Help - baptism/godmother question

[SAVINGRACE]

I need advice. My good friend who I first met as a work colleague has married her same sex partner. She claims to be a practicing Catholic. I had no idea she is a lesbian as the time we worked together she had a boyfriend. She has asked me to be godmother to their newborn “daughters” baptism. This 5month baby is very sick and has been in/out of hospital since she was born. I don’t know what the right thing to do is, I don’t want to punish the child for their sins, I treasure the friendship but I don’t want to them to think I approve of their relationship.

Initially my husband said “No way are we attending, let alone me being the godmother of the baby”. A few days later he said “it’s my decision to make and he will support me”. I am so stressed out at the moment over this and prayer is not helping me make the decision.

Her Priest is okay with doing the baptism which she was very pleasantly surprised about according to her facebook post.

My Priest advised that I can act as the baby’s godmother and that I may be this child’s only link to the Church. He advised to separate the baby from the relationship. He also advised that I need to have that “talk” with the couple, the difficult one where I tell them that I do not and will never approve of SSM. He said I also need to tell them that I take the role of godmother seriously and everything that it entails including caring for the spiritual wellbeing of the child which may be in contradiction to their understanding. He said they should know that before the baptism so the final decision is made with all information out in the open that way we minimise arguments/disagreements later on.

How do I tell them, what words do I us without alienating them?

Please help, any advice would be much appreciated. I’m sorry my post is all over the place the baptism is next week and I’m desperate.

 

[AdamP88]

I think there may be no way to tell them this without alienating them.

You’re essentially going to be telling them that you completely disagree with their lifestyle and believe it’s sinful, and you will, in being the godmother of their child, also instruct the child that it is sinful.

I am surprised they found a priest willing to do the baptism. The child is not supposed to be baptised if the parents are not living in accordance with the laws of the Church and have no intention of bringing the child up in the faith.

 

[Gorgias]

I am surprised they found a priest willing to do the baptism.

You shouldn’t be. He’s doing what the Church asks of him.

The child is not supposed to be baptised if the parents are not living in accordance with the laws of the Church and have no intention of bringing the child up in the faith.

No, that’s not quite true. Whether or not the “parents are living in accordance with the laws of the Church” is irrelevant to the question of whether the child can be baptized. The only thing that matters is whether there is “a founded hope that the infant will be brought up in the Catholic religion.”

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I need advice. My good friend who I first met as a work colleague has married her same sex partner. She claims to be a practicing Catholic. I had no idea she is a lesbian as the time we worked together she had a boyfriend. She has asked me to be godmother to their newborn “daughters” baptism. This 5month baby is very sick and has been in/out of hospital since she was born. I don’t know what the right thing to do is, I don’t want to punish the child for their sins, I treasure the friendship but I don’t want to them to think I approve of their relationship.

Initially my husband said “No way are we attending, let alone me being the godmother of the baby”. A few days later he said “it’s my decision to make and he will support me”. I am so stressed out at the moment over this and prayer is not helping me make the decision.

Her Priest is okay with doing the baptism /…/

My Priest advised that I can act as the baby’s godmother and that I may be this child’s only link to the Church. He advised to separate the baby from the relationship. He also advised that I need to have that “talk” with the couple, the difficult one where I tell them that I do not and will never approve of SSM. He said I also need to tell them that I take the role of godmother seriously and everything that it entails including caring for the spiritual wellbeing of the child which may be in contradiction to their understanding. He said they should know that before the baptism so the final decision is made with all information out in the open that way we minimise arguments/disagreements later on.

How do I tell them, what words do I us without alienating them?

Please help, any advice would be much appreciated. I’m sorry my post is all over the place the baptism is next week and I’m desperate.

I’m beyond reluctant to give advice that is at variance to what a confrere in the priesthood has offered. He knows you and should be in a better position to offer advice to you than a priest who is writing without knowledge of the persons involved

That said, you qualify that the baby is “very sick” and has been in and out of the hospital since birth. This is an alarming situation and, depending on the child’s underlying condition(s), it’s potentially dire; the baby’s baptism should not be delayed at all. As I used to tell my students, one reaches a threshold pastorally…if there is a prospect of the danger of death, a priest must act because you can’t go back and correct that deficiency, if you make the wrong choice and the patient dies without the benefit of the sacraments that you could have provided

Beyond those points, I am having trouble reconciling all the threads of what you relate

