[BlessedBeGod]

You don't use a baby's soul to teach someone a lesson. It's of eternal/infinte importance to that baby and to God.

Instruct the couple as best can be done and hope it made an impression (and even follow up on it), but do not use that baby's soul as a bribe/cudgel/punishment for the sins of the parents/"parents."

[MyKidsDad73]

You don't use a baby's soul to teach someone a lesson. It's of eternal/infinte importance to that baby and to God.

Instruct the couple as best can be done and hope it made an impression (and even follow up on it), but do not use that baby's soul as a bribe/cudgel/punishment for the sins of the parents/"parents."

With all due respect, I can't rationalize your statement with this portion of your tagline: "Appeasing evil is cowardice"

I also don't believe that God will hold the parents' sin against the child. Besides, if the child's baptism is predicated on the "faith and obedience" of the parent... wouldn't God consider the baptism be null and void anyway? It would be tantamount to an individual being baptized, but not accepting Jesus' death and atonement for our sins and acknowledging him as LORD, correct?

Disclaimer: I'm asking, not as a Catholic who believes in infant baptism, but as an Evangelical who does not.

[Albion Wilde]

Instruct the couple as best can be done and hope it made an impression (and even follow up on it), but do not use that baby's soul as a bribe/cudgel/punishment for the sins of the parents/"parents."

Nor let the unrepentant parents use the baby's soul as a wedge to divide the church or vacate its teachings.