how to repent working4christ2 working4christ2

EvangelCatholic · #16 Aug 28, '13, 10:01 am

I have never heard of a "re-baptism" so long as the person was baptized using the Trinitarian forum.

Perhaps someone can explain why an infant baptism would be considered invalid if the person later on joins an Evangelical church? I understand the Baptist/ Evangelical idea behind preferring adult baptism but never heard of people being re-baptized if they initially received this sacrament as a baby in a Lutheran church.

SteveVH · #17 Aug 28, '13, 12:45 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by steido01

Roman Catholic friends, please correct me if I'm mistaken, but being born and raised a "separated brother" in a non-Roman Catholic communion, doesn't that absolve me of accusations of heresy and schism, since I was never formally a "Roman Catholic" to begin with?

You cannot be considered a heretic, even though you may believe in heretical teachings. And you cannot be considered a schismatic since, as you say, you were never a member to begin with. I don't think you can properly be called a Protestant since you are not protesting anything. But you belong to a faith tradition that can be traced back to heresy and schism and protest and division from the original Church. So, to the extent that you believe any heresy that might have crept into your faith tradition, you would be in error, regardless of whether or not you initiated the error.

Quote:

Originally Posted by steido01

No word game here. Baptism isn't merely "recognized by other Christians;" those baptisms performed by "other Christians" are recognized as valid by the Roman Catholic Church (assuming, of course, that they were performed according to proper Trinitarian formula). Almost anyone can baptize.

Correct.

ltwin · #18 Aug 28, '13, 2:43 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvangelCatholic

I have never heard of a "re-baptism" so long as the person was baptized using the Trinitarian forum.

Perhaps someone can explain why an infant baptism would be considered invalid if the person later on joins an Evangelical church? I understand the Baptist/ Evangelical idea behind preferring adult baptism but never heard of people being re-baptized if they initially received this sacrament as a baby in a Lutheran church.

Baptists and Evangelicals typically believe that baptism is an expression of faith and an appeal to God for a good conscience. Therefore, to be baptized as an infant is simply not baptism. Infant baptism is simply indicative of the parent's desire and intention to raise the child in the Christian faith, similar to the evangelical practice of dedicating children. While such an intention is praiseworthy, their children will need to be baptized on their own confession of faith and intention to live a Christian life.

One need not, from an evangelical perspective, see adult baptism as a repudiation of infant baptism so much as an affirmation of the parent's decision to raise them as Christian.

EvangelCatholic · #19 Aug 28, '13, 2:55 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by ltwin

Baptists and Evangelicals typically believe that baptism is an expression of faith and an appeal to God for a good conscience. Therefore, to be baptized as an infant is simply not baptism. Infant baptism is simply indicative of the parent's desire and intention to raise the child in the Christian faith, similar to the evangelical practice of dedicating children. While such an intention is praiseworthy, their children will need to be baptized on their own confession of faith and intention to live a Christian life.

One need not, from an evangelical perspective, see adult baptism as a repudiation of infant baptism so much as an affirmation of the parent's decision to raise them as Christian.

Thanks Itwin,

I did not know that adult re-baptism was required of those who were initially baptized as an infant. It reminds me of Confirmation. Lutherans believe that confirmation, which usually occurs around the age of 14 or older, is an extension of Holy Baptism, that the individual doesn't need God parents to proclaim faith in God.

Does an Evangelical Christian need to be baptized before receiving Holy Communion?

ltwin · #20 Aug 28, '13, 5:06 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvangelCatholic

Thanks Itwin,

I did not know that adult re-baptism was required of those who were initially baptized as an infant.

It's only required in so far as baptism is required to fully participate in the life of the local church. Evangelicals are not of one mind on this. Some evangelical churches may require baptism as a condition of church membership, while other churches simply offer opportunities and encourage people to be baptized but they do not "require" it for full participation in the life of the church. This latter tendency derives from the fact that evangelicals see the conversion experience as a person's entry into the church.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvangelCatholic

It reminds me of Confirmation. Lutherans believe that confirmation, which usually occurs around the age of 14 or older, is an extension of Holy Baptism, that the individual doesn't need God parents to proclaim faith in God.

