In the Spirit: Catholic diocese changes process for baptism of children of same-sex couples

[Prodigal_Son]

Baptism of an infant, absent a Christian upbringing, is not beneficial, and brings other consequences. There is not a penalty in denying baptism in that case. Were such baptisms to benefit infants, we should be moved to baptize (in secret) the infants of non-Catholics whenever the opportunity presents.

First of all, something can be beneficial despite the fact that we do not have a right to do it. It would be beneficial to the children of atheists if we kidnapped them for an hour weekly and snuck them off to church, but it is wrong to do this.

Secondly, I think it is at least an open question whether an individual child of gay parents will receive something of a Christian upbringing. By bringing a godmother and a godfather into the mix, baptism would seem to make such a possibility more likely. I expect there would be different results in different situations.

 

[EIF5A]

I would say that at least 80% of baptisms celebrated in our parish are for children of parents who are cohabiting. In many cases so are the godparents. I’ve asked the present pastor how couples like that can stand in front of the parish and ‘renounce sin’ when they have no intention of changing their situation. He simply said ‘I know’ and rolled his eyes.

I remember one couple in particular. As I went over the Renunciation of Sins and Profession of Faith at the rehearsal, they joked with the godparents about being in sin due to their marital status. And the next morning, they went up to Communion with everyone else.

Unless the Pastor is willing to refuse to give them Communion I don’t see how he can refuse to baptize their children.

Does he know for a fact that they are cohabiting?

Regardless, if those who know they are not living in accord with moral standards of the Church don’t think much of Communion to care and even joke about it, do they not believe that Jesus is actually present under the physical appearance of Bread? Maybe in their hearts, they believe in the symbolism only like Protestants do…in which case, Communion is only a weekly wafer-eating social ceremony. That would be sad, and we hope they wouldn’t believe that ubiquitous lie…

If the parishes cracked down on denying heterosexuals Communions for knowingly living in continual sin, do you think that would “equalize” perceived treatment of sins regardless of the orientation of the person living in said sin? It would seem to negate the argument of, “That’s not fair — how come straight people living in sin are ignored?”

 

[Rau]

First of all, something can be beneficial despite the fact that we do not have a right to do it. It would be beneficial to the children of atheists if we kidnapped them for an hour weekly and snuck them off to church, but it is wrong to do this.

Secondly, I think it is at least an open question whether an individual child of gay parents will receive something of a Christian upbringing. By bringing a godmother and a godfather into the mix, baptism would seem to make such a possibility more likely. I expect there would be different results in different situations.

Perhaps some illicit acts can bring good - I don’t believe that baptism of an infant without the prospect of Christian upbringing is one of them.

I agree with your second para. But my post addresses the circumstance where there is not going to be a Christian upbringing.

 

[Tigg]

I would say that at least 80% of baptisms celebrated in our parish are for children of parents who are cohabiting. In many cases so are the godparents. I’ve asked the present pastor how couples like that can stand in front of the parish and ‘renounce sin’ when they have no intention of changing their situation. He simply said ‘I know’ and rolled his eyes.

I remember one couple in particular. As I went over the Renunciation of Sins and Profession of Faith at the rehearsal, they joked with the godparents about being in sin due to their marital status. And the next morning, they went up to Communion with everyone else.

Unless the Pastor is willing to refuse to give them Communion I don’t see how he can refuse to baptize their children.

WOW, Phemie! I know you’re in Canada, but has the Church really reached this point that no effort is made at all to protect the Eucharist against sacrilege? I find this a bit staggering.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I agree with your second para. But my post addresses the circumstance where there is not going to be a Christian upbringing.

Got it.

 

[Phemie]

WOW, Phemie! I know you’re in Canada, but has the Church really reached this point that no effort is made at all to protect the Eucharist against sacrilege? I find this a bit staggering.

The problem in my area is that there is no catechesis beyond direct sacramental preparation. We used to have Catholic schools but the Catholic system was dismantled 16 years ago and in our town at least, nothing has replaced that. So kids are baptized, a majority of these are not seen again until they are old enough for First Communion, and in many cases it’s the grandmother rather than the parents who signs them up for preparation, then we don’t see them again unless the parents make the effort to present them for Confirmation (not a given that that will happen).

To me that speaks volumes about the quality of catechesis the parents received even when there was such in the schools.

