Do Catholics Believe That a Baby Is Not Saved Unless Baptized

Why practice Catholics remember Baptism saves?
Why do Catholics baptise babies?
Why simply a sprinkle of water?

Zwingli was the leader of the reformation in Switzerland.

His defense of infant baptism was based on inferences from statements of the early Church Fathers that it was skilful in the early on church building and that it took the place of circumcision. (source: Mainstream Oklahoma Baptists)

Martin Luther was as well a stiff advocate of infant Baptism, to this twenty-four hour period Lutherans baptise babies, as do many of the older Protestant denominations. This article is really for the newer denomination or "not-denominational" folks, who don't like infant Baptism.

How can babe Baptism exist effective if children can't make a personal determination for Christ?

About Evangelicals recollect that Baptism is just an outward sign of a profession of faith. They don't think anything supernatural occurs during Baptism. And then, given their beliefs, it makes sense that Evangelicals recollect that but adults, who consciously proclaim Christ should be baptized. They consider it simply a public witness to their "born once again" determination and since babies can't make that decision, they feel there is no reason for the "sign" of Baptism until they can brand such a decision.

Catholics don't believe Baptism is merely a sign. We believe something very profound and tangible happens during Baptism. Nosotros believe the Bible when it says that Baptism washes away sin. (Acts 22:16) And so for u.s.a., it is non as much about what we give during Baptism (i.e., a profession of faith) merely information technology is about what we get , which is conservancy. We believe this salvation is for babies too. Jesus said "let the little children come to me." (Lk xviii:16)

We didn't cull to be born into humanity merely we even so received the grace of human life. Similarly, Catholics don't call back babies have to consciously cull Baptism in gild to receive its grace.

We didn't choose to be built-in into the sin of Adam, (caused by his disobedience), yet nevertheless we were born into information technology (original sin). In the same mode, Catholics believe that equally infants, we can receive the saving grace of Baptism that was won by Jesus' obedience, without consciously choosing it.

Nosotros don't ask a baby if it wants to eat. We just feed him or her. Nosotros don't ask a baby if it wants its diaper changed, we just change the diaper. We don't inquire a baby if it needs a bath, we simply give the baby a bath when information technology is muddy. Nosotros accept these simple and logical actions to physically clean upwards a baby. Catholics think information technology is even more important to do the aforementioned thing spiritually, through Baptism. We need to let our Lord wash abroad the "original sin" from the babe.

And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every 1 of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you lot and to your children and to all that are far off, every i whom the Lord our God calls to him." (Acts 2:38-39)

Here we encounter that Baptism applies to children. Perhaps some Evangelicals might expect at this text and say the kids in this passage are saved by the parent's Baptism, just then the judgement would non say that the hope is for "all who are far off." Surely, the adult Baptism does not save "all who are far off" also.

Now they were bringing fifty-fifty infants to him that he might bear on them; and when the disciples saw it, they rebuked them. But Jesus chosen them to him, saying, 'Let the children come up to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of God' (Luke 18:15–16).

Here we come across children being brought to Jesus before they were able to brand a personal conclusion for Christ. In Greek information technology is Prosepheron de auto kai ta brepha. The Greek word brepha means "infants." The Lord did non crave these infants to make a personal decision for Christ.

Infant circumcision was the sign of Old Covenant.
Baptism is the sign of the New Covenant.
It makes sense that Baptism includes infants.

Nether Jewish law, the 8 twenty-four hours old child didn't have to make a profession of faith. He was office of a household of organized religion and was thus called by God, and therefore circumcised. Give thanks God for that! We shudder at the thought of being circumcised as an developed ... OUCHHH!!!

The famous Evangelical theologian Frances A. Schaeffer as well maintained that an infant should be baptised considering of Baptism'south correspondence with circumcision.

Jesus was 30 years onetime when he was baptized, so why do Catholics baptize babies?

We got an electronic mail that said:

If Jesus was baptised by John the baptist when he was thirty years and the Holy Spirit came then why is it that Catholics don't do the aforementioned.

