Did anyone NOT baptize their kids?

[daisax]

For what it's worth, in my 44 years in the Northeast, I've never thought "holy rollers" was a sect-specific term. In my experience it simply referred to ANYbody who aggressively promoted their religious views. So for those who are offended by the use of the term, for many of us it is nothing more than the equivalent of "church ladies" in the Dana Carvey sense. If I'm tempted to use it in future I'll try to be more sensitive since it appears that it does have a very specific meaning to many people in a different geographical area, but conversely, other folks can rest assured that when many of us throw the term around it's on the level of an eye rolling insult, not a vicious one.

Traditionally in the Roman Catholic church, unbaptized babies didn't go to Heaven -- they went to Limbo. Thus the haste to baptize any baby that looked like it was in danger. I believe they're dropping Limbo entirely (if they haven't already) since as a Cardinal the current Pope was leading a committee that was studying the issue and had formally stated his opinion that it was never more than a hypothesis.

 

[Buckalew11]

For those Christians who hold to the concept of baptism as sacrament (Anglicans, Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Orthodox come to mind) we believe that baptism is an outward sign of an inner and invisible reality. We also believe that baptism has little to do with the actions of the minister presiding at the baptism and everything to do with God acting in the life of the individual being baptized.

We also believe that this is not so much a matter of humans choosing to be baptized as it is a matter of God choosing us in our baptism.

Martin Luther held that since the act of baptism is an act of God, it is not right to re-baptize. The actions of God are done once and for all and do not need to be repeated. There is no need to repeat the washing for the remission of sins.

I have even read that we are to assume baptism has occurred if one is not sure if one has been baptized.

Once and for all for a baby? I mean look how many people here are baptized as babies and now reject baptism and Jesus Christ. How does that work? God is choosing to baptize that baby into the Christian faith when that baby doesnt even know anything? Or its parents are being pressured into the baptism by relatives or just out of fear in case the baby dies (because some people believe this is important).
I think god brings conviction and calling later when one can understand what is going on not when they are a baby. People reject God's call everyday. IMHO, He gives us choice.
My infant baptism meant nothing to me and I think it is a dangerous thing when people believe all is OK with them and the Lord if baptism has taken place in their infancy. I am not saying you believe in this last sentence, btw. But I do think some people might think that.

 

[Buckalew11]

For what it's worth, in my 44 years in the Northeast, I've never thought "holy rollers" was a sect-specific term. In my experience it simply referred to ANYbody who aggressively promoted their religious views. So for those who are offended by the use of the term, for many of us it is nothing more than the equivalent of "church ladies" in the Dana Carvey sense. If I'm tempted to use it in future I'll try to be more sensitive since it appears that it does have a very specific meaning to many people in a different geographical area, but conversely, other folks can rest assured that when many of us throw the term around it's on the level of an eye rolling insult, not a vicious one.

From now on just call us "Bible Thumpers" instead.

 

[JennyMominRI]

From now on just call us "Bible Thumpers" instead.

I'm just glad you thump with bibles..If I thumped you with a the Talmud you'd be unconscious.

 

[NotUrsula]

Oh, I don't know, my family Bible could pack a good wallop. It was a big one, about 6 inches thick and 12" x 16". Beautiful wooden covers.

Honestly, it did shock me a bit to see that term casually posted on the DIS. My family lived through rather a lot of religious discrimination in their home country, and we were NOT allowed to make fun of others' religions when we were kids. If I'd said it as a child I would have earned a nice soapy snack. Glad to hear that the person who said it didn't mean it the way that I read it.

 

[RoyalCanadian]

I think god brings conviction and calling later when one can understand what is going on not when they are a baby.

By and far, the majority of Christians (Roman Catholic, Lutheran, the Anglican Communion) hold to a theology in which faith in God through Jesus Christ is a gift given to us in our baptism. Infant baptism is a way of showing that we receive this gift not through any work of our own, but only through the grace of God.

Certainly, one can reject God's choice but Lutherans do not believe that we are able, through our own understanding and strength, to come to know Jesus Christ. It's all a gift of the Holy Spirit.

You, and many other Christians, hold to the Anabaptist tradition which teaches a believer's baptism. I don't think there is anything wrong with it (Martin Luther, on the other hand, had more than a few harsh words for the Anabaptists) -- it's just a different way of understanding baptism. I am not sure if all Anabaptists also teach the one baptism theology.

Now we do celebrate confirmation -- or, as it is more properly called, affirmation of baptism. This usually occurs at the age of 13 or 14 and sees the child go through 1-3 years of in-depth instruction about their faith, the Holy Bible, Luther's Small Catechism, Lutheran theology, etc., etc. The end result is a liturgy in which the confirmand "affirms their baptism" -- that is, affirms the decisions made for them by their parents and baptismal sponsors when they were baptized as an infant. Many see it as a rite of passage in the church, while others take it much more seriously and give serious consideration to whether they actually want to take on the responsibilities and obligations of adult membership in the church.

