Do that many people still baptize their children within the first few weeks of birth?

[smswife]

When pregnant with my first child, I was discussing the problem of planning for an early baptism with a coworker who is Jewish.

She just smiled and pointed out that when she was pregnant, she had to plan for a bris on exactly the 8th day!

If they can do it, we can do it.

 

[jilly4ski]

If the preparations are made prior to birth, it is easier. One ought to schedule the baptism and fill out paperwork prenatally.

You can’t fill out the baby’s name, sex, or birth date until the baby is born.

We were born in 1953, 1954 & 1958. We were baptized on the first Sunday after Mom came out of the hospital so we were between 10 & 14 days old. Mom never saw any of those baptisms because back in those days women didn’t leave the house until their 6 week check-up. So in 1958, when my baby brother was baptized, my other brother and I were there along with Dad and the proxy godparents (godparents were off on a day trip) but Mom was home. I still remember it although I was only 5. In those days the baptistry was a fenced off area in the sacristy. I remember the face JL made when the priest put the salt in his mouth.

In this parish, after you’ve done the preparation, all you have to do is call by Wednesday or Thursday and you can have your child baptized at Saturday evening or Sunday morning Mass (if there is a priest in town which, for the past year, hasn’t been a given). We don’t do paperwork until after the baptism, too well aware that there are often last minute changes in the godparents.

My mom was born in 1950. But grandma had all her kids at home.

That is cool that your parish can do that so quickly. (Dependent on the priests schedule of course). And that they do the paper work later (I think that would solve a lot of these other issues that are used to delay baptism.

 

[babochka]

When pregnant with my first child, I was discussing the problem of planning for an early baptism with a coworker who is Jewish.

She just smiled and pointed out that when she was pregnant, she had to plan for a bris on exactly the 8th day!

If they can do it, we can do it.

I believe the bris is done at home. That’s always helpful.

 

[JGMendes4049]

You can’t fill out the baby’s name, sex, or birth date until the baby is born.

My point is, everything that can be done before birth to prepare for baptism should be done.

 

[tafan]

I can say this:

If I get married and have children (I am discerning the priesthood), I will be absolutely positively certain, within the best of my human ability, to have my child(ren) baptized within a week of birth. Preferably the first day possible. And then I will make sure to stress to all my parish friends that they should do the same.

Stick to your guns!!! Definitely doable, or dang close. and you are correct in your thinking… As to the response about recovery time of mother; it is possible. Hospitals kick you out the next day; assuming a vaginal birth, within 3 or 4 days will be possible for most mothers to get out for this; it’s not that strenuous. And if a c-section or other complication on mother’s recovery: well I am pretty sure the church does not require both parents to be present. Yea, that might sound extreme; but that attitude sure makes more sense than the: “let’s just wait a few months until all the plans for a big event fall perfectly into place”. That is extreme: extremely wrong.

 

[RPRPsych]

I think this varies from country to country.

I was born around 30 years ago, and was baptised within three weeks or so of being born. Things have remained more or less the same since then. In my home city, most baptisms do take place within a month or two of birth, at least if I go by the parish bulletin

 

[tafan]

I did a quick review of church law. It is quite clear:

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.

I think the Church is giving parents quite a break with a “few weeks”; nevertheless, it is obvious that anything over 2 months would be quite sinful (for whoever was responsiblefor the delay). It would be quite a stretch that the church intended “a few weeks” to really mean “2 or 3 months”. The church is obviously not trying to be overlly legalistic with a hard and fast time frame; regardless, it does specifically command a time frame.

 

[babochka]

. My due date was just after Easter and the parish does not do baptisms during Lent, so the first several weeks after Easter were already filled up.

Is this a common practice? I’ve never heard of it.

 

[anp1215]

Our parish offers a baptism class once a month on Saturday from 9-12. Baptisms take place once a month at 3:00 on Sunday. Spanish baptism classes are offered four times a year and Spanish baptism take place every other month during the Spanish Mass on Sunday. Godparents are encouraged to attend but not required.

We have a large parish (4800 families) and I think this is a pretty good setup. Having a baptism service once a month is a good way to ensure that people don’t have to wait too long to have their baby baptized.

