Baptizing child even though religious?

[sandy_beach]

My friend is baptizing his child and has asked me to attend. He does not practice any religion and nor is catholic or Christian. Is it quite common to baptize even if there's no religious meaning? What do others think about it?

[45ED]

As long as the child has the option/freedom to opt out later on in life, it's all good. Though I would much rather an opt in option for the child rather than automatically being enrolled and having to get out later in life.

[Agafaba]

As long as the child has the option/freedom to opt out later on in life, it's all good. Though I would much rather an opt in option for the child rather than automatically being enrolled and having to get out later in life.

The only way you could opt out of a baptism would be if there was a religious connection that was real, and if that was the case who in their right mind would choose to opt out?

[Corleone187]

I think it's common for people to do whatever they want even if it's not something they regularly do.

I think many people get baptized even if they are not religious like mainly people in prisons. I saw this documentary here
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0334416/

The guy was baptized even though he had no religion. I think he did it just to get rid of demons inside of him or whatever he believed. Usually they get persuaded though by other people to do it (I think)

[_Allan_]

Catholicism and other denominations allow baby baptisms, however, I'm of the feeling (along with dozens of denominations), that one can be DEDICATED as a baby, with the church body (congregation) agreeing to 'raise the child in the ways of The Lord", but only with their own decision at a time when they are capable of it, can they truly be baptized. Baptism is a sell recognition of ones sin, and wanting to be cleansed, which is what baptism symbolizes.

[jdewit]

My friend is baptizing his child and has asked me to attend. He does not practice any religion and nor is catholic or Christian. Is it quite common to baptize even if there's no religious meaning? What do others think about it?

If he is not Catholic or Christian, what is he? I'd say that this is not common.

[ishfish]

These sorts of rituals are quite common - they just usually are not called baptism. They most often are about welcoming and wishing the child well. Often there is less formality than the church baptism as it is a celebration designed and individualized by the parents.

[Manatus]

If he is not Catholic or Christian, what is he? I'd say that this is not common.

It depends how you define that... there are many people of every religion who don't really practise (e.g. don't attend church regularly, don't read the Bible, don't fast during Lent, don't really know much indepth about their religion or why it is what it is) but who still pay some token attention to it (e.g. who attend Christmas mass as a family when they never usually go to mass). I would say baptism can fall into that category. You do it not because you believe that anyone is going to be filled with the Holy Spirit, but because it's something you do to little kids in your family/community. It may just be a social part of growing up, or it might be that he wants to give the impression of being more religious than he is. For example in some families/communities where almost everyone is Christian and gets baptised, not baptising your child might stick out, others might think that you're making a statement against religion etc. Like going to church at Christmas, some people find it easier to just go to church and sit there for an hour rather than admit at a big family gathering that they didn't go, and have to answer questions about why they didn't.

[lordnikon]

All Catholics are Christian but not all Christians are Catholics.

[Mark77]

It takes a lot more than baptism to get rid of the thetans. Intensive auditing courses are often required to obtain the level of "clear" in Scientology. Better start a big trust fund, that's all I gotta say.

[ishfish]

It takes a lot more than baptism to get rid of the thetans. Intensive auditing courses are often required to obtain the level of "clear" in Scientology. Better start a big trust fund, that's all I gotta say.

Oh just go for an easy one - not one that requires a lot of money or energy. The distinction of Christianity is Belief. Just Believe.

[Syne]

Pascal's Wager in action.

[t3359]

Was there a wife involved? Maybe it was initiated by her?

bjl

[ishfish]

Pascal's Wager in action.

Better to be safe than sorry.

(Dang! Sarcasm just does not translate well in text - I almost ran to a pew).

[obernewtyn]

If the child is getting baptized in a Christian church, wouldn't they have to go to bible school first? Baptism is like a celebration and recognition to the faith. I'm not sure how their church operates if the family is part of, but the child has to decide if this is something he/she wants to go through. There's no point going through it if it doesn't symbolize anything to the child.

If it's going to make the parents happy and the child is only agreeing to do so for the sake of his/her parents, I see no harm. If I was a pastor, I find it quite weird and probably wouldn't allow such a thing.

