Baptism during Lent

[BabyLutheran]

I am asking my pastor tomorrow too!!! After all, he is the one who caused this big debate! lol

Seriously, our baptismal font doesn't even have water in it now. I went to cross myself with the water from the font, and it was dry.

I think Rev Cowboy hit it on the head. Baptisms always followed some sort of instructional period. Even though infants can't be instructed, maybe this time is for parents to be instructed. I know....it's a stretch!

By the time the debate ends, it will be time for my daughter's baptism. lol

 

[Flipper]

A Lutheran friend of mine told me that it is "traditional" to baptize babies on the Saturday before Easter. That's also new to me.

Oh no, debates here have been known to last for years. Ya opened a can o' worms.

I don't know if I can get to my pastor to talk to him Sunday (3 services, lots of people, etc.), but I have a friend in third year seminary who is much more easily accessible. I'll ask him. We can come back and compare notes.

 

[BabyLutheran]

Sounds good! This denomination is so logic driven, don't you love it!?

 

[porterross]

Flipper makes the most crucial point, IMO, of risking nothing happening to the child during the wait. This would bother me as well if I had an infant needing to be baptized and I would likely be most insistent on it being done as soon as possible.
As for pre-baptismal counseling, why would that be necessarily lengthy for parents who are catechized members of the Lutheran synod in question? My ex isn't Lutheran and I wasn't a member of the congregation where our daughter's baptism took place, yet besides sitting down with the pastor and being clear on our parental duties, there was no counseling required.

 

[RadMan]

About 2 years ago my son and the twins came down to my cabin and I called the pastor and asked if he would come to the house and baptize the girls. Before my boy arrived I told him about the pastor coming and he says "uhh-----ok". I knew he was leary but he didn't' say much. After the baptism he mentioned how much it affected him . Ever since then he's been taking the twins to church often. Before that he never went to church.

God works in mysterious way.

 

[cerette]

Show me a bible verse that even says there is Lent, or Advent. Are we going to give those up too?

There is no verse in the Bible saying we have to have our children baptized immediately either, that I know of.

I don't know that any pastor is "denying" baptism. i am sure they would do it if the parent were concerned.

I prefer to have a positive attitude. I don't like thinking about, "wow I should get my baby baptized immediately just in case they die." That's definitely the wrong reason to be baptized.

It's similar to the tactic the baptists use to get us "saved." Do you know where you would go if you died right now? I heard that countless times from the Baptists coming through my parents' neighborhood.

I am not trying to sound harsh. It just sounds like the people who are against waiting are against it for the wrong reason: FEAR

The Bible doesn't say we have to have them baptized two seconds after birth. But the Bible does tell us what baptism is, and it is only good things. So why wait? Some say 'wait because it is Lent'. Well, to me, that reason for waiting isn't strong enough. I can focus on the meaning of Lent (and Advent and easter and every other occasion as well) even if I have my children baptized during that period of time as well.

 

[cerette]

Lent is time of preparation and instruction in the faith. Show me a Bible Verse where Baptism isn't preceeded by some sort of teaching and instruction in the faith, and I will stop saying that simply it would nice to Baptize at Easter instead of Lent.

Also read the Didache, Justin Martyr, Hippolytus. Hippolytus even says: [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]21 At the hour in which the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crows, they shall first pray over the water. 2When
they come to the water, the water shall be pure and flowing, that is, the water of a spring
or a flowing body of water. 3Then they shall take off all their clothes. 4The children shall be
baptized first. All of the children who can answer for themselves, let them answer. If there
are any children who cannot answer for themselves, let their parents answer for them, or
someone else from their family.

The practice of instruction in the faith before Baptism has been around right from Day 1 of Christianity. Even Jesus heard John's preaching before he was Baptized.
[/FONT][/FONT]
BTW, I have never said that I would never Baptize in Lent. All I have been trying say is that is nice to honour the scriptural practice of instruction before Baptism, in the season which set apart by the early Church for instruction for Baptism.

I would also like to say that the notion that the Early Church's practice and tradition was not based in scripture is inaccurate. We have to remember that it was out of this very tradition and practice that scripture was decided upon and canonized. I believe that through the guidance of the Holy Spirit the Church's tradition and practiced matched until both could be decided upon.

