My father never made it to my wedding. A week before, he was hospitalized with blood clots in his legs…and was told not fly.
My daughter is being baptized this Sunday. My mother and father live in San Antonio, and so have not yet seen their granddaughter (born in July). As my parents were passing through security at the San Antonio airport, my mother is falling asleep every other minute. Apparently, on top of all her OTHER health problems, she was diagnosed with thyroid problems 1 week ago, so right before getting ready to board…dad decides that they can’t fly…and so will miss another significant life event.
Dad calls mrs beagledave, who emails me a little bit ago.
Yeah, I’m real jazzed about baptism right now :rolleyes:
–your father didn’t make it to your wedding because
–he had blood clots and
–he couldn’t fly;
and so now he’s going to miss his granddaughter’s baptism because
–your mother has thyroid problems and
–your dad doesn’t think she can fly.
I mean, shit happens, dude, and God isn’t necessarily the Shitter.
Obviously you can’t replay the wedding, but is there some reason you can’t reschedule the baptism? From the conservative Protestant perspective, at least, we no longer believe that unbaptized infants go straight to Hell when they die, so IMO her immortal soul isn’t in any danger while your mom and dad get their problems worked out.
How old is she? If she’s of the age of consent, there’s nothing in the Bible that says you have to be baptized to be saved, so nothing to worry about there, either.
Reschedule. The water in the font’s just water. Pull the plug, start over next week.
Well I “know” that God isn’t the Shitter, thanks…part of being an Irish Catholic is using one’s perogative of cursing God for life’s misfortunes…
Same belief for RC-ers…baptism is a rite of initiation these days more than a salvific event.
Mom has other problems, in addition to the thyroid…the docs don’t exactly have a handle on the cause of it either…it’s not as if we have a firm date, based on her medical outlook… that we could re-schedule it TO…other family are travelling from out of town with reservations…so we have to stick with this Sunday for all practical purposes
So, are millions of Baptists wrong? No, it’s just that baptism is only meant to be a visible witness for the life-changing event you’ve just undergone, symbolic of washing away the old life.
Which is why the Protestants don’t practice infant baptism, reasoning that an infant doesn’t have an old life that needs to be washed away, nor can said infant make a public affirmation of his new-found faith in Jesus Christ.
Then said [Job’s] wife unto him, Dost thou still retain thine integrity? curse God, and die. But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil?
Well thanks for the morality lesson at this particular point in my life…it surely salves my soul. :rolleyes:
My response to DDG was not meant as a “justification” (read I’m doing the “righteous” thing) for what I said…rather to point out that yes indeed, I know that God does not purposely smite his children (I’ve read “When Bad Things Happen To People”, also)…and to offer up an answer to the implied “why would beagledave say such a thing when he ‘knows’ better”.
It IS part of the culture (rightly, or wrongly) of most of the Irish Catholics who I have hung around with in my life…so the “MY Irish Catholic friends wouldn’t THINK of doing such a thing” seems to me to be more judgemental than “educational”…the other cites (Beckett and Job) are only to provide a view of the history of the tradition…
If someone really wants to debate the righteousness of cursing God, by all means start a GD thread (and I won’t disagree that cursing God is a “bad” thing)…otherwise I REALLY don’t need to hear it at THIS particular point in my life.
If people are offended that I slandered THEIR God, than I offer my apologies to them.
Look, DAVE, I’m not trying to chap your ass. It sounds like things have sucked lately, and I’m sorry to hear that. But your OP was a clear blasphemy, and one that can’t really be avoided since you stuck the darn thing in the thread title. Did I find it offensive? Yeah, just a tad. But I didn’t even say anything until you claimed the blasphemy as something particularly Irish Catholic, when it’s not. I did not mean to judge you by saying that, merely to point out that I believe you over-extend yourself to state that blasphemy is a “perogative” of Irish Catholics. It’s a perogative of any individual who wants to say it, at least in our society, but it’s no more okay for Irish Catholics to blaspheme than it is for the rest of us.
I do appreciate your apology, to the extent I was offended (which frankly was not very). I hope you will accept mine, to the extent it appeared I was trying to judge you or lecture you.
Now I get it. The problem was my word choice of “perogative” which I think I spelled incorrectly anyway…I did not mean to suggest that Irish-Catholics have a special right to curse God…but to suggest that it’s often part of the culture…It’s just as “wrong”. It’s analagous to saying, as an Irish-American I have the perogative to get looped on Guinness and act like a lout…
Well, to clarify: Lutheran denominations baptise infants, but it isn’t mandatory, and indeed, is still rather controversial. The difference between Lutheran and Catholic infant baptism is that in the Lutheran church, the pastor usually isn’t going to tell you that you have to have your newborn infant baptised immediately, or else she’ll go to Hell if she dies. Lutheran infant baptism isn’t for “saving her immortal soul” or “making her a Christian”, it’s a ceremony for welcoming her into the Family of God. It’s generally understood that she still needs to make a “decision for Christ” later on in life.
Lutheran infant baptism isn’t for making the child a Lutheran–it’s for making the child a “child of God”. From the Missouri Synod link, below.
It’s more of a “dedication”, and indeed, that’s how many other denominations like the Baptists and the Methodists, in which there are parents who feel a need to do something religious with this new baby, refer to it.
I myself was “dedicated” in a Southern Baptist church as an infant, and when my parents transferred to an ELCA church when I was in the 7th grade, and I had to go through Confirmation Class, they were told that that “dedication” wasn’t good enough, so I had to stand up there at the baptismal font at age 12 and, completely baffled, be baptized all over again. And then when I was 16, after making a “decision for Jesus” in an American Baptist church, I was told that the Lutheran “sprinkling” didn’t count, because I didn’t understand what it was for, and they forthwith “dunked” me, white robes and all. So if you are saved by baptism, then I’m definitely “in”.
The Lutheran churches also sometimes have a catechism that the parents (and godparents, if any) have to take on “baptism”, as they are standing in for the infant, so they have to understand what it is they’re promising.
The verse in Mark is one isolated verse, whereas there is a broad general doctrine throughout the New Testament that says quite clearly that all you have to do to be “saved” is believe. There are plenty of deathbed conversions, where the person didn’t have time to be baptized, and nobody has any theological doubts that the salvation “took”.
beagledave, I’m very sorry to hear that both of your parents are ill. I know their absence and your concern for them is going to tarnish the joy of an otherwise joyful day.
sigh Since I’m not a religious person I feel that if cursing God makes you feel better then go for it. However, the only God I could choose to believe in would understand your anger, and forgive you for your temporary trespass, just as you would forgive your daughter if she spoke harshly in a moment of anger.
If you believe in an infinite, omniscient, omnipotent God, surely you must believe that this is all part of a much larger design, and He would not deliberately choose to hurt either you or your parents.
May your daughter’s life be filled with peace, love, and joy from this day forward.
The other thing is this: many biblical scholars believe that the original text of Mark ended at 16:8 (“So they end out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid”).
Everything after that is believed to have been added sometime in the 2nd century, whereas the original text is traditionally given a date of about 70 AD. (CE. Whatever). A lot of Bibles don’t mention this fact, and just use the extended version of the text without any sort of note. If you procure a study Bible (New Oxford Annotated, for example), they will point this out.
So, basically, if that’s the ONLY place in which baptism is pronounced necessary…well, it seems a bit suspect. At least in my opinion.
There is ONE other possible reference to baptism as necessary. 1 Peter 3:21. Just for the record.