HOME  Why its a mistake to give the Catholic Church support via membership or donations



When you agree with the Church insulting babies in the whitewashing baptismal ceremony you can't complain about it insulting you or anything else about you be it your sexuality or whatever. Instead of, "Welcome to this world you precious little angel and we accept you and honour you unconditionally", it is, "You are outside God's Church, you are not one of his people. You are in the same state as Adam was after he sinned so grievously against God. You will always be damaged. To help stop you becoming the evil thing you would become we heal you in baptism. Now that you are baptised you are one of us." You cannot accuse a baby of being justly rejected by God unless you are putting faith before evidence and before your natural instincts which are to adore the child as an angel. Baptism is the vow to make the religion come before people and to judge as the religion judges and to believe what it believes.
Most Christians take babies to church to have water poured over them by a minister or priest who says, "I baptise you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit". 
The Roman Catholic Church claims that baptism is a big deal.
It says it is of utmost importance to be baptised for it makes you a member of God's one true family of love the Catholic Church. This membership confers the alleged benefits of the sacraments - you can't get any sacraments without baptism. And the benefits of having the Catholic Church to teach you for God guards the pope and the bishops from doctrinal or moral error under certain conditions.
It says that baptism infuses faith in the teaching God gives you through the Church. It gives a miraculous inclination to obey the Church and thus it obligates you to support Church doctrine to remain Catholic.
It says that baptism removes and heals much of the tendency to despise God's laws that we have from the first moment of our existence.
It says that baptism forgives original sin and if this is not done the baby will not go to Heaven if he or she dies.
It says baptism makes God dwell in you and gives you your best friend who matters more than your parents or anybody else.
Catholic doctrine is very serious matter when deliberately choosing to reject it will land you in Hell forever.
To agree with the Church that your baby should be baptised is to say that the Church has authority to teach. It would then be a mockery of the ceremony to have your baby undergo it while intending to raise the baby to pick and choose as it suits from the Catholic faith. 
If we could persuade society to stop bringing babies to clergy for baptism we would manage to avert much of the damage that religion is accountable for and get rid of its dangerous influence. Religion uses infant baptism to accustom society and desensitise it in relation to the exploitation and manipulation of the vulnerable children. People bring their babies to get them baptised and promise to have them conditioned to follow the teachings of the denomination providing the baptism. The result is that people are reluctant to protest against the unfair advantage over the child's mind that the religion seeks. They are reluctant to protest against religion's plot to keep the child away from truth if the religion doesn't have the truth.
We are not saying that stopping infant baptism will stop the indoctrination of children. But it does stop an attempt to use baptism to justify that indoctrination. We are saying that once we get infant baptism stopped it will be easier to stop indoctrination.
It is nobody's business, not even the parents's, what a child believes. Parents might condition their children to live and think like Catholics but that is not making them real believers. It is nobody's business what a child believes for no amount of conditioning can make a child truly believe. It may make the child think he or she believes. Conditioning or indoctrinating means you are hypnotised into agreeing with something while belief means you came to agree through thinking and considering valid evidence and logic. Real belief comes from freedom and free inquiry.
If you are forced by your parents or others to have your child baptised then be firm. Tell them that it is a mockery of the child to put them through something you think is meaningless and that you take baptism seriously. Tell them you will not mock a religion by going through the motions. Tell them it is not good for the child if you commit them to a religion and have no intention of nurturing this commitment. It is bad enough to choose religion for a child if you do believe. But it is terrible if your belief is weak. And it is even worse if you do not believe. And if you know the religion is balderdash - well nothing bad enough can be said about that!
Some religious parents think that babies should be baptised to make them children of God so that they will know God loves them. The insinuation is that a child as a person isn't great and needs a God to be good. They urge the child to want to be loved by God and they express that intention during the baptism of the child. But wanting to be loved is loving yourself and putting yourself before God. Jesus said that the greatest commandment is for us to love God totally and above ourselves and people. This tells you that Christianity is not about you needing God to love you. It is not about you needing to love God for that implies that you should love him to satisfy a need in yourself. It is about what God needs. Thus we see that Christian parents should be only worried about the child loving God. If they are not then they are not consenting properly or validly to the baptism. No sane person would be capable of wanting their child to love God and not care about being loved. The religion of the baby baptisers is idolatry and hypocrisy. Atheists who refuse to have their children baptised are avoiding the cruelty of Christian parents.
