A baptismal question to Roman Catholics?

[Yarddog]

That may be the case, although the person in the mortuary should have known the difference unless a Priest can use holy water when giving the last rights, etc? does holy water ever get used during last rights or prayers, etc?

We can all speculate about what occurred but we may not get anywhere. Why don't you write to the Archdiocese Office of the area which it occurred and ask? You may get a response and then you can share it with us.

 

[Uphill Battle]

The bodies of the dead were sometimes anointed (Mark 14:8; Luke 23:56).

It is within the realms of possibility that this was an anointing, and not a baptism.

specifically because with a child, water may be used as opposed to oil, if I'm not mistaken.

I wonder if an R.C. could answer if the anointing of the dead is common practice, but it has biblical reference for sure.

the whole thing is a mountain out of a molehill either way.

 

[Tyndale]

I've just been reassured that the baptism did actually take place. It took place in the hospital mortuary. The hospital chaplains told our local minister that the baptism took place. No-one (on our side) knows when the child officially died, we only know that the baptism took place in the hospital mortuary.

We can all speculate about what occurred but we may not get anywhere. Why don't you write to the Archdiocese Office of the area which it occurred and ask? You may get a response and then you can share it with us.

I will write to the Archdiocese concerning this issue and report back.

 

[Tyndale]

The bodies of the dead were sometimes anointed (Mark 14:8;

Not in Mark 14:8. Jesus was still living.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Indeed he was, but he pointed to the practice of anointing for burial.

 

[Tyndale]

but he pointed to the practice of anointing for burial.

did he?

 

[Uphill Battle]

I've just been reassured that the baptism did actually take place. It took place in the hospital mortuary. The hospital chaplains told our local minister that the baptism took place.

do you see what this sounds like? He told she... who told he... who told me... that...

Sounds a bit like the sewing circle previously mentioned.

did he?

of course. Much of his time prior to his death, he spent trying to let his dull-witted followers know, that he was going to die.

 

[Tyndale]

do you see what this sounds like? He told she... who told he... who told me... that...

Sounds a bit like the sewing circle previously mentioned.

That's fine by me, i really don't care what it sounds like, I only care what is reality. Read Albion's posts beginning with page 1.
I will ask the diosease what went on and I will report back.

but he pointed to the practice of anointing for burial.

of course. Much of his time prior to his death, he spent trying to let his dull-witted followers know, that he was going to die.

Uphill Battle, You've lost my support. I used to agree with you in certain things, but your views have become outrageous.

 

[Uphill Battle]

That's fine by me, i really don't care what it sounds like, I only care what is reality. Read Albion's posts beginning with page 1.
I will ask the diosease what went on and I will report back.

I just don't know why you should expect anyone to take it seriously, when it reads like a game of telephone.

Uphill Battle, You've lost my support. I used to agree with you in certain things, but your views have become outrageous.

It's a good thing that I'm not seeking your support then.

I don't know why you find it so outrageous.

John 18:32 (New International Version)


"But we have no right to execute anyone," the Jews objected. 32This happened so that the words Jesus had spoken indicating the kind of death he was going to die would be fulfilled.

he spoke on his impending death frequently.

 

[Celticflower]

Uphill Battle, You've lost my support. I used to agree with you in certain things, but your views have become outrageous.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Outrageous=doesn't take a crack at Catholics at any given opportunity.

 

[Celticflower]

Outrageous=doesn't take a crack at Catholics at any given opportunity.

So that's what he meant.

I've seen you being outrageously funny at times - guess that's why I was confused.

 

[Tyndale]

Outrageous=doesn't take a crack at Catholics at any given opportunity.

No, its not because of that. Only in your mind it does. Your posts on this thread suggest it will be used to simply 'throw dirt' at Catholics. You also suggested there's a 'sewing circle' going on. I can assure you now there is no 'sewing circle' making up lies about the Priest. The Priest baptised the body in the hospital morgue, that's a fact. Albion, an ex-RC, said on page 1 "therefore baptisms done on the person moments after death are not unheard of" His own words agree with what I've been told by my minister and what the hospital chaplains told him. My minister doesn't sew lies about the Roman Catholic church, neither do I.

As for you putting "protestant" in quotation marks, when referring to the minister, I find that rather odd. Why did you need to do that?

Also, why do you claim its all a "mountain out of a molehill either way" ? Do you regard annointing of a dead body similar to baptising a dead body? Do you even think there's anything amiss with baptising a dead body?

 

[MrPolo]

Why is this thread still open? The OP question has long since been answered.

 

[Albion]

No, its not because of that. Only in your mind it does. Your posts on this thread suggest it will be used to simply 'throw dirt' at Catholics. You also suggested there's a 'sewing circle' going on. I can assure you now there is no 'sewing circle' making up lies about the Priest. The Priest baptised the body in the hospital morgue, that's a fact. Albion, an ex-RC, said on page 1 "therefore baptisms done on the person moments after death are not unheard of" His own words agree with what I've been told by my minister and what the hospital chaplains told him. My minister doesn't sew lies about the Roman Catholic church, neither do I.

As for you putting "protestant" in quotation marks, when referring to the minister, I find that rather odd. Why did you need to do that?

Also, why do you claim its all a "mountain out of a molehill either way" ? Do you regard annointing of a dead body similar to baptising a dead body? Do you even think there's anything amiss with baptising a dead body?

I tend to agree with you, but while some Catholics have a very thin veneer covering their anti-Protestantism, there were also some Catholics on this thread who showed themselves to be secure in their faith, not feeling the need to rush in and deny that any parish priest could possibly ever have made a mistake.

