I know lots of church members get in a twist over this. I know that lots of hard feelings have happened in families when a baptism has been refused. Whole families have left congregations. But I guess i stand by the idea that all should be included and maybe we should change our dogma ( if that is the right word)

Hi Weeze,

Theologically speaking not even those who are active can keep their baptismal vows with integrity.  Relative integrity perhaps when compared to a random sample of other believers but our standard is God and none of us match that level of perfection.

All have sinned and all have fallen short right?

Plus, it is a covenant not a contract.  All that is necessary for baptism to stick is God's integrity.  He promises to be our God come what may and not only if we can keep up our side of the covenant.

Why do you need that?

Well then perhaps you need a choice either than to say no and be the baddie or to say yes and let the parents be the baddie.  Like maybe a "not yet" option.

It is good that you ask some questions.  It is okay if you don't like the answers and it is okay to challenge the answers if you feel that they are simply trying to mollify you to get what they think they want.

I run into this scenario frequently.  Sometimes baptism is being sought for superstitious purposes and I take a lot of care to try and demolish those superstitions.  Since my ordination in 98 I have only had two occurences of "not yet" answers to a baptismal request.

The first was simply a timing thing.  The parents demanded a time and we said no to that demand.  They also demanded a private baptism and I said no to that.  The baptism eventually happened at a mutually agreed upon time.

The second was as a result in a conflict between Dad who was UCCAN and Mom who was SA.  Neither wanted their child baptized in the tradition of the other and both were racing to get respective clergy to commit before the other did.  I said no because I didn't want to be a club in a marital spat.  I called the Captain down the road and he followed my lead and counselled the mom to talk it over further with her husband.

They eventually went to the local Pentecostal Church for a dedication service so neither got what they wanted at the expense of the other.

Honest conversation about the sacrament is important for everyone.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Actually, John did the Baptizing (in the traditional sense anyway).

When we moved to London in '99, Little Mendalla was 3 months old. Since we were, at that point, not connected to any churches here and were basically UU (although I wasn't a member of UU church at that point), we decided that a baptism wasn't right. If he wants to be baptized into a Christian denomination, he can make that call when he's older.

Instead, we engaged one of the lay chaplains from the Untarian Fellowship to work with us on a Naming and Dedication. It was a private service in our temporary home (a condo we rented while our house was being built) with my family and a couple local friends in attendance (she didn't have any family in Canada at that time). It was as beautiful and meaningful as any baptism I've ever been to. Nobody in my family squawked, but the one who would have was my mother and she had passed away by then. Unfortunately, the chaplain who officiated passed away shortly after I joined the church.

I guess my point being that there are other options if baptism is not appropriate for a given family. You just need to know that they're there. Most UU churches have these lay chaplains (who are also licensed to marry, BTW) specifically to provide services (child dedications, weddings, memorials, etc.) to non-members. The services are custom-built in cooperation with the chaplain, too, so there's lots of leeway for making it meaningful on a very specific level.

Mendalla

I think CH is on to something - maybe not so much a change in dogma but even an alternative set of vows.

I baptized a baby this year whose parents made it quite clear they wanted nothing to do with the church.  The mother was going through this for her Grandmother and the Father of the baby didn't take part in the vows (which actually demonstrates integrity).  On the other hand the grandparents are faithful members of the congregation.  Ultimately it is not my responsibility, or the Sessions, to police people making the vows and that is how I get around it.  It is easy to fall into self-righteousness and forget about God's grace.

I've never said no yet but would in certain circumstances.  My husband was asked to do a private baptism and he could see no good reason why it had to be private so he refused.

The baptism represents the neccesity of full communion with God in order for true repentance or what I call "enlightenment" to be complete & every bit as natural to us, as it is to God.

The baptism of the Holy Spirit is essential.

This is what repentance is.

Some cases in this world, we ourselves create a stumbling block on others, instead of creating solutions collectively.

There are indeed solutions to every problem & it's not too late to ever start with the attitude of thinking about solutions, instead of focusing on the negatives all the time.

This world bombards our minds with negatives that enslave, & are only driven back by an equal or more measure of what is freedom.

Even the Church elect still bombard our minds with things that enslave yet they believe otherwise.