Baptism represents the view that the sacrament of baptism is more important to a child than getting the doctor or protecting the child from a murderer or paedophile. It is anti-human. Instead of being on your knees, instead of giving sacraments and baptising, instead of receiving sacraments and being baptised, instead of reading and kissing bibles, instead of trying to believe dogmas about a man who supposedly came back from the dead, go and do good works. Make those your dogmas and prayers. The epistle of James the Apostle in the Bible says that true religion is doing good works - if he proclaimed faith in the resurrection of Jesus it was not that he considered that resurrection important. Most people are decent enough and don't have the sacraments. God didn't need Christianity that badly when the vast majority of the people who have ever lived lived and survived and did good without it and the faith is only a couple of thousand years old when man has been around for millions of years.
Considering few people and few religions could have a correct belief the child is just being entered in on a path of what is probably error and based on lies. Is it not manipulative to enter a child into the authority of a religion that most people in the world don't believe in? It is not even worse to enter a child into a religion like Roman Catholicism that few Catholics themselves understand or would willingly join if they knew what it really taught and knew the nasty implications of Catholic doctrine. Most Catholics don't care much for the faith and pick and choose.
It is vile to enter a child to a faith that can't prove it isn't just more manmade claptrap. Take the pope. He doesn't know if Catholicism is true. He only believes, assuming he is sincere, that his beliefs came from God through men and aren't simply the inventions of men. He admits he cannot prove that birth-control is so bad that you should prefer to get AIDS than to use it to protect yourself. He admits he cannot prove that we are not obligated to live a basic life so that we can send all we can to the poor. It doesn't even bother him that Jesus would have been horrified at his attitude (I'd say Jesus would be as bad but if Jesus is as gentle and good as the pope pretends then that version of Jesus would be horrified!). He admits that beliefs can be wrong but he refuses to take the safe side and have his beliefs but take care in case he is wrong. He should for example provide for people who listen to him on birth control and give them money to deal with the consequences of this obedience. He should part with all he has for the sake of the poor even if he thinks he is not obligated for he only thinks it and could be wrong. To enter a child into religion is to make the child less moral not more moral. If you want your beliefs you must take on the obligations that come with them. If you don't want your child to have those heavy obligations then don't have her or him baptised unless you want her or him to be a hypocrite and being a hypocrite leads to bigotry. If a child is made a Christian by baptism, that child is to support and represent a strict and frightening code of morality and doctrine. Remember that Jesus said that the Pharisees and scribes were bad for giving burdensome teaching and not living it themselves. If you require the rich to give money to the poor, be harder on yourself and give even more than what you require of others.
Jesus promised us that he would give us the truth and the truth would set us free. This freedom was supposed to mean we would enjoy doing his will and find it easier with the help of God. This is the Christian answer to those who wonder how one could be called free if one's marriage breaks up and one is not allowed by Jesus to remarry or if one is forbidden to use contraception to avoid a pregnancy that is likely to be fatal or when the baby is unlikely to survive. But all these rules one would not have if one was not religious or not very religious can hardly be described as freedom. If you feel free in your religion that does not mean you are actually free. The best way to keep people in bondage is to make them feel free. Slaves frequently felt free in the past despite being slaves. The worst bondage is bondage during which you feel free but when you actually are not - ie when you are drunk for then you are not you. A person or God who really loves you will give you freedom. God will not care if you get baptised or not. The Christian God claims to be love but he actually is not.
If baptism works we have the right and responsibility to know how it works. There are no sensible or rational reasons. The Church gives dogmatic reasons, "Oh Jesus died to get help from God for us for our sins and that help is given out in baptism". Those really amount to trickery in the form of circular arguments like, "Baptism works for we say it does. And we say it works for it does work." Baptism is a denial of our rights and those of our children.
If somebody grows up and wishes to make his or her baptism ineffectual, he or she is renouncing the power of God and rejecting salvation. Such a one will be damned in Hell forever according to the doctrine of the Catholic Church. The idea of baptism having saving mystical power is an intimidating and bullying one.
