and done a bit of searching on.

Baptism can be done by anyone as long as they use the right form and intent. That is what I was taught growing up Catholic, and what has recently been confirmed to me by an apologetic priest.

So, If I witnessed a car accident or caught a baby at birth, I could baptize them, even if I don’t believe, if I used the proper form (words and water, spit will work in a pinch) and my intent was to initiate them into the kingdom of God.

I was taught NOT to do this outside of dire emergency, because if they lived, I was responsible to see that they were educated in the faith. Also, by baptising them, I was making them more attractive prey to the attacks of Satan, and if they were not in the church receiving the graces of Sacraments, I would actually have done their soul a diservice.

However, they would still be validly baptised. God has given this ability to confer baptism to humanity, and apparently agreed to be bound. Baptism causes and indelible change, so no matter what, once one is validly baptized thats’ it, for eternity.

I don’t think that I could validly baptize an entire pool of people at once, because that really wouldn’t be proper form. I think I would have to specifically attend to each person individually, pouring the water over them, saying the words over them.

Whether or not one can validly baptize an adult against their will, I am not certain. I’m sure theology exists on the subject, but I do not know. But if they are in a coma, etc, they can still be validly baptized (or so I was taught in Catholic school). So they don’t have to participate, but if they are actually opposed, it may affect the validity.

Recently an apologetic priest teaching on the subject said that it is wrong for a grandparent, or other well meaning believer to secretly baptize people. He did not say their baptisms were invalid, but that it was against the spirit of the Church to do so, and was inviting harm by making the baptized more vulnerable to the attack of Satan.

Things/people can be blessed against their will, for their own good,to be rid of nefarious energies that might be clinging to them from a former owner, or intent placed upon them by someone else…so that leads me to think maybe one could be baptized against their will.

Incantation is a correct term to use, except that many Catholics associate it only with magic/pagan use, but it is not specific to any tradition. Catholicism and other occult faiths evolved side by side and there are many similarities in the form of ritual, initiations and consecrations. They often mirror one another in practice, which is not to say they are honoring or accomplishing the same thing, just that they use similar rituals and understandings of spirituality in their practice.

For those of us who follow faiths based on a very different understanding of the nature of things, these practices and beliefs can seem very odd, but they must be considered in the context of their own system, in which they make logical sense.

Very good post. Accurate and clear.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Most of the Protestant I’ve known deny any value in water baptism at all. To them you are just swimming (though some put vale in singing a prewritten prayer).

I’ll put forth a few concepts that I’m sure not all will agree with.

1. Baptism must be done by someone with God’s authority. Not just knowledge and good intentions.
2. If you don’t stick to the path back to God baptism is just a bath.

3.Therefore baptism can only be of value if it is what you want. God is not fooled by people who just make outwardly sings and don’t want to change.

But then your church goes and does baptism for the dead. How can a person the has died say I want to be baptized?

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

I have a question. The whole “pagan” thread got me thinking.

Let’s suppose I was swimming with some Catholic Christian or Protestant Christian friends. My never having been baptized in water was just eating at one of them and they snuck up behind me and recited the appropriate words/formula over me and dunked me…would I be considered “baptized”?

Most of those I know who were baptized as children or babies had no conscious awareness or at least understanding about what a baptismal covenant in water meant, nor did they give consent, yet as I understand it, they are considered “baptized”.

In some of the other threads on CAF, people sneak around and baptize their grandchildren or their nieces and nephews to make sure their souls aren’t in jeapordy should they die before they reach some “age of accountability”…which in itself is strange to me…if one isn’t at an age of accountability what’s the difference if one is sprinkled with water and an incantation is spoken over the unwary child.

The whole issue that if one is baptized in water they can never be a “pagan”…I suspect they can only a “heretic”…a distinction I’m sure has some value to someone, but I’m curious…am I now “safe” in my hypotheical scenario in God’s eyes now that I have been dunked in water with the appropriate words spoken over me with our without my approval?

I await the responses.

NO you would not have been baptized. As an person that has reached the age of accountability you would have to be receptive for it to be a valid baptism. As for the child/infant their parents /guardians are the ones that are over all matters for them so yes they can place the child up to be baptized and vow to raise him/her as a Christian.

I have nephews and nieces that have not been baptized and it concerns me, but i would never have gone behind their mothers back to have them baptized as I could not be there to insure their continued education in the Faith.

 

[Publisher]

This is exactly the sort of thing that fascinated me as a child about Catholicism, the ins and outs and labrynthian theology. I thought it was amazing that over the centuries people had actually sat down and ferreted out answers for all these things and theology to go along with them.

So this is something I’ve thought a lot about, and done a bit of searching on.

Baptism can be done by anyone as long as they use the right form and intent. That is what I was taught growing up Catholic, and what has recently been confirmed to me by an apologetic priest.