Mary and Joseph followed Jewish constabulary (Lk 2:22). They were still nether the Old Covenant, and infant circumcision was its sign. So that's what they did. Mary wouldn't do something that would be bizarre in Jewish Law. She was a devout Jew. The New Covenant was not instituted until Jesus' ministry. And then it was natural that Mary did not follow the New Covenant when performing the ritual on the infant Jesus. Jesus instituted Baptism during his ministry 30 years later.

Before John's ministry, Baptism was not practiced by Jews as such. Baptism was foreshadowed in Jewish law, (i.e., ritual washing when Gentiles became Jews and blood sprinklings to make clean the altar). But John the Baptist was the first guy to really brand Baptism a specific practice. That's where he got his name. John'southward role was that he was "preparing the manner of the Lord." Naturally, that grooming would include a prefiguration of the way that Jesus would salve souls, which Catholics believe is through Baptism. (Acts 2:38, 22:16, ane Pt. 3:21, Mk sixteen:15-16 Acts 2:38) Afterwards Jesus was Baptised, He made Baptism the doorway to conservancy and He sent his disciples to "Go therefore and brand disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Mark 28:19). We presume from Scripture and early Christian writings that that included infants.

Information technology is quite logical that most of the Baptisms in the Bible were on adults since Jesus had just instituted Baptism.

Infant Baptisms predate the 2^nd century

Infant Baptisms predate the 2^nd century and it is quite possible that from the offset of the apostolic preaching, when whole "households" received Baptism, infants may also have been baptized. (Acts 16:15).

I recently visited the Catacombs just outside Rome. The early Christians left of a dandy legacy of their beliefs in pictures. In the photo below in that location is a motion-picture show of an adult baptising a child.

Photo: Chapel of Sacraments "Expanse 3 " of the Crypt of St. Callisto,
Copyright Pontificia Commissione di Archeologia Cristiana, Roma (Used with Permission)

Babe Baptism is recorded in the works of Origen (185-254 A.D.):

"Every soul that is built-in into mankind is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin... In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If at that place were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous."

Thus, from the third century until the 16th century, infant Baptism was the virtually universal practise of Christian churches. The controversy surrounding infant Baptism didn't begin until the 16th century, when the Anabaptists challenged the biblical warrant for this practice. And every denomination including Lutherans, Catholics etc... were against that idea.

Tin the faith of the parents salve the kids without Baptism?

Some Evangelicals believe that the children are covered past the faith of the parents and therefore don't need Baptism. Nosotros got an email from an Evangelical that said:

The bible teaches that a child is covered by God when parents are christians, and when that kid is sometime plenty to understand can then brand that determination on their own.

She believes that the faith of the (Evangelical) parents encompass the child, just at the same time she has a problem with the thought that Cosmic parents, godparents and the customs can stand in the gap for the children in Baptism. This seems counter intuitive.

Be that as it may, she was talking near this passage:

"The unbelieving husband is sanctified past the assertive wife; and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the believing husband; otherwise your children should be unclean; but at present they are holy." (1 Cor seven)

The surrounding text clearly shows that it is not speaking of regenerating or sanctifying grace, but answering questions by the Corinthians concerning the validity of marriages between heathens and believers. It is saying the validity of such marriages is proved from the fact that children built-in of them are legitimate, not illegitimate. The term "sanctified" in this context means To requite social or moral sanction to (www.thefreedictionary.com/sanctified) Nosotros don't think whatsoever Evangelical denomination would say that a hubby is saved past the faith of the wife.

So we don't believe that the faith of the parents saves the kids. However, we do not underestimate the contribution that a solid Christian home makes to the life of a baptised infant. In fact, we require it for Baptism. The Catechism says:

1255 For the grace of Baptism to unfold, the parents' assistance is of import. So too is the role of the godfather and godmother, who must be firm believers, able and ready to aid the newly baptized - child or adult on the road of Christian life.55 Their job is a truly ecclesial role (officium).56 The whole ecclesial community bears some responsibility for the development and safeguarding of the grace given at Baptism.

