In-laws baptized our children without permission

[EasterJoy]

Easterjoy, although you have a lot of posts, you do not speak for the Catholic Church.

What I said clearly is that the grandparents erred; however, the error of the OP greater than the error of the grandparents.

I suggest the OP read a little on Padre Pio as this Saint gave straight answers to the questions of many nonbelievers.

The OP has chosen to neglect the spiritual upbringing of his children and come to a Catholic Forum to enforce his perspective.

You have chosen to ignore this.

I have not.

That is where we differ.

The severity of the Church is always necessary in order to clarify our ideas. Otherwise there would be chaos. –Padre Pio

How can you send someone to the Church for answers or to Padre Pio for answers when you are arguing in favor of ignoring the Church when it doesn’t suit you? Who is going to listen to an evangelist who talks out of both sides of the mouth?

At the very beginning of this thread, 1ke, a person trained in canon law, explained the mind of the Church on this question. This is not some great mystery that has to be sent off to Rome for adjudication, it is a straight-forward issue! What the OP has failed to do does not give anyone else, not a priest, not a bishop, and especially not his in-laws the right to usurp his natural rights as a parent. The truth is, if he and his wife had shown up at a church and said, “We have no intention of raising our children Catholic, but here, baptize them anyway to please our parents,” the priest would have been forced to turn them away until he could satisfy himself that the children would have good hope to receive all those things which the baptized have by right. Yet you argue that someone who would do even what bishops forbid their priests to do ought to keep a position of trust with a parent whose trust they have violated. You argue that it is “wise” for a parent to just ignore evidence that their in-laws feel free to ignore their parental rules (and, I might add, to lie about it by omission!) That is wise? No. That is foolish.

Padre Pio never said to anyone that “baptism means nothing.” He never said “oh, canon law, you can ignore that, Jesus was never one for the rules.” When someone came to him and said, ““Padre, I don’t believe in God,” he replied: “Why are you telling me? Tell Him!"

 

[AnnArbor]

Easterjoy, although you have a lot of posts, you do not speak for the Catholic Church.

What I said clearly is that the grandparents erred; however, the error of the OP greater than the error of the grandparents.

I suggest the OP read a little on Padre Pio as this Saint gave straight answers to the questions of many nonbelievers.

The OP has chosen to neglect the spiritual upbringing of his children and come to a Catholic Forum to enforce his perspective.

You have chosen to ignore this.

I have not.

That is where we differ.

In this instance, Easter Joy is speaking what the Church teaches. While this baptism was valid, it was illicit. And I might add, that, although he is a saint, Padre Pio does not speak for the Church either.

 

[kbachler]

The OP has chosen to neglect the spiritual upbringing of his children and come to a Catholic Forum to enforce his perspective.

I never find it convincing when posters have to resort to ad hominem attacks in order to make their post.

The OP has chosen a different route than you. The doesn’t imply that he has chosen to neglect the spiritual upbringing of his children.

 

[Country_Gal]

The grandparents clearly have severe boundary issues. Take away the whole religion aspect of it and you end up with that. They don’t even respect the boundaries set by their own church law!

I don’t blame the OP for his actions one bit. As one poster said, the same disrespect occurred from her Protestant parents trying to undermine Catholic teaching in her grandchildren.

Parents of adult children need to respect their adult children!

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Actually, there is nothing “obvious” about this at all.

I know of more than one protestant who continued to keep the commitments made in baptism after a separation/divorce or after their Catholic spouse became non-practicing.

Sorry, but my mom doesn’t even have the knowledge required to raise a catholic child, and when she was single, poor, and had an infant daughter, learning another faith to bring her child up in to honor the commitment to her abusive ex husband wasn’t her top priority, especially since she was already so involved with and committed to her own church.

Realistically, a protestant is just not likely to do that, especially since I was an infant and would have no recollection of my days in a catholic church.

To top it all off, in the yeas following her divorce, we lived with my grandmother in a 200 population town with one tiny church. The nearest catholic church was at least 30 minutes away.

 

[EasterJoy]

I never find it convincing when posters have to resort to ad hominem attacks in order to make their post.

The OP has chosen a different route than you. The doesn’t imply that he has chosen to neglect the spiritual upbringing of his children.

By his account, the OP and his wife were raised in the Church. His children do have the right not just for the spiritual upbringing of their parents’ choice, but the right to a Catholic upbringing.

