What if an atheist gets baptised?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sultan_Of_Swing
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wait a second. So if I go to confession, and the priest says I’m absolved, but doesn’t really want to me to be, my sins aren’t forgiven? That doesn’t seem right at all. :confused:
This does seem odd…I am not sure in what context this would actually happen, but I think it very strange that God would withhold His forgiveness because a priest basically lied (but the person had no way of knowing this and believed sincerely that he was forgiven). This seems like God sending someone to hell on a technicality–which I personally cannot believe He would do.
 
I really can’t envision a situation where an atheist would allow himself to be baptized “for the fun of it.” I’ve known a few atheists, and I really can’t imagine they would do this. They wouldn’t consider it “fun”, they would consider it a waste of time.
 
I really can’t envision a situation where an atheist would allow himself to be baptized “for the fun of it.” I’ve known a few atheists, and I really can’t imagine they would do this. They wouldn’t consider it “fun”, they would consider it a waste of time.
What if a Christian friend knocks the atheist out cold and then baptises him?
 
Wait a second. So if I go to confession, and the priest says I’m absolved, but doesn’t really want to me to be, my sins aren’t forgiven? That doesn’t seem right at all. :confused:
If the priest says the words, you’re OK. A better analog to this is if you aren’t really contrite for your sins:
Can. 987 To receive the salvific remedy of the sacrament of penance, a member of the Christian faithful must be disposed in such a way that, rejecting sins committed and having a purpose of amendment, the person is turned back to God.
If you aren’t contrite, you don’t receive the benefits of the sacrament.
 
I really can’t envision a situation where an atheist would allow himself to be baptized “for the fun of it.” I’ve known a few atheists, and I really can’t imagine they would do this. They wouldn’t consider it “fun”, they would consider it a waste of time.
I can imagine it in the past. When Spain was liberated from the Saracens, there were many Jews and Musselmen who allowed themselves to be baptized so that they would not be expelled.

In fact, rooting these people out was the primary rationale for the Spanish Inquisition.
 
What if a Christian friend knocks the atheist out cold and then baptises him?
Can. 865 §1. For an adult to be baptized, the person must have manifested the intention to receive baptism, have been instructed sufficiently about the truths of the faith and Christian obligations, and have been tested in the Christian life through the catechumenate. The adult is also to be urged to have sorrow for personal sins.

§2. An adult in danger of death can be baptized if, having some knowledge of the principal truths of the faith, the person has manifested in any way at all the intention to receive baptism and promises to observe the commandments of the Christian religion.

(Emphasis mine.)
 
even if it did it would do him no good unless he died shortly after. The first mortal sin he commits would most likely go unrepented and therefore send him to hell.
do you really believe that about hell?

but

remembering if they are atheist there is no heaven and hell because both are of God. They don’t believe in God so wouldn’t believe in heaven or hell. So how would they go to a Hell?
 
do you really believe that about hell?

but

remembering if they are atheist there is no heaven and hell because both are of God. They don’t believe in God so wouldn’t believe in heaven or hell. So how would they go to a Hell?
Why does not believing in something make it untrue?
 
What if two atheists take their infant child to be baptized? Assume that everything is kosher except the parents lie during their profession of faith and their promise to raise the child Catholic. Is the baptism valid? Is the child Catholic?
 
Yep. And there’s no point in going to the market, because you don’t know if you’re really being sold what you’re being marketed. And there’s no point in going to work, because you don’t know that they intend to pay you. Etc, etc, etc…

If you go to confession, though, and if (by some exceedingly rare chance) you happen to get a priest who’s only in ministry in order to ‘fool’ well-intentioned Catholics (do you really think this happens with any frequency? :rolleyes:) then your sins might not be forgiven by virtue of the sacrament… yet, forgiveness would come from God, who sees the injustice in the situation. (On the other hand, if you decide “there’s no point”, then how would you conclude that God would forgive you?)
That is exactly my point, but it was suggested that the sacrament would be invalid i.e. forgiveness would not occur, if the very rare situation would happen that the priest is not intending to grant the person absolution.
 
As i said in the above post, no Point of going to confession because i dont know if he has even the minimum intent, so i might just as well give up confession and just pray to the Lord for forgiveness.
Why should i expose my sins to a person who “maybe” doesnt have the intent?
That’s a sorry excuse not to go to Confession. Firstly, we must trust that the priest has the intent, because it’s his job to, and most priests love hearing Confessions. If a priest spoke the formula of absolution, with intent to ‘trick’ you, he would put himself in a state of mortal sin. Also: I suggest you trust in God’s judgement if you have these thoughts. I would argue that, if the priest spoke the formula of absolution over you, with no intent to absolve, and you then received Holy Communion, that would not count as a sin against you (because you were unaware that it would be a sin–you would have been tricked into thinking you are in a state of grace), but against the priest who tricked you.

Secondly, even if a priest withholds his intent, he is still bound by the seal of the confessional. So he still can’t tell anyone or use that knowledge at all, or else he is excommunicated latae sententiae.
 
That is exactly my point, but it was suggested that the sacrament would be invalid i.e. forgiveness would not occur, if the very rare situation would happen that the priest is not intending to grant the person absolution.
But it means that your point doesn’t hold, though. The forgiveness of sin would happen through a special grace of God* by virtue of the fact that you went to confession *and, through no fault of your own, weren’t actually absolved of your sins in the context of the rite. “Why bother?” Because the absolution happens specifically because you bothered to go!
 
But it means that your point doesn’t hold, though. The forgiveness of sin would happen through a special grace of God* by virtue of the fact that you went to confession *and, through no fault of your own, weren’t actually absolved of your sins in the context of the rite.
The Church does not teach that a mere intention of confessing suffices for the forgiveness of mortal sin.
 
As will all things regarding the sacraments, one must be “properly disposed”, or “have intent” for the sacrament to be valid.

If someone was of the age of reason, and did not have the true intent in their hearts for the baptism, it would be invalid.

In the same way, if a priest were to pray the formula of absolution over a Catholic, and the priest did not have the intent to absolve the person’s sins, the absolution would be invalid.
As will all things regarding the sacraments, one must be “properly disposed”, or “have intent” for the sacrament to be valid.

…unless you’re an infant, apparently: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=794040
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top