In a kid Baptism, the parents and the Church intercede for the child (Evangelicals might call it "standing in the Gap"). The parents who are interceding for the Kid hope to bring the child upwards in the organized religion so as to ready the child for this hereafter mature decision for Christ, to the  best of their abilities. Catholics feel that Jesus' generosity and the parents/Church building'due south intercession along with the expectation that the kid will make a personal decision for Christ when they are capable of doing and then (1st Communion or Confirmation), combined with God's Grace and love of children, make the Baptism valid and wins conservancy for the child.

Nosotros do believe that God is a merciful God. The Catechism says:

"As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church building can only entrust them to the mercy of God, every bit she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come up to me, exercise not hinder them," allows the states to hope that there is a style of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more than urgent is the Church's call not to foreclose footling children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism."

We don't believe this mercy would necessarily be contingent on the faith of the parents, just rather on the Lord'due south great mercy for, and love of children.

Personal sin vs. original sin

Some Evangelical denominations (thankfully not too many) think "Separation from God" is a consequence of personal sin and therefore they believe that before the age of reason anybody is bound for heaven. Catholics believe that humanity's "Separation from God" is the result of "original sin" from Adam and Eve, our first parents. Catholics believe nosotros are born into "original sin," we inherit it. If original sin is the source of our damnation and so we are born with information technology. We don't think children should be without the grace of Jesus. That is why Catholics baptise babies "in the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost." The Bible says:

Surely I was born sinful, a sinner when my female parent conceived me. (Psm 51:5)

We meet many Evangelical parents seem to intuitively understand that we are born into sin, and teach their children to surrender to Jesus, even earlier the children empathize what that means. Catholics think the best manner to protect the child spiritually is to baptise them.

If we go onto a kindergarten playground and ask children the difference between a "adept boy" and a "bad boy", they volition tell us "a good boy is nice, he doesn't steal, and a bad boy takes things and is mean." Nosotros are built-in with a propensity to sin and it shows up long before the historic period of reason. Nosotros recall this is original sin.

Why practise Catholics but cascade h2o on the caput instead of a full dunk?

The official Cosmic educational activity is a full dunk is the best fashion:

...Baptism is performed in the most expressive way past triple immersion in the baptismal water. Even so, from ancient times it has also been able to be conferred by pouring the water iii times over the candidate'southward head. (Catechism 1339)

Virtually new churches today have a big baptismal fountain for a full douse.

Ascension Roman Catholic Parish, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

We got an e-mail that said:

Check out the scriptures in the new testament. It teaches that the full immersion is a meaning doing earlier God, when one reaches a mature age to take Christ, then baptism follows, considering the old life has gone and a new one in Christ ...In the new testament there is no scripture to support the Catholic sprinkling.

Actually, There is biblical precedence. Paul says "with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water." (Heb 10:22) Leading up to that department he talks about the Jewish people sprinkling blood on the curl, and on the tent, and vessels of worship to cleanse them. (Heb nine:nineteen)

The early Christian Didache says:

And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, cognominate 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 and then in cold water, do so in warm. But if yous accept neither, pour out h2o three times upon the head into the name of Male parent and Son and Holy Spirit. But earlier the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but y'all shall order the baptized to fast 1 or ii days before. (Didache 7, 140 A.D.)

There is nowhere in Scripture that information technology forbids pouring water on the head as a valid Baptism. On the other mitt there numerous mention'southward of sprinkling with respect to Jewish cleansing rituals, which are precursors to Baptism.

What baffles the states is that Evangelicals claim that Baptism is only a symbolic human activity, still endeavor to be literal when it comes to Baptism being a full douse. This seems to exist symbolic nigh the wrong matter and literal nigh the wrong thing. To take this to its logical conclusion, even the tank of h2o is inadequate. Only a river would exist adequate considering that's probably the style it happened in the Bible. To those who do the full river, nosotros would say, perhaps only sure rivers are ok, (i.e., the Hashemite kingdom of jordan). To those who travel to the Jordan, maybe only a certain 4 human foot square section where Jesus was baptised should exist ok.