To entrust your child to a religion that puts religion before people when it accuses the unbaptised of not having God and his protection against evil in them and of not being members of God's Church or community is child abuse. It is putting the religion before the child. If the child embraces that evil, the child should embrace the other religious evils too.
Atheists should admit that they are doing wrong by living lives of comfort and relative luxury while the poor need help. We can do that. Religion can't. It builds churches and pays priests and prints Bibles and prayer books and so on. At least as bad as we Atheists are we are hiding nothing and are not saying we approve of what we do.
Christian doctrine says that the Church is the mystical body of Christ and are supernaturally united. This follows the teaching of the apostle Paul and Jesus himself which say that if a part of the body is sick the whole body is sick. So Catholics cannot pretend that the sins of the clergy are not their responsibility. If your king declares war, because you are under his authority and associate yourself with it you are responsible. He declares war on your behalf. The sins of the clergy which have included the worst kind of child sexual abuse only happened because the laity gave them the support and power and the position they abused. Do you want to make your child responsible in a sense for clerical sex abuse by enrolling that child in the Catholic Church membership by baptism?
If you join a community, it is the community's business what you think, believe and do in relation to religion. It is everybody in the community's business if a baptised child gets a bit bigger and starts to scoff at religion. It is their business because baptism entered the child into their community. It is their business because baptism is a promise to believe what the community believes and stand by the community.
Christians have so little enthusiasm for their faith that they don't bother running after those who fall away from the Church. But baptism gives them the right and authority to order you if you are baptised to believe and do what the Church wants. They have the right to be offended and to hate your sin if you leave the Church. In fact they have the duty to. Infant baptism is about control. It still is. It is just that most Christians are so disobedient that the controlling can't be done. But it was done in the past and it might be done again. And in many parts of the world it still happens. But disobedient or not, baptism is blessing and condoning and encouraging the pressure put on you by the religious community you are in. It is still subjecting the child to a degrading and bigoted principle.
Baptism removes or seeks to remove the right of the child to autonomy and to form her or his own relationships and religious or non-religious opinions. It is putting serious obligations on the child without the child's consent. It isn't fair.
Religions like most Christian Churches and others which claim children as members have no right to do so. The practice of a baby for example being counted say a Roman Catholic at baptism shows contempt for the child and what the child may need.  Even more so the harsher a religion is. It is bad to baptise a child into a liberal Protestant Church that believes everybody will be saved eventually and that if you die estranged from God and go to Hell you will get out of it sometime. But it is diabolical to baptise a child into Roman Catholicism which teaches that it is possible that most people go to Hell forever for dying in sin and that you should prefer to get AIDS than use condoms to protect yourself even during rape and that you should believe that the Law of God in the Bible given to the Jews that demanded ritual murder on God's authority was right.

You wouldn't vaccinate a child with a vaccine that is dangerous or whose effectiveness is not based on reliable study. Yet religion says a baby should be entered into religion to vaccinate it against evil and error - error meaning any opinion that differs from the official teaching of the religion. 
People say if you are obese and you really want to lose weight you will do it. Others say that you do really want it but don't want it enough if you fail to succeed. With God it would be different. If God exists then if you really want him you will find him and believe all his truth and practice all his ways and obey his religion because he helps you to want him. If you don't want him enough then it is because you are fighting him and sinning.
To say you can do anything if you really want to is to burden people. We want to do things but we often fail through weakness or error. But if God exists and provides superhuman power for us if we want it there is no excuse. The atheist wife can understand if her husband forgets her birthday. The religious wife is being inconsistent with her religion if she understands. Her husband turned away from the inspirations and guidance and help of God. Can you see the amount of trouble the doctrine of divine grace can cause? Baptism is an expression and a declaration that the doctrine of grace is true.
We are said by believers in God to want God and he alone can fulfil our need. They say then that baptism makes that want stronger for it heals our tendency to go about fulfilling our needs without God - which is sin. But those who are baptised don't feel any different from those who are? They don't find their struggle against temptations suddenly being strengthened. Baptism bases Christianity on lies.