Freedom comes by hearing the truth & then expressing it. Just as this "Jesus" did.

Bolt

It's appropriate to welcome all children to Baptism. This includes those children whose parents don't regularly attending worship. (Provided the parents consent and commit to raising their child in faithfulness to the baptismal covenant). A Baptism can provide a wonderful occasion for sharing the Gospel.

Yes, CF, John the Baptizer did the baptizing by full immersion in the River Jordan. But upon Jesus' return from his 40 days in the desert, John had been imprisoned and exceuted, and John's followers looked for a successor. Naturally, this successor was Jesus. But, appearantly, Jesus and his disciples did not dunk people in the River Jordan the same way John had done.

Jesus baptized by fire.

The only hope, or else despair

Lies in the choice of pyre or pyre—

To be redeemed from fire by fire.

-T.S. Eliot

The act of baptism is simply a faith statement, there is no power in the ritual of immersion in water.

Baptism is in God's court in every way, & just because one offers up a statement, doesn't always make it true.

To be truely baptized, is to absolutely know the communion with God at all times & without any reservations.

To discern that with is of God, & that which isn't.

The only time one can be so shure of a man who follows God's instruction, is by their fruits.

Not by the name one prefers to call God.

Bolt

Hi Meredith,

"Police" would be the pejorative interpretation for the traditional language of "oversight" wouldn't it?

While I agree it is easy to fall into self-righteousness I don't know how God's grace is advanced by making the option of "no" non-existent.  My red-flag says license is being advocated and not grace if Session, or its equivalent, is not taking responsibility and administering the sacrament respectfully.

Just to make gramma happy is not what the sacrament is for and respectfully is not a good example of grace.  The predominant factor seems to be apathy rather than hope.

If the parents don't care for it and are only doing it to mollify family members then the Session, or its equivalent shows more grace by saying "no" and taking the heat off of the parents.  Of course, having angry gramma decide she isn't interested in a church who won't baptize the grandchild she wants baptized contrary to the wants of the grandchild's parents might cost the congregation some dough.  If that is the fear then they simply need to determine how much their integrity is worth.

To be completely honest, I don't think the church essentially prostituting the sacrament, is going to win it any support from those who already have little if any use for either.

It isn't about policing, which suggests we only offer the sacrament to those who are entitled to it.  It is about providing oversight, which suggests we celebrate the sacrament with those who actually would celebrate and not those who grudgingly participate.

Not to be a wise-ass but isn't that you taking responsibility to do some "police" work?  :)

Grace and peace to you.

John

You can only baptize babies by immersion and on profession of faith.  Okay, I'll stop now....

For me, we are supposed to have a relationship with God but also one with people... eaning family and community. This is where the baptism dilemma often happens. People for so long told other people that an unbaptized child went straight to hell. They did not pasa Go and they did not collect $200. If a child died and was not baptized there was enough "original sin" that got on them in the birth canal that they were condemned. So, parents who loved their children at all had them baptized. If the parents were no onboard, family members put on pressure to "save" the children.... It was something that happened to all Christian children. Thus, it became a milestone in human lives. It meant children were valued, were cared for, were loved, that their future mattered... our importance, both as a human being and as part of the community was sealed in the ceremony....Then, we wonder why someone is pressuring a baptism and why folks who are not that religious decide to baptize their child. We, a collective we, taught them it. Many times, they were not taught anything else or they were not around when the lessons changed. Our lessons used to be heavy on holiness and sinfulness and retribution and that baptism was required to save a child's soul.... and lighter on God's grace, compassion 

I totally disagree with the above statement. What about the thousands of children who have not been baptised. And if i may be so bold, saved from what or saved for what?

I think it's time to think of baptism and what it represents from a different perspective, and not one of membership!

First, baptism is an invitation - to be drawn into God's unconditional love. That invitation has no expiry date - one of the reasons we do not "re-baptize".  But although the invitation remains open, some may reject it for a time, be indifferent for a time, but the offer always remains.

Secondly, and to answer She-Devil on this point, baptism is not just for the baptized, and that is why it is a public and not a private event. Those attending are also affected. They are reminded of their own baptisms, and that the invitation that they originally received themselves is still open to them. Ancient practice has been to think of baptism as being "washed from sin".  Well, baptism is not a guarantee that we will never sin again (in the sense of being less than we could be) is it? The ritual of baptism is a single event, but its practice (reminding ourselves that the healing that God's forgiveness offers is always there for us) continues for a lifetime.