The first priest you cite is correct to do the baptism – in fact, he actually doesn’t need a founded hope that the baby will be brought up in the faith as that is overridden by the prospect that the baby may not survive. The priest can act on the basis of canon 867 §2 and even canon 868 §2 to justify his decision

Frankly, more than any advice I can attempt to give you in this forum, I would suggest you contact this priest to speak about your concerns. He’s the only priest in this situation who has the cura animarum for the baby – and that is where the priority rests. He seems best positioned to help you with the decision, in turn, that you must make

The second priest is correct that you, potentially, may be the child’s vital link to the Church; I agree with that assessment, based on what you wrote. Given the baby’s illness, yes, there is a need to separate the baby from the caregivers. I’m in agreement with that point as well

Beyond that, you characterise his advice and it is unclear to me whose thoughts are being expressed – yours, his, or some combination thereof

Hoping and praying that the child survives the present health crisis/crises, I’m not sure in the near term what intervention you could possibly make, as the baby’s sponsor, that would be meaningful beyond prayer

Even when the child reaches the age of reason – and assuming there is no developmental delay or permanent disability as a result of the challenges the child has faced since birth – there’s going to be little for you to actually say or do, even in those years. Being a positive influence. Being one encouraging faith formation and preparation for receiving the other sacraments (which is more a role of advocating) seem to be the most that you can hope for in those years. There’s a point beyond which you can’t take matters into your own hands

Potentially, as the child matures and questions may arise, there may be occasions for you to discreetly and diplomatically offer positive aid and be a voice for expression of the Church’s mind

Your role in the child’s formation in the faith will obviously be limited; it will be subordinate to the custodial caregivers and any attempt to explain the living situation of those caring for the child could have negative consequences for you, the child, and these two women, if done imprudently or in an untimely fashion. You would be able, presuming the friendship continues for years (which is itself an assumption), to perhaps play a positive role in the child’s life

The best advice, again, that I can offer is to consult the priest who is doing the baptism. Clearly, he has reached a judgment about how he needs to proceed and will, from that perspective, hopefully have useful thoughts for you as you discern what you are willing to do in this circumstance. I would suggest reaching out to him as soon as possible to try to make a decision as early as possible. If you can’t assume this role, someone needs to, for the child’s sake

I will only add that, assuming the veracity of the fact that the child is, in truth, very ill, I don’t think any actor in this scenario should act in a way that threatens to leave the child unbaptised

 

[Lily_Bernans]

If you treasure the friendship, just be the baby’s godmother without quibbles. Don’t have “the talk” with the couple. They probably guess what you think of their relationship anyway. The child is the important person here. Consider the child and be the godmother without passing judgment on the relationship of the parents. I don’t approve of everything my friends do, nor do they approve of everything I do, but we don’t go around telling one another we disapprove. Your friend has made her relationship decision. You should step in as they asked and be a link to Christ for this child, who I hope sees healthier days ahead.

 

[SAVINGRACE]

I’m beyond reluctant to give advice that is at variance to what a confrere in the priesthood has offered. He knows you and should be in a better position to offer advice to you than a priest who is writing without knowledge of the persons involved

That said, you qualify that the baby is “very sick” and has been in and out of the hospital since birth. This is an alarming situation and, depending on the child’s underlying condition(s), it’s potentially dire; the baby’s baptism should not be delayed at all. As I used to tell my students, one reaches a threshold pastorally…if there is a prospect of the danger of death, a priest must act because you can’t go back and correct that deficiency, if you make the wrong choice and the patient dies without the benefit of the sacraments that you could have provided

Beyond those points, I am having trouble reconciling all the threads of what you relate

The first priest you cite is correct to do the baptism – in fact, he actually doesn’t need a founded hope that the baby will be brought up in the faith as that is overridden by the prospect that the baby may not survive. The priest can act on the basis of canon 867 §2 and even canon 868 §2 to justify his decision

Frankly, more than any advice I can attempt to give you in this forum, I would suggest you contact this priest to speak about your concerns. He’s the only priest in this situation who has the cura animarum for the baby – and that is where the priority rests. He seems best positioned to help you with the decision, in turn, that you must make

The second priest is correct that you, potentially, may be the child’s vital link to the Church; I agree with that assessment, based on what you wrote. Given the baby’s illness, yes, there is a need to separate the baby from the caregivers. I’m in agreement with that point as well

Beyond that, you characterise his advice and it is unclear to me whose thoughts are being expressed – yours, his, or some combination thereof