The reason I do not bring that up is that I am quite sure that his in-laws have not neglected to tell him and his wife this! The Church does require him and his wife to pass the treasure of the faith on to their children, but if the parents cannot promise to do that because they have lost the faith themselves, the Church* will not *put the duties of the baptized onto children who are to be denied the means to be formed according to their baptism.

I know people who have left the Church and come back. It does not hurt to remind others of their obligations, but the return doesn’t happen by bullying. It does not happen via sacramental kidnapping. It happens by prayer, it happens by patience, it happens by living the faith personally, and it happens by trusting that God loves the innocent even more than grandparents do. I hope with all my heart that the OP and his wife do return to the Church, but in the meantime his in-laws would do well to confine themselves to the means that the Church gives them to encourage their children towards that end. The rest is in the hands of God, and cannot be forced. The OP should not be told that he ought to mutely submit to improper means towards that end, because that is not what the Church teaches.

 

[EasterJoy]

Sorry, but my mom doesn’t even have the knowledge required to raise a catholic child, and when she was single, poor, and had an infant daughter, learning another faith to bring her child up in to honor the commitment to her abusive ex husband wasn’t her top priority, especially since she was already so involved with and committed to her own church.

Realistically, a protestant is just not likely to do that, especially since I was an infant and would have no recollection of my days in a catholic church.

I don’t think 1ke was saying that your mother was culpable; we cannot know that. I would be the last to argue that the circumstances you cite are not mitigating.

She was saying that parents who were not Catholic themselves but who married Catholics in appreciation of the duties of a Catholic parent have taken their children’s right to be Catholic seriously. Yes, non-Catholic custodial parents have heroically seen to it that the child’s rights, neglected by the Catholic parent, were honored by the non-Catholic parent. They know a promise was made to the Church when they married in the Church, and they decide that they will see that promise kept. That is possible, a person who does not know how can find help to do it, and it is a very praiseworthy thing to do.

It is a bit off-topic, however, as both the OP and his wife were raised Catholic.

 

[1ke]

Sorry, but my mom doesn’t even have the knowledge required to raise a catholic child, and when she was single, poor, and had an infant daughter, learning another faith to bring her child up in to honor the commitment to her abusive ex husband wasn’t her top priority, especially since she was already so involved with and committed to her own church.

Realistically, a protestant is just not likely to do that, especially since I was an infant and would have no recollection of my days in a catholic church.

To top it all of, in the yeas following her divorce, we lived with my grandmother in a 200 population town with one tiny church. The nearest catholic church was at least 30 minutes away.

My comment was not on your specific situation, but merely that it cannot be generalized to all such situations.

 

[sallybutler]

My biggest problem with this is that it seems to show a lack of trust in God by the grandparents.

Why weren’t they praying for the family. How many years did St Monica pray for St Augustine? How many parents have spent years praying for their children? How many grand parents have spent years praying for their grandchildren? Some were not alive when their children returned to the Church or joined it.

And how many have been further alienated from God (and the Church) by this kind of behavior?

I was taught that God always answers prayers. Not always yes, not always the way you expect, and not always in your timeframe (ok, “not usually” instead of “not always” on the last two).

And that is why we say Thy will be done, not my will be done.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

My comment was not on your specific situation, but merely that it cannot be generalized to all such situations.

My initial comment wasn’t meant to be generalized. It was meant to show that at least in my family’s experience, even a priest would rather not have a child baptized if there isn’t reason to believe that they will be raised in the faith. And I was his great niece for goodness sake!

My uncle was a great man, and the only member of my dad’s family to reach out to me as I was growing up. But he wouldn’t baptize me.

 

[dedo]

The severity of the Church is always necessary in order to clarify our ideas. Otherwise there would be chaos. –Padre Pio

How can you send someone to the Church for answers or to Padre Pio for answers when you are arguing in favor of ignoring the Church when it doesn’t suit you? Who is going to listen to an evangelist who talks out of both sides of the mouth?

