s/o Baptism

[Lovedtodeath]

Of course. I only took an interest in the question myself when birth #1 started to go south fairly seriously; and so for birth #2, I extracted the promise from non-Christian dh (pretty easily; he's a fantastic guy, which is why I married him) that if something went really wrong, he would step in with an emergency baptism.

:001_wub: That is so sweet!

[milovany]

but I think if you claim certain verses do not "apply" to the church as a whole, where do we stop with that? We do need to consider context and content, but we need to deeply understand it and not surface read. Who were the disciples to which Jesus was speaking? Lay men (fishermen and business) not seminary trained, not ordained or licensed. Just men Jesus called out to follow Him. Paul talks about how some are to be teachers, some apostles, etc so there were apostles after the original 13 (the 11 plus Matthias and Paul).

 

It seems that if the writer clarified that Jesus was speaking to a select set of men (which it does in this instance) there is something to that. It says He pulled the 11 aside from the crowd. And they were not just fishermen and lay people -- they were the men Christ selected to be the leaders of the early church. They were the future first bishops. I'm wondering if more than a general "everyone should tell others about Christ" message (like it is commonly applied today) this is instead a "go out and build apostolic churches" message. Makes more sense, actually, and is how the early church functioned.

[Lovedtodeath]

Well, I think [you] get into dangerous territory here. The truth is the entire Bible was originally written to someone else. The church at Galatia, the church at Ephesus, the church at Colossi, etc. I am all about context and exegesis (I have a masters from a Southern Baptist seminary :tongue_smilie:) but I think if you claim certain verses do not "apply" to the church as a whole, where do we stop with that? We do need to consider context and content, but we need to deeply understand it and not surface read. Who were the disciples to which Jesus was speaking? Lay men (fishermen and business) not seminary trained, not ordained or licensed. Just men Jesus called out to follow Him. Paul talks about how some are to be teachers, some apostles, etc so there were apostles after the original 13 (the 11 plus Matthias and Paul). Of course I believe in the priesthood of all believers (I Peter 2:9) explained here.

 

Just me .02 :tongue_smilie:

 

It seems that if the writer clarified that Jesus was speaking to a select set of men (which it does in this instance) there is something to that. It says He pulled the 11 aside from the crowd. And they were not just fishermen and lay people -- they were the men Christ selected to be the leaders of the early church. They were the future first bishops. I'm wondering if more than a general "everyone should tell others about Christ" message (like it is commonly applied today) this is instead a "go out and build apostolic churches" message. Makes more sense, actually, and is how the early church functioned.

Thank you for continuing this discussion, sisters, this is all new to me. I will be sure to re-read this in context.

[Kathryn]

It seems that if the writer clarified that Jesus was speaking to a select set of men (which it does in this instance) there is something to that. It says He pulled the 11 aside from the crowd. And they were not just fishermen and lay people -- they were the men Christ selected to be the leaders of the early church. They were the future first bishops. I'm wondering if more than a general "everyone should tell others about Christ" message (like it is commonly applied today) this is instead a "go out and build apostolic churches" message. Makes more sense, actually, and is how the early church functioned.

 

This is the point I was trying to make. These WEREN'T just random guys. These were the men Jesus CHOSE. They had walked with him, followed him, eaten with him, learned from him. He chose these men to carry on his message. Their time with him was their education, moreso than seminary and ordination is today, but that is how we continue the tradition.

[Parrothead]

Of course. I only took an interest in the question myself when birth #1 started to go south fairly seriously; and so for birth #2, I extracted the promise from non-Christian dh (pretty easily; he's a fantastic guy, which is why I married him) that if something went really wrong, he would step in with an emergency baptism.

 

That's when I started noticing that a lot of denominations would say that baptism had to be administered by a Christian, and I wondered if Catholics were alone in considering it "real" baptism, even if by a non-believer, if there was nevertheless the right intention.

You know I don't think being baptized by a non-Christian ever occurred to me. I find that interesting.

 

On a side note: I have two good friends. One a devout cradle Catholic. The other a devout Baptist. Between the three of us we have 4 girls roughly the same age. The kids travel from house to house. One day when we were all together at my house someone the topic of baptism came up. It came out that (at the time) B's dd had not been baptized. Both C and I popped up with, well, if anything happens to B's dd while on one of our watches we would be baptizing her while waiting for the ambulance. ;)

 

B was okay with that. :D Luckily B's dd got baptized this spring.