Baptism functions like confirmation for many evangelicals. If you are raised in the church, you are typically baptized at ages that approximate confirmation. Seven and up would be typical I'd think.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvangelCatholic

Does an Evangelical Christian need to be baptized before receiving Holy Communion?

Some evangelical churches on the more fundamentalist end of the spectrum may practice forms of closed communion that may attach baptism as a requirement, but typically, at least in my experience, evangelical churches practice open communion for all those who believe in Christ as Lord and Savior. We're pretty ecumenical in that respect.

fallow spirit · #21 Aug 30, '13, 10:12 pm

It's because they believe baptism is just an action that we perform, a symbol of our salvation that is done after one 'accepts Christ' and has no bearing on the actual saving act whatsoever. So it isn't common for individuals who become Evangelical fundamentalists to get re-baptized after they realized that their baptism as an infant was 'fake.' I know about this, my Dad was baptized a baby as a Lutheran, then conditionally baptized by the Catholic Church, then he went and got himself baptized by one of these 'Bible Churches' during college. Only one of those events was an actual baptism the others were simply water being splashed on him (and hint: the time in college was not the valid one). That sort of careless attitude is common among evangelicals, at my church when I went to baptism classes recently (planning on get baptized at my current church since I do not want to risk what might happen in the wait to becoming Catholic), and there was an elderly lady there who stated that she had already been baptized before but that she wanted to have a do-over. She claimed her reason was that she re-dedicated herself to Christ. But that example sort of illustrates my points, to many evangelicals baptism isn't really anything sacred but a sort of 'rite of passage' that can be repeated, repeated and repeated however many instances one might desire to.

ltwin · #22 Yesterday, 2:10 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by fallow spirit

It's because they believe baptism is just an action that we perform, a symbol of our salvation that is done after one 'accepts Christ' and has no bearing on the actual saving act whatsoever. So it isn't common for individuals who become Evangelical fundamentalists to get re-baptized after they realized that their baptism as an infant was 'fake.' I know about this, my Dad was baptized a baby as a Lutheran, then conditionally baptized by the Catholic Church, then he went and got himself baptized by one of these 'Bible Churches' during college. Only one of those events was an actual baptism the others were simply water being splashed on him (and hint: the time in college was not the valid one). That sort of careless attitude is common among evangelicals, . . .

What, may I ask is "careless" about evangelicals or fundamentalists actually carrying out their convictions that baptism should occur after repentance? That may be offensive or nonsensical to a non-evangelical or a non-fundamentalist, but it can hardly be characterized as "careless" on their part. I find infant baptism misguided and ineffectual, but given what I know Catholics believe about baptism, I don't find them living out those convictions and baptizing babies "careless." It's actually the responsible thing to do if you believe in Catholic theology.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fallow spirit

. . . at my church when I went to baptism classes recently (planning on get baptized at my current church since I do not want to risk what might happen in the wait to becoming Catholic), and there was an elderly lady there who stated that she had already been baptized before but that she wanted to have a do-over. She claimed her reason was that she re-dedicated herself to Christ. But that example sort of illustrates my points, to many evangelicals baptism isn't really anything sacred but a sort of 'rite of passage' that can be repeated, repeated and repeated however many instances one might desire to.

Well, apparently it's sacred enough for some of us to want to "do-over" again.

cyguy · #1 Aug 27, '13, 12:31 pm

Okay so my in-laws have always been of the Lutheran faith and have recently switched to an E-free, bible thumpin Catholic bashing cult. I thought they'd be smart enough to see through it but all of a sudden they've announced that they've been re-baptized. I always thought they were as Lutheran as I am Catholic, but this adds another dimension that is "unique". Can anyone help me with this re-bapitism ordeal? Do they do it so you can profess, as an adult? I'll need some ammunition on this topic...unfortunately. Thanks in advance for your help.