At the very beginning of this thread, 1ke, a person trained in canon law, explained the mind of the Church on this question. This is not some great mystery that has to be sent off to Rome for adjudication, it is a straight-forward issue! What the OP has failed to do does not give anyone else, not a priest, not a bishop, and especially not his in-laws the right to usurp his natural rights as a parent. The truth is, if he and his wife had shown up at a church and said, “We have no intention of raising our children Catholic, but here, baptize them anyway to please our parents,” the priest would have been forced to turn them away until he could satisfy himself that the children would have good hope to receive all those things which the baptized have by right. Yet you argue that someone who would do even what bishops forbid their priests to do ought to keep a position of trust with a parent whose trust they have violated. You argue that it is “wise” for a parent to just ignore evidence that their in-laws feel free to ignore their parental rules (and, I might add, to lie about it by omission!) That is wise? No. That is foolish.

Padre Pio never said to anyone that “baptism means nothing.” He never said “oh, canon law, you can ignore that, Jesus was never one for the rules.” When someone came to him and said, ““Padre, I don’t believe in God,” he replied: “Why are you telling me? Tell Him!"

Easterjoy:

You are attributing a position to me that I never said. That is not disagreement, and it comes very close to calumny.

I said the grandparents erred but the error of the OP is greater.

I did not say that grandparents were justified in what they did. If I were the grandparents, I would not have done what these grandparents did, but I would have spoken up to the parents. After that, all you can do is set a good example and pray.

Padre Pio is very blunt.

I doubt any of us could spend 2 minutes with him and not have our faults illuminated in graphic detail.

Anyway, over the years I have seen certain character traits that lead to a bad end.

One of them is to always look at what the other guy did wrong. In this case it is the error of obsessing with the grandparents.

Another one is the “grudge holder”.

The best answer in this thread was given in post # 186 by Oneofmany, that suggested forgiveness and reconciliation.

That is my final response to this thread.

 

[EasterJoy]

Easterjoy:

You are attributing a position to me that I never said. That is not disagreement, and it comes very close to calumny.

I said the grandparents erred but the error of the OP is greater.

I did not say that grandparents were justified in what they did. If I were the grandparents, I would not have done what these grandparents did, but I would have spoken up to the parents. After that, all you can do is set a good example and pray.

Padre Pio is very blunt.

I doubt any of us could spend 2 minutes with him and not have our faults illuminated in graphic detail.

Anyway, over the years I have seen certain character traits that lead to a bad end.

One of them is to always look at what the other guy did wrong. In this case it is the error of obsessing with the grandparents.

Another one is the “grudge holder”.

The best answer in this thread was given in post # 186 by Oneofmany, that suggested forgiveness and reconciliation.

That is my final response to this thread.

It is “obsessing” to keep asserting that performing an illicit baptism is indeed a serious matter? It is “holding a grudge” to tell someone who won’t abide by your rules that they may not have supervision of your children? As I said, there was so much wrong with post #186 that one hardly knows where to start!

Maybe you didn’t say some of those things yourself, but you have now twice planted yourself very firmly in the Amen Pew of the person who did. Your response to me is an odd defense of “wise counsel” that asserts that “Baptism means nothing to you” and ends with “If you still want to be controlling and can’t get over this I see a divorce in your future.”

But yes, as long as the OP realizes what the Church teaches, there is no point in having any more back-and-forth about it between us. If you and OneofMany see it as vindictive to take someone out of a position of trust because the person states bluntly that they feel no remorse over having violated that trust, oh well. It is no worse than the OP is getting from his in-laws. He seems to be coping with the situation rather well, and is being far more forgiving than many others would be in his shoes. For that, let us congratulate him, and drop the criticism.

 

[EasterJoy]

My initial comment wasn’t meant to be generalized. It was meant to show that at least in my family’s experience, even a priest would rather not have a child baptized if there isn’t reason to believe that they will be raised in the faith. And I was his great niece for goodness sake!

My uncle was a great man, and the only member of my dad’s family to reach out to me as I was growing up. But he wouldn’t baptize me.

It sounds as if your great uncle was an obedient priest.

 

[Vectivus]

I think, personally speaking, that there is no good reason not to report the baptism to the local parish priest. It can hurt nothing, and can only help if the children decide later on to become Catholic (as the case may be, with Catholic relatives in the mix).

The grandparents should not have done what they did, but it seems to be that, since the deed is already done and NOT reporting it could only lead to possible complications down the road, the only real REASON not to report would be out of anger at the grandparents.

 

[David011]

What shocks me is that you, OP, are taking the meaning of baptism seriously, while there are Catholics here who are trying to convince you to treat it as nothing. How is this possible?

