Baptism at an older age?

[Crown_of_Stars]

I’ve seen this within my church. Mostly, it’s infants being baptized during the Mass, but the week before last, a little girl of about two or three was being baptized, and I wondered it it’s Catholically (I just made up that word) acceptable to have your child baptized at an older age? In one way, I feel it’s important to have the child baptized right away, even a small, private baptism by a priest in the hospital soon after it’s born…Yet in another way, I feel it’s nice to do it when the child is old enough to somewhat understand what is going on. The basic question of this thread is… Is there a right or wrong time to be baptized within the Catholic Church? Is the teaching that we must be infants, or can we be a little older?

 

[SHoJjhmou]

I’ve seen this within my church. Mostly, it’s infants being baptized during the Mass, but the week before last, a little girl of about two or three was being baptized, and I wondered it it’s Catholically (I just made up that word) acceptable to have your child baptized at an older age? In one way, I feel it’s important to have the child baptized right away, even a small, private baptism by a priest in the hospital soon after it’s born…Yet in another way, I feel it’s nice to do it when the child is old enough to somewhat understand what is going on. The basic question of this thread is… Is there a right or wrong time to be baptized within the Catholic Church? Is the teaching that we must be infants, or can we be a little older?

**
Can. 867 §1. Parents are obliged to take care that infants are baptized in the first few weeks; as soon as possible after the birth or even before it, they are to go to the pastor to request the sacrament for their child and to be prepared properly for it.**

Besides, why would you want to spend a life where you’re not able to be unified with Christ in the Eucharist? Or why risk dying without being baptized?

 

[JerryZ]

I’ve seen this within my church. Mostly, it’s infants being baptized during the Mass, but the week before last, a little girl of about two or three was being baptized, and I wondered it it’s Catholically (I just made up that word) acceptable to have your child baptized at an older age? In one way, I feel it’s important to have the child baptized right away, even a small, private baptism by a priest in the hospital soon after it’s born…Yet in another way, I feel it’s nice to do it when the child is old enough to somewhat understand what is going on. The basic question of this thread is… Is there a right or wrong time to be baptized within the Catholic Church? Is the teaching that we must be infants, or can we be a little older?

The Church feels it is important to baptise children as soon as possible after birth.
This has been a teaching of the Church since the time of the Apostles. It was the custom in Israel to bring new male babies into the faith after 8 days by circumcising them. The Apostles used the same logic with babies from the early Christians for Baptism.

However the Church also want the parents of the baby to be prepared and know what is required of them. Hence they attend pre-baptism classes. Choosing the godparents is also important and they also have to attend together with the parents.

Now if the situation so requires the priest will baptise an older no longer baby but still all the other requirements need to be fulfilled by the parents.

.

 

[SecretGarden]

As far as I’m concerned, people have all kinds of reasons to baptize their children at times other than infancy. As a result, a pastoral approach needs to be taken because people multiple reasons to be baptized or choose to baptize their children at when they are older.

For example.

1. They might chose to be baptized when they are older because they are certain Catholicism is the denomination they desire to follow.
2. We have to take into account the fact we have Catholic converts who are choosing to become Catholic therefore if they have children who are not infants, they may chose to baptize their children at whatever age their children are at the time.
3. Sometimes people adopt older children which means once the children are settled, the parents will decide to baptize their children.
4. Lapsed Catholics or Catholics who left the church who whatever reason, decide to return to the Catholic church and if they have children, they may decide to baptize their children then.

The reasons are endless and so we can’t really point a finger but simply rejoice every time a child is baptized and pray that one day they will decide to follow the Christian faith.

 

[Gertabelle]

I’ve seen this within my church. Mostly, it’s infants being baptized during the Mass, but the week before last, a little girl of about two or three was being baptized, and I wondered it it’s Catholically (I just made up that word) acceptable to have your child baptized at an older age? In one way, I feel it’s important to have the child baptized right away, even a small, private baptism by a priest in the hospital soon after it’s born…Yet in another way, I feel it’s nice to do it when the child is old enough to somewhat understand what is going on. The basic question of this thread is… Is there a right or wrong time to be baptized within the Catholic Church? Is the teaching that we must be infants, or can we be a little older?

My son was baptized when he was three-and-a-half years old. I left the Church for some 15 years, during which time I married (outside the Church), had a child, returned to the faith, and got a divorce.

In other words, my child was baptized when he was older because that’s when I returned to the Church. He should have been given the graces of baptism as soon after his birth as possible. This was a failure on the part of his father (who is still away from the Church) and me.

