Religion Should parents baptise their kids or let them decide?

[Gameova_]

Parents should be able to baptize. What does a person lose it they end up not believing in God anyway? Nothing was just a bit of water.

I was circumcised as a child and I'm glad my parents did it. That's probably a better question to ask.

 

[Pessimistic]

It’s a nice excuse to get together. The churches get some dosh from the one of the three times you visit

 

[HARKER]

Parents should be able to baptize. What does a person lose it they end up not believing in God anyway? Nothing was just a bit of water.

I was circumcised as a child and I'm glad my parents did it. That's probably a better question to ask.

That just depends on your principles.

I didn't baptise my child even though there was heavy pressure to do so.
I didn't force my kid to barrack for a team that I happened to barrack for.
I did my best to not to impose any of my views upon another being and especially one with a growing mind

.......so I guess it all depends on the standards you choose to adopt......and I'm happy to say I've been thanked for it many times over.

 

[western royboy]

Indoctrination is a crime - without it the majority of religions would cease - Catholicism is an evil cult reliant on its education system for survival and virtual demand that prospective students be baptised. Without that it would already be almost defunct or on life suppor.

 

[Rusty Brookes]

Indoctrination is a crime - without it the majority of religions would cease - Catholicism is an evil cult reliant on its education system for survival and virtual demand that prospective students be baptised. Without that it would already be almost defunct or on life suppor.

I was reading up on some family history. I have the rather unusual scenario of having one grandparent who was Catholic and one who was Orthodox. On the surface, that doesn't sound too unusual until you factor, they were from Serbia. My grandfather was a POW of the Germans - my grandmother was sent to a concentration camp. Anyways it made me read up on the actions of the ultra-facist Ustase. Some of the absolute worst atrocities of WW2 (including a death camp for children) was established by the Ustase - with the cooperation of the Catholic Church. There were of course, dissenters but it is clear the Pope Pius supported the fascist movement.

Of course, history often repeats itself and in the 1990s is the was the Orthodox persecution of Catholics, Muslims, etc that helped set off the Croatian war. There are ultra-fascist groups like Serbian Action advocating for exactly the same thing the Ustase did - except they push Orthodoxy rather than Catholicism. It drives me nuts.

Just illustrates how ridiculous religion is. People worship the same invisible man in the sky and will kill and commit atrocities of the worst kind because others don't worship in the "correct way".

 

[Brick Loosener]

Indoctrination is a crime - without it the majority of religions would cease - Catholicism is an evil cult reliant on its education system for survival and virtual demand that prospective students be baptised. Without that it would already be almost defunct or on life suppor.

There's like a billion of the buggers running around world wide.
Doubt you'll see the back of them during your life time.

 

[GetDimmaBack]

Getting back to the essence of the topic, there are many Protestant denominations who baptize infants pretty much as a "safeguard" against the perceived spiritual consequences of an unexpected death. I think the Catholic Church does the same.

Others, e.g. Baptists and Churches of Christ, do only 'the baptism of believers', and that takes place only when a believer asks to be baptised.

Fair enough, if parents are believers, to want to protect the spiritual destiny of one's children, but surely it becomes more meaningful if baptism is the believer's choice.

 

[kickazz]

I know theologically speaking an unbaptised soul gets shunted into a place called purgatory,

Actually unbaptised souls go to Limbo - I think purgatory is like a half way between heaven and hell for cases where it isn't immediately obvious where you belong!

 

[kickazz]

I think the better question to be asked, for Catholics anyway, is around the sacrament of Confirmation and at what age it should happen.

I think the notion of parents deciding to baptise their infants is fine - I mean, parents make innumerable decisions on behalf of their children all the time, why should this be any different?

But Confirmation, for those who don't know, is the Catholic sacrament whereby someone who is already baptised "confirms" their faith. The idea being that yeah, you didn't really have a say at your baptism, so instead of having godparents renounce Satan and his empty promises on your behalf, you actually do it for yourself.

All great in theory, but most people do confirmation when they are around grade 6, still very impressionable and not that independent. Perhaps it should be moved to when you are an adult.

 

[Pessimistic]

"Trust in God and keep your powder dry"

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Actually unbaptised souls go to Limbo - I think purgatory is like a half way between heaven and hell for cases where it isn't immediately obvious where you belong!

Thanks for that. I always think purgatory and Limbo are the same thing!

Difference between Limbo and Purgatory | Limbo vs Purgatory

Purgatory is the place where souls are prepared for Heaven. The Limbo of doctrine was introduced by philosopher Augustine, who claimed that children who are not baptized are consigned to hell.

www.differencebetween.info

 

[Fire]

Not to go in too hard, but what is this thread? The title asks a non question, then the OP is a post that isn't really connected to it, instead making a surface level observation with no argument. This feels like the worlds lowest energy troll, or some religious nut sock puppet.

But no. Its not real and it doesn't matter. An argument for circumcision can be made as it has lifelong ramifications, but not giving a kid a public bath. There are 0 ethical ramifications here.

 

[Present Not Past]

Send them to a religious private school, obviously.

 

[Rusty Brookes]

So here's an interesting take. I've got a friend that just got up-baptised. He wrote to the Catholic Church and asked that his baptism be annulled as he didn't consent to it. They accepted is argument and he's been struck from the record.

I don't reckon I'd bother (from a statistical point of view I want to count as baptised but no longer Catholic) but he felt very strongly about it.

 

[Caesar]

I think the better question to be asked, for Catholics anyway, is around the sacrament of Confirmation and at what age it should happen.

I think the notion of parents deciding to baptise their infants is fine - I mean, parents make innumerable decisions on behalf of their children all the time, why should this be any different?

But Confirmation, for those who don't know, is the Catholic sacrament whereby someone who is already baptised "confirms" their faith. The idea being that yeah, you didn't really have a say at your baptism, so instead of having godparents renounce Satan and his empty promises on your behalf, you actually do it for yourself.

All great in theory, but most people do confirmation when they are around grade 6, still very impressionable and not that independent. Perhaps it should be moved to when you are an adult.

The Church sets the minimum age for confirmation at 7. The logic is that this is when children can be relied upon to know right from wrong, and thus become morally responsible for their actions.

It is definitely a little young, but most justice systems around the world hold children criminally responsible starting somewhere between 10 and 14 so it is perhaps not totally out of step with secular society.

I don’t think it really matters. Originally confirmation had little to do with adult decisionmaking and was performed on infants, not long after their baptism

 

[HairyO]

Indoctrination is a crime - without it the majority of religions would cease - Catholicism is an evil cult reliant on its education system for survival and virtual demand that prospective students be baptised. Without that it would already be almost defunct or on life suppor.

If Catholicism is an evil cult what do you think of Islam ?

Catholics are tame compared to the more extreme religions.

 

[Hoops]

Mormons do baptism for the dead. At least children have an opportunity to denounce the religion.

 

[western royboy]

If Catholicism is an evil cult what do you think of Islam ?

Catholics are tame compared to the more extreme religions.

I have NFI of Islam - I have an in depth knowledge of the workings of Catholism and have spent many years fighting the sick campaigners in courts (where I won) the hypocrisy of their public bleating v legal manoeuvrping is truly unbelievabl. I don’t make comment on things I have no knowledge on

 

[HairyO]

I have NFI of Islam - I have an in depth knowledge of the workings of Catholism and have spent many years fighting the sick campaigners in courts (where I won) the hypocrisy of their public bleating v legal manoeuvrping is truly unbelievabl. I don’t make comment on things I have no knowledge on

Never read a newspaper or watched the news ?

 

[western royboy]

Never read a newspaper or watched the news ?

I don’t believe in Sky Fairies - of any kind

 

[Rusty Brookes]

If Catholicism is an evil cult what do you think of Islam ?

Catholics are tame compared to the more extreme religions.

I like to make a distinction between those people who are members of the organised religion and the organised religion itself.

So I don't think Catholics are evil - many of them are good people (including people in my family) who for whatever reason decide to be a member of the church. The Church itself historically however has done and encouraged actions that are evil by any definition. From the torture cells at Avignon, to the persecution of non-Catholics, to the protection of paedophiles, to burning people at the stake, to the Crusades - its track record is awful.

Does Islam have the same issues? Absolutely it does.

But I would again, make the distinction between members of the organised religion and the organised religion itself. I don't think all Muslims are evil - many of them are good people. But atrocities have been done and encouraged in its name. Its track record is awful as well.

FWIW, I can't think a single religion that has been "pure". Even Buddhism which has been put forth as a "peaceful religion" has some horrible elements to it. The Sinhalese Buddhists have persecuted Christians and Muslims in Sri Lanka.

The issue for me is when you think your organised religion (or your political belief or your football team or whatever) is infallible, you run the risk of becoming a zealot. You see non-compliance or criticism as justification for evil acts. You will do anything to protect the organisation - and that includes hiding the rampant paedophilia that was so prevalent in the Catholic Church.

 

[DaRick]

I like to make a distinction between those people who are members of the organised religion and the organised religion itself.

So I don't think Catholics are evil - many of them are good people (including people in my family) who for whatever reason decide to be a member of the church. The Church itself historically however has done and encouraged actions that are evil by any definition. From the torture cells at Avignon, to the persecution of non-Catholics, to the protection of paedophiles, to burning people at the stake, to the Crusades - its track record is awful.

Does Islam have the same issues? Absolutely it does.

