Feb 1, 2006

Another argument against immersion-baptism

Here's an update on that January 30 LA Times story on traces of prescription drugs, including the birth control Pill, showing up in the Southland's reclaimed water.

In a letter to the Times today, February 1, Steve Oppenheimer, the director of the Cal State Northridge Center for Cancer and Developmental Biology, writes, "The National Research Council, in a 1998 study, indicated that reclaimed water is unsafe for drinking because the technology does not exist to test for thousands of potential toxins and carcinogens that can survive the reclamation process."

Gulp! (So to speak.) Do you suppose any of this birth control Pill-laced water is showing up in the Cardinal Mahony-dictated, Protestant-style immersion-baptism fonts that are now in so many of our churches?

7 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would ease up on "protestant-style" immersion baptisms. I believe our eastern bretheren perform them, as do the orthodox. That being said, it's too bad we don't hear more about Humanae Vitae. I have only heard one priest speak out against birth control in the past three years in LA, and he was a visting priest from Nigeria.

9:38 AM  
Anonymous Andy K. said...

Greetings!

I just want to say that water reclamation is not complete without purification, which occurs by boiling and recondensing it.

1:42 PM  
Blogger Quintero said...

Dear Anonymous, You make a good point about the baptisms. The thing is, the presence of an immersion-type facility in a Catholic church casts doubt upon Catholic practice from time immemorial, and confuses the faithful.

8:34 PM  
Blogger Quintero said...

Dear Anonymous, You also make a very good point about Humanae Vitae and the pulpit! Thank you.

8:37 PM  
Blogger Quintero said...

Dear Andy K., Thanks for pointing this out about water reclamation!

8:38 PM  
Anonymous Mike said...

Q,

I was anon and usually sign my name, but I was having trouble with blogging from work. Anyway, I'm not sure if pouring/sprinkkling qualifies as the Catholic practice from time immemorial. It was my understanding that it was a common practice for the first thousand years or so (12th century according to the Catholic Encyclopedia -http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm]).

But your point is well taken. After so long, we are used to it being done a certain way, and protestants doing it another way. Why the change? Is ther something wrong with what we've been doing?

11:17 PM  
Blogger Quintero said...

Dear Mike, Thanks for your points. Innovations such as this are not wrong because they are new, but because they create uncertainty and doubt.

1:58 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Site Meter