There is a family in my parish that has 8 adopted children. Many of them were adopted when they were toddlers or older, and they could not be baptized until the adoption was final. Again, older children being baptized, but not because the parents were going against Church teaching – which is to baptize children as soon as possible, and not to wait.

Great question! Thanks for asking it!

Gertie

 

[pianistclare]

Some people just don’t get around to it, unfortunately.
In the case of immigrants. many people move around quite a bit before they settle into a parish. They wake up one day and OOPS! We forgot to get the baby Baptized!!!

I just thank God when they realize they’ve neglected something of paramount importance.

Funny story: We had a child being Baptized that was around 3 yrs. old. While the Godparent was holding the candle, she kept trying to blow it out. All she knew about the day was:

1. she was all dressed up,
2. there were lots of people
3. there was a candle involved.
   IT MUST BE MY BIRTHDAY!

The poor Deacon had a time keeping her far enough from the candle to not extinguish the Light of Christ.

 

[Gorgias]

I’ve seen this within my church. Mostly, it’s infants being baptized during the Mass, but the week before last, a little girl of about two or three was being baptized, and I wondered it it’s Catholically (I just made up that word) acceptable to have your child baptized at an older age? In one way, I feel it’s important to have the child baptized right away, even a small, private baptism by a priest in the hospital soon after it’s born…Yet in another way, I feel it’s nice to do it when the child is old enough to somewhat understand what is going on.

Yes, it’s ok for a person to be baptized at any age.

Here’s the thing: if the child is an infant or toddler, then baptism alone is appropriate. However, if the child is already 7 or older, what is appropriate is to give that child all the sacraments of initiation (just like we give those who enter the Church at the Easter Vigil all the sacraments on the same occasion – baptism, confirmation, 1st Holy Communion).

However, sadly, out of some (misguided?) sense of pastoral latitude, this is often ignored – the child will be baptized only, in order that he might “receive communion and confirmation with his class”. :sad_yes:

 

[Neofight]

From a pue legalistic perspective, infancy may be the appropriate time, but I would not go so far as saying it is the right time, because when Baptism occurs is never the wrong time, as long as it happens.

Peace and all good!

 

[Casilda]

He reminded them a priest does not have the right to not baptize a baby born of a single mother, or whose parents have been divorced and re-married.

t.news.va/en/news/pope-francis-leads-meditation-for-international-ga

I was a week shy of my first birthday when baptized. My aunt, who was my godmother and horrified by the delay at my parent’s parish, took me to her priest who baptized me. My mother was remarried, the annulment paperwork had reached a permanent standstill, so my parents married civilly. My sister was 4 when she was baptized. It was a second cousin who had her priest baptize her. There are some merciful priests.

It’s not that immigrants ‘forget’, its more like priests do. They want to make sure the paperwork is in or that parents are members in good standing. But we have it straight from the Pope, a priest does not have the right to refuse to baptize a baby.

 

[jaimeleglise]

I understand people getting baptized at an older age because they are converts or they returned to the Faith and their older children still need Baptism. No problem. What I dont like is when parents wait six months or a year or more because they want to rent a huge hall or save for a big party. It is much more important to get baptized soon after birth. The party can wait.

 

[7_Sorrows]

I understand people getting baptized at an older age because they are converts or they returned to the Faith and their older children still need Baptism. No problem. What I dont like is when parents wait six months or a year or more because they want to rent a huge hall or save for a big party. It is much more important to get baptized soon after birth. The party can wait.

People actually do that?!!! Yes the baptism is more important than a party!

 

[pianistclare]

He reminded them a priest does not have the right to not baptize a baby born of a single mother, or whose parents have been divorced and re-married.

t.news.va/en/news/pope-francis-leads-meditation-for-international-ga

I was a week shy of my first birthday when baptized. My aunt, who was my godmother and horrified by the delay at my parent’s parish, took me to her priest who baptized me. My mother was remarried, the annulment paperwork had reached a permanent standstill, so my parents married civilly. My sister was 4 when she was baptized. It was a second cousin who had her priest baptize her. There are some merciful priests.

It’s not that immigrants ‘forget’, its more like priests do. They want to make sure the paperwork is in or that parents are members in good standing. But we have it straight from the Pope, a priest does not have the right to refuse to baptize a baby.

Our priests have never refused to Baptize anyone…so long as the parents are committed to the faith. If there is NO HOPE of a child being raised in the church…then they will not rubber stamp it.