Catholics recall the important affair is that they are baptized with water and Spirit (Jn iii:5). Beneath (left) is Leonardo's pouring of Jesus' Baptism. In the picture from in the Catacomb (right) from the kickoff centuries, they are doing a sprinkling of h2o, non a full dunk. This practice of pouring h2o goes back a long style.

__

If yous have inverse to a denomination that requires full immersion and they want to re-baptize you considering you take been previously baptised in a denomination by pouring water on the head (in the proper noun of the Father Son and the Holy Ghost), the nigh you volition go out of the full immersion is a dainty bathroom and lots of congratulations from the congregation. The Holy Spirit already showed up the first time around.

Having said that, I'thou actually glad the fundamentalists are out at that place doing Baptisms because the Lord requires it for salvation. What we Catholics do take literally is that Baptism is necessary to Conservancy. That is something that is clearly stated in Scripture. (Acts 2:38-39)

What virtually the necessity of being born again to be saved?

In the article "Are Catholics built-in over again?" we explain that the Catholic Church building teaches the necessity of a personal surrender to Jesus, once someone is capable of agreement what it means to make that commitment. We doubtfulness if someone can go along the grace of Baptism if they are not engaged in an ongoing human relationship with Christ. More nearly that below. If y'all haven't fabricated a personal give up to Jesus y'all can practise that here. However, we believe the critical moment of salvation is Baptism. In his #1 selling Evangelical volume, The Purpose Driven Life, Pastor Rick Warren said:

For years I wondered why Jesus' Slap-up Commission gives the same prominence to baptism as it does to the slap-up tasks of Evangelism and edification...(The Purpose Driven Life, pg 120)

Catholics experience they have Biblical answers to that. We think the Lord is proverb that Baptism is the disquisitional moment of salvation. In the New Testament we encounter a connection betwixt salvation and Baptism. (Acts ii:38, 22:16, i Pt. 3:21, Mk 16:15-16 Acts 2:38). We think Scripture points to that, and we run into no restriction to adults only.

"Be baptized, and wash away thy sins." (Acts 22:16)

Christ loved the Church, and delivered Himself upwards for it: that he might sanctify it, cleansing information technology by the washing of water in the give-and-take of life: that he might nowadays information technology to Himself a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing; simply that it should be holy and without blemish." (Eph v:25)

"Baptism . . . at present saves you, not equally a removal of dirt from the torso but as an appeal to God for a articulate conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." (ane Peter three:21)

The prophecy of Ezekiel has also been understood to speak about Baptism:

"I volition cascade upon you clean water, and you lot shall be cleansed from all your filthiness" (inquinamentis) (Ezekiel 36:25)

The prophet is unquestionably speaking of moral defilements.

"In that day a fountain will be opened for the business firm of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for impurity" (Zechariah 13:1).

"Launder me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin"  (Psalms 51:two).

Catholics expect at the journey of water through the Old Testament including the not bad flood that cleansed the world. They feel that these were foreshadowings of Baptism in the New Testament.(Gen.1:ane-2, half-dozen:5, 8:23, ix:9, Ex 3:4, Is12:two-3,1 Pt 3:20,ane Cor. 10:2) Particularly, Peter makes the connection between the great flood and Baptism in 1 Peter 3:20-21.

...who in onetime times did not obey, when God waited patiently in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water. And baptism, which this prefigured, now saves you—not as a removal of clay from the body, but equally an appeal to God for a expert censor, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, ...

Here we encounter the express relationship of water Baptism to salvation and as well the foundation of the required entreatment and "heart" behind the Baptism. When we baptise in the proper noun of the "Father Son and the Holy Ghost" we are making this appeal. Baptism requires not only water, but the words "Male parent Son and the Holy Ghost" and the intention of baptising. Catholics don't believe we are save by h2o alone. In Catholic theology all three of these things are necessary for a valid Baptism (water, words and intention). We think this passage outlines the necessity of water and of the appeal. When the eunuchs were traveling along the road and Philip evangelized them, one of them said

"Wait expect, at that place is h2o! What is to prevent me from existence baptized?' ...when they came up out of the h2o the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away. The eunuch saw him no more than and went on his way rejoicing" (Acts eight:36-forty)

The eunuch was hit with the Holy Spirit. For the Eunuch the born again experience included a water Baptism.