Reading text in which self-identified devout Catholics try to convince someone outside the Church to take on a sacrilegious and dismissive attitude towards baptism in one breath–*why are you upset? It is nothing to you!–*while proposing that he join the Church in the next breath is almost more than I can stand. That a grandmother thinks she is doing the right thing by illicitly administering baptism and then by omission lying about it to both the child’s parents and the child’s pastor goes beyond the pale.

Honestly it’s puzzling me too! I may not believe in the faith but I certainly have respect for it. Yet certain people here calling themselves devout Catholics are literally saying “who cares!” about things I thought they (especially as Catholics) would be taking more seriously. I’m not trying to point out a mistake they might have made, but I honestly want to know where they think they are getting the justification of something that blatantly states is against what they are supposed to do.

 

[oneofmany]

With all the young married people leaving the church now I bet there are thousands and thousands of baptized infants by worried Catholic grandparents.

Our new Pope has instructed all Catholics to go out into the community to evangelize, will I can see that evangelizeation really needs to start at home.

That is what I and my husband plan to do. We sometimes take our grandsons to Mass with us. They love it. My husband is a Eucharist Minister and when he was giving communion out my oldest grandson asked me what grandpa was doing, when I told him he asked if he could have some, of course, I told him no. But we do let them go up to communion with their hands folded over their chests.

You know this is how the Protestants evangelize. They have bus loads of kids brought to church and get them interested, then the parents follow.

If the kids and I believe with the help of the Holy Spirit and lots of prayer they just may bring their parents to the church and the whole family will be united. Thank you God.

 

[Peter_J]

Honestly it’s puzzling me too! I may not believe in the faith but I certainly have respect for it. Yet certain people here calling themselves devout Catholics are literally saying “who cares!” about things I thought they (especially as Catholics) would be taking more seriously. I’m not trying to point out a mistake they might have made, but I honestly want to know where they think they are getting the justification of something that blatantly states is against what they are supposed to do.

You have to keep in mind that the Internet is a real magnet for crazy ideas.

 

[David011]

With all the young married people leaving the church now I bet there are thousands and thousands of baptized infants by worried Catholic grandparents.

Our new Pope has instructed all Catholics to go out into the community to evangelize, will I can see that evangelizeation really needs to start at home.

That is what I and my husband plan to do. We sometimes take our grandsons to Mass with us. They love it. My husband is a Eucharist Minister and when he was giving communion out my oldest grandson asked me what grandpa was doing, when I told him he asked if he could have some, of course, I told him no. But we do let them go up to communion with their hands folded over their chests.

You know this is how the Protestants evangelize. They have bus loads of kids brought to church and get them interested, then the parents follow.

If the kids and I believe with the help of the Holy Spirit and lots of prayer they just may bring their parents to the church and the whole family will be united. Thank you God.

Ok I’m probably taking a Christian rout here but, here goes. Some advice on evangelizing that’s not the sarcasm I gave before.

First of all, evangelizing does not mean taking people’s children and baptizing them behind their parents backs. Honestly, I think you need to evangelize yourself first because from what I’ve picked up, you don’t even fully believe what you claim to believe. When you approach someone in hopes of evangelizing, they are looking at you as if you are Jesus. You basically ARE Jesus to them because you say you represent his teachings.

If they see you as gentle, they will think God is gentle.
If they think you are kind, they will think God is kind.
If they see you as trustworthy, they will know God is trustworthy as well.

People want to be validated and taken seriously. Trust me nothing will help you more than acting and living out what you SAY you believe. And please don’t confuse that with going on a baptizing spree. If you want your evangelizing to start at home, be truthful, kind, and respectful of your children as adults. If my in-laws had been this way, perhaps the situation could have been very different. Many people here urge others to constantly pray about situations out of their control, and when they do, and I mean truthfully do without trying to cross boundaries that they need to stay behind, I actually admire their faith for completely giving their trust to a higher power.

As for there being “thousands and thousands of Catholic grandparents” illicitly baptizing their kids, I’m pretty sure there are thousand and thousands of Catholics using birth control. And the church still says this is a no no.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I’ve read most of this whole thread and am so tired of all the rules and regulations in it. Didn’t Jesus condemn those who only lived by the law but had no charity and compassion for others? Where is the charity and compassion in trying to usurp parents?