 

[summerrluvv]

Didn't read the whole thread, but my children are not baptized, but I am (catholic). I sort of felt like it's a sham to make a promise to the church that I'll raise my children in the church, when I really don't even attend mass myself. I'm comfortable with my decision

 

[Linzybrooke]

My parents never pushed me or my sister to be baptized. We are baptist and our understanding is that you need to understand what you are doing to make the decision. My sister was baptized at about 13, but my husband and I took that step in our faith on Easter of 2006, at the age of 24.

 

[Tink&SquirtsMom]

For those Christians who hold to the concept of baptism as sacrament (Anglicans, Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Orthodox come to mind) we believe that baptism is an outward sign of an inner and invisible reality. We also believe that baptism has little to do with the actions of the minister presiding at the baptism and everything to do with God acting in the life of the individual being baptized.

We also believe that this is not so much a matter of humans choosing to be baptized as it is a matter of God choosing us in our baptism.

Martin Luther held that since the act of baptism is an act of God, it is not right to re-baptize. The actions of God are done once and for all and do not need to be repeated. There is no need to repeat the washing for the remission of sins.

I have even read that we are to assume baptism has occurred if one is not sure if one has been baptized.

Interesting. Thanks for explaining. Can't say that I agree with that... but that's the great thing about grace right.

ETA: OOPS!!! Should read "can't say that I agree 100% with that. I actually do agree with quite a lot of it.

 

[LBelle]

My first 2 boys were but my youngest is not.

Reason: I am Catholic, my exDH is Anglican. We baptised our firstborn at the church we were married in (but were never members of). We lived in a different town when 2nd son was born, so I called up the closest Anglican church and the Priest(?) came to our house to discuss the baptism. He was assuming that we intended on joining his congregation, which we weren't, and when he found this out he asked me why then did I want to baptise my son. I told him that I thought all babies NEEDED to be baptised...wouldn't go to heaven, his older brother was, etc, etc.

Well...he explained that no God would ever keep out of Heaven an innocent baby/child. That baptism, in his church, was to welcome a baby into the faith and the congregation. That if we had no intention of going to church, there was no need for the service. Well, he did it for us anyways.

My last son is with Hubby #2. We don't attend Church and have never baptised our son. He will be 12 this year. We figure that if he wants to pursue ANY religion, it will be of his choice as an adult and can then take steps to fulfill his responsibility to his denomination.

 

[RoyalCanadian]

Well...he explained that no God would ever keep out of Heaven an innocent baby/child. That baptism, in his church, was to welcome a baby into the faith and the congregation. That if we had no intention of going to church, there was no need for the service. Well, he did it for us anyways.

You found yourselves a very grace-filled minister. He listened to your concerns. He gave you the current FAQ on baptism and then he did exactly what you asked him to do in the first place. However, now it was being done for the "right" reason and not for "fire insurance" purposes.

Even if the child never darkens the door of that congregation ever again, the child was still welcomed into the faith of the Church. Perhaps a seed was planted. It can take a long time for an oak tree to grow.

 

[daisax]

Honestly, it did shock me a bit to see that term casually posted on the DIS.

I think this shows what a diverse group we have here. In a different thread (maybe the one on non Catholics attending Catholic school?) somebody referenced their church choir's NAME being "The Holy Rollers."

Edit to say I did a search and found out that The Holy Rollerz is the world's largest Christian car club!

 

[SydSim]

I was baptized as an adult. Dd-11 said that she wanted to be baptized a few years ago, but I felt that she just wanted to do it because she saw her cousin being baptized (and the little party she had afterwards). Wrong reason! I told her what it meant, I keep her in church (and The Word) and will wait until she truly accepts Christ and decides she want to become a new creature in the Lord. Then she will be baptized.

 

[believe]

Both DDs were dedicated, but haven't made the decision to be baptized. My oldest does not like public attention. She has Christ in her heart but doesn't want to tell the 'world' yet. Which is fine by me, it is what is in her heart that matters. My other DD is still young.

I was baptized around 13yrs old. DH was baptized as a baby, Catholic. He has gone forward in the Baptist church to confess his faith, but still feels he needs to respect his parents in their decision of baptism. Again, it is what is in the heart that matters.

 

[diz8297]

I was baptized Episcopalian as a baby, my DH was baptized Catholic as a baby too. Both of our children were baptized in the Episcopal Church as infants and we are active members of the Church. I hope that they will choose to be confirmed and I hope that they will continue in our Faith. It is very important to me.

