Baptising children on a list of newborns

[Secondname]

I know of a lady who works in a maternity hospital. As part of her job she gets the list of new borns the day after they are born. One of our mutual friend mentioned to her that she could baptise all the new born babies on the list by sprinkling holy water in the form of a cross on the on the piece of paper listing the new babies and saying the words that are normally said at Baptism i.e. “I baptise you … in the name of the Father…”

Do you think this is an acceptable and sensible practice? This lady in question feels she is doing the right thing and that God has given her this job for this purpose.

 

[stbruno]

Maybe that would work in a different Christian denomination but by no means is that a licit baptism in the Catholic faith.

 

[1ke]

I know of a lady who works in a maternity hospital. As part of her job she gets the list of new borns the day after they are born. One of our mutual friend mentioned to her that she could baptise all the new born babies on the list by sprinkling holy water in the form of a cross on the on the piece of paper listing the new babies and saying the words that are normally said at Baptism i.e. “I baptise you … in the name of the Father…”

Your friend has no idea what she is talking about.

First, the a valid baptism requires the water be poured on the BABY and the words of baptism pronounced. Sprinkling water on a piece of paper merely gets the paper wet, nothing more.

Secondly, Church law requires that the PARENTS present their child for baptism and the minister of baptism be the priest or deacon. A person such as a nurse may baptize IN DANGER OF DEATH.

A nurse has NO business baptizing children on her own without a request from parents and danger of death.

Thirdly, any person performing a baptism in an emergency must report it to the parish priest and the rites of baptism completed for the child.

Do you think this is an acceptable and sensible practice?

No, it is not acceptable or sensible. Frankly I think it is ridiculous and shows a complete lack of understanding about what Sacraments are and Church teaching.

This lady in question feels she is doing the right thing and that God has given her this job for this purpose.

The lady sounds a few french fries short of a happy meal.

The parents are the ones who request baptism for their child. We don’t go around baptizing children on a whim. There is responsibility that goes with baptism.

 

[Secondname]

Yes that is exactly what I thought.
However coming from a country termed as “developing country”, I find it difficult to get messages across. At least now I can print views given by others any hopefully convince them that they are wrong in their practices.

 

[1ke]

Yes that is exactly what I thought.
However coming from a country termed as “developing country”, I find it difficult to get messages across. At least now I can print views given by others any hopefully convince them that they are wrong in their practices.

Perhaps direct the lady to talk to her priest.

Clearly she wants to do something good in baptizing children. She needs to understand that with baptism comes the responsibility to raise the child in the faith, and she cannot make that promise or fulfill it. Only the parents can do so.

 

[scott122]

If this were acceptable, you could get a copy of the local phone book and baptize the whole city/county/area. Who got this idea? And why do they think this is correct? It shows a complete misunderstanding of Christian belief and practice.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

Yes that is exactly what I thought.
However coming from a country termed as “developing country”, I find it difficult to get messages across. At least now I can print views given by others any hopefully convince them that they are wrong in their practices.

Don’t tell her! She might then begin baptizing the babies themselves which would be even worse.

 

[Rawb]

Baptizing a baby with no guarantee of the child being raised in the Catholic faith, or even a Christian faith, opens the baby to greater spiritual dangers and temptations without the protection of further teaching and sacraments. So I’ve always been told.

So if she did start actually baptizing babies, she would be doing something very dangerous.

 

[jmcrae]

This lady in question feels she is doing the right thing and that God has given her this job for this purpose.

Just tell this lady that she has no authority to baptize anyone unless he or she is in danger of death, and is likely to have wanted to be baptized (or the parents are likely to have wanted their child who is not yet seven years old to be baptized). The best thing for her is to wait to be asked to do the baptism, rather than taking any initiative of her own.

Also inform her that she must let the parish priest of the parents know that she has baptized that child, if she does so, so that if the child lives, he can complete the Rites for the child, and so that he doesn’t accidentally re-baptize the child at a later time, not knowing that the child has already been baptized.