Hoping and praying that the child survives the present health crisis/crises, I’m not sure in the near term what intervention you could possibly make, as the baby’s sponsor, that would be meaningful beyond prayer

Even when the child reaches the age of reason – and assuming there is no developmental delay or permanent disability as a result of the challenges the child has faced since birth – there’s going to be little for you to actually say or do, even in those years. Being a positive influence. Being one encouraging faith formation and preparation for receiving the other sacraments (which is more a role of advocating) seem to be the most that you can hope for in those years. There’s a point beyond which you can’t take matters into your own hands

Potentially, as the child matures and questions may arise, there may be occasions for you to discreetly and diplomatically offer positive aid and be a voice for expression of the Church’s mind

Your role in the child’s formation in the faith will obviously be limited; it will be subordinate to the custodial caregivers and any attempt to explain the living situation of those caring for the child could have negative consequences for you, the child, and these two women, if done imprudently or in an untimely fashion. You would be able, presuming the friendship continues for years (which is itself an assumption), to perhaps play a positive role in the child’s life

The best advice, again, that I can offer is to consult the priest who is doing the baptism. Clearly, he has reached a judgment about how he needs to proceed and will, from that perspective, hopefully have useful thoughts for you as you discern what you are willing to do in this circumstance. I would suggest reaching out to him as soon as possible to try to make a decision as early as possible. If you can’t assume this role, someone needs to, for the child’s sake

I will only add that, assuming the veracity of the fact that the child is, in truth, very ill, I don’t think any actor in this scenario should act in a way that threatens to leave the child unbaptised

Thank you Don,

You were right, I have just had a chat to the baptising Priest and feel unburdened. My prayers were answered when I read your suggestion. Why didn’t I think of that? The immediate priority is the baby.

I am ashamed of how selfish I have been about this. Regardless of what my husband or I think, the fact is two separate Priests stated that it’s okay to baptise the baby and act as godparent. Why did we complicate the issue and second guess? Everything else can be dealt with another day.

Thank you again, a weight has lifted. :hug1:

Please keep baby Emma in your prayers.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Thank you Don,

You were right, I have just had a chat to the baptising Priest and feel unburdened. My prayers were answered when I read your suggestion. Why didn’t I think of that? The immediate priority is the baby.

You mustn’t feel badly. I may have had a little bit more experience at this than you’ve had.

I am ashamed of how selfish I have been about this. Regardless of what my husband or I think, the fact is two separate Priests stated that it’s okay to baptise the baby and act as godparent. Why did we complicate the issue and second guess? Everything else can be dealt with another day.

Actually…three priests are saying it’s okay to baptise the baby.

In any event, I am just praying the baby can pull through whatever is wrong…and go on to have a long and healthy life.

You mustn’t be ashamed, please. There are several values here to protect and you are obviously conscientious and want to do the right thing regarding all the concerns. That’s good.

Thank you again, a weight has lifted. :hug1:

Please keep baby Emma in your prayers.

You’re very welcome! I will gladly remember Emma…and all of you…in my Masses and prayers.

I am so glad the priest who will do the baptism was in fact able to help you and to reassure you. That’s a cause of relief also for me. It can be hard to try to help via an Internet forum.

God bless you!

 

[AdamP88]

You shouldn’t be. He’s doing what the Church asks of him.

No, that’s not quite true. Whether or not the “parents are living in accordance with the laws of the Church” is irrelevant to the question of whether the child can be baptized. The only thing that matters is whether there is “a founded hope that the infant will be brought up in the Catholic religion.”

But is there really a founded hope,in this situation, that the child would be brought up in the faith? I some countries parents are required to demonstrate their commitment to the church before they have their child baptised.

 

[mommy_k]

But is there really a founded hope,in this situation, that the child would be brought up in the faith? I some countries parents are required to demonstrate their commitment to the church before they have their child baptised.

I would think you can’t punish a baby for the sins of the parents.
I am sure they have to go to a pre-baptism meeting to see what is required given this circumstance.

There are many broken families these days, and the church is clear that we are to minister to them, with the hope of full conversion. A loving and religious godparent such as the op combined with a welcoming church is a step in this direction.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I think the baby should be baptized and am grateful they wish to do this. But I would never, ever be the godparent.

The oddity of flaunting one sacrament but not another in a church that deems that union sinful and wrong is odd to me.