[Tornado F2]

If the child is getting baptized in a Christian church, wouldn't they have to go to bible school first? Baptism is like a celebration and recognition to the faith. I'm not sure how their church operates if the family is part of, but the child has to decide if this is something he/she wants to go through. There's no point going through it if it doesn't symbolize anything to the child.

If it's going to make the parents happy and the child is only agreeing to do so for the sake of his/her parents, I see no harm. If I was a pastor, I find it quite weird and probably wouldn't allow such a thing.

Yeah, put the baby in school first. :facepalm:

Can you really be that ignorant?

[kenchau66]

this is a great thing to do to your child, really a blessing. It instills fundamental morals to a child and teaches them the ways of God.

[mbg]

Is this where they submerge the baby under water for a few minutes?

I saw it once and the baby was screaming the whole time.

[Ojam]

Is this where they submerge the baby under water for a few minutes?

I saw it once and the baby was screaming the whole time.

It can be as simple as just a drop of water on the baby's forehead.

I say who cares, it's a little bit of water that may or may not represent something to the parents or family (They maybe doing it to please the Grandparents). It doesn't automatically sign the kid up for anything. To people who believe it's just giving the kid a fresh slate, washing away the "original sin", not automatic life long membership.

[sandikosh]

My friend is baptizing his child and has asked me to attend. He does not practice any religion and nor is catholic or Christian. Is it quite common to baptize even if there's no religious meaning? What do others think about it?

What do you think about it? Give us your perspective. I am catholic but I rarely attend church or even follow its practices.

[time space]

Is it quite common to baptize even if there's no religious meaning?

Who wants to miss a party with gifts?

[Tornado F2]

Is this where they submerge the baby under water for a few minutes?

I saw it once and the baby was screaming the whole time.

That sounds more like waterboarding. :lol:

Christening of a child usually just involves a little water on the forehead. A bit of a shock possibly, but nothing scary at all.

[Tornado F2]

What do you think about it? Give us your perspective. I am catholic but I rarely attend church or even follow its practices.

That seems to be very common among Canadian "Catholics". Many even question Papal pronouncements. So why are they "Catholic" in the first place? They should switch to a Protestant denomination that more closely matches their true beliefs.

BTW, did you know there's at least one married (with kids) "Catholic" priest in Canada? Seems he was originally Anglican, but then switched. Wonder what the Pope would think if all his young would-be priests took that approach, having a family first and then becoming priests? I'm surprised even that one was permitted to make that switch. What does that make of his wife and kids? Are they still legitimate in the eyes of the Catholic church?

PS: OP, your thread title needs correcting.

[Ottomaddox]

That seems to be very common among Canadian "Catholics". Many even question Papal pronouncements. So why are they "Catholic" in the first place? They should switch to a Protestant denomination that more closely matches their true beliefs.

BTW, did you know there's at least one married (with kids) "Catholic" priest in Canada? Seems he was originally Anglican, but then switched. Wonder what the Pope would think if all his young would-be priests took that approach, having a family first and then becoming priests? I'm surprised even that one was permitted to make that switch. What does that make of his wife and kids? Are they still legitimate in the eyes of the Catholic church?

PS: OP, your thread title needs correcting.

'Catholic' covers alot of ground. You're referring to Roman Catholic.
I know a Greek Catholic priest, and he's allowed to be married.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Catholic_Church
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Catholic_Churches

[Tornado F2]

'Catholic' covers alot of ground. You're referring to Roman Catholic.
I know a Greek Catholic priest, and he's allowed to be married.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Catholic_Church
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Catholic_Churches

Aren't Greek priests called Orthodox?

I think most people in Canada understand "Catholic" to mean Roman Catholic. I'm sure that's what the vast majority of Canadian Catholics are. But to be strictly correct, apparently "catholic" means "universal". I was a little surprised to hear the term used when I attended an Anglican church once with a friend at university.

[obernewtyn]

Yeah, put the baby in school first. :facepalm:

Can you really be that ignorant?

Thanks for your assumption, but you read incorrectly. No where I mention baby or Catholic and no where the OP mention baby.

