MaxPC wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 7:53 am
Wade wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 12:55 am
I begs the question what even is baptism then?
Maybe Catholics and Eastern Orthodox just don’t even view baptism close to what the Anabaptist’s and early church viewed it as?
Was it not partly a public testimony of a clear conscience with God? Don’t we see this in Scripture? - That takes Free will and personal choice. So what does baptizing an infant mean?
I will endeavor to be succinct and mind that this will not be a detailed dissertation on Catholic Rites of Christian Initiation. That would take up too much space for this forum.
You are right when speaking of our definitions being different and I believe it has as much to do with history as it does doctrine and theology.
Anabaptist World
There is one Sacrament for Christian Initiation into the fellowship and the life of a disciple: Baptism. This can take place in the teens or adult ages.
Catholic World
The RCI (Rite of Christian Initiation) is
tripartite: it is
not complete until all 3 sacraments are administered sequentially. It is not Baptism only.
Those 3 sacraments proceed in the following order:
1. Baptism (any age)
2. 1st Holy Communion
3. Confirmation (the earliest age for Confirmation in most USA dioceses is in the teens after they have received instruction).
Catholic teaching on Free Will is very much highlighted for teens and adults: they have the Free Will to continue instruction and to receive Holy communion and Confirmation to complete their Christian Initiation.
In Catholic World when children are baptised, the sacrament’s prayers involve a commitment by the parents and godparents to raise the child in the Faith.
I don’t mean to pick on you, as I appreciate your willingness to answer and explain. But, Peter did say part of baptism was a good conscience toward God.
1 Peter 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
Makes it hard to accept infant baptism(baptism as we see it defined in Scripture) could be supported by Peter since infants cannot act or acknowledge a good conscience toward God…. And interestingly Peter is considered the first pope by the people supporting infant baptism….?
At least it seems reasonable to me with scripture like this why anyone could imagine people reading their bibles would reject infant baptism. Not in a desire to divide but to be true to following Christ.
And on a side note the first Anabaptist that we can find was actually maybe Paul:
Acts 19:3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
Acts 19:4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
Acts 19:5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.