Original sin teaches that we are born flawed, not born innocent. When I look at my babies at work I don't know how anyone could believe that.
So if I understand it right, the newborn baby is already a sinner for the simple reason that it is a human being?
When discussing it with someone who teaches in the church, the view was that we are all born with the seed of original sin, and that we grow with it, and it with us. Born innocent, but, with the potential to sin as we grow. Which makes sense if you mentally graph out the severity of sins committed by years of age. Damn sin seeds. lol.
That's one church's stance. The notion of baptism and unbaptised babies being in limbo if they die clearly implies they are born WITH sin, not simply with the seeds to be able to sin later. It's been an issue at work at times. We've actually baptised babies ourselves when the parents requested and no priest was available because they fear the baby won't go to heaven unless it's done.
That's one church's stance. The notion of baptism and unbaptised babies being in limbo if they die clearly implies they are born WITH sin, not simply with the seeds to be able to sin later. It's been an issue at work at times. We've actually baptised babies ourselves when the parents requested and no priest was available because they fear the baby won't go to heaven unless it's done.
According to Christian dogma (let's say Catholic because it's more strict and official), does a baby who die before baptism go to Heaven? (I sure hope so...)
That's a very good point. Surely a baby must be guilty of something if it is not admitted to heaven for the simple reason that it isn't baptized?
According to Christian dogma (let's say Catholic because it's more strict and official), does a baby who die before baptism go to Heaven? (I sure hope so...)
I'd probably ask to have it done too tracy, even knowing what I know and feeling the way I do. Not out of fear, but because it's part of our ritual. Ritual is such a funny thing.
But, also keep in mind that when you say 'that's one church's view', it's not even that of one church. It's a snapshot in the time of the church, and even within the Catholic church, there are parishes that would be disgusted that it is taught as a metaphor and not literal truth of adam and eve having cursed us all in a garden once upon a time.
If not for original sin, we would not baptise infants. We would wait until they were old enough to understand what it means to join the church. But, because we don't want them to die in a state of sin (original sin is a state, not an act), we baptise them.
Thank you for this information Tracy. I personally find it despicable that one would believe an infant would not be accepted to Heaven for reasons absolutely beyond its control. What do you think?
Thank you for this information Tracy. I personally find it despicable that one would believe an infant would not be accepted to Heaven for reasons absolutely beyond its control. What do you think?
And from everything I've been told, the infant baptism is to ensure that a child is done, clean, slate wiped, incase they die in those grey years between being a baby, and being old enough to consent to baptism. It's not about the state they are in at birth. One view.
Catholicism in Canada seems a tad more relaxed than in the US.
What does an infant need to be cleaned of if not original sin? You yourself say "slate wiped", "cleaned". That implies they are born with something wrong or at the very least they could sin enough to lose the ability to enter heaven before they were old enough to consent to baptism. Otherwise, why would we be spiritually "cleaning" an infant? If the church set an age at which children were capable of sinning and baptised at that age, then I could see them arguing they don't think babies are born into sin. But, infant baptism is clearly in place to cleanse them of an impure state. It doesn't say babies commit sin or are personally guilty of sinning. It does say they are born in a state of sin, a separation from God, inherrited from Adam that is washed away through baptism.
Oh, **** me!!! More sinnin and stuff!!
okPart of the problem we run into Tracy is old ritual melding with new thinking. And there just doesn't seem to be a vocabulary to explain all the changes. While the baptism is still often performed as a baby, and we hold that it is still essentially for the same reasons (thus my use of the terms), we don't hold to the old view that it's 'needed' on a baby, or that a baby is born sinful (let alone a child). But, it's the way it used to be done, so why worry about changing it?
Churches teaching that aren't towing the Vatican line, can we agree on that?
.... if the Vatican ever comes out clearly on the issue.
But I still love it oddly enough, and wouldn't leave it for any other flawed human construct. I'll just spend my time trying to bend bricks I guess. lol.But I still love it oddly enough, and wouldn't leave it for any other flawed human construct. I'll just spend my time trying to bend bricks I guess. lol.
Hopefully the Vatican will one day realise it needs to adapt with the times or will die off, just like anything else in the world.
Original sin teaches that we are born flawed, not born innocent. When I look at my babies at work I don't know how anyone could believe that.
Original sin teaches that we are born flawed, not born innocent. When I look at my babies at work I don't know how anyone could believe that.