Lent is a time for instruction... OK... If someone would be interested in learning more about the Lutheran faith, let's say around advent or so, would you then say to them "Wait until Lent to learn because Lent is the time for instruction"? I don't think you would.
If you had a family with 3 already baptized kids, and a newborn, and the parents were well educated in the lutheran beliefs, would they too have to wait until Lent is over before they should have the wee one baptized, since they should be instructed during Lent?

 

[cerette]

We baptize because we are commanded to. Further all I've ever heard said here is that if an unbaptized child dies, while we think that God will know that child's heart, we certainly don't know for sure.

I've only been a Lutheran 10 years, and have been taught from day one to do it as soon as you can. This is the first I've seen that might not be correct during a certain time of the year, and of course I'm getting it off a messageboard. I'm also getting ready to adopt children from a country in Africa where we will more than likely not get a perfectly healthy baby and/or child. I guess I'm looking at this a little bit differently than, say, a year ago.

Maybe I should just talk to my pastor and defer to what he says.

God' blessings to you and the soon to be adopted children. I hope you won't face any difficulties with your pastor when you decide to have the children baptized.

 

[BabyLutheran]

I find it pretty ironic that in 2007, we all of a sudden have different points of view on it...not saying anything against either side. I just think it's weird how unstandardized the practices are depending on which church you attend. I wonder when the Lutherans began splitting (for lack of a better term) on whether to do baptisms during Lent?

Like I said before, infants, I kind of agree on doing it when you need to as parents. In my daughter's case, she is 9, and can understand some, so I think it is best for her to wait and get some instruction in the faith first. Heck I am just tickled she wants to do it, and I am not having to force it on her.

Blessings to all.

 

[RadMan]

I find it pretty ironic that in 2007, we all of a sudden have different points of view on it...not saying anything against either side. I just think it's weird how unstandardized the practices are depending on which church you attend. I wonder when the Lutherans began splitting (for lack of a better term) on whether to do baptisms during Lent?

Like I said before, infants, I kind of agree on doing it when you need to as parents. In my daughter's case, she is 9, and can understand some, so I think it is best for her to wait and get some instruction in the faith first. Heck I am just tickled she wants to do it, and I am not having to force it on her.

Blessings to all.

Lutherans aren't that strict on the why/where/when/how of baptism. Some people just have opinions. Have it done and don't worry about the specifics.

 

[RevCowboy]

Lent is a time for instruction... OK... If someone would be interested in learning more about the Lutheran faith, let's say around advent or so, would you then say to them "Wait until Lent to learn because Lent is the time for instruction"? I don't think you would.
If you had a family with 3 already baptized kids, and a newborn, and the parents were well educated in the lutheran beliefs, would they too have to wait until Lent is over before they should have the wee one baptized, since they should be instructed during Lent?

If the family was insistent that the child be baptized sooner, we would still go visit them and do the pre-baptismal class. However, as I have said I would probably relent and do the Baptism in Lent. However, I will not do it at their house or outside the context of Sunday morning worship.

Now, if the family was worried about their child I also think a discussion on what Baptism is would warranted. A family who could not wit might be mistakenly thinking that Baptism is some kind of magical shield that protects from the devil or a ticket that gets is into heaven.

Baptism in and of itself does not save, God saves.
Baptism proclaims God's faith in us, not our faith in God. God does not need Baptism to give us faith.
Baptism is for our sake, not God's.
God does not need Baptism to bestow grace unto us, rather gives us this sign as gift that we see, touch, hear, etc... so that we know the reality of God's love.
If God is such that He would damn an unbaptized baby, then I don't want that God. However, the merciful God that we encounter in Bible and in the person of Jesus indicates that a God who is willing to die for our sins certainly wouldn't damn an infant to hell because it is not baptized.

But let me be clear again: It would be nice to Baptize on the Easter Vigil has has been the custom of Christians for a long. However, I have never said that I would not Baptize in Lent for an emergency or perhaps even to assuage the fears of family who did not want to wait. However, in the latter case I might consider some post-baptismal instruction on the difference between having faith and trusting God versus having faith in Baptism.

 

[DaRev]

My views...

Baptism is two-fold. It is the water combined with the word which is one of the means of grace. It is where God calls us by name and makes us His. It is also a rite of the Church where an individual becomes a member of the body of Christ. It should be done in the context of the Church, during the Divine Service.

