Baptism of child of same sex couple

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tom_Beckman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I personally don’t know why or how gay couples would want to be Catholic and want to attend mass when they know how Catholic stand on the way they live in such sin. But the child does have a right to be baptized in our religion.

How many children go against their parents beliefs? The baby will grow and become an adult and who is to say they will not live with Jesus in their heart an grow to love the Catholic church. The child may respect his or her parents but not agree with their life style. Who are we to predict how the infant will be later in life. That infant should get that chance if go enough the opportunity to be baptized.
 
These situations are handled by individual pastors on a case by case basis. I’m not going to second guess them. If I were a priest, which I’m not, I would not necessarily decline to baptize a child because the parents were not living a Catholic life, but in our baptism preparation, we would have a serious discussion about questions such as these:

–Why do you wish your child do be baptized?
–Do you understand that by having your child baptized, you incur an obligation to raise the child in the Catholic Faith, and that this is a serious obligation?

–Do you intend to bring the child to Mass every Sunday with you, since that is an obligation of every Catholic? Will you catechize the child, bring him to religious instructions, attend instruction yourself if you are rusty in the Faith, make sure that the child receives and is prepared for the subsequent sacraments?
 
glendab said:
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
Click to expand...
Maybe this varies from parish to parish or country to country. All of my nephews and friends’ kids were baptised despite the fact that the couples were not married at the time. I know of dozens of other non married couples whose kids were also baptised, no problem. Why would the Church punish the child in such a situation?!
 
Galbin said:
Maybe this varies from parish to parish or country to country. All of my nephews and friends’ kids were baptised despite the fact that the couples were not married at the time. I know of dozens of other non married couples whose kids were also baptised, no problem. Why would the Church punish the child in such a situation?!
Click to expand...
I can see a thread here in 25 years.

"Please, none of my Catholic friends will come to my wedding. I am have a beautiful ceremony on the beach. They say I should be married in a Catholic Church because I was baptized in a Catholic Church. What are they talking about? Am I Catholic?
 
The question is not one of ‘punishing’ the child. The child is at the mercy of his parents to seek baptism and to raise him in the faith.

Do the parents want what is best for the child? If so, then they want the child to be raised in the Faith, to live in accordance with the Faith, to receive the other sacraments, and to grow in grace. If the parents take care to meet their obligations in this regard, there may be reason to believe that the child will be raised in the Faith, and this is pretty much what the norms for baptism require.

If the parents are not themselves practicing their Faith, but do provide proper catechesis for the child, it will at some point become apparent to the child that his parents are living in contradiction to the Faith into which they had him baptized.
 
JimG said:
If the parents are not themselves practicing their Faith, but do provide proper catechesis for the child, it will at some point become apparent to the child that his parents are living in contradiction to the Faith into which they had him baptized.
Click to expand...
Yes, but if the child is baptised he will at least have a chance. If he is never baptised he is not even offered a chance of religion at all. Luckily many priests are aware of this…
 
Galbin said:
Yes, but if the child is baptised he will at least have a chance. If he is never baptised he is not even offered a chance of religion at all. Luckily many priests are aware of this…
Click to expand...
Yes, although this is a double edged sword. Baptism imparts an indelible mark on the soul. It is said that even in hell, the baptized (and confirmed) are distinguishable from the unbaptized. Baptism brings with it sanctifying grace and release from original sin, but also the obligation to remain in that grace and to continue the Christian journey.

In having the child baptized, the parents give him a great gift. If they do not also intend to help him with the obligations that gift brings, they lay on him a great burden.
 
Linybaby said:
But the child does have a right to be baptized in our religion.
Click to expand...
I disagree that an infant, an arbitrary infant, has any such (absolute) “right”. To claim such is to advocate the arbitrary baptising of children whenever the opportunity presents - by baby-sitters in secret perhaps, and regardless of the commitment of the parents to bring the child up in the Faith.

I would argue that the infant enjoys a privilege if he or she finds themselves born into a family committed to bringing up the child in the Faith. Parents who intend to bring their children up as Catholics have an obligation to seek baptism for the child, and **those **children have a right to be baptised.

In other circumstances, a grown child reaches an age when s/he can make their own decisions and at that point, the individual has a right to seek baptism.

As for the child of the lesbian couple in the OP - this is a decision for the relevant priest. Do the sins of the parents amount to a lack of intent to bring the child up in the Faith - I cannot answer.
 
JimG said:
In having the child baptized, the parents give him a great gift. If they do not also intend to help him with the obligations that gift brings, they lay on him a great burden.
Click to expand...
What burden? Surely having a baptism is a better start than having no faith?
 
JimG said:
Yes, although this is a double edged sword. Baptism imparts an indelible mark on the soul. It is said that even in hell, the baptized (and confirmed) are distinguishable from the unbaptized. ** Baptism brings with it sanctifying grace and release from original sin, but also the obligation to remain in that grace and to continue the Christian journey. **

In having the child baptized, the parents give him a great gift. If they do not also intend to help him with the obligations that gift brings, they lay on him a great burden.
Click to expand...
Galbin said:
What burden? Surely having a baptism is a better start than having no faith?
Click to expand...
Jim has already given you some information about the burden.

Once baptized, that person is responsible for all of the obligations of a Catholic Christian. (Like being married in the Catholic Church.)
 
Rau said:
Baptism (alone) does not provide “faith”.
Click to expand...
That’s true; faith is a pre-requisite, in the case of children, provided on the child’s behalf by the parents and sponsors.

As to the burden, baptism brings the child into the Catholic Church. Now, that is not really a burden–at least I don’t find it so–but there are obligations to practice the Faith, and that can be made difficult by lack of instruction. One becomes a member of the Church and a child of God, and that brings with it the responsibilities thereof.
 
Galbin said:
Yes, but if the child is baptised he will at least have a chance. If he is never baptised he is not even offered a chance of religion at all. Luckily many priests are aware of this…
Click to expand...
yep. This topic was brought up on catholic answers yesterday. Jimmy akin gave the same answer basically. A caller asked about a gay couple that was having their kid baptized int he church.
 
Rau said:
I disagree that an infant, an arbitrary infant, has any such (absolute) “right”. To claim such is to advocate the arbitrary baptising of children whenever the opportunity presents - by baby-sitters in secret perhaps, and regardless of the commitment of the parents to bring the child up in the Faith.
Click to expand...
Do Catholic evangalists not go to third world countries and baptized any kid they can get their hands on?
 
I fail to see being baptized and following the faith as a burden. I see it as an oppurtunity gifted by God. Maybe it’s the difference b/t optomists and pessimists?
 
CatholicSooner said:
I fail to see being baptized and following the faith as a burden. I see it as an oppurtunity gifted by God. Maybe it’s the difference b/t optomists and pessimists?
Click to expand...
It isn’t a burden for those with parents that follow the faith.

But with those that don’t have parents that take them to church, make sure they receive their sacraments, introduce them to God, well, then it becomes a burden.

Which is why the Church asks for a
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.
Click to expand...
 
Let’s say an infant is baptized, and 25 years later he finds out about it. Is he then obligated to practice Catholicism?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top