 

[Phemie]

In one way, I feel it’s important to have the child baptized right away, even a small, private baptism by a priest in the hospital soon after it’s born…

That’s not allowed unless there is danger of the baby dying.
Can. 860 §1. Apart from a case of necessity, baptism is not to be conferred in private houses, unless the local ordinary has permitted it for a grave cause. §2. Except in a case of necessity or for some other compelling pastoral reason, baptism is not to be celebrated in hospitals unless the diocesan bishop has established otherwise.

 

[Gorgias]

That’s not allowed unless there is danger of the baby dying.
§2. Except in a case of necessity or for some other compelling pastoral reason, baptism is not to be celebrated in hospitals unless the diocesan bishop has established otherwise.

Just to be picky: your assertion is much more strict than the canon you quote in support of it. ‘In danger of death’ is not the standard here: ‘a case of necessity’ or a ‘compelling pastoral reason’ is, and that would seem to include a greater range of circumstances than merely ‘in danger of death’…

 

[InThePew]

The basic question of this thread is… Is there a right or wrong time to be baptized within the Catholic Church? Is the teaching that we must be infants, or can we be a little older?

The Church strongly encourages the baptism of infants so that the gift of salvation - the sign of God’s love - may not be delayed. That said, other than in exceptional cases, baptism doesn’t usually happen until the child is a few months old because of the need to make allowances for the health of the mother and pastoral considerations such as allowing sufficient time for preparation and planning for the celebration itself (and I don’t mean the party afterwards) including allowances for the priest/deacon’s availability as well as that of the godparents and other family members.

What’s important to remember is that baptism requires faith as much as faith requires baptism. for infants, the faith is that of the parents, supported by their parish community.So there may be times when a delay is necessary in order to ensure that there is a well-founded hope that the child will be adequately brought up in the faith. In some cases that can mean waiting until the child is school-aged an enrolling it in an catechumenate (RCIC) program. Whether the child then receives all three sacraments of initiation depends on local practice (in particular the age of confirmation).

 

[Crown_of_Stars]

That’s not allowed unless there is danger of the baby dying.

I didn’t know. I thought it would be. A baby can suddenly die, even unexpectedly. Anything could go wrong. Cradle death, SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) I’ve never had a baby, but I would worry about this, that what if the baby suddenly dies somehow, even though there is no reason to think he or she would, medically? It can still happen.

 

[Gertabelle]

I didn’t know. I thought it would be. A baby can suddenly die, even unexpectedly. Anything could go wrong. Cradle death, SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) I’ve never had a baby, but I would worry about this, that what if the baby suddenly dies somehow, even though there is no reason to think he or she would, medically? It can still happen.

I have often wondered whether an infant in these circumstances, as well as in miscarriages, would be covered by the Baptism of Desire – the desire being their parents’ desire that their child be baptized.

Anyone know about that possibility?

Gertie

 

[Mintaka]

Today it is generally accepted that yes, parental desire to have the child baptized does cover them.

That said, it’s 500 zillion times better to have a baptized baby than to have regrets. If you’re a practicing Catholic, your baby is more than a month old, and you haven’t had him baptized? You’re not acting very seriously about your faith, frankly.

The early Christians basically used to debate whether it was better to baptize the child within 24 hours of birth, or whether it was okay to wait 8 days as a sign of the Covenant, like circumcision.

And then people got all legalistic, and asked themselves why they shouldn’t wait until they were ready to die of old age before they got baptized. After all, baptism wiped away sins! Why bother with getting any other sacraments at all, when it was so easy to get out of going to most of Mass by being a lifelong catechumen? So of course a lot of these “smart” parents saw their kids die as unbaptized adults.

Waiting months and months is just not helpful to your baby. Why hold back spiritual gifts? Like the Ethiopian said, “Is there any reason why I shouldn’t be baptized now?”

 

[jaimeleglise]

People actually do that?!!! Yes the baptism is more important than a party!

Yes, unfortunately, I see it all the time. Parents wait until child is two or more because they want a fancy hall, custom favors, dj, etc. Anything to impress. The importance of the Sacrament is a big afterthought for them.

 

[InThePew]

And then people got all legalistic, and asked themselves why they shouldn’t wait until they were ready to die of old age before they got baptized. After all, baptism wiped away sins! Why bother with getting any other sacraments at all, when it was so easy to get out of going to most of Mass by being a lifelong catechumen? So of course a lot of these “smart” parents saw their kids die as unbaptized adults.

It was more a sense of fear rather than legalism - the view in about the 4th century was that, while baptism wiped away sins if you sinned again after baptism you were basically doomed. So people waited until old age to be baptised in order to try and avoid the possibility of falling back into sin - presumably they still attended services of the Word in the meantime. As far as receiving other sacraments was concerned, exactly what did and didn’t count as a sacrament wasn’t finalised until much later.