Baptism of a Dying Infant

[Fly Caster]

Would it be wrong for a Protestant pastor to honor the request of a Roman Catholic parent to baptize a dying child? For example, suppose a Reformed pastor was serving as a chaplain at a hospital and was requested, by a grieving mother that had just given birth, to baptize her child which only had moments to live.

What would you do in this situation?

 

[MMasztal]

I cannot see why a Reformed pastor would not baptise the child despite the fact that the RC view of baptismal regeneration is unbiblical.

 

[ericfromcowtown]

Is this hypothetical? I'd suspect that a Roman Catholic wouldn't acknowledge the authority of a protestant chaplain to perform the baptism.

 

[Fly Caster]

Is this hypothetical? I'd suspect that a Roman Catholic wouldn't acknowledge the authority of a protestant chaplain to perform the baptism.

Yes, it is. Although I was discussing this question with a Non-Reformed Baptist friend who found himself in this situation. He was on hospital duty and was asked by a distraught mother to baptize her dying child.

 

[raekwon]

Is this hypothetical? I'd suspect that a Roman Catholic wouldn't acknowledge the authority of a protestant chaplain to perform the baptism.

Yes, it is. Although I was discussing this question with a Non-Reformed Baptist friend who found himself in this situation. He was on hospital duty and was asked by a distraught mother to baptize her dying child.

If your friend was Baptist, it sounds like it'd have been a pretty easy choice to deny the request (as difficult as it might've been in the face of a distraught mom).

 

[steadfast7]

Isn't baptism rightly conducted in the context of the local church? This 'private' baptism is kind of like 'private' communion.

 

[Rich Koster]

I would pray for healing and God's mercy for the mother and child and leave it at that.

 

[Willem van Oranje]

First choice would be to try and get a Roman Catholic priest who could do it.

 

[ericfromcowtown]

Is this hypothetical? I'd suspect that a Roman Catholic wouldn't acknowledge the authority of a protestant chaplain to perform the baptism.

Yes, it is. Although I was discussing this question with a Non-Reformed Baptist friend who found himself in this situation. He was on hospital duty and was asked by a distraught mother to baptize her dying child.

I'm glad that I'm a layman and will never be faced by a mother distraught over the reality of loosing her child in such a circumstance. It would be easy to grant her request as a means of comforting her, and terribly hard to deny her that comfort in her time of need. However, I think Joshua is right, and that in such a case baptizing the child of a Roman Catholic (or Mormon) would be inconsistent with our belief as to what baptism is and what it means.

 

[Rich Koster]

First choice would be to try and get a Roman Catholic priest who could do it.

Wouldn't that be considered assistance in committing an idolatrous act?

 

[steadfast7]

exactly how old is this child? Is he/she able to make their own profession of faith? If not, the baptist chaplain has no reason to go against his beliefs on this matter - he would be compromising his integrity before God for the sake of the mother.

Is it idolatrous to recommend an RC priest to come and do it? hmm. What if a Muslim or Hindu person wanted that chaplain to perform an equivalent religious rite? Wouldn't it better to recommend that someone from their own faith group come and do it? I wouldn't consider that idolatrous. Remember that hospital chaplaincy is an ecumenical and multifaith setting.

I have a pastor friend who did hospital chaplaincy and was asked by a Jewish woman to recite the Shemma for her. Was it idolatrous?

 

[Willem van Oranje]

First choice would be to try and get a Roman Catholic priest who could do it.

Wouldn't that be considered assistance in committing an idolatrous act?

Why? Because of the oil and sign of the cross on the infant's forehead, etc?

In general I affirm the validity of Trinitarian Baptism officiated by an ordained priest of the Roman Catholic Church. This certainly doesn't mean that a Protestant parent would be advised to present his or her child to a priest. But for a committed Roman Catholic, where else would you turn him/her?

 

[steadfast7]

Even Calvin did not reject his baptism under the Roman church.

 

[Rich Koster]

First choice would be to try and get a Roman Catholic priest who could do it.

Wouldn't that be considered assistance in committing an idolatrous act?

Why? Because of the oil and sign of the cross on the infant's forehead, etc?