I was speaking for Christians not Catholic Christians. In a Catholic system, it makes sense where a "baby" gets baptize.

The OP said the child not baby. How can a baby even know what baptizing is or practice the faith. When I read child, it can be a 10 year old or a child who at least can decide for them self.

Maybe the OP can be a little more clear.

Whatever the case is, the baptize is happening. The church allows it, I see no harm.

[Tornado F2]

Thanks for your assumption, but you read incorrectly. No where I mention baby or Catholic and no where the OP mention baby.

I was speaking for Christians not Catholic Christians. In a Catholic system, it makes sense where a "baby" gets baptize.

The OP said the child not baby. How can a baby even know what baptizing is or practice the faith. When I read child, it can be a 10 year old or a child who at least can decide for them self.

Maybe the OP can be a little more clear.

Whatever the case is, the baptize is happening. The church allows it, I see no harm.

Usually a child's baptism occurs shortly after birth - while the child is still a baby. That's a reasonable assumption.

And speaking of reading incorrectly, I never said you mentioned Catholicism. That was Sandikosh admitting to be a lapsed Catholic, which I pointed out to be common here in Canada.

[Ottomaddox]

'Catholic' covers alot of ground. You're referring to Roman Catholic.
I know a Greek Catholic priest, and he's allowed to be married.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Catholic_Church
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Catholic_Churches


Aren't Greek priests called Orthodox?

You're thinking of this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Orthodox_Church

[Tornado F2]

You're thinking of this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Orthodox_Church

It's what usually comes to mind when Greek priests are mentioned.

So which one is the direct descendent of the Byzantine church?

[obernewtyn]

Usually a child's baptism occurs shortly after birth - while the child is still a baby. That's a reasonable assumption.

And speaking of reading incorrectly, I never said you mentioned Catholicism. That was Sandikosh admitting to be a lapsed Catholic, which I pointed out to be common here in Canada.


The assumption comes from your response "put baby in school...". Your interpretation of a child includes baby and in Catholicism, it's reasonable the same. I'm only reminding you that I'm not speaking from a Catholic point of view and OP did not mention "baby".
Your assumption on my comment is incorrect. My interpretation of child in this topic does not refer to babies because as for Christians (Not Catholics), there is a difference. It's the individual decision to get baptize, and there's baptism classes beforehand. A baby would not understand what's going on in baptism, but a child could. Hence when OP said "child", the thought of baby did not come into mind. If OP said mention "baby", I know right away it's Catholicism.

[007craft]

I was baptized. I hope they didnt dunk me in water, causing brain damage when I was a baby lol. Ill have to ask my mom how it was done. Im just thankful I wasnt circumcised :cry:.

Then I grew up and thought logically, coming to the conclusion that religion is just hogwash fiction, which people use to help ease their fear/anxiety over the unknown. Baptism = waste of time.

[Ojam]

Your assumption on my comment is incorrect. My interpretation of child in this topic does not refer to babies because as for Christians (Not Catholics), there is a difference. It's the individual decision to get baptize, and there's baptism classes beforehand. A baby would not understand what's going on in baptism, but a child could. Hence when OP said "child", the thought of baby did not come into mind. If OP said mention "baby", I know right away it's Catholicism.

Other sects of Christianty also baptize shortly after birth, not just Catholics.

[mbg]

Other sects of Christianty also baptize shortly after birth, not just Catholics.

Why can't they just make it so that they use holy water to clean up the baby after it comes out... to save time later on?

You could even make it like a fee-based option.... to baptize the baby on the way out for an extra $5.

[Ojam]

Why can't they just make it so that they use holy water to clean up the baby after it comes out... to save time later on?

You could even make it like a fee-based option.... to baptize the baby on the way out for an extra $5.

Because it's a communal thing, all the members of a church and family like to be there to see it done.

[feelthedeal]

I was baptized. I hope they didnt dunk me in water, causing brain damage when I was a baby lol. Ill have to ask my mom how it was done. Im just thankful I wasnt circumcised :cry:.

Then I grew up and thought logically, coming to the conclusion that religion is just hogwash fiction, which people use to help ease their fear/anxiety over the unknown. Baptism = waste of time.