Religion thrives more on people joining it and not taking it seriously than on people joining it and following it properly and being real members who believe all they are supposed to believe. Each religion has few orthodox devotees and any that are orthodox are often orthodox for the wrong reason which makes their orthodoxy count for little or nothing. What is the point of zealously promoting the pope as the head of the Church if you are only doing it in the hope of seeing society controlled by religion better?
Most baptised people feel no inclination to believe and do precisely what their baptismal vows committed them to do. They pick and choose. If you can pick and choose, then why attach importance to baptism? Why is it not optional? To baptise a child is to confess there is an authority that should not be questioned and to attempt to embroil the child into the control of that authority. It is a declaration that there is an infallible religious authority - the Bible for Protestants and the Pope and the Bible and the bishops for Catholics. It is a declaration that that authority must be obeyed without question. And then the religious complain about the Nazis holding that their leaders were virtually infallible!
The Church demands that babies be baptised. It claims that baptism has mystical and supernatural power to heal the babies of spiritual harm. Where is the research to back this claim up? The priests are quacks. They claim that spiritual health is the most important health of all for Jesus said that it profits a man nothing to gain the whole world and lose out spiritually. If they can be quacks then why should the medical quacks who look up to them worry? What a lovely example baptism sets for the world!
Baptism is supposed to heal the effects of sin and protect a child from error and evil. We see no difference between baptised and unbaptised children. In fact Muslims are often holier than baptised people. The doctrine of baptism's healing potencies is laced with bigotry.
The Catholic Church says that baptism washes away original sin and cures the child of much of the tendency to sin which is why it baptises infants. The Bible itself never says that baptism does that for the baptism it stresses is the baptism in the Holy Spirit. ďUnless a man be born again of water and the spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of GodĒ, does not imply infant baptism because of the spirit bit and you have to personally respond to the spirit as a person who knows what is happening. The water could be the water in the womb and Jesus is speaking in a passage filled with figurative language and poetry so he could be talking this way to get across that you need the Spirit to be saved as much as you need to exist from water and be born before you can be a citizen of the kingdom of Heaven. Peter said that baptism saves as the appeal to God for a clear conscience which only means that baptism in water is a sign of repentance and true repentance always wipes sin away and wins salvation from it. Babies would be saved in the kingdom of God if God is good even if they are not baptised. To say they need baptism is to imply that God is a right old scrooge with his graces and to imply that children should be entered into a religion with a scary God. That is child abuse.
If you subject your baby to a healing ritual that does nothing instead of looking for one that does, then do you love your child as much as you love the approval of the Church?
You can't have your baby baptised just in case religion is true and the baby will suffer if it is not baptised. Then why not get it circumcised a Jew in case Judaism is true as well?
If you can have no better reason for getting the baby baptised than that it might do it harm not to be baptised then you do not have a high view of God. He would want you to come to him for you see him as great and attractive and not because you are scared. Can you really be expecting and asking for a blessing when you come in fear? Its absurd to seek a blessing from a God you don't trust. You are really asking for a curse!

People don't behave rationally when they fall in love. Religion says it wants people to fall in love with God even more than they could fall in love with any person. In other words, it advocates dangerous love, the love that makes a wife take beatings from her husband and condone them. Believers condone the terrible things God does to others and to a lesser extent they condone the evil God does to them and say its to keep them disciplined or to make them holy. Believers encourage people to be so interested in God that there will be an insane anger if he is slighted. We know the consequences of that. All we have to do is see the rivers of blood that Christianity has produced.
Baptism does not give the child a consoling God. It gives a God who sets up a church that seeks the right to exert an undue influence over the child and an unfair advantage and who thinks the child isn't worth much when he requires a rite to accept the child. That's reluctant acceptance and a bad example for the thinking child. To console the child with tales about God's unconditional love won't help the child. God though all powerful didn't accept the child until baptism and that is not unconditional love. He doesn't forgive the child who is not baptised but he forgives monsters who do terrible things. Baptism is a perfect symbol of the unreasoning "morality" that religion advocates. It is evil to put a child through it. Love the sinner and hate the sin is nonsense for when a person does wrong it is not the action that bothers us but what it says about the person. To hate the sin is to hate the sinner. To oppose the sin is to oppose the sinner. God cannot love unconditionally and such love would be hypocrisy. To console people with tales about God's love is to offer false consolation.