15  And he said to them, "Become into all the world and proclaim the adept news to the whole creation. 16  The ane who believes and is baptized volition be saved; but the one who does not believe will exist condemned.

It is a cardinal principle in mathematics and logic that the discussion "and" is a joining word. If we require a credit card and an email account to brand an online payment, both are necessary. If either is missing we will not be able to consummate the transaction. In this instance, Catholics believe Peter uses the discussion "and" to join belief and Baptism every bit the necessary elements of conservancy. The line after that "the one who does not believe volition be condemned" in no manner diminishes that clan. If either of them is missing there is no salvation. In this instance belief is missing and the person is condemned. It's similar proverb "the i who has a credit carte and an email accost will be accepted for this online transaction but the one who does not have an email address will be denied." Martin Luther, indicates Baptism to exist more than a symbolic gesture. He said that  Baptism...

"...works the forgiveness of sins, delivers from death and the devil, and grants eternal salvation...."

Baptism doesn't means every "card carrying" Catholic with a Baptismal Certificate is saved. Non at all. Catholics believe that the saving grace of Baptism can exist easily lost through rebellion, complacency, sin, and disbelief (for case in nominal or cultural Catholics). Ane trouble of being a 2000 year old church building is that some people are born into the faith simply have very little actual connectedness to it. The saving and redemptive powers imparted by the Holy Spirit during Baptism bring with them the expectation that the Baptised person will brand an adult choice for Jesus equally soon as they accomplish the age of reason. In theory, this should happen at confirmation (nigh x years old) merely in reality it ordinarily happens later during a personal crunch of some sort. My (Hugh) surrender to Jesus happened when I was 27 years erstwhile. That's when I actually encountered him. Many true-blue "practicing Catholics", have had a "conversion of heart" experience which akin to the Evangelical "born again" feel. The Church expects this to happen and also requires it.

Conversionto Christ, the new birth of Baptism, the gift of the Holy Spirit and the Body and Claret of Christ received as food have made united states "holy and without blemish," but as the Church building herself, the Bride of Christ, is "holy and without blemish." Nonetheless the new life received in Christian initiation has not abolished the frailty and weakness of human nature, nor the inclination to sin that tradition callsconcupiscence, which remains in the baptized such that with the help of the grace of Christ they may prove themselves in the struggle of Christian life. This is the struggle ofconversiondirected toward holiness and eternal life to which the Lord never ceases to phone call the states. (Catechism 1426)

We got an email that said:

Cornelius was saved earlier he was baptized. Acts ten:47 states that he "received" the Holy Spirit...Too Cornelius spoke in tongues before he was baptized (Acts 10:44-48). This New Testament souvenir is given to those "in the church building" (1 Corinthians 12:28)

This is a good point. Information technology shows that Cornelius received the gifts of the Spirit, but Scripture tells the states that having the gift of the Holy Spirit, does not necessarily mean someone is saved. Mathew vii:22 says:

On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we non prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and practise many deeds of power in your name?' So I will declare to them, 'I never knew you lot; go abroad from me, you evil doers.' "

The New Testament Christians that Jesus talks nigh in this passage declared Jesus to exist Lord. They received gifts of the Holy Spirit. They could not have bandage out demons if they were not filled with the Holy Spirit. Yet they were not saved. It appears that there was another disquisitional event that needed to occur for them to receive salvation. We Catholics suggest that event is Baptism.

Tin can the Grace of Baptism be Lost?

