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'

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

#16   Aug 28, '13, 10:01 am

EvangelCatholic Junior Member   Join Date: April 16, 2013 Posts: 796 Religion: Lutheran

Re: In-laws have been re-baptized?? 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.

#17   Aug 28, '13, 12:45 pm

SteveVH Regular Member   Join Date: March 18, 2009 Posts: 5,179 Religion: Catholic

Re: In-laws have been re-baptized?? 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. __________________ "Let the time come when those who should oblige the servant of God, do the contrary to him, and what degree of patience and humility he has then, that is the degree he has and no more." - St. Francis of Assisi

#18   Aug 28, '13, 2:43 pm

ltwin Regular Member   Join Date: November 9, 2009 Posts: 2,074 Religion: Pentecostal

Re: In-laws have been re-baptized?? 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. __________________ Oh that rugged cross My salvation Where Your love poured out over me Now my soul cries out Hallelujah Praise and honour unto Thee

#19   Aug 28, '13, 2:55 pm

EvangelCatholic Junior Member   Join Date: April 16, 2013 Posts: 796 Religion: Lutheran

Re: In-laws have been re-baptized?? 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?

#20   Aug 28, '13, 5:06 pm

ltwin Regular Member   Join Date: November 9, 2009 Posts: 2,074 Religion: Pentecostal

Re: In-laws have been re-baptized?? 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. __________________ Oh that rugged cross My salvation Where Your love poured out over me Now my soul cries out Hallelujah Praise and honour unto Thee

#21   Aug 30, '13, 10:12 pm

fallow spirit New Member   Join Date: January 30, 2013 Posts: 98 Religion: Christian teen standing on the edge of the Tiber river

Re: In-laws have been re-baptized?? 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. __________________ a very sporadic person Beware! I lurk a lot, I'll post but I lurk more eat the cookie, eat the cookie, eat the imaginary cookie

#22   Yesterday, 2:10 am

ltwin Regular Member   Join Date: November 9, 2009 Posts: 2,074 Religion: Pentecostal

Re: In-laws have been re-baptized?? 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. __________________ Oh that rugged cross My salvation Where Your love poured out over me Now my soul cries out Hallelujah Praise and honour unto Thee