In general I affirm the validity of Trinitarian Baptism officiated by an ordained priest of the Roman Catholic Church. This certainly doesn't mean that a Protestant parent would be advised to present his or her child to a priest. But for a committed Roman Catholic, where else would you turn him/her?

I have a problem with the idea that the child would be baptized into Rome, not Christ. The language might be the same, but the underlying definitions, due to RC doctrine ("the only TRUE church, etc....) would trouble me.

---------- Post added at 12:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:16 PM ----------

Even Calvin did not reject his baptism under the Roman church.

But would he present his child for baptism by a RC priest? You can't undo the past, but you can avoid future errors. This is the same as the old debate about the validity of a baptism done by "The Lapsed" during early Church persecutions.

 

[jwithnell]

Sadly, I don't think even a paedo-baptist, reformed pastor could in good conscience baptize a covenant child under the suggested circumstances. As a mom, I'd be devastated, but I'd have to trust God's providential timing and appreciate that the child's birth into a believing family does make him a covenant child with every hope of God's mercy.

 

[jwright82]

Wouldn't a Presbyterian minister of a good denomonation be bound by his oath to a book of church order that probably woudn't allow him to baptize someone outside his church anyway? When my daughter was baptized her mother and I were in the proccess of joining the church and the church got repromanded, not very severly, for that baptism because we were not officially members. Also our view of baptism is that it is not a saving sacrament at all. Therefore recieving of it or not does not affect ones salvation. So if the infant was dying its possible salvation wouldn't be affected by not receiving baptism at all. That is a Roman Catholic view that is driving the mother's distress and as bad as I feel for the mother and her pain I wouldn't do it on the above mentioned reasons but I would try to find a priest for her out of compassion.

 

[Scott1]

Would it be wrong for a Protestant pastor to honor the request of a Roman Catholic parent to baptize a dying child? For example, suppose a Reformed pastor was serving as a chaplain at a hospital and was requested, by a grieving mother that had just given birth, to baptize her child which only had moments to live.

What would you do in this situation?

It's difficult to know without more information.

It would seem that an ostensibly Roman Catholic parent would know that a Protestant baptism was not valid in the Roman system.

If they somehow did not believe that, and also believed that (any) baptism would save a dying infant, it would be obligatory for the Protestant Minister to explain that salvation does not, in and of itself save, and also to examine whether there was a basis for the true faith of the parent.

Infants are baptized really, based on the examined faith of at least on parent. Reformed would be careful about that (but perhaps not "broadly evangelical.")

 

[SolaScriptura]

Incidentally, I am the ward chaplain for the mother and infant care center at National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, MD. I deal with this type of thing for a living.

As providence would have it, two weeks ago we had a preemie in the NICU develop an infection, he turned septic, and he died. As he was dying, his parents - who are nominally Catholic - asked me to baptize the baby.
(And for the record, Roman theology allows for just about ANYONE to perform a baptism in an emergency situation as long as the Trinitarian formula is used - I've had several priests and a monk reiterate that. Their point was that we protestant chaplains don't need to call and wake them up in the middle of the night to do an emergency baptism if someone requests it.)

What do you think I did?

 

[Jack K]

A fascinating question. It involves the intersection of right doctrine with good pastoral care.

Clearly a credobaptist cannot baptize the baby. But what about a reformed paedobaptist? If there's a credible profession of faith on the part of the mother (perhaps not likely in the case of a Roman Catholic, but possible), I think the baptism may be allowed.

It would not be a Roman Catholic baptism, because a priest didn't do it. The mother would have to have the difference explained to her, and the pastor should make sure she isn't requesting the baptism out of superstition or a belief that the child needs the baptism to be saved. If the baptism can be performed as an expression of the mother's faith and a witness to God's covenant blessings, then it may be that the baptism is a way for God to be glorified in the child's life, however short. Thus the child's life would be a sweet witness to God's grace. If it were my child dying, I'd want that for him.

I think it has to happen on those terms, though, and with that understanding rather than a superstitious one. It's a pretty high hurdle in the case of an average RC mother, but we shouldn't rule it out. And although we would normally want the parent to be a member of the pastor's church, and have the baptism happen amidst the gathered church, the pastor as the church's representative has the authority to act as fits the circumstances (a la the Ethiopian eunich).

