Baptism of child of same sex couple

[Tom_Beckman]

What is the policy of the church related to the batism of the child of a lesbian biological mother and her partner? The biological father is known only to the couple and is not involved in the family. The couple attend mass and receive the sacraments regularly.

 

[Tom_Beckman]

Will the names of both same sex partners appear on the baptisimal certificate?

 

[JimG]

This is similar to the question of baptism of a child of a cohabiting couple–an event with which I have had a personal experience. I expected that the priest would not baptize the child, since (a) the mother did not even want the child baptized, and (b) the father wanted him baptized but could give no assurance of raising the child in the Catholic Faith.

But I was wrong. The priest gave the dad the benefit of the doubt and baptized the child.

What I find puzzling that a parent in either of these circumstances would desire baptism for the child if they are not practicing or intending to practice the Catholic Faith.

 

[Tom_Beckman]

The parents are “cafeteria” Catholics- they pick and choose the Church doctrines that conform to their personal beliefs.

 

[Cricket2]

What is the policy of the church related to the batism of the child of a lesbian biological mother and her partner? The biological father is known only to the couple and is not involved in the family. The couple attend mass and receive the sacraments regularly.

I could care less about policy. The child needs to be Baptized regardless.

 

[UnCatholicBride]

I could care less about policy. The child needs to be Baptized regardless.

This. Regardless of your stance on same-sex relationships, a child should never be punished for the actions of the parents.

 

[JimG]

This. Regardless of your stance on same-sex relationships, a child should never be punished for the actions of the parents.

I sort of agree. But if the children are never going to practice their Faith, and be raised in a home which does not recognize or accept the basics of the Faith, what’s the point? If they ever do start practicing their Faith, they will just have to go to confession, )covering a lengthy period of time) since they’ve already been baptized.

 

[ACanthony]

I’ve heard this question asked before on a Catholic apologetics radio show, and the radio host said the child should not be punished for the sins of the parents. Although it could very well be the child may not be raised with the faith, what is impossible with man is possible with God. It is similar for parents who are cohabitating, out of wedlock, etc. We also need to remember, although it was the most blessed event ever, the Blessed Mother was not married at the time when she conceived either There was lots of shame involved and Joseph even wanted to divorce her quietly.

 

[Deus_tecum]

What is the policy of the church related to the batism of the child of a lesbian biological mother and her partner? The biological father is known only to the couple and is not involved in the family. The couple attend mass and receive the sacraments regularly.

Are they even supposed to receive the Eucharist while living in unrepentant sin?

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

Canon Law:

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.

vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2X.HTM

 

[glendab]

Hello Tom.

What is the policy of the church related to the batism of the child of a lesbian biological mother and her partner? The biological father is known only to the couple and is not involved in the family. The couple attend mass and receive the sacraments regularly.

Excuse me? A lesbian couple attend Mass together and regularly receive Sacraments? Is this done in one of those ICC places? Can you disclose the actual Parish? I cannot see this happening in your run-of-the-mill parish. It must be in one where there is open dissent. The Church cannot appear to be fostering open partnerships between gays. So, unless the priest and persons there are unaware that these ladies are in fact a couple, I really don’t see this happening EXCEPT in a dissenting Catholic place.

The other thing, and it appears further down the thread, is if this “couple” is living as a “married” couple, no the Church cannot Baptize because there needs to be a reasonable expectation that the child will be raised Catholic, NOT DISSENTING CATHOLIC. No Baptism, no Baptismal certificate so no which names will appear quandary. This “couple” is living counter to Church teaching and it would be the same as if a co-habituating couple presented their child for Baptism. It couldn’t happen till that which is outside the Church’s domain is rectified, i.e. the co-habiting couple got married and conformed. This is IMPOSSIBLE for the gay ladies no matter how much governmental pressure gets applied. So, I’m guessing no, their “child” cannot be Baptized.

But I’m no expert on anything but dinner and tonight it is steak and potatoes. Yummy! Mommy’s been good.

Glenda

 

[Ophelia23]

I sort of agree. But if the children are never going to practice their Faith, and be raised in a home which does not recognize or accept the basics of the Faith, what’s the point?

How could we ever possibly know that?

What if the parents realize their sin, convert, and live a pious and holy life three years from now? What if, heaven forbid, the parents passed away and the child was raised by a family member? What if, what if, what if! It is not ours to know how this child’s life will unfold within their family.

 

[JimG]

How could we ever possibly know that?

What if the parents realize their sin, convert, and live a pious and holy life three years from now? What if, heaven forbid, the parents passed away and the child was raised by a family member? What if, what if, what if! It is not ours to know how this child’s life will unfold within their family.

What do the parents think that Baptism does for a child? Do they realize that it makes him a child of God and a member of the Church, subject to the jurisdiction of the Church? Are they in effect saying to the child, okay, you’re a Catholic now. Your receipt of the sacrament was based on our Faith, but really, we have no Faith, so while we’ve made you a Christian, we will not nourish you as a Christian.

So I ask again, what’s the point? What is their expectation? That the child will grow up Catholic in spite of their example?

 

[JimG]

I’ve heard this question asked before on a Catholic apologetics radio show, and the radio host said the child should not be punished for the sins of the parents. Although it could very well be the child may not be raised with the faith, what is impossible with man is possible with God. It is similar for parents who are cohabitating, out of wedlock, etc. We also need to remember, although it was the most blessed event ever, the Blessed Mother was not married at the time when she conceived either There was lots of shame involved and Joseph even wanted to divorce her quietly.