Lastly, (and an extension of the second reason), baptism frees us all, and not just the baptised.  Every individual, every child and every adult is subject to some kind of prejudice of the part of others - because one is male or female, rich or poor, foreign or native, black or white - you name it. When we use these distinctions to make assumptions and create walls betwen ourselves and others, we set in place the exclusion of others and ultimately, blockade the possibilty of a full relationship.  And broken relationships (and those that we never allow to develop) is the basis for what is traditionally called "sin". So what is washed from that infant is really just our own prejudices. And we all need to be reminded from time to time of what gets in the way of loving and open relationships.

Thank you SpiritBear

mendalla, can you tell me where Carolyn is worshipping now?

Hey Weeze,

Everytime I bring it up, the kids just want me to baptize them.  Our minister says that's o.k., if we want to do it that way.   Parents can baptize their own kids in front of the congregation.  I can't think of a better way to get committment and thought from a full family than to make it so personal. 

Still, the kids don't want to be batpized in public.  They're too old to think of it as a fun party, too young to understand its complexity and too aware not to be embarassed by how very odd the whole thing really is. 

Indeed, and it was very heartening to me to find her in VU when I first started going to the UCC again. And, even better, one of the McDade hymns in it was my old UU favorite "Spirit of Life". However, one of my favorite lines from her is the final one from that quote I posted: "I call myself a woman of faith seeking with others to touch what matters."  Just substitute "person" for "woman" and you pretty much have my feelings about the spiritual life.

Mendalla

Mendella,

Not all ordained ministers are cool with it.  But, I don't relate at all at all at all  with heirarchies and in order to relate to me, ministers either have to dethrone themselves or are already walking on the earth. 

My big question is whether we see our intent as getting up a religions numbers or establishing a relationship with God? Most in church, would agree you can have a wonderful church relationship with God without being baptized. Many people baptised or not, and unchurched have a relationship with God.

So, what do we look at baptism being? 

It seems, to me, we set it up to be more about Church or church than about God. I am not sure either John or Jesus saw it that way.

I think subsequent church attendance is important. It is at church where the sacrament of communion is rightfully administered, where Godly preaching will take place, where believers are most likely to engage in Bible reading and seasoned fellowship. I believe that God uses all these things as conduits for his grace. He uses them to strengthen the faith of Christians. Without these things, a Christian will struggle with their faith and may ultimately lose their salvation and perish.

I believe being churched elsewhere is fine, so long as communion is observed, the Bible is studied, preaching is sound, fellowship is enjoyed, and there are opportunities for confession and absolution.

Again, it is easy to blame the baptized or their parents for not showing up anymore... It is harder to look at what baptism is supposed to be versus what we make it be and what we assume it means....

I am using the words from my personal baptism. The brackets  (as long as you come to our church) are the conditions and what it seems we actually are promising to adult or child and would follow each and every verse. Read it and then read it with, "as long as you come to our church" with each line.

Let us pledge our continued support and care.

We will continue to support you,

walk with you, and grow with you.

With God’s help, we will live out our baptism

as a loving community in Jesus Christ:

nurturing one another in faith,

upholding one another in prayer,

encouraging one another in God’s work.

I know what it was that I promised. I promised a belief. I promised to follow The Way. I promised to celebrate God's presence, to live with respect in creation, and to love and serve others.  I ask how it is assumed I would be violating any of those simply because I did not go inside a building to keep those promises? What of house bound people, the hospitalized, the elderly, the ill.... are they suddenly breaking their baptismal promises? I think not.

There was certainly nothing there that I would attend church every Sunday or take communion or read the Bible or anything of the sort. I do nto recall John asking Jesus about Torah study or breaking bread.... In fact, people tend to say John was not really a social fellowship kind of guy.

What if in the promise that the congregation made, there was found to not be a loving community, there was no nurturing, there was no upholding or encouraging? If the baptized leaves, did they break their baptismal promise or did the congregation break theirs?

Do we dare ask why people are not in church? It is often about us as much as it is about them.