Filius illegitimus- Baptism Record

[catholicconvert2020]

So I was looking at my Father’s baptism record in my Parish’s Baptism Register and saw the words filius illegitimus in the comment area of his record. I googled the translation which means “illegitimate son” which I don’t understand since my grandparents were married the year before his birth (they did not get married in the church and were married by a Methodist Minister). My Grandfather also was not Catholic. If anyone with experience about church laws back in the 1967 or sacrament record notations could help me figure this out that would be greatly appreciated. I am discerning the priesthood and just don’t want this to be an issue.

 

[TMC]

I am discerning the priesthood and just don’t want this to be an issue.

I could speculate, but I am guessing someone here will know for sure so I won’t answer on the filius illegitimus issue. BUT, why would the legitimacy (or lack) of your father (or you, even) have anything to do with your discernment?

 

[catholicconvert2020]

@TMC I am recently new to the Faith (hence the username) so I heard from someone that years ago they use to bar people from seminary if there was an illegitimacy issue but they probably got bad info like I did. However, it probably doesn’t effect me since I was baptized into a different Christian denomination and converted.

 

[catholicconvert2020]

@(name removed by moderator) I am aware of the 5-year wait requirement.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

So I was looking at my Father’s baptism record in my Parish’s Baptism Register and saw the words filius illegitimus in the comment area of his record. I googled the translation which means “illegitimate son” which I don’t understand since my grandparents were married the year before his birth (they did not get married in the church and were married by a Methodist Minister). My Grandfather also was not Catholic. If anyone with experience about church laws back in the 1967 or sacrament record notations could help me figure this out that would be greatly appreciated. I am discerning the priesthood and just don’t want this to be an issue.

Was your grandmother Catholic, but not married in the Church at the time your father was born?

If so, then the Church would not have regarded your grandparents as being validly married (unless there were some sort of dispensation from canonical form for their marriage, or a sanatio in radice), thus I have to think that any children from their marriage would have been regarded as illegitimate.

I will welcome correction on this, if in fact I am wrong. “Illegitimate” is an ugly word to use to refer to a child in the first place, and I’d like to see it fall out of common usage. The circumstances of a child’s parents have no bearing whatsoever on what that child “is”. As a friend of mine once said (liberal Protestant local politician, now deceased), there are no illegitimate children — only illegitimate parents.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

@TMC I am recently new to the Faith (hence the username) so I heard from someone that years ago they use to bar people from seminary if there was an illegitimacy issue but they probably got bad info like I did.

If that was ever the case, I imagine it was only locally and years and years ago. I can’t imagine there being any reason an illegitimate child couldn’t become a priest.

 

[catholicconvert2020]

@HomeschoolDad yes my Grandmother is a baptized Catholic (and is still practicing her faith at 76 years old) and did not get married in the Church. My Uncle who came a few years after my dad does not have that Latin phrase on his baptism.

Also the Bishops actually encourage priests from refraining from using that word in official registers.

 

[1ke]

so I heard from someone that years ago they use to bar people from seminary if there was an illegitimacy issue but they probably got bad info like I did. However, it probably doesn’t effect me since I was baptized into a different Christian denomination and converted.

What used to be isn’t relevant. And yes, illegitimacy was an impediment to orders in previous periods of Church law.

What matters for you is the current code of canon law.

In the current code, illegitimacy is not an impediment. Even if it were, it could be dispensed.

I am discerning the priesthood and just don’t want this to be an issue.

Even when it was an impediment, it was the aspirant’s legitimacy at issue, not that if their parent.

So I was looking at my Father’s baptism record in my Parish’s Baptism Register

So… is your father deceased? I’m curious as to why you would have access to those records, they aren’t public.

which I don’t understand since my grandparents were married the year before his birth (they did not get married in the church and were married by a Methodist Minister). My Grandfather also was not Catholic.

This would be a question for your grandparents, but likely it had to do with your grandparents being in an invalid marriage.

A civil marriage would not have been sufficient as far as church law was concerned regarding legitimacy.

 

[catholicconvert2020]

@1ke no he is 52 and very much alive. I work for my Parish and I handle the sacrament record requests.

 

[1ke]

If that was ever the case, I imagine it was only locally and years and years ago.

It was universal, and part of the code until the 1983 revision.

I can’t imagine there being any reason an illegitimate child couldn’t become a priest.

Well, canon law prohibiting it would be a reason. But it doesn’t, currently.

 

[1ke]

yes my Grandmother is a baptized Catholic (and is still practicing her faith at 76 years old) and did not get married in the Church. My Uncle who came a few years after my dad does not have that Latin phrase on his baptism.

Perhaps your grandmother corrected her marital status in the church between the two children.

In such case, your father’s record should have been notated as subsequent marriage of the parents would have changed his status to legitimate.

But that’s water under the bridge. It isn’t relevant in the current code of canon law.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I heard from someone that years ago they use to bar people from seminary if there was an illegitimacy issue

1ke beat me to it. I was going to say that the current canon law doesn’t have this bar any more and that even when it did (before 1983), the concern would be whether you yourself were illegitimate, not your dad. The reason was that the Church didn’t want men who were embarrassed or otherwise inconvenienced by having an illegitimate son around shuffling the kid off into the monastery or seminary and effectively making the priesthood a dumping ground for their unwanted sons. In those days the seminaries would take the boys at much younger ages and start to train them as priests.

 

[1ke]

The reason was that the Church didn’t want men who were embarrassed or otherwise inconvenienced by having an illegitimate son around shuffling the kid off into the monastery or seminary and effectively making the priesthood a dumping ground for their unwanted sons.

Or the place illegitimate sons of priests went to make a career and receive income streams bestowed upon them by their high ranking fathers.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

It was universal, and part of the code until the 1983 revision.

Seriously? What was the rationale?

Edit: I see it’s already been explained. Still seems totally bananas.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Edit: I see it’s already been explained. Still seems totally bananas.

Not really. The Church has kind of a long history of monasteries being used as respectable places for well-off donors to put family members who they didn’t want around them. It’s one reason why religious orders have needed reform from time to time.

Exceptions/ dispensations could be made if the illegitimate son appeared truly called by God.

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

Seems like it would have been better just to assess that during the application/discernment process.

“Do you actually want to be here or are you being shuffled off so you don’t embarrass your family?” seems like the kind of question the application process would be intended to address.

Also, it’s not like you can drop a baby off at a seminary and they’re in the priesthood pipeline. If the goal is to hide the product of dads affair, you would have to had to keep him locked in the attic for at least what, 12-13 years before you could pack them off to the seminary?

Not to mention the basic problem of penalizing/stigmatizing the boy for the sins of his parents.

 

[Anesti33]

If the goal is to hide the product of dads affair, you would have to had to keep him locked in the attic for at least what, 12-13 years before you could pack them off to the seminary?

Once those owls start coming through the window and a magical giant busts down your door, it would be unavoidable at that point.