Also tell her that she must under no circumstances ever - not even in danger of death - baptize the child of non-Christian parents. She could get into really serious trouble if she does this, and she could also get the entire Church into a public-relations nightmare that would seriously harm our Christian witness in the world for generations to come, as happened in the case of a housekeeper who baptized a Jewish baby when it seemed to her that he was in danger of death.

The baby lived, and because he had been baptized into the Christian faith, he could no longer be allowed to live with his Jewish parents, and he was taken away to be educated as a Christian. The Jewish people have not yet forgiven us for that one, and whenever anyone tries to discuss the Christian faith with Jewish people, that case is always brought up as an example of “forcing our faith” on to them. Yes, it was the action of a well-meaning but very stupid housekeeper - but the negative impact is world-wide, lasting, and deep.

 

[FrDavid96]

Just tell this lady that she has no authority to baptize anyone unless he or she is in danger of death, and is likely to have wanted to be baptized (or the parents are likely to have wanted their child who is not yet seven years old to be baptized). The best thing for her is to wait to be asked to do the baptism, rather than taking any initiative of her own.

Also inform her that she must let the parish priest of the parents know that she has baptized that child, if she does so, so that if the child lives, he can complete the Rites for the child, and so that he doesn’t accidentally re-baptize the child at a later time, not knowing that the child has already been baptized.

Also tell her that she must under no circumstances ever - not even in danger of death - baptize the child of non-Christian parents. She could get into really serious trouble if she does this, and she could also get the entire Church into a public-relations nightmare that would seriously harm our Christian witness in the world for generations to come, as happened in the case of a housekeeper who baptized a Jewish baby when it seemed to her that he was in danger of death.

The baby lived, and because he had been baptized into the Christian faith, he could no longer be allowed to live with his Jewish parents, and he was taken away to be educated as a Christian. The Jewish people have not yet forgiven us for that one, and whenever anyone tries to discuss the Christian faith with Jewish people, that case is always brought up as an example of “forcing our faith” on to them. Yes, it was the action of a well-meaning but very stupid housekeeper - but the negative impact is world-wide, lasting, and deep.

All of that is true. But let’s also keep in mind that she isn’t baptising anyone; she’s “baptising” a piece of paper.

This reminds me of the Mormons “baptising” the dead. I wonder how many Catholics are aware that the popular “geneology” searches we see advertised so much are actually a ruse by the Mormons to obtain lists of deceased people to perform these so-called baptisms? Do Catholics realize that when they give the names of their deceased relatives, they are actually presenting these names for fake baptism?

 

[jmcrae]

All of that is true. But let’s also keep in mind that she isn’t baptising anyone; she’s “baptising” a piece of paper.

This reminds me of the Mormons “baptising” the dead. I wonder how many Catholics are aware that the popular “geneology” searches we see advertised so much are actually a ruse by the Mormons to obtain lists of deceased people to perform these so-called baptisms? Do Catholics realize that when they give the names of their deceased relatives, they are actually presenting these names for fake baptism?

I was reacting to the suggestion that she needs to baptize the actual babies, themselves. But your point about the Mormons is well-taken.

 

[Thomas63116]

Perhaps you could encourage her to simply pray for these children, and pray that their parents will have them baptized and raised in the Christian faith. It is the parents who must ultimately be responsible for their spiritual development and well-being.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

Perhaps you could encourage her to simply pray for these children, and pray that their parents will have them baptized and raised in the Christian faith. It is the parents who must ultimately be responsible for their spiritual development and well-being.

Yes, maybe that is why God has put her in that position, not to baptize but to pray for the babies and their families.

 

[bpbasilphx]

Do Catholics realize that when they give the names of their deceased relatives, they are actually presenting these names for fake baptism?

---

Don’t worry. It doesn’t accomplish anything, except possibly to add to the damnation of those who presume to do this.