 

[LongingSoul]

Baptism of an infant, absent a Christian upbringing, is not beneficial, and brings other consequences. There is not a penalty in denying baptism in that case. Were such baptisms to benefit infants, we should be moved to baptize (in secret) the infants of non-Catholics whenever the opportunity presents.

We have to strive to ‘think with the Church’ with regards to Baptism and Pope Francis has spoken a lot about it even this year. The original article linked to in the thread did not anticipate that there would be less approvals for Baptism with this move to centralise the process through the archdiocese, so it wasn’t a matter of coming down against the sins of the parents. It was putting emphasis on the intention of the parents and understanding the meaning of Baptism.

Baptism is not just a right of passage or family ritual… as Pope Francis says “Baptism lets us enter this People of God that transmits the faith. This is very important. A People of God that journeys and hands down the faith.” So basically the child is being brought into the whole Christian family by whose faith they are nourished. That is the job of all of us facilitated by the intention of the parents and the promise of the sponsors who are supported by the whole Church community. Going around stealthily baptising children in secret like sprinkling fairy dust on them misses the point of this communal entry point into the Church family completely.

I’d imagine that the Church sees that if parents want their child to be part of the Church and despite not being perfect themselves, don’t actively hinder or discourage the transmission of faith through the many other sources of Church evangelisation (all of us), there would be the basis to believe that the child will be nourished.

 

[Tigg]

The problem in my area is that there is no catechesis beyond direct sacramental preparation. We used to have Catholic schools but the Catholic system was dismantled 16 years ago and in our town at least, nothing has replaced that. So kids are baptized, a majority of these are not seen again until they are old enough for First Communion, and in many cases it’s the grandmother rather than the parents who signs them up for preparation, then we don’t see them again unless the parents make the effort to present them for Confirmation (not a given that that will happen).

To me that speaks volumes about the quality of catechesis the parents received even when there was such in the schools.

Thank you and this is a very sad confirmation of my earlier post.

 

[JimG]

I would say that at least 80% of baptisms celebrated in our parish are for children of parents who are cohabiting. In many cases so are the godparents. I’ve asked the present pastor how couples like that can stand in front of the parish and ‘renounce sin’ when they have no intention of changing their situation. He simply said ‘I know’ and rolled his eyes.

I remember one couple in particular. As I went over the Renunciation of Sins and Profession of Faith at the rehearsal, they joked with the godparents about being in sin due to their marital status. And the next morning, they went up to Communion with everyone else.

Unless the Pastor is willing to refuse to give them Communion I don’t see how he can refuse to baptize their children.

I am astonished, but not surprised. If the parents are cohabitng and unmarried, the godparents are cohabiting and unmarried, I see no possibility that the children being baptized will be raised in the Catholic Faith. I suppose the one possible remedy might be a series of homilies on the basics of Baptism, Communion, and marriage. I have a hard time understanding what the parents think they are doing when presenting the children for Baptism. And really the pastor should not have to refuse them communion, they should refuse communion to themselves.

 

[Phemie]

I am astonished, but not surprised. If the parents are cohabitng and unmarried, the godparents are cohabiting and unmarried, I see no possibility that the children being baptized will be raised in the Catholic Faith. I suppose the one possible remedy might be a series of homilies on the basics of Baptism, Communion, and marriage. I have a hard time understanding what the parents think they are doing when presenting the children for Baptism. And really the pastor should not have to refuse them communion, they should refuse communion to themselves.

I’ve noticed some who do not receive at their children’s Baptism but they are a minority.

The reason many of them present their children for Baptism, and I know that because we ask them that specific question at the beginning of the preparation session, is pressure from their parents and grandparents. It means little to them but they are keeping grandma happy. For others it’s ‘that’s what Catholics do’ although they have no idea why Catholics do it.

 

[JimG]

I’ve noticed some who do not receive at their children’s Baptism but they are a minority.

The reason many of them present their children for Baptism, and I know that because we ask them that specific question at the beginning of the preparation session, is pressure from their parents and grandparents. It means little to them but they are keeping grandma happy. For others it’s ‘that’s what Catholics do’ although they have no idea why Catholics do it.

Yes, I understand. But I wonder how happy the grandparents are going to be if the grandkids never practice their faith. I mentioned in another place that I was godparent for a child whose parents were not only unmarried but no longer living together. So now the child is baptized and living on his own, and neither mom nor dad nor child attends church or practices the faith. “Founded hope of being raised Catholic” indeed!