At the parish where my goddaughter was baptized (also a large parish of maybe 4000 families), parents and godparents have to attend two classes, on Tuesday nights two weeks apart. This can be a little harder to coordinate, especially if parents and godparents work different schedules.

 

[anp1215]

I didn’t have formal classes. Well, I’m a catechist, so the priest trusts me I know what I have to know I only have to ask questions regarding baptism in the Eastern Rite as this was our first baptism in the Ukrainian-Byzantine Rite.

My sponsor’s husband taught RCIA and BOW in our parish. He received a bachelors in theology from a Catholic University a few days before their baby was born (he now has a masters and is pursuing a doctorate). He is the most orthodox Catholic I know. His beliefs are 100% in line with the Church, which is unfortunately more than I can say about many of the clergy at our parish. They still made them take the baptism class. It was pretty silly.

 

[jilly4ski]

My point is, everything that can be done before birth to prepare for baptism should be done.

But that is the thing, in a large busy parish, even scheduling the baptism before hand is a problem. This is my third child and she is late (3 days now), my second was early 10 days (which put his baptism a week later than my first child’s), and my first was right on time. That is pretty good, but my mother had almost all of her children very early anywhere from 5 to 2 weeks early (except for me who was 5 days late). So, if a parish only offers baptisms once a month, and you schedule baptisms for the first one available after your due date, and you go 4 weeks early, your child is suddenly 2 months old at their baptism.

But yes, if the parish requires classes, then they should be done before hand (if possible). And other things like know which days are available, and get what paper work can be done, before hand. But that still doesn’t ensure that you can get your child baptized within the first few weeks (depending on the bureaucracy in the parish).

 

[tafan]

But that is the thing, in a large busy parish, even scheduling the baptism before hand is a problem. This is my third child and she is late (3 days now), my second was early 10 days (which put his baptism a week later than my first child’s), and my first was right on time. That is pretty good, but my mother had almost all of her children very early anywhere from 5 to 2 weeks early (except for me who was 5 days late). So, if a parish only offers baptisms once a month, and you schedule baptisms for the first one available after your due date, and you go 4 weeks early, your child is suddenly 2 months old at their baptism.

But yes, if the parish requires classes, then they should be done before hand (if possible). And other things like know which days are available, and get what paper work can be done, before hand. But that still doesn’t ensure that you can get your child baptized within the first few weeks (depending on the bureaucracy in the parish).

Let me get this straight: your parish has batisms only once a month at a set time? You have to schdedule your child at that baptism more than a month in advance? Assuming you have had the class, you cannot be included in the next monthly baptism?

Unbelievable, your parish staff and pastor must have become blind bureaucrats. Quite sad.

 

[ringil]

I did a quick review of church law. It is quite clear:

I think the Church is giving parents quite a break with a “few weeks”; nevertheless, it is obvious that anything over 2 months would be quite sinful (for whoever was responsiblefor the delay). It would be quite a stretch that the church intended “a few weeks” to really mean “2 or 3 months”. The church is obviously not trying to be overlly legalistic with a hard and fast time frame; regardless, it does specifically command a time frame.

Do you have a source to your claim of “sinfulness” in not having your child baptised by a certain time- you state “a few weeks”.

 

[tafan]

Do you have a source to your claim of “sinfulness” in not having your child baptised by a certain time- you state “a few weeks”.

I provided the source: Canon 867 specifically defines what a parents’ obligations in this regard is. Disobeying church law is objectively sinful. You doubt that?

This is part is only my opinion: but I would have to assume it is grave matter in this particular case. I have not found that spelled out, but it seems only logical. Baptism is necessary for salvation, the Church says we can only “entrust unbaptized infants to the mercy of God” and that we allowed to hope “that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism”. But the Church does not know of any other certainty than Baptism. All of this seems consistent as a purpose for canon 867. This is a BIG deal. Not some nice excuse for for inviting the grandparents over and celebrating the birth of a new baby.