 

[Melissa]

Do Catholics realize that when they give the names of their deceased relatives, they are actually presenting these names for fake baptism?

---

Don’t worry. It doesn’t accomplish anything, except possibly to add to the damnation of those who presume to do this.

The other thing that is accomplished, however, by people submitting names of family to Mormons or those “genealogy searches”–and I found this VERY distressing, is that your entire name and DOB can be posted on websites that you know nothing of unless you google your name. This happened to me (and I tracked the info down to having been provided by a cousin of my father) and included the full name/DOB of my eldest (since this was apparently done when he was yet my only). Considering that our surname is very rare (around 500 people in the US share it, and we’re all related by blood or marriage through my husband’s grandfather), I guard our surname from being online very carefully, and I was FURIOUS to find these names posted and it took months to get them removed. As my parents were also listed, I notified them so that they could request their names’ removal from these lists (though my maiden name isn’t anywhere near as uncommon–I can go to other cities and find an entire column or page in the phone book depending on the size of community w/ my maiden name). The info on that site also included the city we live in–might as well have included our street address, KWIM? Totally inappropriate to post people’s info like that.

 

[Secondname]

Originally Posted by FrDavid96
“Do Catholics realize that when they give the names of their deceased relatives, they are actually presenting these names for fake baptism?”

Dear Father
My dad gave all his children the middlename of a deceased relative from his side. It was a practice followed at that time by the community (don’t know if still is) to give names of deceased relative from the father’s side. We are three sisters and all of us got our first names of the day’s saint when we were born and all our middle names are those of deceased relatives. Do you mean to say that all our baptisms are fakes? The middle names we have are those which are given to innumerable other people all of whom are human beings just like saints. Sorry I am a bit confused.

 

[bpbasilphx]

Do you mean to say that all our baptisms are fakes?

---

Fr. David was talking about the Mormonoid practice of baptizing for the dead, not names given to new children in the family.

 

[jmcrae]

Dear Father
My dad gave all his children the middlename of a deceased relative from his side. It was a practice followed at that time by the community (don’t know if still is) to give names of deceased relative from the father’s side. We are three sisters and all of us got our first names of the day’s saint when we were born and all our middle names are those of deceased relatives. Do you mean to say that all our baptisms are fakes? The middle names we have are those which are given to innumerable other people all of whom are human beings just like saints. Sorry I am a bit confused.

No, no. The Mormon religion has the practice of taking the names of the deceased (not naming themselves those names, but getting a list of them, I mean) and appointing other Mormon people to be baptized in their stead, in a Mormon ceremony. (ie: an already-baptized person is baptized on behalf of a deceased person.)

The fact that you were named after a deceased relative in no way means that you were baptized in that person’s place (because presumably members of your family are already baptized, in any case) - your name is yours, and you were baptized as yourself - not as that dead person.

 

[jmcrae]

Do you mean to say that all our baptisms are fakes?

---

Fr. David was talking about the Mormonoid practice of baptizing for the dead, not names given to new children in the family.

He was talking about a specific Mormon ritual. It is unlikely that anyone who is not actually a Mormon has ever encountered it.

 

[FrDavid96]

Dear Father
My dad gave all his children the middlename of a deceased relative from his side. It was a practice followed at that time by the community (don’t know if still is) to give names of deceased relative from the father’s side. We are three sisters and all of us got our first names of the day’s saint when we were born and all our middle names are those of deceased relatives. Do you mean to say that all our baptisms are fakes? The middle names we have are those which are given to innumerable other people all of whom are human beings just like saints. Sorry I am a bit confused.

Not at all. As a few others have already replied, I wasn’t speaking about *your *baptism being invalid. Mormons have a custom of “baptising” dead people and they use the geneology searches as a source for a list of names of dead people (in fact, they don’t just use the lists, they actually started and operate the lists). Those are the fake baptisms to which I referred.

Sorry if my comments caused any confusion.