 

[Prodigal_Son]

I’ve noticed some who do not receive at their children’s Baptism but they are a minority.

I would recommend not making a study of who receives communion and who doesn’t. It is not our concern, as we are not pastors. I guess I just can’t imagine any good reason to pay attention to it.

 

[pnewton]

So no explanation for why I shouldn’t baptize the atheist neighbor’s kids?

I’m certainly for submitting to authoritative interpretations. But it’s my understanding that authoritative interpretations is that there be a well founded hope that the child will be raised in the faith. If the parents involved will be insisting on teaching the child that something evil is something good, is that a well founded hope?

Parental perfection is never a requirement for baptism. * All* have sinned…

I would even go so far as to bet that most Catholics have at least one area they struggle with and dissent from Catholic teaching, in practice, if not openly. Children learn the sin of parents from observation. I would say, that since the diocese is getting directly involved, the Catholic position should be to give the bishop the benefit of the doubt that he know where to draw the line.

 

[Arizona_Fat_Gir]

In the good old days before gays came out of the closet, it would probably be possible for two people in a same sex relationship to tell everyone that they are only “best friends” and/or room mates. They probably would not discuss their intimate lives with the children, if any. If they hid their situation from the kids and just didn’t make an issue of it, it may work. Unfortunately, nowadays, they are pretty strident about their rights and would never try to downplay the fact that they live together not as room mates but as lovers. Or married people.
Also, they are not ashamed of what they do, so they don’t try to avoid telling anyone that they are gay.

Another thought: This is just an observation. Back in the good old days not everyone went to communion on Sundays. If someone did not go, they did not have to explain why. It was the norm. They could just go to church for the sake of the kids, and maybe they, too, would learn something along the way.

 

[marymary1975]

Hmmmmm I have very very mixed feelings on this issue out of personal experience. But first let me remind you all that this practice of baptizing children of unmarried parents is fairly new. Not that long ago most priests would only baptise children out of parents married by the catholic church. Children out of wedlock, divorced parents and from a gay person would be automatically rejected from baptism. I was born in the 70’s and my mother was a single mother who just wanted to have a kid but no intention to marry. My mother despite being a cafeteria catholic wanted to baptize me catholic. She went to every imaginable church and every single priest denied me baptism. My grandmother on the other hand was a very strict catholic (actually a maronitr but afopyed the catholic faith when she got married with my grandfather) and was very worried because she wanted me to become catholic so my grandmother had to go and talk to several priests. Finally after being told by several priests that I could not be baptized because my mother was not married and was not a practicing catholic, she found one priests who was friends with one if my aunts that agreed to baptized “only if” if my grandparents would take the commitment of raising me themselves under the catholic faith. The people who baptized me were my grandparents and they choose my godparents too and it took many churches and priests to find one that would baptize me. That did not happen one hundred years ago, that happen in the 70’s so if you ask me we should be happy that at least the church is giving the possibility of baptism if there is a hope because forty fifty years ago many kids were refused baptism due to divorce or remarriage.

Second, I have serious difficulty with the idea of why bringing a kid to the catholic faith if your lifestyle is in direct and visible conflict with the church doctrine. I struggled for many years with this. It is very difficult for a child – using my case particularly – to have to deal with the idea that your religion teaches marriage between a man and a woman and that children must be born of a marriage while looking at your parent doing exactly the opposite. While my grandmother was very into raising me catholic and teaching me our doctrine and sending me to catholic school, it was always an internal struggle and shame for me that I was basically the product of a sin, that I had no father, that why my mother did that to me etc etc etc. It was many years of emotional struggle between what I learned and what was my reality to the point that sometimes I wished I wouldn’t have been baptized and instead they would had allowed to choose the catholic religion when I was older because of that I find the idea of a homosexual couple baptizing their kids and bringing them catholic really troubling as that is going to cause a lot of conflicts and emotional pain to the child. Maybe the solution if they have changed their ways and are trying to be faithful is teachingteaching the faith first and giving the kid the option to become catholic and get baptized by their own feet when they grow up?

Yes I know the idea of allowing the baptism of children of divorcees, out of wedlock etc is to be more inclusive but I am not sure that many have thought that this is a sword with a double edge and that this entire situation can cause a lot of pain to the child