ok i realize this question has been asked but, what i would like is for an answer that has scripture back up. and do catholics believe that baptizing a baby saves its soul? i would also like to know why catholics refer to their pastor as father, please give a scripture reference with any answer. i want a biblical answer. not your opinion on the subject.
135289
as fas as infant baptism...here is a reason against it...\n\nif baptism is for remission of sins (acts 2:38, mark 16:16, 1 peter 3:21\n\nand sin is transgression against God's law(1 john 3:4)\n\nthan one has to be able process right from wrong and understand the consequences of sin...\n\nhow can a child sin if they cannot understand the concept? \n\nalso there is no evidence that we carry the weight of adam and eve's sin as someone else has said...quite the opposite actually....romans 14:12 "every one of us shall give account of himself to God." clearly this means that i am responsible for MY sin and you are responsible for yours....it does not say that i will have to account for adam's sin....\n\nand for calling a priest father....matt 23:9 says call no man father...the point of these verses starting in verse 2 and continuing was to teach that the pharisees that were uplifint them selves to a higher position and be loved and adored by men were sinning....
430588
your right it's not in the bible. the catholic church incorporated into their system, because it would be easier for pagan worshippers who sacrificed babies to come into the church.
127331
I am not a priest but I am Catholic so I hope I can give you some help on this.  I was not Catholic when I married my Catholic husband.  I was christened as a child but I can't remember if they even asked for any documentation to prove that.  But we did have to meet with a priest to clear up issues about how any children would be raised, etc.  And, anyone getting married in the Catholic Church must attend pre-cana classes.  Also, I was not allowed, of course, to take communion during the ceremony.
493466
I am a Christian. I think abortion is completely and totally wrong. Its the same as murder. Once a baby is concieved, it is a human being, not just tissue. I also will tell you and every one else out tere, after a girl has had an abortion, she will most likey regret it the rest of her life, because that was a life. That baby could have become a president or someone who made a big difference in the world. Hope this helps out.   JesusSaves\nDo the same for the baby
608915
If a mother steps out into oncoming traffic and is killed while saving her child, who lives, is the child "happy" the she had to do it?  Is he thankful for her sacrifice?  Does he realize how much she loved him to do such an act of heroism?  Does he think of her as the dearest person in the world to him for loving him so much?\n\nGod requires a sacrifice to cleanse ones heart from sin or he will die.  Jesus stepped out into the oncoming traffic for all of mankind.  Anyone who believes on him has a heart of adoration and gratitude for this act of love, knowing that if he had not done it, the world would be lost and die.\n\n"But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name." John 20:31
33925
And people wonder why Catholics leave the church.  Sheesh.\n\nOn baptism, your priest should have allowed it.  According to the catechism of the church, anyone who has not recieved baptism may do so.  Plus, from a practical standpoint, why would the church or some dufus priest disallow a child born out of wedlock NOT to enter the church, be "born-again" (as that what baptism is about), or to have original and personal sins forgiven by baptism.  Your child did not have a choice in his birth circumstances so why should he be punished.  \n\nBut none of this answers your question.\n\nMy suggestion is since you're not tied to any one denomination yet, try a few different services/churches and see what "fits".   That is, what denomination and service is conducive to YOUR spiritual connection with God.  \nLutheran, to me seems much closer to Catholic than Baptist. Nothing against Baptists.  But I would go with either Lutheran or Catholic since you're both connected to those and since one child was baptised lutheran and the other has not religious affiliation.\n\nAgain, try a few services and see what suits your family.\n\nGod bless and good luck.\nMy opinion is to try different churches (denominations)
365109
When a child is adopted by a non-blood related couple... does the child still call the new parents Father and Mother?\n\nWhen Jesus was a Child... I truly doubt that he would address Mary as ..." OI! Mary!" or Joseph as " Hey! Carpenter man!", he would address them both as their earth father and mother.\n\nIf calling Mary, "Mother" is good enough for Jesus, the very Prince of Heaven, why is it not good enough for others who follow his path? Unless of course they think they are better than Jesus Christ......
620313
If you were Joseph, and Mary told you she was pregnant with the Son of God, would you have mixed emotions?\nOn one hand, you've been chosen to father the Son of God, but on the other, your woman is pregnant with anothers child, and you've never even had intercourse with her....\n\nPossibly an even better question:\nIf you were Joe, as i like to call him, would you feel weird to have sex with Mary while she was pregnant-or even after she gave birth to Jesus? \nThose are Holy fallopian tubes now.......