But I would again, make the distinction between members of the organised religion and the organised religion itself. I don't think all Muslims are evil - many of them are good people. But atrocities have been done and encouraged in its name. Its track record is awful as well.

FWIW, I can't think a single religion that has been "pure". Even Buddhism which has been put forth as a "peaceful religion" has some horrible elements to it. The Sinhalese Buddhists have persecuted Christians and Muslims in Sri Lanka.

The issue for me is when you think your organised religion (or your political belief or your football team or whatever) is infallible, you run the risk of becoming a zealot. You see non-compliance or criticism as justification for evil acts. You will do anything to protect the organisation - and that includes hiding the rampant paedophilia that was so prevalent in the Catholic Church.

It's a sad fact of life that no large institution is free from wickedness and corruption.

Large institutions are a reflection of humanity, which is of course inherently flawed and full of moral/ethical shades of grey.

Even atheists/agnostics are not free from being influenced and corrupted by institutions.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Here's some more food for thought - the Catholic Church, once you're baptised into it - will never let you voluntarily leave!! Words in brackets are mine to make the snippet more readable.

Want to leave the Catholic Church? Officially, you can’t.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/2018/10/22/want-leave-catholic-church-officially-you-cant/

By Dan Waidelich
Oct. 23, 2018

(Mary) Combs (who switched from Catholicism to Lutheran) researched her status, which led her to the office of the Rev. Thomas Ferguson, vicar general of the Catholic Diocese of Arlington, Va. After five weeks of trying to talk to the vicar general, she got a one-sentence response from Ferguson through a staffer, saying it was impossible to defect from the Catholic Church. (The Diocese of Arlington declined to discuss this subject with The Washington Post.)

Combs had struck on a frustrating piece of church bureaucracy: According to Catholic theology, there are no former Catholics.

That means I (the writer of the article) am technically Catholic, too, as I was baptized, per family tradition. But I am an atheist. I stopped considering myself affiliated with the Catholic Church long ago.

Recently, I too tried to formally split from the church. Between the Pennsylvania grand jury investigation and much of Catholic America’s apparent comfort with Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, I wanted nothing to do with it.

I was as stunned as Combs when I found out there was no way to disaffiliate.

“The claim that underlies all of this, a claim most Christian denominations share, is that baptism, once given, can’t be taken back,” said Patrick Hornbeck, chair of theology at Fordham University, a Catholic school. “When a person is baptized, the person always remains, in some way, shape or form, related to the Catholic Church.”

Formal acts of defection were introduced in the 1983 Code of Canon Law to solve a regulatory issue in some Catholic marriages. Unintentionally, that allowed defection for any reason. Pope Benedict XVI closed the loophole in 2010.

In theory, the act appended one’s baptismal record to show that the person no longer recognized church authority. But diocesan responses were inconsistent. Some honored defections, while others considered requests case by case or not at all, Hornbeck said.

Other separations exist. The church can excommunicate a member, a remedial denial of sacraments or church participation to encourage repentance for some wrong. “Notorious acts of defection” are significant public renunciations of church authority, including openly switching faiths or denominations. But neither appends the all-important baptismal record...

So a baptised Catholic like myself can elect not to ever go to mass or take a sacrament again, but on official records I'll always be named as a Catholic.
I renounced my faith more than half a lifetime ago yet I'm still part of their 'club'. Always and unto death. In day-to-day life it doesn't matter much, but there's something about it that just doesn't sit right with me.

 

[Rusty Brookes]

Here's some more food for thought - the Catholic Church, once you're baptised into it - will never let you voluntarily leave!! Words in brackets are mine to make the snippet more readable.



So a baptised Catholic like myself can elect not to ever go to mass or take a sacrament again, but on official records I'll always be named as a Catholic.
I renounced my faith more than half a lifetime ago yet I'm still part of their 'club'. Always and unto death. In day-to-day life it doesn't matter much, but there's something about it that just doesn't sit right with me.

I think that's changed. As I noted in an earlier post, a mate of mine wrote to the Archbishop Comensoli and asked to have his name removed from the records on the basis the he didn't give his permission to be baptised. He got a letter back noting that they followed his request.

 

[Admiral Byng]

So here's an interesting take. I've got a friend that just got up-baptised. He wrote to the Catholic Church and asked that his baptism be annulled as he didn't consent to it. They accepted is argument and he's been struck from the record.

I don't reckon I'd bother (from a statistical point of view I want to count as baptised but no longer Catholic) but he felt very strongly about it.

From a statistical point of view, all you do is wait till the next Federal Census comes along, and then don't tick the box that says Catholic. Tick some other box, like "no religion" or whatever other faith you have decided to follow instead of Catholicism. It's not that hard, and this is the statistic that is actually going to count far more than the church's own records. The Church know they have a huge gap already between the Census data and their own.