As for calling in a Catholic priest if there's time... It may get the pastor out of a jam (not a good reason). Or it may be respectful to the mom (perhaps a good reason). But will God be more glorified if the priest gets there and does the deed on his terms? I'm unconvinced.

 

[SRoper]

Ben is right. Roman Catholic teaching allows anyone, even a layman, to baptise in an emergency.

From the CCC:

1256 The ordinary ministers of Baptism are the bishop and priest and, in the Latin Church, also the deacon. In case of necessity, anyone, even a nonbaptized person, with the required intention, can baptize, by using the Trinitarian baptismal formula. The intention required is to will to do what the church does when she baptizes. The Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of Baptism for salvation.

 

[SolaScriptura]

Ben is right.

Of course I am... I am not a rank amateur; I'm an experienced and highly competent professional. Bask in the glow, folks, bask in the glow.

 

[Willem van Oranje]

Koster-- I have a problem with the idea that the child would be baptized into Rome, not Christ. The language might be the same, but the underlying definitions, due to RC doctrine ("the only TRUE church, etc....) would trouble me.

Even Rome considers baptism to be into Christ. Hence, they recognize baptism performed by Trinitarian Protestants. In other words, is there any such thing as "Baptism into Rome?" I don't think there is.

Is there something about the Roman Catholic definition of the Trinity which troubles you? Because that's really the doctrine that applies here. I share Calvin's view that baptism is one of the few remnants of Christian truth which remains in Roman Catholicism.

 

[Willem van Oranje]

Wouldn't a Presbyterian minister of a good denomonation be bound by his oath to a book of church order that probably woudn't allow him to baptize someone outside his church anyway? When my daughter was baptized her mother and I were in the proccess of joining the church and the church got repromanded, not very severly, for that baptism because we were not officially members. Also our view of baptism is that it is not a saving sacrament at all. Therefore recieving of it or not does not affect ones salvation. So if the infant was dying its possible salvation wouldn't be affected by not receiving baptism at all. That is a Roman Catholic view that is driving the mother's distress and as bad as I feel for the mother and her pain I wouldn't do it on the above mentioned reasons but I would try to find a priest for her out of compassion.

Correct, our Reformed view would not see "emergency baptisms" as necessary. Baptism is a sign and seal of that child's preexisting status as a covenant child, and therefore we baptize. We do not baptize them into the covenant.

---------- Post added at 02:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:42 PM ----------

It would seem that an ostensibly Roman Catholic parent would know that a Protestant baptism was not valid in the Roman system.

Actually, in the "Roman system", baptisms performed by trinitarian Protestants are considered valid.

---------- Post added at 02:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:44 PM ----------

Incidentally, I am the ward chaplain for the mother and infant care center at National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, MD. I deal with this type of thing for a living.

As providence would have it, two weeks ago we had a preemie in the NICU develop an infection, he turned septic, and he died. As he was dying, his parents - who are nominally Catholic - asked me to baptize the baby.
(And for the record, Roman theology allows for just about ANYONE to perform a baptism in an emergency situation as long as the Trinitarian formula is used - I've had several priests and a monk reiterate that. Their point was that we protestant chaplains don't need to call and wake them up in the middle of the night to do an emergency baptism if someone requests it.)

What do you think I did?

Let me guess. You got an RC priest to do it?

 

[Herald]

I would not administer the baptism for a few reasons. #1 I'm not a paedobaptist. #2 I consider Roman Catholicism to be apostate and their sacraments apostate signs. #3 I would not want to have the parent believe their child will go to heaven based on baptism. Sadly, this belief is common among Roman Catholics. I used to hold to it when I was RC. As others have said, I would pray with the parent and offer her the comfort that is found only in the Gospel.

 

[steadfast7]

I'd love an answer to a question I posed:

What if a Muslim or Hindu person wanted a protestant chaplain to perform religious rite equivalent to baptism?

Would it be wrong to contact an imam or sadhu to come and take over?

It might shed some light on how damnable we think RC baptism is.

