Where in the Bible do priests baptize babies?

Question

Where do catholics get this?

Answer 1

It's unbiblical practice to baptize babies. It's supposed to be done through immersion
The Catholic Encyclopedia on page 261-262 even agree with the immersion:
"The very word 'baptize' as we have seen, means washing......the most ancient form usually employed was unquestionably immersion."

Reason why they don't do immersion:
"For several centuries after the establishment of Christianity Baptism was usually conferred by immersion; but since the twelfth century the practice of baptizing by infusion has prevailed in the Catholic Church, as this manner is attended with less inconvinience than Baptism by immersion."

-- James Cardinal Gibbons, The Faith of our Fathers 1917 page 228

Answer 2

Not just Catholics, but the argument is that entire households were baptized, and although the Baptists are quick to point out that no mention is made of babies getting baptized within these households, the other side of the coin is that they weren't specifically excluded either.

Infant baptism is most definitely the correct way to baptize. It differentiates God's people from the rest of the world. To say that babies shouldn't be baptized is to say that they don't need a Savior. If in Adam ALL have sinned, all means all to me. Giving them a free ticket to Heaven if they die is a nice thought, but once again this is God's prerogative, and we need to trust Him to do the right thing.

And if you'll look at the rite of circumcision in the Old Testament, this same "marking" of God's people has an exact parallel to baptism in the NT. Adults converting to the faith also had to be circumcised after renouncing other gods and repenting, and that's where the Baptists get it right. But babies were circumcised as a part of God's covenant with His own, they were not excluded. And when Baptists call adult baptism a "statement of faith" rather than a participation in God's covenant, they make it a merit-oriented, earn-your-way-to-heaven practice. That kind of faith is not for me, I don't trust that theology at all.

Answer 3

It seems to have been introduced 200 - 300 years after Christ. It's roots are unknown I believe but I could be wrong there, but either way it is obviously a man-made tradition.

Which is interesting, because Jesus himself was about 30 years old when he got baptized, and John the Baptizer was known for baptizing adults who came down to the Jordan river to show their repentance. Both examples show men and women making conscience decisions of baptism, something not capable of infants.

Answer 4

Catholics have been baptizing infants (along with entire households) since the times of the apostles.

Where in scripture is infant baptism prohibited?

Nowhere!

In the old testament, all male children were required to be circumcised on the 8th day of life. Certainly, no one asked any of those children whether they wanted to become one of God's Chosen People.

Infant baptism in the Cathoic Church is the ultimate statement of salvation by grace and faith, and not by ANY works at all.

The infant does absolutely NOTHING in order to be saved.

Everything, including the water and the FAITH, is freely supplied by the church, simply because God desires that all men be saved, and come to the knowledge of his truth.

The church does the saving, the Holy Spirit supplies the truth, and the infant becomes a member of the church, an adopted child of God, a temple of the Holy Spirit, and co-heir wiith Jesus Christ.

Why would ANYONE want to put off something as IMPORTANT as this?

Waiting until an advanced age for baptism is spiritually risky, without scriptural precedent of any kind, a total invention of late day Protestant reformers, and a false tradition of men.

Answer 5

I don't know where catholics get this, because it is not in the Bible. When a person decides to be baptized it is because they have learned how to reason and know right from wrong. I don't know of many babies who can do this.

Answer 6

i'm getting that that's maximum possibly a made up challenge yet i will respond to as even though if it fairly is genuine. First i'm professional decision, and it fairly is terrible what has occurred to you. No-you may could circulate with the aid of that. yet you at the instant are 20 weeks (21 once you intend to get your abortion). it is barely 3 weeks away out of your infant being waiting to possibly stay in case you have been to furnish delivery. At 20 weeks you're able to be feeling movements daily and your fetus is totally formed (albeit tiny). you might have prevalent which you have been pregnant for a minimum of four months and could have been feeling movements for a month. that's sufficient time so which you will have made this decision previously. the undeniable fact which you have permit your self get to 20 weeks till now dealing with with an abortion tells me that there is something preserving you back. Going however with an abortion at 21 weeks isn't an undemanding technique, and is plenty extra annoying than an early abortion. in terms of your question a pair of priest doing a baptism, the superb individual to ask may well be your abortion provider. maximum hospitals have on team/ on call clergy. A clergy individual for a wellbeing center is possibly to be extra open minded. finally that's your decision. i don't think of you're a evil individual for choosing it. yet i don't help it at this overdue point.

Answer 7

As Protestants see it, baptism is not a sacrament (in the true sense of the word), but an ordinance. It does not in any way convey the grace it symbolizes; rather, it is merely a public manifestation of the person’s conversion. Since only an adult or older child can be converted, baptism is inappropriate for infants or for children who have not yet reached the age of reason (generally considered to be age seven).

Since the New Testament era, the Catholic Church has always understood baptism differently, teaching that it is a sacrament which accomplishes several things, the first of which is the remission of sin, both original sin and actual sin—only original sin in the case of infants and young children, since they are incapable of actual sin; and both original and actual sin in the case of older persons.

But the text in Luke 18:15 says, "Now they were bringing even infants to him

But notice what Jesus said: "to such as these [referring to the infants and children who had been brought to him by their mothers] belongs the kingdom of heaven." The Lord did not require them to make a conscious decision. He says that they are precisely the kind of people who can come to him and receive the kingdom.

Furthermore, Paul notes that baptism has replaced circumcision (Col. 2:11–12). The Old Covenant which was the law of Moses required circumcision. Infant baptism is for the New Covenant.

Answer 8

Hi there.

There is no Biblical text to prove this. If baby baptism was so important, why wasn't Jesus baptized as a baby? Why was Jesus baptized as an adult? Baptism should be by choice. People, after being taught of Christ and believes should be baptized.

Answer 9

It's not in the Bible, they think because Jesus said "bring the children to me and do not hinder them for the Kingdom of Heaven is made for such as these" means you baptize babies. But, Jesus didnt baptize them or urge them to be. There is also the Baptism of the Eunuch and his household but since eunuchs are castrated, they dont have babies.

Answer 10

You get baptized for the same reason Christ got baptized, to publicly demonstrate his learned and conscientious commitment to Almighty God. Since he was without sin, clearly it was not to wash away his sins, and neither is it for us. You get baptized after taking the time to learn what that commitment means. Children, especially babies, cannot make such a commitment, as they don't even BEGIN developing conceptual thought process until puberty.