For the OP. When you married a woman who had very devout Catholic parents what did you think would happen? Didn’t you know they would talk about their faith to their grandchildren? If you had married a women whose parents were devout Jews or Muslims or Protestants wouldn’t you expect them to do the same thing?This isn’t talking about their faith, this is a deceitful and underhanded baptism. If your in-laws were Muslim, I can assure you that you would not be ok with them attempting to induct the children that you are trying to raise Catholic into the Muslim faith. Also, I have Catholic in-laws. They will be allowed to discuss their faith, but if it crosses the line into evangelization and they refuse to stop, they will lose contact with my child.

For those people who suggested bringing in a lawyer or drag the grandparents to a counselor, do you really want to spend a small fortune and start a war? How crazy is that, over religion?I mentioned the lawyer, but only to keep the baby’s name off of the church records. Not to do anything to the grandparents.

I don’t know what religion you are since you didn’t want to say but if you are secular, why are you so upset? Baptism means nothing to you and your daughter will pick up on that. I am sure your wife’s parents have been praying for her to return to her faith from the time she left and now that she has had a child I am sure they are praying she will come back and bring her family as well. NO. You don’t get to decide what baptism means to the OP. That’s completely up to him. As far as I’m concerned, while spiritually baptism is meaningless, the fact that my child’s name would be on church records and the fact that the grandparents went behind the parents back are both far from meaningless. That’s not to say the OP feels that way though, as I said, that’s up to him.

You say they confirmed they did baptize your daughter, probably since they see their daughter has no thoughts of returning to her faith and getting her child baptized they decided to do it for the fear of Original Sin. If you don’t know about Original Sin you can do a search on it. The parents are probably old school and believe that way and had no thoughts of anything else religion wise for your daughter.

They know they cannot raise her Catholic or take her for her first Communion. The parents would surely be involved in those sacraments and the church would need the parents involvement. Your daughter is bright and would talk about her parents and tell you what is happening.

My advice is to drop this whole thing or your daughter will feel the tension. You have stated your position to the parents and that is all you can do. If you think you will stop devout Catholic people from talking about their religion or praying in front of your daughter then you don’t know about life. The same for Jews or Muslims or Protestants, etc. If he drops the whole thing, there’s really no telling what else the grandparents might think they know best on. You wouldn’t tell a Catholic to drop it if a gay person tried to get their child into an LGBT organization, so please stop patronizing the OP.

I think it is silly the grandparents now need your supervision all the time. Then don’t send your daughter to school, I assure she will see and hear much worse at school, You will need to home school her. Who exactly would baptize his child at school?

If you still want to be controlling and can’t get over this I see a divorce in your future. Your wife’s parents will always be her parents and we all need to accept our in-laws. I am sure we can all tell you stories about in-laws and how we need to go along to get along. No reason to start a war over this, I am sure that is how Jesus would want it. Peace in families is the most important thing.

Did you really just say that??? He’s going to be divorced if he doesn’t let his in-laws do whatever they want to his child? Guess what, he and his wife are on the same page, and even if they weren’t, she cannot take the side of her parents over him. If they divorced over this it would be the wife’s fault. And peace in families is not the most important thing, ever. Would you let a gay couple have unsupervised access to your child to keep the peace? I highly doubt it. The religious upbringing of a child is not something that you need to “go along to get along” on. EVER. He accepts his in-laws, and he is not going to war. They can still see the child anytime they want.

 

[oneofmany]

I think you may have missed the part where we aren’t Catholic… But what does it matter? You said yourself rules aren’t that important to be followed. If you don’t mind me asking, did you ever tell the parents of your children that you illicitly baptized their kids?

No we haven’t told the parents. They aren’t Catholic, never have been. The son was raised in the Protestant church (non-denominational) in his younger years and I am not sure of his wife’s religious upbringing. Right now they don’t go to any church.

Since we did the 'illicit" baptisms I learned about the church teachings on it, I didn’t know before. They have since had another boy and are expecting another child this summer.

AND NO WE WILL NOT BE BAPTIZING THEM SINCE WE NOW KNOW THE CHURCH LAWS.

The OP didn’t have a problem with the baptism as I understood it, it was the parental authority that bothered him and that is what I was referring to about the law. I do take church laws seriously----when I know about them----and I do take parental authority seriously. This is the only area we did this, well we did take them to see Santa Claus and their mother’s ok was iffy, but if grandparents need to walk on eggs each time they see the grand kids it’s not good for the whole family.