So, If I witnessed a car accident or caught a baby at birth, I could baptize them, even if I don’t believe, if I used the proper form (words and water, spit will work in a pinch) and my intent was to initiate them into the kingdom of God.

I was taught NOT to do this outside of dire emergency, because if they lived, I was responsible to see that they were educated in the faith. Also, by baptising them, I was making them more attractive prey to the attacks of Satan, and if they were not in the church receiving the graces of Sacraments, I would actually have done their soul a diservice.

However, they would still be validly baptised. God has given this ability to confer baptism to humanity, and apparently agreed to be bound. Baptism causes and indelible change, so no matter what, once one is validly baptized thats’ it, for eternity.

I don’t think that I could validly baptize an entire pool of people at once, because that really wouldn’t be proper form. I think I would have to specifically attend to each person individually, pouring the water over them, saying the words over them.

Whether or not one can validly baptize an adult against their will, I am not certain. I’m sure theology exists on the subject, but I do not know. But if they are in a coma, etc, they can still be validly baptized (or so I was taught in Catholic school). So they don’t have to participate, but if they are actually opposed, it may affect the validity.

Recently an apologetic priest teaching on the subject said that it is wrong for a grandparent, or other well meaning believer to secretly baptize people. He did not say their baptisms were invalid, but that it was against the spirit of the Church to do so, and was inviting harm by making the baptized more vulnerable to the attack of Satan.

Things/people can be blessed against their will, for their own good,to be rid of nefarious energies that might be clinging to them from a former owner, or intent placed upon them by someone else…so that leads me to think maybe one could be baptized against their will.

Incantation is a correct term to use, except that many Catholics associate it only with magic/pagan use, but it is not specific to any tradition. Catholicism and other occult faiths evolved side by side and there are many similarities in the form of ritual, initiations and consecrations. They often mirror one another in practice, which is not to say they are honoring or accomplishing the same thing, just that they use similar rituals and understandings of spirituality in their practice.

For those of us who follow faiths based on a very different understanding of the nature of things, these practices and beliefs can seem very odd, but they must be considered in the context of their own system, in which they make logical sense.

cheddarsox,

Thank you for the well thought out post. I have no wish to be offensive to ibkc in using words he finds offensive, but thank you for your post just the same.

Manuvering through the ins and outs of Catholic doctrine for me is daunting. To understand all the various nuances of what and what is not allowed or accepted is one of the reasons I am here…to understand. I will continue to try to understand and ask questions, but I will also seek to be sensitive to those whom I’m asking those questions of…I have no wish to bruise tender hearts or cause hard feelings.

Your post was appreciated, it answered some of the questions I wanted to ask but thought better of it after I put my foot in my mouth previously, thank you.

 

[mercygate]

cheddarsox,

Thank you for the well thought out post. I have no wish to be offensive to ibkc in using words he finds offensive, but thank you for your post just the same.

Manuvering through the ins and outs of Catholic doctrine for me is daunting. To understand all the various nuances of what and what is not allowed or accepted is one of the reasons I am here…to understand. I will continue to try to understand and ask questions, but I will also seek to be sensitive to those whom I’m asking those questions of…I have no wish to bruise tender hearts or cause hard feelings.

Your post was appreciated, it answered some of the questions I wanted to ask but thought better of it after I put my foot in my mouth previously, thank you.

Publisher, you are one of the most decent guys around here! Your post could only be “offensive” if someone were expecting to be offended.

 

[ralphinal]

Publisher,

You can always PM me if you want. I do not offend to easily. Just ask away.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

cheddarsox,

Thank you for the well thought out post. I have no wish to be offensive to ibkc in using words he finds offensive, but thank you for your post just the same.

Manuvering through the ins and outs of Catholic doctrine for me is daunting. To understand all the various nuances of what and what is not allowed or accepted is one of the reasons I am here…to understand. I will continue to try to understand and ask questions, but I will also seek to be sensitive to those whom I’m asking those questions of…I have no wish to bruise tender hearts or cause hard feelings.

Your post was appreciated, it answered some of the questions I wanted to ask but thought better of it after I put my foot in my mouth previously, thank you.

Ask away, IMO if a person is offend by a question they really are way to touchy to begin with. Now there are those that say things in away that is meant to be abrasive and they do it on propose. I have never read a post of your that what put you in that category.
The problem is how could I know what could be offensive to a person or group that I know very little about till I ask question.

For example If I had never known any catholics and all I had ever hear was that they worshiped idols and thought of the Pope as Christ. Should I be offended if someone asked me why about these things. I don’t think so. Growing Up one of my best friend ( he’s souther Baptist) would always refer to me as a mackerel snapper. I don’t even like mackerel. People tend to take themselves way to seriously.