AbideWithMe · #2 Aug 27, '13, 12:43 pm

Cyguy--I just have a few minutes to reply, but Evangelical Free Churches of America were formed from a merger of some originally Lutheran churches in the US; as such, they do not require re-baptism. Some E-Free churches routinely baptize infants as well as older people. E-Free churches aren't a cult; they're generally not Bible-thumpers; and they're generally open to ecumenical co-operation with Catholics. If your relatives are finding all those things in an E-Free church, that's not the norm for the denomination.

cyguy · #3 Aug 27, '13, 12:55 pm

I know this church, many of the members, and know they challenge Catholic salvation once they're well versed and comfortable quoting Bible scripture. Trust me, I'll have my hands full at some point.

AbideWithMe · #4 Aug 27, '13, 1:10 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyguy

I know this church, many of the members, and know they challenge Catholic salvation once they're well versed and comfortable quoting Bible scripture. Trust me, I'll have my hands full at some point.

Well, if you do have problems, just explain your faith in a respectful manner. That's all you can do. I don't have time today to dig up links to E-Free statements for you, but more or less officially, the EFCA is ecumenically open to respecting and cooperating with the CC. If you've hit an anti-Catholic pocket, that's regrettable.

cyguy · #5 Aug 27, '13, 1:12 pm

I'll do some searching on here...thank you. Calling it an anti-Catholic pocket is a perfect description.

Michael57 · #6 Aug 27, '13, 1:49 pm

God bless you.

There is one baptism for the remission of sin.

Sounds like you're going to have your hands full.

I will be praying for you and your family.

hazcompat · #7 Aug 27, '13, 2:52 pm

THE WORK OF ST. OPTATUS
BISHOP OF MILEVIS
AGAINST THE DONATISTS
Translated BY THE REV. O. R. VASSALL-PHILLIPS, B.A.
BALLIOL COLLEGE, OXFORD
PRIEST OF THE CONGREGATION OF THE MOST HOLY REDEEMER

Lest anyone should say that without thought I call them brethren, I would reply that such they are, for we cannot escape from the words of the prophet saying: You who fear the Word of the Lord, hear ye the Word of the Lord. To those who detest and curse you, and are unwilling to be called your brethren, say ye nevertheless: “You are our brethren.”
They therefore are without doubt brothers, though not good brothers. Wherefore let no one marvel that I term those brothers, who are unable to escape being our brethren. They and we have one spiritual birth, though widely differing is our conduct.

(They could not escape this, because by Baptism they had become Sons of God, and therefore brethren of all the brothers of Christ.)

Concerning the sins of these our brethren, I will speak in another place. For they, sitting over against us, speak evil things about us. They consort with that Thief who robs God, and share their lot with adulterers (that is, with heretics), and make their sins an object of praise, and plan reproachful words against us Catholics.
They all each in his own district make a great noise with wicked words. To some of their statements I may reply when opportunity arises. …
For what can be more to our purpose than your argument from the fact that there was only one Flood the type of Baptism? And, in maintaining that the one Circumcision availed for the salvation of the people of the Jews, you have written in defense of our doctrine, as though you were one of us. For this is our argument, who defend the Unity of Baptism conferred in [the Name of] the Trinity.
It is not an argument in favor of you, who dare to repeat, against the laws, that Baptism, of which the one Flood and one Circumcision are typical. And this, although you yourselves would not deny that what has been commanded to be done once only, ought not to be repeated.
But whilst you have praised with acuteness that which is worthy of all praise, you have by a quibble introduced your own persons, as if since it is only lawful once [to baptise] for you it were lawful, for others unlawful.
If it be unlawful for Betrayers to baptise, it cannot be lawful for you, for we can prove that your first fathers were Betrayers. If it be unlawful for schismatics to baptise, it must therefore be unlawful for you, for you originated the Schism.
If it be unlawful for sinners to baptize, we can prove from divine testimony that you are sinners also. Finally, since the validity of Baptism does not depend upon the character of the man who has been chosen to baptize, but upon an act which lawfully is done but once, for this reason we do not set right baptisms which have been administered by you, because both amongst us and amongst you the Sacrament is one.

