“Cornelius and his family are not the norm, but the exception that proves the norm.”
....
“But, Scripture notes that immediately following, Cornelius and his family were baptized.”
If water baptism imputes the Holy Spirit, as Francis claims, then the water baptism that followed after the infilling/baptism of the Holy Spirit is redundant. The Holy Spirit already fell on them, thus demonstrating that they were regenerated, washed, and made clean by the power of God already. If, on the other hand, the purpose of baptism is the first act of a convert publicly confessing His inward faith and determination to follow God, then it is logical that it should be done either way, as it is the entry way to public membership in the body of Christ, a fact that is already secured by the regeneration of the Holy Spirit done (normally, in our age) invisibly.
Peter was not surprised at it, but the Jews were, as Peter had already been told that salvation should be to the Gentiles also. It was not to convince Peter to baptize them, since he already had the commands of God backing him up. If water baptism is necessary for salvation, then the rule should be kept on every occasion. If the “rule” is broken so easily at the whim of God, it is more likely that your rule is a figment of your imagination.
Rules are from God and of God and for man. Man does not hold God to account, but is rather held to account by God.
That being said....
The norm is that one receives the Holy Spirit for the first time in baptism, but obviously there are instances in Scripture where that is not the case.
In the upper room, following His resurrection, Jesus breathes on the Apostles and says, “Receive the Holy Spirit” and yet the Holy Spirit comes upon them at Pentecost as well.
In baptism, one is born again, into a new life with Christ, becoming the temple of the Holy Spirit. One is also cleansed of all sin and becomes a child of God.