LONDON-L Archives

Archiver > LONDON > 2005-11 > 1133029097


From: Charani <>
Subject: Re: [Lon] Baptized twice
Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 18:20:05 +0000
References: <hDLeWPARtJiDFwSN@varneys.demon.co.uk> <43889F22.8000208@charani.plus.com> <61FCD523-CAED-4115-9289-F5580334A04F@adelphia.net>
In-Reply-To: <61FCD523-CAED-4115-9289-F5580334A04F@adelphia.net>


Paula Goodfellow wrote:
> Perhaps the little guy just seemed so neglected in general that they
> figured he probably hadn't been baptized either.

Maybe.

> Now a question from
> me-- I've heard that people believed that children who weren't baptized
> went to hell, even tiny babies-- is that true? And if so, why did some
> people wait so long to have them baptized? I've got some ancestors who
> took two or three children in at a time, when the oldest was about 8.

The story I heard was that babies were not only baptised into God's
family but also to stop their bodies being used for unholy purposes.
That doesn't account for why some babies were baptised within a week
of their birth but others were very much older. Parental beliefs
perhaps??

This thread: