Actually it's the Communication Workers Union

I stand corrected

Actually it doesn't need to be renounced at all.

At a baptism the Godparents and parents state they will try to bring the child up in the ways of the church. The child has no choice so has no need to feel remotely "blighted"

Then if the child wishes, they can then become confirmed. It is at this confirmation you become a fully fledged member of the church, so to speak.

However as most of these ceremonies take place when the child is rarely at an age to make an informed decision (normally before puberty) then even that should be considered rather tenuous at least.

I have never felt the need to renounce anything and I have been both baptised and confirmed

Oh boy.

Undone? By whom and how?

Baptism's supposed to be repenting your sins and accepting christ as your saviour. How can a baby or young child be expected to underatand the concept of sin let alone give them up (what sins does a baby commit anyway?) and do they really need a saviour? The law won't hold you to a contract if your under 18, but the church expects you to sell your soul to jesus when you're still in nappies.

But that's just it the original church didn't, the practice of baptising kids goes back to 3AD, before that it was adults, anyway this is going off topic, perhaps the mods could split it?

http://www.freethinker.co.uk/2008/06/27/di...s-of-the-mouse/

Not quite.

Its the Godparents job to make sure the child is is bought up in the faith and its why a child under the age of 7 can be buried in a white coffin, simply because they are deemed without any sin.

It is also why many priests these days prefer adult baptism.

Its been a long time since the church (at least the Anglican) considered the lack of baptism a reason for a child to go to limbo should they have the misfortune of dying.

The Roman Catholic church abolished limbo last year.

The Pope ends state of limbo after 800 years

What did they need the real estate for all the priest caught doing things they shouldn't have?

I was baptised and confirmed and see the former as an excuse for my parents to show off at a posh party (my Godparents never did anything at all) and the latter as teenage tomfoolery. No need to regret or renounce; it's completely meaningless in my life. It did used to kind of niggle at the back of my mind years ago, but when I read the Bible cover to cover I came to the conclusion that the whole thing was just a death/messiah sect of Judaism, extended to non Jews by St Paul (if I remember rightly) against the wishes of some early Christians, and nothing to do with the words of Jesus. Thence brought to England by the Romans. I had a kind of revelation (if you'll pardon the pun) that it really was nothing whatsoever to do with me, and a slight feeling of being cheated which gradually diminished to nothing. It is now of no more consequence to my life than Jainism, or Hinduism.



Ah you'd be surprised - door keys down the lav, cat food in mother's hair, eating tree bark - at least 10 hail marys a piece if you're that way inclined

Edited for shit grammar

No. Originally baptism was a sign that the household had accepted the Christian faith. After the Biblical period, in the early church, it was given to individuals rather than households, and only after coaching and preparation - sometimes for a year. It was accompanied by confirmation and administered by a bishop. As things developed, and there weren't enough bishops to baptise everyone, confirmation got split off and children were baptised to ensure they went to heaven on death.

The actual rite of individual entry into the faith is confirmation. The Roman Catholic church will not administer this until 'the age of reason', which they place at around seven years old. The church of England tends not to give confirmation below teenage.

I was confirmed as an adult, and purely because, under canon law, I could not be on the PCC (the body which governs a church together with the churchwardens and priest) unless confirmed. I told the bishop this at the sherry party the night prior to confirmation and he didn't have a problem, being one of the more liberal bishops in the CofE. We had a civilised discussion about the theological basis for the sacrament and whether it was 'fit for purpose'.

Once confirmed, abandoning one's faith is termed 'apostasy'. An apostate is held to have denied the Holy Spirit (who is conferred on the individual on confirmation) and so be irredeemable and a dead cert for hell, unlike those who have not been confirmed.

Ive not been baptised, but Ive not been Wiccaned either!
I guess it doesnt matter what happens to the baby in this context, eventually they will grow up and make their own decisions!

Wiccaned?

In school in Ireland we were taught that baptism is needed to cleanse the baby's soul of "original sin" by which they meant Adam and Eve's sin by disobeying the lord god by eating the forbidden fruit.


OMG I just realised after I typed that, that I had quoted word for word the parish priests weekly sermon at school Looks like the beatings worked

I was baptised and confirmed, I do not feel the need to renounce anything, I was seriously not aware that any other religion existed until I was 15!! I thought all people were catholic, never even knew about protestants properly, I was brought up thinking they were devil worshippers, nevermind paganism! So I could hardly make an informed decision.

Two of my daughters have been baptised (my ex is catholic) and I fully expect them to have the holy communion ceremony and confirmation, life at school is hard enough without confusing them in a strict catholic school where they would be made outcasts. I fully intend on answering thier questions if they ask, it's doubtful though and my ex knows that I will let them be brought up catholic until they are old enough to objectively understand my faith. They are not around me enough to learn by witnessing. Holy communion is a big thing for 7 year olds, not one child in my, my sisters and cousins and even my girls schools, have never made their first communion, the beautiful dresses etc, I look at it now as dress up, I don't believe that them being brought up like that will prevent them from being pagan later if they wish and I certainly don't see why they would have to renounce anything, at that age you trust your parents completely and you do what they want, it's not always a reflection of your own beliefs.
If all three of my girls faith was pagan when they grow up it wouldn't make Roisin any better than Ava and Cait just because she hasn't been baptised into the xtian faiths.

I did the full works, including adult baptism by emersion in my 20s. I did do a little ritual to mark the end of my time as a Christian. It was very meaningful and helpful to me but not something I *needed* to do if you know what I mean.

Looks like Christianity is winning now

http://www.renounce-your-religion.com/home.aspx

Don't you mean Christianity is losing???

We (Aborigines) do not have to bring a baby to God. That implies that there can be separation.

In your Christian baptisms, the priest puts a cross on the third eye of the baby. This closes the spiritual connection, so the child must go through an intermediary to connect with the divine.

The white man's way literally turns people into a flock who have no option but to follow the priest.

In our traditional way everyone is connected to 'The Great Spirit'.

(Diana Cooper, Codes of Power)


When I read this it made an impression on me. Just thought I would share it with you

My dad is a lapsed RC and mum is a (very) High Church Anglican but they let us make our own choices with regards to churches etc but it had to be Christian.
In my family you had to choose whether or not you wanted to be baptised at about nine years old and whether you wanted to be confirmed later, a tradition I carried on with my children.
Two of my brothers and myself were baptised and confirmed into the HCA faith and my younger brother chose to do neither.
When we were younger we three did go to Mass at least four times a week, (my eldest brother was a Thurifer heading for the priesthood and even I was heading for the nunnery at one point! Well at least I was til I found out that that was what you got. Nun! lol )
My daughter was both baptised and confirmed and my son chose to be baptised but not confirmed.
The whole of my family (not so much a family tree as a mangrove swamp) follow the same line. We don't baptise babies.
To me, personally, it seems that it's only the Hatches, Matches and Dispatches (Christenings, weddings and funeral) brigade that want to do that sort of thing and it's usually for the show-off value and the parties and presents afterwards. They don't bother going to church unless it's to get young 'Sebastian' or 'Gemima' into a good school and don't really believe in it at all.

The last 2 churches I was in didn't baptise babies. One was a non-denominational charismatic church, the other AOG pentecostal. They dedicate babies and baptise by immersion once they are old enough to decide for themselves (usually early teens and up). Seems like a much better way to do it to me.