We need to remember also that baptism isn't the only means of grace. Paul writes "Faith comes by hearing, and hearing the message of Christ."

If a baptism is to be scheduled, I would not schedule it during Lent because of the nature of the season, unless there were specific circumstances that warranted a sooner baptism rather than a later one. I would never refuse a baptism, but I would strongly encourage that the baptism be done in the context of the Church as described above.

That being said, if a parent said to me "I'll leave the church if you don't baptize my child when and where I want you to," I would probably hold the door for them. I would seriously have to question what their idea of the Church is.

 

[Qoheleth]

If a baptism is to be scheduled, I would not schedule it during Lent because of the nature of the season, unless there were specific circumstances that warranted a sooner baptism rather than a later one. I would never refuse a baptism, but I would strongly encourage that the baptism be done in the context of the Church as described above.

That being said, if a parent said to me "I'll leave the church if you don't baptize my child when and where I want you to," I would probably hold the door for them. I would seriously have to question what their idea of the Church is.

This could not have been said better!



Q

 

[ThePilgrim]

My views...

Baptism is two-fold. It is the water combined with the word which is one of the means of grace. It is where God calls us by name and makes us His. It is also a rite of the Church where an individual becomes a member of the body of Christ. It should be done in the context of the Church, during the Divine Service.

We need to remember also that baptism isn't the only means of grace. Paul writes "Faith comes by hearing, and hearing the message of Christ."

If a baptism is to be scheduled, I would not schedule it during Lent because of the nature of the season, unless there were specific circumstances that warranted a sooner baptism rather than a later one. I would never refuse a baptism, but I would strongly encourage that the baptism be done in the context of the Church as described above.

That being said, if a parent said to me "I'll leave the church if you don't baptize my child when and where I want you to," I would probably hold the door for them. I would seriously have to question what their idea of the Church is.

*claps*

 

[DaRev]

Ha! I'm glad I have the approval of our EO brethren.

 

[filosofer]

I would baptize during Lent.

But were I in your position, I wouldn't hold the door for them. But I would try in all ways possible to discuss with them the Biblical view of Baptism.

Now, if they threatened to leave because of the color of the hymnal, I would hold the door.

 

[DaRev]

But were I in your position, I wouldn't hold the door for them. But I would try in all ways possible to discuss with them the Biblical view of Baptism.

Now, if they threatened to leave because of the color of the hymnal, I would hold the door.

Of course I would explain what Baptism is. If their threat came after that, then...

As for the hymnal, I haven't had anyone complain about that... unless we tried using that awful green one.

 

[Edial]

Show me a bible verse that even says there is Lent, or Advent. Are we going to give those up too?

There is no verse in the Bible saying we have to have our children baptized immediately either, that I know of.

There are plenty of verses presenting cases when adults request being baptized they are immediately baptized.

Since children are under the authority of their parents, infants should be baptized whenever parents ask for it.

I prefer to have a positive attitude. I don't like thinking about, "wow I should get my baby baptized immediately just in case they die." That's definitely the wrong reason to be baptized.
...

I do not think so.

LK 12:16 And he told them this parable: "The ground of a certain rich man produced a good crop. 17 He thought to himself, `What shall I do? I have no place to store my crops.'
LK 12:18 "Then he said, `This is what I'll do. I will tear down my barns and build bigger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. 19 And I'll say to myself, "You have plenty of good things laid up for many years. Take life easy; eat, drink and be merry." '
LK 12:20 "But God said to him, `You fool! This very night your life will be demanded from you. Then who will get what you have prepared for yourself?'

We do not know when we die.

It is not right "postponing" this grace of God that is available to all.

 

[BabyLutheran]

I am sorry you feel that fear of going to hell is a reason to be baptized

 

[Edial]

Indeed, just as the Early Church Father's taught this.

I believe this is the key phrase from your post ...
"The Church believes that whole season of Easter is only day, and that also that day is the very same day that Christ rose from the dead.".
Can you support this with the Scriptures and/or the Confessions?

This is a symbolic understanding of Easter.

Yet the real resurrection of Christ happened at a real time in history.
It is a historical resurrection.

Do you believe it is wise to mix the symbolic with the hostorical in the context we are talking about?