 

[mt_gooseberry]

Wow, I had no idea it was actually a sin to delay your child’s baptism. My 2 were baptized on the same day, at ages 2 and 4mo. My husband was stuck in another country for most of our DD’s infancy. I didn’t want to do it without him. I was pregnant again soon after he came home, and at that point we decided to just get them both done at the same time. It took us 4mo to get the baptism set up because our dear 82-yo priest (who retired and said his last mass with us last Sunday) is very sloooowww at this point. I will admit, though that every day that passed without getting my kids baptized left me feeling gross.

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

Let me get this straight: your parish has batisms only once a month at a set time? You have to schdedule your child at that baptism more than a month in advance? Assuming you have had the class, you cannot be included in the next monthly baptism?

Unbelievable, your parish staff and pastor must have become blind bureaucrats. Quite sad.

Every parish I’m familiar with does the same thing. Maybe back in the day, when there was a pastor, assistant pastor, and a couple of curates (a word that has since disappeared), Baptisms were handled differently. But with one-priest parishes, not so much. Actually in our place the deacon does 95% of the Baptisms, and as a Dad himself is much more comfortable around kids than our pastor is.

 

[ringil]

Wow, I had no idea it was actually a sin to delay your child’s baptism. My 2 were baptized on the same day, at ages 2 and 4mo. My husband was stuck in another country for most of our DD’s infancy. I didn’t want to do it without him. I was pregnant again soon after he came home, and at that point we decided to just get them both done at the same time. It took us 4mo to get the baptism set up because our dear 82-yo priest (who retired and said his last mass with us last Sunday) is very sloooowww at this point. I will admit, though that every day that passed without getting my kids baptized left me feeling gross.

Talk to a priest regarding whether you sinned in this matter. If indeed a sin, it certainly wasn’t grave, at least given how you present your situation.

 

[tafan]

Talk to a priest regarding whether you sinned in this matter. If indeed a sin, it certainly wasn’t grave, at least given how you present your situation.

Likely not culpable at all, due to ignorance. Now as for those pastors who do not make this parental responsibility known? That is another matter.

 

[jilly4ski]

Let me get this straight: your parish has batisms only once a month at a set time? You have to schdedule your child at that baptism more than a month in advance? Assuming you have had the class, you cannot be included in the next monthly baptism?

Unbelievable, your parish staff and pastor must have become blind bureaucrats. Quite sad.

Well, the parish I am in now seems rather flexible about baptisms. But the class is indeed given only once every 2 months. The next one is the 16th of July. We only just joined this parish and missed the one in May. The schedule had no baptism dates open from July 16th until August. Which meant if my baby had been born on June 23rd we could not have had her baptized before August, unless the class requirement was waived. (Like I said, the parish is in the middle of a priest transition, so I am hoping he will be willing to do the baptism sometime before August).

The Parish my other 2 were born in, only had baptisms 2 out of the 4 weekends a month. But I have been acquainted with other parishes that only have baptisms once every month. Usually they are big parishes with lots of children, and lots of bureaucracy because they can’t deal with everyone on an individual basis. So they make everyone follow the same set of rules regardless, which means delay, for those who have moved, those in extraordinary circumstances (like military) or etc.

 

[Phemie]

I provided the source: Canon 867 specifically defines what a parents’ obligations in this regard is. Disobeying church law is objectively sinful. You doubt that?

This is part is only my opinion: but I would have to assume it is grave matter in this particular case. I have not found that spelled out, but it seems only logical. Baptism is necessary for salvation, the Church says we can only “entrust unbaptized infants to the mercy of God” and that we allowed to hope “that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism”. But the Church does not know of any other certainty than Baptism. All of this seems consistent as a purpose for canon 867. This is a BIG deal. Not some nice excuse for for inviting the grandparents over and celebrating the birth of a new baby.

To be fair, that’s not a Precept of the Church and most people know nothing about Canon Law so there is little sin involved here.

You also have priests who will only baptize once a month and who put a limit on how many children they will baptize at any given time. Not to mention those who will categorically not baptize during Lent although there is no reason not to do so. So parents aren’t always the only ones to blame. Our last Pastor only baptized during a Sunday Mass but he only wanted to celebrate one Sunday Baptism every 3 months. Every other Baptism had to be at the Saturday evening Sunday Mass.