[Lovedtodeath]

You know I don't think being baptized by a non-Christian ever occurred to me. I find that interesting.

 

On a side note: I have two good friends. One a devout cradle Catholic. The other a devout Baptist. Between the three of us we have 4 girls roughly the same age. The kids travel from house to house. One day when we were all together at my house someone the topic of baptism came up. It came out that (at the time) B's dd had not been baptized. Both C and I popped up with, well, if anything happens to B's dd while on one of our watches we would be baptizing her while waiting for the ambulance. ;)

 

B was okay with that. :D

Thanks for sharing. My beliefs about baptism match Baptist's mostly. I have friends of various denominational beliefs and I would be okay with that too. :)

 

So you don't now feel the need to baptize her while waiting for the ambulance due to it not being a Catholic baptism?

[Avila]

Thanks for sharing. My beliefs about baptism match Baptist's mostly. I have friends of various denominational beliefs and I would be okay with that too. :)

 

So you don't now feel the need to baptize her while waiting for the ambulance due to it not being a Catholic baptism?

 

There is no such thing really as a Catholic baptism. Just a valid one or an invalid one. A Trinitarian baptism is a valid baptism. We do not rebaptize anyone coming into the Catholic Church with a valid baptism. When I came into the Church, my Dh (baptized as a baby in a Methodist church) and I (baptized at 12 in a Trinitarian Pentecostal church) did not get baptized again.

 

In the Nicene Creed, we say "I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins." http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/index.cfm. And we stick with that.

[Lovedtodeath]

There is no such thing really as a Catholic baptism. Just a valid one or an invalid one. A Trinitarian baptism is a valid baptism. We do not rebaptize anyone coming into the Catholic Church with a valid baptism. When I came into the Church, my Dh (baptized as a baby in a Methodist church) and I (baptized at 12 in a Trinitarian Pentecostal church) did not get baptized again.

 

In the Nicene Creed, we say "I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins." http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/index.cfm. And we stick with that.

Thank you for explaining. :)

 

I asked for a discussion of Matt 28:19-20 on a facebook group and after showing someone that He wasn't speaking to all, but the 11 she said that it was "petty semantics" hmmph:glare:

[Parrothead]

 

So you don't now feel the need to baptize her while waiting for the ambulance due to it not being a Catholic baptism?

Nope. It was what the RC would recognize as a valid baptism (done using the Trinatarian formula).

 

I was shocked that we were the only ones to give the young lady a gift after the event.

 

 

ETA: Now if she had been baptized in the name of Tom, Dick and Harry, I'd feel compel to validly baptize her if she were in danger of dying.

Edited August 16, 2012 by Parrothead

[NittanyJen]

When one of our dd's expressed the desire to be saved/baptized we prayed with her and her daddy baptized her in the bathtub at home that evening. We had just our family and a close friend in attendance and it was awesome.

 

My question is, does one really need to be in an actual church environment for baptism to be done? Does baptism need to be done by an ordained pastor/priest? If one believes this, is there Scripture to support this? I think of Philip and the Ethopian and while Philip was a disciple there was no body of believers present in a church building; Philip heard the Ethopian's declaration and the baptism happened immediately.

 

Just curious as to what others believe.

 

For us, Baptism is a sacrament that recognizes the obligation of the family and the community to watch over and raise the child; all of these people (including the community-- usually the church, but it can include the large community if the family wishes) make certain promises to love, protect, and teach the child as he or she grows. A private baptism is not necessarily 'invalid' per se, but deprives the child of this larger communion of family and of being accepted into the larger community family as when the entire congregation accepts the child into their "family." (we practice infant baptism, though children can also be baptized at any age). As such, promises are not obviously not required of the child :). As a PP mentioned, for us it is also a sign of provenient Grace, the idea that you do not have to earn your way into God's love; because God already loves you.

 

The mechanics of the baptism are not terribly important, IMHO-- bathtub, cup of water dotted on the head, flowing river dunking, swimming pool-- whatever floats your boat. For us, it is the open profession of being accepted, protected, educated, and loved by the community, at a time when we are too little to have done anything to have "earned it" for ourselves, and a recommitment by the community to care for the next generation, as if all the children are our own. During baptism, we give only the first and middle names, bestowing the last name of "Christian" on the child.

