I know I'm not the only one...

[monkeybard]

...who thinks that baptizing infants and babies is wrong. I grew up in a church that didn't do that, and to this day does not do that. They believe, and I agree, that no one should commit you to something that important without your full understanding of and agreement with what's going on. I mention this because my man-cub's family wasn't raised that way, and my sister-in-law and her hubby just had their kid baptized, as did my cousin-in-law. I believe that it's just plain wrong. I am glad I'm not baptized. It's not a commitment that I chose to make, and I'm very grateful that the decision was left up to me. Thank you, my liberal Christian parental units, for having that much respect for your offspring and allowing us to make our own decisions.

Comments

[brightbeak.livejournal.com]

i completely agree!
i was baptised as a child, and even *I* considered it invalid. *I* wasn't the one who made the choice, someone else made it for me. that is not what i consider empowering!
*I* made the choice later (age 22) to be rebaptised.
i don't believe in infant/child baptism. Biblically, there's no basis... folks were baptised AFTER they believed, not before...

bb

[sunkrux.livejournal.com]

I was baptized as a kid, but was given the option. In the religion I grew up in, kids were baptized at 8 as the religion thought that was an age of accountability - meaning most kids at 8 do understand right from wrong and can make decisions about their lives, like being baptized.

For a long time I was an active church goer, but then as I got older, I realized that while I do believe in the gospel I was taught, the "church/religion" as ruled by man wasn't all it was cracked up to be. I still believe in God but don't attend church. Guess I'll be going to hell, according to most religions. LOL

[kayjayuu.livejournal.com]

I don't know that I'd term is as 'wrong' but I would pick up the phrase 'invalid' as already commented. Most baptisms I've seen within the protestant faiths (and I'm generalizing here) seem to focus on the commitment of the family to raising the child within the church/faith, versus it being considered a precursor to 'being saved'. And what that all boils down to depends on the degree of involvement of someone's particular family in church life and/or religious views.

That said, I personally don't see it as a requirement of faith in either case. We didn't baptize our son because the church were were attending didn't do infant baptism. I was baptized as a baby, but I later made the conscious choice to become baptized as an adult. (And that was another whole 'sprinkle vs. dunk' debate that goes on ad nauseum.) I guess what I'm saying is it didn't make or break me one way or another, and my son hasn't made up his mind yet... I trust him to find his own path.

[fisherbear.livejournal.com]

Interesting. I never thought of that. I'm curious, though - how many people really care? Not so much about the general baptizing practice of one group or another - I'm sure plenty of people get worked up about that - but about whether or not they, themselves, were baptized early?

If you still approve of whatever your parents chose when you grow up, that's spiffy. Good call all around. If not, I can't imagine someone abandoning a religious practice that they believe in - or a church throwing someone out to be damned - because their parents gave them the wrong kind of bath when they were too young to sit up without assistance.

Of course, my own interest in religion is purely academic and intermittent at best, so I'm sure I could be missing something obvious...