I would ask them why did they want to baptize. There can really not be a theological reason in thier minds. I would be unable to keep my mouth shut about a gospel that required that family to disband.

That being said. Pope Francis baptized the baby of lesbians. And his reasoning for wanting to liberalize the rite of baptism makes theological sense to me.

I just could not do it.

 

[Padres1969]

I think the baby should be baptized and am grateful they wish to do this. But I would never, ever be the godparent.

The oddity of flaunting one sacrament but not another in a church that deems that union sinful and wrong is odd to me.

**I would ask them why did they want to baptize. There can really not be a theological reason in thier minds. ** I would be unable to keep my mouth shut about a gospel that required that family to disband.

That being said. Pope Francis baptized the baby of lesbians. And his reasoning for wanting to liberalize the rite of baptism makes theological sense to me.

I just could not do it.

Wanting the saving grace of Christ granted to a child is not reason enough to want them baptized?

 

[Magdalen2013]

I think the baby should be baptized and am grateful they wish to do this. But I would never, ever be the godparent.

That being said. Pope Francis baptized the baby of lesbians. And his reasoning for wanting to liberalize the rite of baptism makes theological sense to me.

I just could not do it.

Really, you couldn’t do the merciful, loving, action? It’s NOT Baby Emma’s fault that her parents are in a sinful relationship. A godparent who cares about the child, a priest who sees the soul to be sustained not the sins of her parents, and a loving parish will go a long way to seeing Emma safely into the Church.

This is a future saint we are talking about – and we are all called to be saints.

Is your heart TRULY so small?

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Wanting the saving grace of Christ granted to a child is not reason enough to want them baptized?

I would wonder why the believe in one sacrament of the church but not the other.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I would wonder why the believe in one sacrament of the church but not the other.

It is utterly irrelevant to the pastoral decision being made in this situation by the priest who has the cura animarum for the child.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Really, you couldn’t do the merciful, loving, action? It’s NOT Baby Emma’s fault that her parents are in a sinful relationship. A godparent who cares about the child, a priest who sees the soul to be sustained not the sins of her parents, and a loving parish will go a long way to seeing Emma safely into the Church.

This is a future saint we are talking about – and we are all called to be saints.

Is your heart TRULY so small?

Did you miss the part where I said the child should be baptized. For me, I could not see a reasonable chance to help this child be truly Catholic without condemning the parents relationship. That is not a small heart. It’s honest introspection.

I’m always astonished at the intolerance and judgementalism and even name calling from the so called tolerance crowd. I wonder, would you use the same condemnation against the actual sinners who flaunt the church and her sacraments. In this case the lesbians?

 

[Magdalen2013]

I didn’t miss it – I guess I just look at it from a slightly different point to view.

 

[Chatter163]

Wanting the saving grace of Christ granted to a child is not reason enough to want them baptized?

If you’d like to have a discussion where you seek to understand Catholic teaching, please ask a specific question.

 

[Gorgias]

But is there really a founded hope,in this situation, that the child would be brought up in the faith?

Don R is right, here – in responding to your list of ‘criteria’, I forgot the part about the infant still having medical problems – so, when “in danger of death”, all other considerations go out the window!

But, in a ‘normal’ situation, the considerations you listed aren’t what’s necessary. So, there’s the need to judge whether there’s a ‘founded hope’; that’s up to the priest to determine.

I some countries parents are required to demonstrate their commitment to the church before they have their child baptised.

And, in that situation, that’s what the appropriate pastor has determined that demonstrates a ‘founded hope.’ Not all would say that this is how one demonstrates that the child will be raised in the faith. (And, I hope, ‘demonstrate their commitment’ isn’t code for “donate to the parish”!!! )

 

[Padres1969]

I would wonder why the believe in one sacrament of the church but not the other.

Who says they don’t believe in the other sacraments? Or Catholic teaching in general? You’re basically presupposing that their views on homosexuality would override the hope that the child would be raised Catholic in every other respect. Homosexuality is only one issue among a myriad of other issues both moral and temporal that Catholicism teaches on or has positions on. Frankly I’d view this little different than a couple who are not known to be regular church attendees (and thus regular mortal sinners), someone who never goes to confession, or a regular attending so called Cafeteria Catholic asking to have their child baptized. Situations which happen regularly around the world with little or no objection.

 

[Padres1969]

If you’d like to have a discussion where you seek to understand Catholic teaching, please ask a specific question.

I did ask a question, but it wasn’t directed to you