What helps you ease your fear/anxiety over the unknown :?:

(Honestly wondering just out of curiosity) :D

[zz000ter]

As long as the child has the option/freedom to opt out later on in life, it's all good. Though I would much rather an opt in option for the child rather than automatically being enrolled and having to get out later in life.

Like the Jewish cutting of the penis?
Is there an "opt out" of that?

In Christianity, a baby get Baptized - but then in the teen years the child takes the Sacrement of Confirmation. During this ceremony the person themselves confirms that they do in fact want to be a Christian.

- so Confirmation is the "Opt-Out" option

[Tornado F2]

Like the Jewish cutting of the penis?
Is there an "opt out" of that?

In Christianity, a baby get Baptized - but then in the teen years the child takes the Sacrement of Confirmation. During this ceremony the person themselves confirms that they do in fact want to be a Christian.

- so Confirmation is the "Opt-Out" option

I don't know if it's true or not, but I heard/read once that many male American babies (possibly even the majority) are circumcised. While it apparently has its health advantages for societies that live in sandy desert regions, (not only Jews do it), I'm not sure what argument was applied in the US to promote its adoption. Personally, I'm glad I wasn't born there. (From that standpoint anyway, among others).

[feelthedeal]

I don't know if it's true or not, but I heard/read once that many male American babies (possibly even the majority) are circumcised. While it apparently has its health advantages for societies that live in sandy desert regions, (not only Jews do it), I'm not sure what argument was applied in the US to promote its adoption. Personally, I'm glad I wasn't born there. (From that standpoint anyway, among others).

Yeah, I remember reading before the circumcision was generally adopted and implemented for hygienic reasons associated with uncircumcision and foreskins

Dunno what that really means or what truth there is to that.....

[Tornado F2]

Yeah, I remember reading before the circumcision was generally adopted and implemented for hygienic reasons associated with uncircumcision and foreskins

Dunno what that really means or what truth there is to that.....

Lots of info here for anybody interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision

It says 68% of circumcised men are actually Moslem and that it was practiced in Ancient Egypt - possibly where the Jews aquired it? It would be interesting to see where in the Bible it is first mentioned. As I recall once reading, it's common in desert regions. Sandy environments seem to have been the primary impetus towards it, no doubt then becoming a part of the regional religions. It was likely common among Arabs long (very long) before Islam was started.

[ippon]

I don't know if it's true or not, but I heard/read once that many male American babies (possibly even the majority) are circumcised. While it apparently has its health advantages for societies that live in sandy desert regions, (not only Jews do it), I'm not sure what argument was applied in the US to promote its adoption. Personally, I'm glad I wasn't born there. (From that standpoint anyway, among others).

one of the theories is that circumcision was heavily pushed by the christian sects in the US.



Lots of info here for anybody interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision

It says 68% of circumcised men are actually Moslem and that it was practiced in Ancient Egypt - possibly where the Jews aquired it? It would be interesting to see where in the Bible it is first mentioned. As I recall once reading, it's common in desert regions. Sandy environments seem to have been the primary impetus towards it, no doubt then becoming a part of the regional religions. It was likely common among Arabs long (very long) before Islam was started.

the jews were never in egypt like the bible says. there are no records of their ethnic slavery outside of the hebrew bible.

[Tornado F2]

the jews were never in egypt like the bible says. there are no records of their ethnic slavery outside of the hebrew bible.

I have no knowledge regarding that, but enslavement of entire nations was common in those days, and Ancient Egypt obviously needed a large labour force during its big construction phases, so I have no difficulty believing that the Jews spent a lengthy period of time there. Remember that Israel is located just north of Egypt, right in the middle of their armies' most likely route for invasions and conquest. The captive period obviously had its benefits though. It's very possible that the Jews learned/improved their knowledge of writing, math, construction, weapons, etc, while there, giving them an advantage over the other peoples who had moved into the "Promised Land" during their absence. Much like what happened after their modern era return.