 

We're in the United Methodist Church, if it matters. As with most things in the UMC, our local traditions can vary greatly from other UMC churches that others may be familiar with.

 

Neat discussion-- I find it interesting how different people view this rite of passage.

[Lovedtodeath]

We're in the United Methodist Church, if it matters. As with most things in the UMC, our local traditions can vary greatly from other UMC churches that others may be familiar with.

 

Neat discussion-- I find it interesting how different people view this rite of passage.

I agree. :) How does the UMC handle it when an adult asks to be baptized there?

[JenniferB]

There is no such thing really as a Catholic baptism. Just a valid one or an invalid one. A Trinitarian baptism is a valid baptism. We do not rebaptize anyone coming into the Catholic Church with a valid baptism. When I came into the Church, my Dh (baptized as a baby in a Methodist church) and I (baptized at 12 in a Trinitarian Pentecostal church) did not get baptized again.

 

In the Nicene Creed, we say "I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins." http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/index.cfm. And we stick with that.

 

I have a funny history with baptism and the confession of "one baptism for the remission of sins." I was baptized first as a teenager by a teen after school group leader in a swimming pool with a small amount of water from the Jordan River mixed in (a neat experience). Later in life a couple of friends of my husband and I said we needed to be baptized in the Holy Spirit, so one of these friends performed this baptism on us in a hot tub. He was very concerned that we had not spoken in tongues as Christians, so he convinced us to undergo this type of baptism. As a side note, still no tongues. Then, when we were solidly attending a different non-denominational church (with a Calvinist bent), and after a series of sermons on "elect" vs. "non-elect," I was concerned that I was still not saved, so I asked the pastor to baptize me. He did, baptism #3. I shared my previous baptism history with the congregation and someone sarcastically said after my baptism, "I hope this one sticks." I laughed and thought to myself, "of course it will," as I sang silently in my heart a hymn that goes, "I have decided to follow Jesus, no turning back, no turning back." 10 years later I found the Orthodox Church, and I was baptized again, and now I confess "one baptism for the remission of sins." So, that's my crazy baptism history. :D I believe the last baptism was the baptism for the "remission of sins," because the other baptisms were performed under the belief and understanding that they were for the purpose of symbolism and expression of belief, but they were not performed for the remission of sins. Lord have mercy on me, a sinner.

Edited August 16, 2012 by JenniferB

[Lovedtodeath]

I believe the last baptism was the baptism for the "remission of sins," because the other baptisms were performed under the belief and understanding that they were for the purpose of symbolism and expression of belief, but they were not performed for the remission of sins. Lord have mercy on me, a sinner.

I believe you are the first to bring this up.

[NittanyJen]

I agree. :) How does the UMC handle it when an adult asks to be baptized there?

 

I'd have to get out the book of discipline to give the "official answer" (and yes, I am sure there is one in there, but I am being lazy) but in our church, we can baptize older kids who can answer for themselves and adults who have never been baptized.

 

It is slightly different, but not much. If the individual still has parents or another family member available to fulfill the role of someone to promise to help nurture them and care for them, then those people can still make that promise publicly, and the church still promises to welcome them into the fold of Christendom, care for them, and nurture them personally and spiritually. Without requiring a 'confirmation' (which is a separate sacrament) the individual can be asked to respond to whether they understand the nature of God's love as provenient Grace, that they cannot buy or earn their way into it, and are ready to receive the community's blessing.

[Bluegoat]

This is the point I was trying to make. These WEREN'T just random guys. These were the men Jesus CHOSE. They had walked with him, followed him, eaten with him, learned from him. He chose these men to carry on his message. Their time with him was their education, moreso than seminary and ordination is today, but that is how we continue the tradition.

 

Well, I don't know that I would say that Jesus never ordained the 12. Ordination is done by laying-on-of-hands in apostolic traditions, and we do see Christ doing that, and the 12 when they need to replace their number as well.

 

Teaching is teaching - a seminary is just one way to be taught.

[Kathryn]

Well, I don't know that I would say that Jesus never ordained the 12. Ordination is done by laying-on-of-hands in apostolic traditions, and we do see Christ doing that, and the 12 when they need to replace their number as well.

 

Teaching is teaching - a seminary is just one way to be taught.

 

I didn't mean it to say that he didn't. I was just comparing Jesus' educating/ordaining the Apostles to the education/ordination of a seminarian today.