To admit that is to take away probably one of the main attractions of belief in God. We only worry about unconditional love and want it when we do something wrong. And then we don't need it or this wish for we should be thinking about earning back people's respect for us instead of looking for it on a plate. The rest of the time it does us no good because we want to be adored for what we do and what kind of people we are. When we are good or weak but not evil being unconditionally loved feels unreal. God's unconditional love does not stop you suffering or dying or getting depressed or going to Hell so there is no point in being grateful for it. It doesn't ring true. It does not even stop babies being born carrying sin and needing baptism because of the natural inclination to defy God and get qualified and in danger of Hell. God's unconditional love does not stop the need for foetuses that are dying to be baptised by a syringe in the womb and ending up stabbed to death by the needle. It is better for death to be the end than for there to be a chance that you might live forever in eternal torment. The adoration of a person who knows nothing about you would not please you - it shows how unconditional love is only appealing on paper and not in life. Parents who hold that bringing a child for baptism is offering them somebody to love them no matter what are deluding themselves. It is vile to take a child to an old man who is pampered and lives in a fancy house and has an easy life and who teaches a difficult message that even he cannot live up to despite the dog collar he sports. The old man by baptising prays that the child will be a saint and live as a real child of God. Baptising professes his belief that God is right to distance himself from the child until the child is baptised. One should live up to strict and hard standards if one asks them of or for others. Baptism is defilement by that old man. It is defilement by the religion.
The practice of child initiation into religion and indoctrination should be illegal and we will do our damnest to get it made illegal for it amounts to spiritual rape. The infant is taken advantage of because it is an infant. We all know that if the child were an adult he or she would make a very different choice in all probability. Jesus said that God has to be loved with all the heart and soul and mind meaning that anybody that really loves God that much will be as sure as possible of being in the most believable religion and should put the search for God and his true faith first. How can that be reconciled with baptising babies and then subjecting them to religious education by the Church that baptised them? The Church claims the right to educate the baptised her way when they were grafted into it by baptism which is understandable because baptism is supposed to be the initiation into the Church. This is really about trying to turn the child into a bigot for it takes a lot of research to work out what the most credible and consistent religion is and that is rarely done. To be in a religion without having done that is to be nothing but a bigot. Jesus said that we know the devilís disciples by their fruits. He is to blame for Christianity being so full of people who donít really care for the truth and who are good for nothing but creating different sects so he is condemned by his own standard.
The Christian Religion is just a religion of outward appearances. It exaggerates human sinfulness (see what God wrote at Romans 3) with the result that people sin nearly all the time for if you have free will and believe that nearly everything is a sin then you are left intending to sin all the time (Romans 14:14, 23). Good works done without repentance are just insults to God and that is what the Church offers. The religion is not about God. He is only the bait. It is about their own selfish selves. Is that what you want to enter your baby into?
The Church says that original sin is the state of being hostile to God from the first moment of your existence and this hostility is inherited from Adam who rebelled against God. So then the baby that is baptised doesnít want to be baptised or healed of this sin for it doesnít like God. Baptism is clearly opposed to the "choice" (for want of a better word for its too young to make a choice) of the baby and religious freedom. What about older people who get baptised? Godís grace can work on their minds and hearts to make them want deliverance from their antagonism towards God in baptism. This cannot happen with a baby. It would make more sense if the Church held that babies should not be baptised and that if they die they will grow up and have to make the same choice between Heaven and Hell as the rest of us.
A baby that is not baptised is far more evil than an adult that sins venially a lot. The Church holds that venial sin does not separate you or estrange you from God. So a baby that harms nobody deliberately is cut off from God and rejected by God and rejects God. The original sin idea says that. And somebody that does harm is accepted by God. A person can commit mortal sin, that is sin that rejects God and cuts you off God, by murder or adultery or doubting the Church and be forgiven easier than an unbaptised baby can be. The person simply has to go to confession to a priest in the Catholic Church and for Protestants, all you need to do is pray for pardon. Even a Hitler could do that so the baby must be extremely evil. The unbaptised baby is at the mercy of its parents and will be in sin as long as it is not baptised. The baby then must be despised by God. It must be worse than the mortal sinner. A being that is rejected by an all-good God despite having done nothing wrong must be far more repulsive and evil than a sinner who has done wrong and very serious wrong at that.