Baptism does not guarantee salvation. Catholics don't recollect conservancy is guaranteed until the day we dice (more about that in the "Born Again" department). Baptism brings with information technology an expectation that nosotros volition truly surrender our lives to Jesus as we mature, so in a sense Catholics agree with Evangelicals that it is necessary for each private to make their own "personal" determination for Christ once they become emotionally and intellectually capable of understanding what that commitment is. Theoretically, that point is at Confirmation, but for many Catholics, it comes much later, usually during a personal crisis where we really have a "conversion of heart" and give up to Jesus (Canon 1428,1430), similar to what an Evangelical would call being "Born Once again".

After being baptized as an infant, and as the kid grows and matures, they will exist faced with a choice.

(1) Maintaining that Grace through conscious contact with God (conversion of heart-which is roughly equivalent to being "born once again") or:

(2) Decline the Grace of Baptism by choosing to sin, through complacency, or rebellion.

If they pass up it, they lose the grace that they were granted at Baptism and will lose salvation. (That's what's happened to a bunch of 'Cultural Catholics' who don't know the Lord and never pray or become to Church.) Unless they reconcile, they will be lost. The "conversion of heart" experience that sustains a personal relationship with Jesus is very similar to what an Evangelical would phone call "born over again." If you lot have never made a personal commitment to Christ. If you take never asked him into your heart and to be Lord of your life, I encourage you to do that now.

Catholics feel nosotros "must endure to the end" (2 Titus 2:12) rather than the "once saved, ever saved" theory. Simply Catholics believe God never forgets the indelible seal that is imparted at Baptism and is always calling and waiting for the states to turn to Him.

In my testimony, I explain that I didn't surrender my life to Jesus until I was 28 years old. Looking back on my life I see the many times God saved me from dangerous circumstances. Recently, I was at a party talking about this and a Catholic girl said "were you baptized as a baby?" I said "yep, my parents were Presbyterians." She said "God never forgets the Baptism of his children, even if you don't remember. He protects, waits and hopes for his baptized children to plough dorsum to him." I got shivers when she said that. It felt and then true. If you accept young children I urge you to baptize them. Instructions are at the cease of this article. You lot don't accept to be Catholic to do and if yous vest to a denomination where the pastor doesn't practice it you can exercise it yourself. The next fourth dimension the children are in the tub just take some h2o, pray to Jesus and say, "(Name) I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit." It might be the best 10 seconds of quality time you'll ever spend with your kids :-)

What is a valid Baptism? Sacramental validity requires these things:

1. proper course,
2. matter,
3. intent,
4. and a minister.

Proper Class: The proper form for Baptism is the Trinitarian formula (Matt. 28:19), i.eastward. the minister of the sacrament says "(name), I baptize yous in the proper name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit/Ghost" or "the retainer of God, (name), is baptized in the proper name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit/Ghost" (c.f. Catechism #1240).

Matter: The proper affair for Baptism is water. The recipient may be completely immersed, partially dunked, or have the h2o poured over him past the government minister (c.f. Canon #1239) while the proper formula is spoken.

Intention: The minister'due south intention must be to do what the Church does, i.e. to baptize (c.f. Catechism #1256). Orthodox conventionalities about the sacrament and faith in its efficacy are not required for the intention to exist valid (c.f. 1993 Directory on Ecumenism 95b).

Government minister: The ordinary minister for Baptism is a priest or deacon, but Baptism may exist validly administered by any person, fifty-fifty a non-Christian (c.f. Catechism #1256). "Any person" does not include the recipient. A person cannot baptize himself or herself. (The recipient of Baptism, simply for the record, may be any living person who is non already baptized. c.f. Catechism #1247.)

Let'south pray together:

Oh Father, please let the states love i another, let united states piece of work together to build Your Kingdom, allow united states of america build a new promise that will forge relationships that cut across denominations and heal the hurting of our partition. Let united states be one in You every bit You are One in u.s.a..

Jesus, Male monarch of Kings, Lord of Lords, nosotros praise Your Mighty Name and comprehend one another in Your Love. Amen!

Related articles

1. Flowchart of Catholic Doctrine
2. Born again Catholics?
3. Are non-Christians saved?

lucasfifixt.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.catholicbridge.com/catholic/infant-baptism.php

Share this post