[ippon]

I have no knowledge regarding that, but enslavement of entire nations was common in those days, and Ancient Egypt obviously needed a large labour force during its big construction phases, so I have no difficulty believing that the Jews spent a lengthy period of time there. Remember that Israel is located just north of Egypt, right in the middle of their armies' most likely route for invasions and conquest. The captive period obviously had its benefits though. It's very possible that the Jews learned/improved their knowledge of writing, math, construction, weapons, etc, while there, giving them an advantage over the other peoples who had moved into the "Promised Land" during their absence. Much like what happened after their modern era return.

well, now you do.
http://waywrong.wordpress.com/2008/09/18/jews-were-enslaved-by-the-egyptian-pharaoh-and-moses-set-them-free/

[zz000ter]

I am surprised that on a forum where discussing religion is taboo that this thread is still open 42 ours after being started.

I guess it is OK for people to discuss / trash Catholic/Christian faith.

Had someone said something critical of the Muslim faith - how quickly would the thread be shut down?

What more can we expect????
I had a PM experience with AcidBomber which leads me to speculate on anti-Christian agenda.

I guess that is the state of our society - all religions must be respected - except for Christianity.

Maybe only Christians should be able to talk critically of Christianity
just like only blacks are allowed to call one another N***

.... or maybe the mods should be consistent in their application of the rules

[Agafaba]

I am surprised that on a forum where discussing religion is taboo that this thread is still open 42 ours after being started.

I guess it is OK for people to discuss / trash Catholic/Christian faith.

Had someone said something critical of the Muslim faith - how quickly would the thread be shut down?

What more can we expect????
I had a PM experience with AcidBomber which leads me to speculate on anti-Christian agenda.

I guess that is the state of our society - all religions must be respected - except for Christianity.

Maybe only Christians should be able to talk critically of Christianity
just like only blacks are allowed to call one another N***

.... or maybe the mods should be consistent in their application of the rules

Well usually people just say they dont agree with this or that when it comes to Christianity, where as Islam usually leads to much more hateful posts.

Besides if you really feel that this thread is all about trashing Christianity then you need to get over yourself.

[45ED]

Well usually people just say they dont agree with this or that when it comes to Christianity, where as Islam usually leads to much more hateful posts.

Besides if you really feel that this thread is all about trashing Christianity then you need to get over yourself.

Don't feed him any further - he's attempting to start something. This thread has remained remarkably civil (with the exception of his post).

[zz000ter]

The very fact that this thread is open - is a sign of BIAS on the part of the mods.

What right does a non Christian have to criticize the system of Christian sacraments?

I will run a test - and let's see what happens

I started threat "Islam - Why do men and women pray separately?" (http://forums.redflagdeals.com/islam-why-do-men-women-pray-separately-1162865/)

Let's see how quickly it gets shut down for being a religious topic

[Agafaba]

The very fact that this thread is open - is a sign of BIAS on the part of the mods.

What right does a non Christian have to criticize the system of Christian sacraments?

I will run a test - and let's see what happens

I started threat "Islam - Why do men and women pray separately?" (http://forums.redflagdeals.com/islam-why-do-men-women-pray-separately-1162865/)

Let's see how quickly it gets shut down for being a religious topic

Why wouldnt you want people to question it, worse case scenario they leave the topic knowing more about Christianity. True faith isnt in blindly believing whatever you are told, its in having your beliefs questioned, and choosing to believe afterwards.

Hopefully people can be mature and your new topic will be as civil as this one, however I doubt so. Also I should point out, this topic started with no bias, where as yours clearly does. Its close enough to flamebait that I wouldnt be surprised if it is closed.

[t3359]

Was there a wife involved? Maybe it was initiated by her?

bjl

OP, no comment on this?

bjl

[zz000ter]

Hopefully people can be mature and your new topic will be as civil as this one, however I doubt so. Also I should point out, this topic started with no bias, where as yours clearly does. Its close enough to flamebait that I wouldnt be surprised if it is closed.

You think that MBG's comments are polite? #33 as an example?

[nsx]

:arrow:
"Political & Religious threads

Political and Religious threads are still not allowed..."

OT Guidelines - updated (http://forums.redflagdeals.com/ot-guidelines-updated-1009785/)