My priest baptised my stillborn baby. I had no problem with it. If the child was dead and it is simply symbolic, so what? It is a beautiful symbol of intent. If there are actual graces bestowed, all the better. What’s the big deal? My child also received a full Catholic Mass funeral. So?I have heard of a priest that baptized a stillborn baby for the parents. It’s an unbelievable story, but I was curious as to whether it was just symbolic or is actual graces expected to be bestowed on a soul of a dead child?
Peace,
DS
The way this priest described it was absolutely beautiful. He was in the chapel in the hospital and he had no water. Nothing - and the couple came in begging him to baptize their little one who had died at birth. He used all their collective tears (including his own) to baptized the baby. I absolutaely have no problem with it. I was just wondering if the church had a stance on it.My priest baptised my stillborn baby. I had no problem with it. If the child was dead and it is simply symbolic, so what? It is a beautiful symbol of intent. If there are actual graces bestowed, all the better. What’s the big deal? My child also received a full Catholic Mass funeral. So?
I think it is a divided stance. Just like Limbo. I once had a priest tell me his mother baptised every miscarriage she had before she flushed. I always wondered about that. But he said, she was that full of faith and certainty.The way this priest described it was absolutely beautiful. He was in the chapel in the hospital and he had no water. Nothing - and the couple came in begging him to baptize their little one who had died at birth. He used all their collective tears (including his own) to baptized the baby. I absolutaely have no problem with it. I was just wondering if the church had a stance on it.
My condolences go out to you.
In Peace,
DS
If one is uncertain that death has occured, the child should be Baptized conditionally.I have heard of a priest that baptized a stillborn baby for the parents. It’s an unbelievable story, but I was curious as to whether it was just symbolic or is actual graces expected to be bestowed on a soul of a dead child?
Peace,
DS
We dont know how long the spirit dwells among the remains. That is why the priest has no problem baptizing an infant in such cases. In Orthodoxy a soul can remain with the remains for a while after all signs of life are gone.My priest baptised my stillborn baby. I had no problem with it. If the child was dead and it is simply symbolic, so what? It is a beautiful symbol of intent. If there are actual graces bestowed, all the better. What’s the big deal? My child also received a full Catholic Mass funeral. So?
I am sure someone will correct me if I am in error, however, I don’t believe that early Catholics ever baptized the dead…the Seducces (sp) practiced this and Paul was saying, “why are you doing this, it does no good” . Mormons baptise on behalf of the dead and use this very passage to justify it. The only phrase in scripture that Mormons use to justify this practice.It seems the early Catholics received baptism on behalf of dead persons and St Paul didn’t have a problem with it.
1Co 15:29 Otherwise, what shall they do that are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not again at all? Why are they then baptized for them?
So what would be the harm of baptizing the dead directly, especially an infant?
Because the Saraments are for the living. Once a person has physically died they can no longer receive any benefit from them.It seems the early Catholics received baptism on behalf of dead persons and St Paul didn’t have a problem with it.
1Co 15:29 Otherwise, what shall they do that are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not again at all? Why are they then baptized for them?
So what would be the harm of baptizing the dead directly, especially an infant?
A person can only desire Baptism for themselves, you cannot desire Baptism for someone else. Sacraments cannot be celebrated remotely. Sacraments are always celebrated with an individual, physically present.What I wonder is whether baptism of desire can apply here. If a mother is Catholic, then she has the desire to baptize her newborn immeditately after birth at the soonest possible time. So perhaps baptism of desire can apply in these cases. An infant does not get to decide whether he or she wants to be baptized anyways. Also, if this is not the case then why don’t priest baptize babies when they are in the womb? I can make an abortion argument based on this as well now that I think about it.
He’s referring to the benefit of the sacramental grace, not the emotional benefit.Sometimes the benefit is to the living, the parents.
I would agree that there are benefits to the community as well from the Rites surrounding the Sacraments.Sometimes the benefit is to the living, the parents.
but an infant can’t desire baptism yet he or she is baptized. If an infant can’t desire baptism, then whose desire is it to have the infant baptized? Therefore, I still think a parent’s desire for baptism would apply to an infant. Either that or infant baptism does not seem valid to me.A person can only desire Baptism for themselves, you cannot desire Baptism for someone else. Sacraments cannot be celebrated remotely. Sacraments are always celebrated with an individual, physically present.