Do Non Demonination Churches Baptize Infants?

[~Anastasia~]

How many Catholic or Eastern Orthodox churches or priests will baptize the family members of people who belong to a Protestant church and have no intention of switching to the Catholic or Orthodox church?

I think it would be unlikely.

Baptism is only the beginning. Without being raised in the faith, some might say it would place the child in a worse (eventual) position than not being baptized as an infant.

In a way, it creates an obligation that no one is willing to follow through with. And in the Orthodox Church, someone besides the parents must also be involved, they must be Orthodox with a relationship to the Church, and they also have an obligation for the child's spiritual upbringing. It can't be done as just an isolated ritual.

 

[GingerBeer]

Apparently for the husband it would be that bad. He seems to have a visceral reaction against the Orthodoxy of his youth, and it looks like it carries over to Catholicism because it is similar. But the other problem is that at least the Catholic Church would expect that the Catholic parent actually practice the Catholic faith. The husband doesn't want that to happen. So I think she doesn't have that option without displeasing her husband.

It all will come down to how the parents view baptism. If they take an evangelical-credobaptist view then the child will not be baptised in any church if they take an evangelical-paedobaptist view then maybe they will baptise their child in an Anglican, Lutheran, or Reformed/Presbyterian church.

 

[chevyontheriver]

It all will come down to how the parents view baptism. If they take an evangelical-credobaptist view then the child will not be baptised in any church if they take an evangelical-paedobaptist view then maybe they will baptise their child in an Anglican, Lutheran, or Reformed/Presbyterian church.

Exactly. And she takes a Catholic paedobaptist view and he grew up Orthodox but wants nothing to do with Orthodoxy. So they have views in turmoil, or maybe in evolution. They are apparently trying out evangelical credobaptist churches and she is hoping they will baptize her child.

 

[Tangible]

For those of us who didn't 'get the reference' can you fill us in please? My mom was Lutheran but didn't convey enough for me to get it.

Sorry if I confused you, I was just stating that a valid option in baby-baptizing, non-Roman Catholic, non-Eastern Orthodox would be a Lutheran church. Lutherans are sacramental and evangelical.

As for the reference, I was only referring to a line from the Princess Bride, "Have you ever considered piracy? I think you'd make a great Dread Pirate Roberts." Just a silly joke.

 

[GingerBeer]

Exactly. And she takes a Catholic paedobaptist view and he grew up Orthodox but wants nothing to do with Orthodoxy. So they have views in turmoil, or maybe in evolution. They are apparently trying out evangelical credobaptist churches and she is hoping they will baptize her child.

Do you think that a Catholic priest would refuse baptism to their child if he was asked?

 

[chevyontheriver]

Do you think that a Catholic priest would refuse baptism to their child if he was asked?

If she has no intention of actually raising the child as a Catholic, and no intention of herself attending a Catholic church, yes I think that almost every priest would decline to baptize the child. Baptism is baptism into Christ and into a Christian community. If they are not going to actually BE part of the community, they should be baptized elsewhere.

Her husband will not allow the child to be baptized in a Catholic or Orthodox church, nor allow her to attend a Catholic church, so she's stuck. They are looking at credobaptist churches and those don't baptize infants. If only she were allowed to attend the Catholic church she grew up in and baptize their daughter in a Catholic church ... but the husband has put his foot down.

 

[GingerBeer]

I was told that Catholics teach that baptism saves because it conveys baptismal grace so why would a priest deny baptism to anybody who asks?

 

[Albion]

By that logic, any one of us would do right to move through any crowd, throwing water on everyone in sight--for their own good, of course.

 

[~Anastasia~]

If she has no intention of actually raising the child as a Catholic, and no intention of herself attending a Catholic church, yes I think that almost every priest would decline to baptize the child. Baptism is baptism into Christ and into a Christian community. If they are not going to actually BE part of the community, they should be baptized elsewhere.

I was told that Catholics teach that baptism saves because it conveys baptismal grace so why would a priest deny baptism to anybody who asks?

An Orthodox priest would almost certainly do the same, btw. If there is no intention whatsoever to be part of the community or raised with its teachings, it could actually do a disservice to the infant.

I think the "disservice" part is even more pronounced with Catholics. As I understand it, Catholics have certain obligations to attend mass, etc. and it is serious (mortal) sin for them to not? So while we Orthodox do not have such "obligation" in the sense that Catholics do, basically you are setting the child up in an impossible situation where they cannot maintain what they are baptized into, and as there is "one baptism for the remission of sins" you also prevent the child from deciding later on his own to take this step, since it would already have been done.

Now, speaking from an Orthodox perspective (because I'm not sure what Catholics teach), baptism gives the grace of the Holy Spirit. It is the entry into the household of faith, the beginning of a life of faith, toward salvation. But it is NOT a magical switch at that moment in time that guarantees salvation, without which God cannot and will not save. We don't presume to know anyone's salvation - only God sees the heart. And God is not limited in how He can bestow His grace. And a person who is baptized as an infant must still turn toward Christ himself and live a life of faith - if he hates God the rest of his life, baptism alone cannot be his defense.

