A
Alice_Hori
Guest
According to my understanding, Baptism is efficacious no matter the disposition of the person baptizing (even if they are a non-believer), as long as the baptizer intends to baptize the person being baptized into the Church. If the person being baptized is an infant, the disposition of his/her parents does not affect the efficacy of the baptism. Baptism makes us members of the Church, heirs of heaven and children of God. It fills us with sanctifying grace and takes original sin from our souls. Why then would we not want infants to be baptized even though they are unlikely to be raised in the faith? Would not baptism still have a salutary effect on their souls and assist in their salvation? I have a personal interest in this as my husband was validly baptized in the Episcopalian church though his parents never raised him Christian afterwards. He was nevertheless drawn to other Christians, and eventually was confirmed a Catholic. His faith is still shaky, but nevertheless, he has a great respect for the Church and the laws of God, attends Mass every Sunday, and is generous towards the Church with his talent and treasure. I cannot but think that his being baptized as an infant moved him toward God. But the Church tells us that we ought not to baptize our children if we do not intend to raise them in the Faith, and we ought not to secretly baptize children whose parents are not Catholic. Why not given all the graces and indeed the adoption as sons and daughters of God that Baptism brings?