So...you might as well consider the issue settled, at least as far as this thread goes. After all, those chiming in to say that what happened 'couldn't have happened' aren't contributing anything.

 

[Uphill Battle]

No, its not because of that. Only in your mind it does. Your posts on this thread suggest it will be used to simply 'throw dirt' at Catholics.

, no, I suggest your "I don't support you anymore" poppycock comes from the fact that I don't throw dirt at Catholics anymore.

You also suggested there's a 'sewing circle' going on. I can assure you now there is no 'sewing circle' making up lies about the Priest.

I never said anything about lies. I didn't not charge dishonesty. I just said it reads like a rumor mill.

The Priest baptised the body in the hospital morgue, that's a fact.

Facts typically have supporting evidence. You say it happened, ok, you think it happened. Others would be justified in NOT believing that it happened, because someone saying "it happened" is a very poor attempt at calling it a fact that it DID happen. I personally don't care if it did, or didn't happen.

Albion, an ex-RC, said on page 1 "therefore baptisms done on the person moments after death are not unheard of" His own words agree with what I've been told by my minister and what the hospital chaplains told him. My minister doesn't sew lies about the Roman Catholic church, neither do I.

again, I never said anything about dishonesty. A rumor COULD be completely true. That doesn't mean it behooves us to pay it any attention.

As for you putting "protestant" in quotation marks, when referring to the minister, I find that rather odd. Why did you need to do that?

only because some people find the term protestant to be offensive, (I.E., many Anglicans decry the use of it.) There was no sinister motive. I have no clue what denomination, or non denomination the pastor is.

Also, why do you claim its all a "mountain out of a molehill either way" ? Do you regard annointing of a dead body similar to baptising a dead body? Do you even think there's anything amiss with baptising a dead body?

No, I do not considere them similar. It's a mountain out of a molehill, because what, if anything, does it prove? you have a number of scenarios, and none of them are of any moment.

scenario 1) the priest did it. He shouldn't have. BAD priest. bad. no treat for you. Impact on Catholicism, Christianity, the world.... zilch.

scenario 2) the pastor is mistaken. Mistakes happen. Impact on Catholicism, protetantism, Christianity, the world.... zilch.

scenario 3) the priest did it, and SHOULD have did it, (I.E. baptising on the last gasp sort of thing) same impact as the above.

if something is so meaningless in the grand scheme, passing it around as "fact" and trying to establish something out of it, is rumor-mongering. even if it IS true. It strikes me as a little bit of posturing on the case of the pastor (see, look at what the catholic did) but that's a judgement I can't actually make, I wasn't there. (It just gives me that impression. Probably because I've seen it, and done it myself more often than not. If I'm in error in my estimation, so be it.)

 

[Albion]

, no, I suggest your "I don't support you anymore" poppycock comes from the fact that I don't throw dirt at Catholics anymore.

I never said anything about lies. I didn't not charge dishonesty. I just said it reads like a rumor mill.

Facts typically have supporting evidence. You say it happened, ok, you think it happened. Others would be justified in NOT believing that it happened, because someone saying "it happened" is a very poor attempt at calling it a fact that it DID happen. I personally don't care if it did, or didn't happen.

again, I never said anything about dishonesty. A rumor COULD be completely true. That doesn't mean it behooves us to pay it any attention.

only because some people find the term protestant to be offensive, (I.E., many Anglicans decry the use of it.) There was no sinister motive. I have no clue what denomination, or non denomination the pastor is.


No, I do not considere them similar. It's a mountain out of a molehill, because what, if anything, does it prove? you have a number of scenarios, and none of them are of any moment.

scenario 1) the priest did it. He shouldn't have. BAD priest. bad. no treat for you. Impact on Catholicism, Christianity, the world.... zilch.

scenario 2) the pastor is mistaken. Mistakes happen. Impact on Catholicism, protetantism, Christianity, the world.... zilch.

scenario 3) the priest did it, and SHOULD have did it, (I.E. baptising on the last gasp sort of thing) same impact as the above.

if something is so meaningless in the grand scheme, passing it around as "fact" and trying to establish something out of it, is rumor-mongering. even if it IS true. It strikes me as a little bit of posturing on the case of the pastor (see, look at what the catholic did) but that's a judgement I can't actually make, I wasn't there. (It just gives me that impression. Probably because I've seen it, and done it myself more often than not. If I'm in error in my estimation, so be it.)

You may have a small point with use of the word "outrageous," but that has not been the focus so much as the heated claims that this event was all made up out of nothing (without, however, anything to support that claim). That DOES suggest a knee-jerk reaction.

Best to drop it right now.

 

[Uphill Battle]

indeed. Blithe statments of "i din't happen! it's a lie!" are no more a fact than the statement that it did happen.

I agree that it's best dropped, given it's rather inconsequential magnitude in the first place.

 

[Albion]

indeed. Blithe statments of "i din't happen! it's a lie!" are no more a fact than the statement that it did happen...I agree that it's best dropped....

Except that he reported on events about which he says he has some knowledge. You and others merely harrumphed that "it's a lie" with NO information whatsoever. We all agreed right away that the doings were unusual.

I agree that it's best dropped, given it's rather inconsequential magnitude in the first place.

It's not dropped if you insist upon calling the whole thing a fabrication as you bow out.

 

[Uphill Battle]

If you read back, Albion, you'll notice I never once said it did not happen. I questioned as to why the people who don't think it did, should pay it any mind, since it's complete hearsay. What I meant was, saying it happened, is not proof that it did. Saying it didn't happen, is not proof that it did NOT happen.

follow?