 

[Aunt Michelle]

Once and for all for a baby? I mean look how many people here are baptized as babies and now reject baptism and Jesus Christ. How does that work? God is choosing to baptize that baby into the Christian faith when that baby doesnt even know anything? Or its parents are being pressured into the baptism by relatives or just out of fear in case the baby dies (because some people believe this is important).
I think god brings conviction and calling later when one can understand what is going on not when they are a baby. People reject God's call everyday. IMHO, He gives us choice.
My infant baptism meant nothing to me and I think it is a dangerous thing when people believe all is OK with them and the Lord if baptism has taken place in their infancy. I am not saying you believe in this last sentence, btw. But I do think some people might think that.

Speaking from strictly a Catholic standpoint; "The Rite of Baptism for Children emphasizes the importance of faithfulness on the part of parents when it says to parents: In asking to have your children baptized, "you are accepting the responsibility of training them in the practice of the faith." That word practice is crucial; it calls for Christian modeling on the part of parents." (American Catholic) Godparents accept the same responsibility, and in many Catholic communities the entire Parish agree to the same. Baptism is the first of three Sacraments modern Catholics sometime refer to as the Sacraments of Initiation - the other two being Eucharist and Confirmation. Babies obviously have no understanding of the Sacrament, and the Sacrament doesn't imply that they do. It is at it's most basic a traditional introduction of a new member of the family, parish, Catholic Community. The symbols include a candle "to light the way," water "to grow," oil (in the mark of a Cross on the child's forehead) "for strength," and Parents, Godparents, other family members and the Parish as companions in their Faith and Spirtual growth.
I know a number of parents who, although raised Catholic (some in my own family), have chosen not to have their children Baptised, and a number of parents (including my two sisters) who have chosen to have their children Baptised in the Catholic Church. I do not know any parents who feel the "were forced or pressured" into doing so. I would be very sad and counsel them against doing so if that's how they truly felt.
I was Baptised and Confirmed in the Catholic Church. I am not a practising Catholic because the Pope and I have fundamental differences in opinion that I have not been able to resolve. That does not mean that I disagree with this beautiful Sacrament, nor do I disdain the Catholic Church and beliefs in the presence of my nieces and nephew. I respect their parents decision to raise them in the Catholic Faith. If they chose, in the future, to question their Faith, I would expect their parents to be understanding of this, as they are of me.

 

[MomNeedsVacay]

I think the good thing about the Catholic church (and the Methodist and maybe a few others), although they are typically baptised as babies, they are asked when they are young adults to "confirm" their faith by going to through "Confirmation". This is a choice that should make on their own around 13 to continue their faith as an "adult".

 

[Cee]

My children are not baptized. I hope they decide for themselves what religion
suits them best when they are mature enough to make that decision.

 

[Tiggernut_jadie]

I do understand the posters that have mentioned they would be disappointed if their children chose to be baptized, when they themselves don't believe. See, we all choose what we believe to be truth. So, the "non-believers" (for lack of a better term) have chosen their truth. If their children choose a different truth, it might seem as though they are doubting their parents intellect, reasoning, what have you. However, as a "believer", I would be happy for their children. KWIM?

Just out of interest how would you feel if your son or daughter said they wanted to become a Muslim?

I would be disappointed. Obviously, as a born again Christian, Islam is not the truth that I chose. So, any choice my children might make that differs from what I believe to be true would disappoint me.

Would you feel the same way if your daughter chose Christianity or Islam over atheism? (just curious)

My point was that you said you would be 'happy' for a child who chose Christianity even if their parents were aethiests or non-christians. Personally I would be 'disappointed' if my child chose ANY religion but I would certainly be annoyed at hearing that others were 'happy' for her. My question to you is how would you feel if your child chose to be a muslim and you were told by another muslim that it was a 'good' thing that she went against what you beleived and they were 'happy' about it?!

 

[Aunt Michelle]

My point was that you said you would be 'happy' for a child who chose Christianity even if their parents were aethiests or non-christians. Personally I would be 'disappointed' if my child chose ANY religion but I would certainly be annoyed at hearing that others were 'happy' for her. My question to you is how would you feel if your child chose to be a muslim and you were told by another muslim that it was a 'good' thing that she went against what you beleived and they were 'happy' about it?!

I may have missed something, but I don't remember anyone saying that they would tell anyone's parents that "it is a good thing that they went against your belief." Catholic Parishes welcome adults into their communities all the time, people who have decided that this is the Faith they wish to follow, and we are happy for them. Happy in their decision and happy that they have joined the community. We don't seek out their relatives and say, "hey I am so glad your daughter totally rejected your Faith."
As I indicated in a previous post, I was raised Catholic. I am at a cross-road in my Faith and don't know where I will end up. I do know that as long I end up with a healthy community whatever denomination (not a cult) that makes me happy and provides comfort, that my family will be supportive.