Also, while we certainly baptize infants, welcome them as full members of the community who can receive the Eucharist, and have free access to all of the Sacraments, we don't presume God's condemnation of an unbaptized infant who dies. Instead, we trust in His mercy. Otherwise, what of the souls of little ones who die through miscarriage, or accidents during childbirth? We don't consider God to be a callous legalistic toward them, nor that His hands are somehow tied making Him unable to receive them.

The couple (sounds like the mother) is in a very difficult position though. May the Lord have mercy on the family, and restore harmony and unity.

 

[Tangible]

By that logic, any one of us would do right to move through any crowd, throwing water on everyone in sight--for their own good, of course.

I think they do that in India, though for different reasons.

 

[~Anastasia~]

By that logic, any one of us would do right to move through any crowd, throwing water on everyone in sight--for their own good, of course.

I understand one "denomination" does this, essentially, baptizing numbers of people by proxy without their knowledge or permission. However ... I thankfully seriously doubt the efficacy.

 

[Albion]

There is always at least one exception to any rule or norm in Christianity, isn't there? In this case, though, we have CF classifying that one church as non-Christian, so we're probably off the hook.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I was told that Catholics teach that baptism saves because it conveys baptismal grace so why would a priest deny baptism to anybody who asks?

Typically there is a multi-session class parents have to take before their child can be baptized. Yes, there is grace in baptism, but it is not magic. I'm sure there is more than one person who was baptized as a Catholic who will be rotting in hell for eternity. Baptism is a beginning, not an end.

 

[GingerBeer]

I think the "disservice" part is even more pronounced with Catholics. As I understand it, Catholics have certain obligations to attend mass, etc. and it is serious (mortal) sin for them to not?

Can it be a mortal sin if you do not know that it is an obligation?

 

[~Anastasia~]

Can it be a mortal sin if you do not know that it is an obligation?

You have a point. I think for any sin to be considered "mortal" in Catholicism, the person has to have an awareness.

But it seems likely parents would tell the child he was baptized Catholic, and he could learn of this obligation someday.

Anyway, better for Catholics to answer you. We Orthodox do not have categories of sin or obligation in the way Catholics do, but a priest would still be unlikely to baptize an infant if the parents had no intention of raising the child in the Church, or teaching him about the Orthodox faith. It does put the child at a disadvantage, and since baptism is not magical, there would not likely be a benefit. Baptism is only the beginning.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Can it be a mortal sin if you do not know that it is an obligation?

No. Not at all. But then most Catholics will know that it IS an obligation. Only specially benighted Catholics wouldn't know that. That said, many shirk their obligation anyhow.

If this child is secretly baptized as a Catholic and never figures out she is Catholic, or never finds out that she is obliged to live as a Catholic, there is no sin on her part. Even if she finds out, any guilt from failing her obligation would be minimal. It would be more like a new opportunity for her than a failed obligation.

 

[Tangible]

I don't think the OP has any good options if they want to go to a baptistic non-denominational church but also want to have their infant baptized. That's just not what these churches teach.

If they are really sold on this particular kind of church, a private "bathtub baptism" at home is probably their best option. Any Christian can baptize, though this isn't the way it is supposed to be done normally.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Ah yes, the home bathtub baptism. Valid certainly but irregular. All that is needed is real water, probably BEFORE the bubblebath is added. The words are exactly those from the end of the gospel of Matthew. Anybody can do it. It's valid. Not that I can recommend it. Baptism should be done in a whole community setting with that whole community willing to support the baptized person.

 

[GingerBeer]

a priest would still be unlikely to baptize an infant if the parents had no intention of raising the child in the Church, or teaching him about the Orthodox faith. It does put the child at a disadvantage, and since baptism is not magical, there would not likely be a benefit. Baptism is only the beginning.

Is there no advantage for the child in baptism then? Is it an optional ritual that makes no difference for a child not brought up in Orthodoxy?

 

[~Anastasia~]

Is there no advantage for the child in baptism then? Is it an optional ritual that makes no difference for a child not brought up in Orthodoxy?

There is certainly an advantage in baptism, because it brings the child into the community of faith and is a Sacrament that bestows the grace of God. But if the child is immediately removed from the community?

I cannot say about raising the child in a "non-denominational" but "Christian" church. When these things were being discussed, there was only one Church, not a bunch of different denominations, and if you were outside the Church, then something was so far off in your beliefs (usually basic Christology) that you couldn't rightly be called Christian. So I can't relate what was said back then to the situation Christianity finds itself in now. The priests are likewise obligated. And while I certainly believe that one can be a true Christian and be part of just about denomination/non-denom out there, they have no way of knowing what a church may teach. There are also serious heresies scattered about. Without knowing that the child will be taught in the faith, I think the priest in conscience can't baptize them.


My GUESS is that it would provide an advantage to the infant, but that advantage would not be fully realized depending on who baptized the child (as far as I know, only the Orthodox baptize, chrismate, and commune infants all at the same time, giving them full access to the Sacraments), and I also think that advantage could be precarious because of not being maintained. It is certainly possible to be baptized and in the end have it mean nothing, if one is not truly converted in the heart, so the "advantage" doesn't stand without believing and living a life of faith. As I said, this part is a GUESS on my part, in an attempt to answer, based on what I know.