Actually Joseph and Mary were married at the time, but had not moved in together.

 

[on_the_hill]

These posts bring up memories of my old man. He had strong opinions on such issues.

But I was wrong. The priest gave the dad the benefit of the doubt and baptized the child.

He used to rant that, “The Church would refuse to baptize a child born out of wedlock in the U.S., but sent priests all over the world baptizing whoever they could get their hands on, regardless of whether or not the parents had been married!”

This. Regardless of your stance on same-sex relationships, a child should never be punished for the actions of the parents.

And if he said it once, he said it a thousand times: You can’t put the sins of the father on the son. Actually, he didn’t say it like that. It came out more like, “YOU CAN’T PUT THE SINS OF THE FATHER ON THE SON!!”

 

[Linybaby]

We have an openly gay couple at our church. They have I thin they have three children, two boys and a girl and all go to religious education in our church. With that I am sure they are getting their sacraments and our parish is ok with it. I can’t see the church not letting innocent children getting their sacraments for their “parents” choice of life style. It’s not their fault!

 

[JimG]

These posts bring up memories of my old man. He had strong opinions on such issues.

He used to rant that, “The Church would refuse to baptize a child born out of wedlock in the U.S., but sent priests all over the world baptizing whoever they could get their hands on, regardless of whether or not the parents had been married!”

And if he said it once, he said it a thousand times: You can’t put the sins of the father on the son. Actually, he didn’t say it like that. It came out more like, “YOU CAN’T PUT THE SINS OF THE FATHER ON THE SON!!”

This is pretty much the argument I was prepared to make to the priest at the parish where the cohabiting couple I mentioned previously, wished to have their child baptized. Why deny the child baptism because of the lifestyle of the parents? Should not the child be given the advantage of the sacrament?

But I never got the chance to make the argument, because the priest did not attempt to deny the baptism. So the child was and is baptized. It has been several decades since then. Neither the parents, nor the child, have been back to that or any other church. So I am still left to wonder, what was the point. Did the parents expect the sacrament to magically make their child into a practicing Catholic even though there own actions worked against that outcome in every way possible?

 

[Linybaby]

A lot of people have their child baptized and then never go back… I don’t know if it’s because they think its something that should or needs to be done? Maybe they believe in original sin and wants that removed from the child? Not exactly sure why? Maybe a grandparent pressured the parents into a baptism… We will never know why people do what they do…

 

[glendab]

I’m starting to wonder why some of the posters here don’t see their dissention from Church teaching regarding Baptism when they say that withholding the Baptism is a punishment or whatever on the child? Do they only see the Church’s laws regarding Baptism as an error of judgment?

The Church isn’t punishing the child. It is preventing them from being personally accountable for whatever teaching outside the Church that he or she WILL become accountable for once Baptism is received for every person who receives Baptism is not only a member of the Church, but becomes responsible for their sins in a way the non-Baptized aren’t. That is why child need religious instruction, etc. And since there is a great possibility that the child will be raised outside the Church and given no instruction or worse false instruction, then the Church is absolutely correct on many counts to withhold the Baptism. Mostly this is the specific parish Priest’s call, not the parish council’s. Sheesh. The Church isn’t a democracy.

Those who’ve decided that the child should be Baptized in this instance have gone against Church teaching and law. That isn’t smart nor faithful. Dissention from Church teaching is at the heart of this issue: two women living as a married couple? and receiving Sacraments as if they are entitled to them nor matter that their sins are as scarlet? and flaunting it in Church in front of everyone? Come on. What kind of life, let alone instruction could the child possible get in those circumstances? And then there’s this: the OP didn’t answer my question about the locale of the two ladies attendance at Mass. It really does matter if it is one of those “Independent Catholic Churches” that live in open dissent.

I’m still wondering.

Glenda

 

[GreyRabbit]

I’m starting to wonder why some of the posters here don’t see their dissention from Church teaching regarding Baptism when they say that withholding the Baptism is a punishment or whatever on the child? Do they only see the Church’s laws regarding Baptism as an error of judgment?

The Church isn’t punishing the child. It is preventing them from being personally accountable for whatever teaching outside the Church that he or she WILL become accountable for once Baptism is received for every person who receives Baptism is not only a member of the Church, but becomes responsible for their sins in a way the non-Baptized aren’t. That is why child need religious instruction, etc. And since there is a great possibility that the child will be raised outside the Church and given no instruction or worse false instruction, then the Church is absolutely correct on many counts to withhold the Baptism. Mostly this is the specific parish Priest’s call, not the parish council’s. Sheesh. The Church isn’t a democracy.

Those who’ve decided that the child should be Baptized in this instance have gone against Church teaching and law. That isn’t smart nor faithful. Dissention from Church teaching is at the heart of this issue: two women living as a married couple? and receiving Sacraments as if they are entitled to them nor matter that their sins are as scarlet? and flaunting it in Church in front of everyone? Come on. What kind of life, let alone instruction could the child possible get in those circumstances? And then there’s this: the OP didn’t answer my question about the locale of the two ladies attendance at Mass. It really does matter if it is one of those “Independent Catholic Churches” that live in open dissent.

I’m still wondering.

Glenda