404225
why would it be a problem for a God that can make man out of dust and breath life into him, to cause a virgin to be with child?\n\nI dont know the details and dont care to...  somewhere along the line the virgin cenception occured  with God causing the egg to be fertalized  not by a human father\n\ndoes it matter .. or is this just a question to vent unbelief?
576636
I looked for the statement by Cardinal Castrillon but couldn't find it. So I can't state an opinion.\n\nPlease add a link next time. \n\nThank you.
110950
The catholic church belives that in order to reach salvation you must not only have faith in god but also recive the sacraments. Its a requirement! so its really not a choice for them.  I on the other hand find it to be ridiculus and a major distraction from what jesus was all about.  They orginated much much later after the death of christ... you would of thought he would have mentioned them if they were that important.
389239
Some people believe that the unborn baby  doesn't have a soul.  Others believe that we have a sould as soon as we are concieved... the other side of this is that it is murder if you kill a human with at heart beat, where does the line get drawn?
232312
It isn't just Roman Catholics who baptize infants. Many Protestant denominations do it as well. Here's why:\n\nUnder the Old Testament, the outward sign of membership in the covenant nation was circumcision (Genesis 17). It was applied to male children when they were only 8 days old. It was no guarantee of eternal salvation though. Both Isaac and Ishmael were circumcised, but only Isaac was elect of God. Both Jacob and Esau were circumsized, but only Jacob received the spiritual inheritance.\n\nUnder the NEW Testament, baptism has "replaced" circumcision as the outward sign of membership in the covenant community (see Hebrews 9, Colossians 2:11-12, Romans 4:11-12, 1st Corinthians 7:14). Like circumcision, the outward sign is no guarantee that the inward man is elect of God! Rather it identifies that child as a member of the community of faith and entitles him or her to all the benefits of that community (the teaching, the oversight, the discipline, the word, etc).\n\nExamples of household baptisms in the Scripture include Cornelius' family (Acts 10), Lydia's family (Acts 16:15), the Philippian jailer's family (Acts 16:33), Crispis' family (Acts 18:8), and Stephanas (1st Corinthians 1:16).\n\nInfant baptism was not "invented" centuries after Christianity was founded. Infant baptism was the CONTINUATION of the covenant sign to believers and their children.
552648
it's part of our belief to see things as God's will ............ that's y they didn't make any comments, but be sure that their prayers were aimed at God asking Him to grant u strength to overcome that tragic event\n\nEDIT: ok, i see that i have to clyrify, since u're not getting any serious answers. what in ur opinion is better? to grieve or to accept ur destiny as God's will? i's really part of our belief to accept EVERYTHING  as His doing and maybe those ppl just assumed that u're also aware of it, although i must add they could have at least said ''God's will' \n\nbe blessed\n\nEDIT: to dummy, u're really a dummy! miscarriage is NOT a sin
314746
a big thank you thank you, this is what i have been trying to get through to ppl. Its an mental illness that affects people from all walks of life. Not just a catholic priest. Only reason they pick on the catholics about this is because the church doesn't allow the priest to get married. so there  is where they come up with this bs. My point is if  that is the case. then whats  the excuse of all the others that do this  and are married?
14221
Roman Catholics have  add works to there salvation.  The Holy Sacrements are required to do to get to heaven. Plus they believe in purgutary a place where they go to finish cleanses there sins, based on there works on earth the longer or least time there will spend in pur. then they will go to heaven. The pope goes straight to heaven bypassing purgutary. They have strange views about Mary, they lift her name up. She did have favor in God's eyes but thats it she still was a sinner just like all men. I disagree with there doctrine
557889
Well here is the Catholic Answer.\n\nBaptism causes an ontological change in an individual in a permanent and indelible way that destroys the stain of original sin.  As such it cannot be repeated.  A baptized individual is reborn through water and the Spirit into the family of God.\n\nIn fact the Catholic Church forbids one from being re baptized and it is considered a great sacrilege because one is willfully rejecting what God has already given.\n\nIt is not true that baptism by immersion is necessary.  The Catholic Church has always allowed non-immersion baptism.  Let me quote from the earliest Catechism, the Didache\n\n""Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism. And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before. ""\n\nBaptism by immersion has always been a common practice of the Catholic Church, though it was more so pre 1300.  It is still used today and you can find modern Catholic Churches that do immersion.\n\nWhile you are doing your scripture studies let me suggest that you also enjoy www.scripturecatholic.com as well as the wonderful Navarre Bible commentaries.  The Faith of the Early Fathers by William Jurgens is also a wonderful series.  All these things can really help your faith come alive as you begin to experience in a deeper way the 2000 years of Catholic teaching of scripture.