 

[Staphlobob]

As a former Roman Catholic clergyman I learned that baptism was valid only if the person doing it (lay, priest, prot., non-Christian) was, in some way, doing that which was God's will. In the end doing His will - even for apostates - is what matters.

So ... don't call a priest. Don't baptize with the idea of regeneration, which is not God's will. Let the child die. Let the mother cry and scream. Provide comfort with the gospel.

Fini.

 

[Willem van Oranje]

I'd love an answer to a question I posed:

What if a Muslim or Hindu person wanted a protestant chaplain to perform religious rite equivalent to baptism?

Would it be wrong to contact an imam or sadhu to come and take over?

It might shed some light on how damnable we think RC baptism is.

I do not see the two cases as analagous. I would not contact an imam or a sadhu in order for him to perform ritual services. Roman Catholicism is a church in ruins. It is not a mosque or a hindu temple. I see her priests as truly ordained pastors of Christ who are for the most part unfaithful in their calling, practicing wicked idolatry in obedience to the Anti-Christ. They are not a Muslim imam or hindu priest. Baptism is one of the few good things the Roman Priests retain, (though even there, they have added errors to the legitimate institution, as some here have noted.)

 

[Scott1]

Wouldn't a Presbyterian minister of a good denomonation be bound by his oath to a book of church order that probably woudn't allow him to baptize someone outside his church anyway? When my daughter was baptized her mother and I were in the proccess of joining the church and the church got repromanded, not very severly, for that baptism because we were not officially members. Also our view of baptism is that it is not a saving sacrament at all. Therefore recieving of it or not does not affect ones salvation. So if the infant was dying its possible salvation wouldn't be affected by not receiving baptism at all. That is a Roman Catholic view that is driving the mother's distress and as bad as I feel for the mother and her pain I wouldn't do it on the above mentioned reasons but I would try to find a priest for her out of compassion.

Perhaps someone with experience in this can comment.

The constitutionally binding sections in the PCA would prevent anyone in the church from infant baptizing the child of a Roman church member, wouldn't it? Even more so under the false pretenses of the original scenario of this post?

Maybe a Minister, or Teaching Elder can comment on this.

 

[Herald]

As a former Roman Catholic clergyman I learned that baptism was valid only if the person doing it (lay, priest, prot., non-Christian) was, in some way, doing that which was God's will. In the end doing His will - even for apostates - is what matters.

So ... don't call a priest. Don't baptize with the idea of regeneration, which is not God's will. Let the child die. Let the mother cry and scream. Provide comfort with the gospel.

Fini.

Kevin, I don't know whether you're being serious or sarcastic. Either way, I don't know of anything that can comfort more than the Gospel. 2 Corinthians 1 was written to emphasize the comfort that God gives those who believe, through the resurrection (2 Cor. 2:9). The baptism of a dying infant has absolutely zero salvific significance for the child. I've never had to counsel a Roman Catholic parent whose infant child is dying; but if I was in that position I would appeal to them with the comfort that God provides (2 Cor. 1:3, 4) through the resurrection. If the parent is insistent on having their child baptized according to Roman rite, that parent will have to seek out a Roman Catholic priest or baptize the child themselves (which is allowed).

 

[Scott1]

After researching this,

The Council of Trent was a point at which the Roman Church, officially rejected the gospel, and the authority of Scripture.

It also left Scripture on the point of baptism.

So, anyone could baptize, even a heretic, even someone of another religion, if they used a trinitarian pronouncement.

The wrong doctrine that baptism itself saves an infant came later, hence the real fear created that any unbaptized infant who dies in infancy must go to hell, because, the reason goes, because they were not baptized.

It's really hard to believe this is the teaching, but apparently so.

The Catholic teaching based on the Council of Trent, Canon 4:

Extraordinary minister

In case of necessity, baptism can be administered lawfully and validly by any person whatsoever who observes the essential conditions, whether this person be a Catholic layman or any other man or woman, heretic or schismatic, infidel or Jew.

The essential conditions are that the person pour water upon the one to be baptized, at the same time pronouncing the words: "I baptize thee in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." Moreover, he must thereby intend really to baptize the person, or technically, he must intend to perform what the Church performs when administering this sacrament.