Catholics claim that their babies can grow up to go to Hell. They need baptism to protect them from the danger. They need absolute proof that anybody can go to Hell forever. They need absolute proof that evil people should go there. They need proof that they deserve it. There is nothing. To baptise babies to save them from a fate they could deserve in Hell is really just being vindictive when there is no proof. It is vindictive to accuse a baby of having the potency to be evil enough to go to Hell forever.
A baby becomes a child of God by being baptised. It follows that whether the Church admits it or not, that its teaching is saying that unbaptised babies are defective and not children of God but little bastards. The Church thinks of children conceived outside of marriage as bastards. If you are a bastard because your father wasnít married to your mother then how much more are you a bastard if you donít have God for your father? He doesnít even want you until baptism magically changes his mind! It follows then that it is a pity unbaptised babies have to exist at all.
Spiritualism says that God has made all things thus God is the father of all things. It says that every man and woman and child is God's child. Catholicism says that God is not your father unless you are on good terms with him by having his spirit inside you. Spiritualism has the right idea. Catholicism is so bent on accusing unbaptised babies of being God's little bastards that it won't base God's fatherhood on his role as creator.
Parents are misled by the Church today to think that the baby is being welcomed into the community. Let us analyse this.
Is the baby not welcome just by being born? It should be.
Is the baby really welcomed when you chose to consider it an outsider until it is baptised? It is like saying Mary is welcome in your house though she is black as long as she puts white powder on her face. We would recognise the hatred and racism if you required such a thing.
Baptism does not welcome the baby into the Christian Church or community. The baby is not welcomed by baptism but allegedly fixed by baptism. Then when it is fixed it is welcomed. So it is not good enough as a person but only as a Christian person. Christianity is one of the lowest religions and a dose of whitewash and an education in the bigotry it has so successfully fomented.
Baptism is not a true celebration. The parents could have a naming ceremony that celebrates the birth of the child and the child as he or she is. That is a genuine celebration.
The Christians may celebrate when and after a baby is baptised but that does not make baptism a celebration. The baptism is not for celebrating the birth of the baby but is about fixing and vaccinating the baby. You may as well say that vaccinating the baby against polio is a celebration. Rather than celebrate the baby, the baptism says the baby is bad the way he or she is.

Catholicism says that baptism puts an indelible mark on the soul. So baptism is an attempt, depending on your viewpoint, to mutilate a child!
There are many people who do not wish to have their babies baptised but feel their decision is going to bring trouble from religious relatives.
They should explain that they respect the views of the relatives and ask the relatives to extend the same courtesy to them. It s their child and their decision.
They should explain that they feel baptism and child initiation into religion is telling the child and everybody else a lie. A child can't be a Catholic or a Protestant or a Muslim or a Jew.
They should explain that they would be disrespecting religion itself by having the ceremony just to please others.
They should explain to say their Christian family that if the family was Muslim they would have much the same feeling about the child being uninitiated.
They should explain how hardly anybody these days who has a healthy baby rushes it for baptism. They may delay it for months. They often delay it out of indifference. They often delay because they want to have a baby born in winter baptised in the summer. They often delay because they want to pick the right time for a good party and when all their friends will be free. If it is okay to delay then why worry about getting the baby baptised at all? What would there be to fear?
No self-respecting or baby-respecting person would have anything to do with the baptism of a child. They should not attend the ceremony or any celebration related to baptism. If they would not consider a child initiated into Hitler Youth to be a true supporter of Nazism, then they should extend the same honour to those who are baptised. Offended at the comparison? Don't be. For all a child knows it could have been initiated into something just as dark. Baptism is nothing yes. It's nonsense. But it should be renounced for certain religions make a lot of it and it still demeans the baptised. Religion claims the baptised as its own and uses this to get power and influence by having them counted as members until they tell it what is what. Is it none of our business if a child is baptised? Yes. But it is our business to express our view on this and to make that view clear to the world.