Baptised Catholic as baby, Marriage?

[runningdude]

If a baby were baptized Catholic by her Grandmother, but her parents (who converted to Baptist years before) raised her Baptist, is the child still bound by Catholic marriage form?

My thoughts are “no”, because all this happen before she turned seven (Catholic age of reason).

 

[dconklin]

Usually the Church will not Baptize a baby without the parents agreeing to raise it in a Catholic home - or something to that extent.

 

[ConstantineTG]

If a baby were baptized Catholic by her Grandmother, but her parents (who converted to Baptist years before) raised her Baptist, is the child still bound by Catholic marriage form?

My thoughts are “no”, because all this happen before she turned seven (Catholic age of reason).

Yes, the person is still bound by Canon Law

 

[laszlo]

If she intends to marry in Catholic Church or at least let witnessing her marriage by a Catholic priest or deacon, then the parish will investigate the case and make decision.

If she is practicing baptist now and marries according to baptist ceremony (with a non catholic men) then problem occurs only if she divorces later.

If she is Catholic and this can be proven (she was baptized in a Church and recorded in the baptism book) then the marriage is invalid, and a quite simple process declares that. If she was not baptized a marriage is valid. It depends on the judges, but dubious (not proven) baptism can be considered nonexistent.

 

[SonCatcher]

The described situation is a little unclear to me. If the grandmother had the child baptized surreptitiously and the child was not then in danger of death, then the baptism itself might be called into question. Can you describe the circumstances of the baptism in greater detail?

 

[Fidelia]

The described situation is a little unclear to me. If the grandmother had the child baptized surreptitiously and the child was not then in danger of death, then the baptism itself might be called into question. Can you describe the circumstances of the baptism in greater detail?

It is also unclear to me. I think that a lay-person can only validly baptize someone in danger of death.

 

[Brendan]

It is also unclear to me. I think that a lay-person can only validly baptize someone in danger of death.

Incorrect, the Baptism is still valid, it did happen, and did what the Church intents for Baptism to do, but it happens illicitly.

 

[Fidelia]

Incorrect, the Baptism is still valid, it did happen, and did what the Church intents for Baptism to do, but it happens illicitly.

Ok, I was probably confusing valid vs licit.
As far as getting married in the Church, though, you need to show a Baptismal record. There would be no proof for this type of baptism.

 

[runningdude]

As far as I know, it was a good and proper Catholic ceremony (priest and everything), though done without the parents permission. My question is, that since if one converts to Catholicism with children under age seven, the children convert as well.

Does it work in reverse, that this girl, who was never consciously Catholic, would be unable to enter into a valid marriage due to technically being Catholic?

 

[1ke]

If a baby were baptized Catholic by her Grandmother, but her parents (who converted to Baptist years before) raised her Baptist, is the child still bound by Catholic marriage form?

If the Grandmother met canon law requirements to present the child for baptism and had the child baptized by a priest/deacon, and the baptism was recorded in the sacramental records of a parish, then the child is canonically a Catholic.

If the grandparent baptized them at home and told no one, it is questionable as to whether this child would be considered a Catholic canonically and it should be investigated by the diocese.

My thoughts are “no”, because all this happen before she turned seven (Catholic age of reason).

A child baptized into the Catholic Church is canonically a Catholic. Their age is not relevant.

 

[Fidelia]

As far as I know, it was a good and proper Catholic ceremony (priest and everything), though done without the parents permission. My question is, that since if one converts to Catholicism with children under age seven, the children convert as well.

Does it work in reverse, that this girl, who was never consciously Catholic, would be unable to enter into a valid marriage due to technically being Catholic?

Originally you said the Baptism was done by the grandmother. Which was it? The Grandmother brought the baby to be properly Baptized in the Church? (as opposed to Baptizing the baby herself). If that’s the case, then yes, she is canonically Catholic, and obligated to marry in the Catholic Church, I think.

1ke beat me to posting. He sounds right.

 

[jilly4ski]

1ke beat me to posting. He sounds right.

1ke is a she.

 

[1ke]

As far as I know, it was a good and proper Catholic ceremony (priest and everything), though done without the parents permission.

Then the child would be a Catholic.

My question is, that since if one converts to Catholicism with children under age seven, the children convert as well.

Not exactly. This is not automatic. The parent(s) have to explicitly request their child be brought into full communion with the Church.

Does it work in reverse, that this girl, who was never consciously Catholic, would be unable to enter into a valid marriage due to technically being Catholic?

No.

 

[1ke]

1ke is a she.

Indeed.

 

[Fidelia]

Indeed.

My bad! Sorry!

 

[runningdude]

Originally you said the Baptism was done by the grandmother. Which was it? The Grandmother brought the baby to be properly Baptized in the Church? (as opposed to Baptizing the baby herself).

The grandmother brought the child for baptism. I didn’t mean to imply otherwise.

If that’s the case, then yes, she is canonically Catholic, and obligated to marry in the Catholic Church, I think.

I suspected that might be the case. Unfortunately the girl is quite opposed to Catholicism, so that particular obligation is unlikely to be met

 

[runningdude]

If the Grandmother met canon law requirements to present the child for baptism and had the child baptized by a priest/deacon, and the baptism was recorded in the sacramental records of a parish, then the child is canonically a Catholic.

What are applicable the requirements?

 

[1ke]

What are applicable the requirements?

Can. 868 §1. For an infant to be baptized licitly:

1/ the parents or at least one of them or the person who legitimately takes their place must consent;

2/ there must be a founded hope that the infant will be brought up in the Catholic religion; if such hope is altogether lacking, the baptism is to be delayed according to the prescripts of particular law after the parents have been advised about the reason.

§2. An infant of Catholic parents or even of non-Catholic parents is baptized licitly in danger of death even against the will of the parents.

 

[runningdude]

Now this is where it gets confusing

Can. 868 §1. For an infant to be baptized licitly:

1/ the parents or at least one of them or the person who legitimately takes their place must consent;

Her grandmother did it somewhat secretly. Her parents are perfectly fit, just made an unfortunate decision to leave the faith.

2/ there must be a founded hope that the infant will be brought up in the Catholic religion; if such hope is altogether lacking, the baptism is to be delayed according to the prescripts of particular law after the parents have been advised about the reason.

Basically no hope whatsoever of that happening at the time, lol. Her devout Catholic grandmother just couldn’t stand the thought of her grandchildren living without baptism!

§2. An infant of Catholic parents or even of non-Catholic parents is baptized licitly in danger of death even against the will of the parents.

 

[SonCatcher]

It appears that the baptism was obtained illicitly. I am not sure whether the Catholic Church would assert jurisdiction. Is there a canon lawyer in the house?