Peace

RoseMary131 · #8 Aug 27, '13, 3:28 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyguy

...my in-laws ....have recently switched to an .....Catholic bashing cult....... I'll need some ammunition on this topic...unfortunately.

Don't let their new religion cause you anguish.

Find a way to let them know that it upsets you when they speak poorly of your faith.

If they want information, take time to share your faith.

You don't have to have "ammunition".... as you will feel you are in a battle and you won't be at peace.

Pray for God's peace to be with you when they say things that are against the Church. Pray that you can let any disrespectful words against the Church not disturb your peace but that you can address their issues without "ammunition".

SecretGarden · #9 Aug 27, '13, 3:43 pm

Often these types of churches don't recognize the infant baptism because they believe infants are unable to make active decisions about their faith. I think there is something about being baptized as an adult that said, I think you need to approach them with love and compassion. It would be interesting to find out why they left the Catholic church and then begin dialogue from there. Sometimes people leave because they haven't been taught about the faith. If they continue to badger you, there are many Catholic apologetic books you can read. A biblical defence of Catholicism by Dave Armstrong and Why do Catholics genuflect by Al Kresta is also a good book to read. The later, you can also purchase for the in-laws and if they continue this anti-catholic badgering you can always ask them to read that book.

Depending on your relations with your in-laws if they are hostile towards your faith, you can always try to limit contact. It is hard but sometimes you do what you have to do. Furthermore, patience is also important when handling them because often people are excited about joining something new. They are new and they just want to share this new faith with everyone. Over time it does fade out a bit as they get settled into their new church.

getysbg · #10 Aug 27, '13, 6:20 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyguy

I know this church, many of the members, and know they challenge Catholic salvation once they're well versed and comfortable quoting Bible scripture. Trust me, I'll have my hands full at some point.

Take a look at some of Patrick Madrid's stuff. Good ammo. Also go on youtube for Fr. Larry Richards

hn160 · #11 Aug 27, '13, 7:13 pm

I had friends that joined a so-called Bible Church and one of the requirements was to be re-baptized because the infant baptism might not have taken.

AbideWithMe · #12 Aug 27, '13, 8:05 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveVH

The fact that they would not recognize the valid Lutheran Baptism is a sure sign of this.

Cyguy, hi again...This is another short post since I was out tonight, but...EFCA (E-Free) churches officially do accept infant baptism from other churches. While some will allow adults to be baptized as a conscious profession of faith, it is not for Donatist reasons. I have to get to sleep, and I'm under a work deadline, but if I have time later this week I'll try to scrounge up some links to EFCA statements and articles.

Have your in-laws actually challenged you, Cyguy, or are you just assuming the worst of them? Have they come after you, or are you taking an adversarial stance (looking for "ammo") without proof that's necessary?

hazcompat · #13 Aug 28, '13, 4:53 am

CARITAS IN VERITATE! There is no charity outside of the truth. To re-baptize is grave matter.

Peace

steido01 · #14 Aug 28, '13, 7:51 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randy Carson

Not in formal communion, no.

YET. You forgot the "yet."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randy Carson

However, all baptized Christians are in some communion with the Catholic Church as the Catechism declares.

Or, as the more authoritative Holy Scriptures state, "For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit." 1 Corinthians 12:13

Dodge, all Christians who receive one baptism in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are part of the church catholic.

Randy Carson · #15 Aug 28, '13, 7:58 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by steido01

YET. You forgot the "yet."

Or, as the more authoritative Holy Scriptures state, "For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit." 1 Corinthians 12:13

Dodge, all Christians who receive one baptism in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are part of the church catholic.

And all Christians who receive one baptism in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are part of the Catholic Church.

They just don't know it.

YET.

how to repent working4christ2 working4christ2

Sunday, September 1, 2013

Family Guy- Canadian Alcatraz

Soul vs Spirit - John Paul Jackson

Joni - Dream Interpretation with John Paul Jackson

It's because they believe baptism is just an action that we perform, a symbol of our salvation that is done after one 'accepts Christ'

In-laws have been re-baptized?? catholic answers 4 dummies working4christ