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

[JimG]

Yes, the Catholic view is that Baptism brings about a real regeneration, and an infusion of sanctifying grace into the soul.

All the more pity, to take such a gift and then toss it aside, in effect telling the recipient, all right, I’ve done my part. Now you’re on your own.

It would be like a mother giving birth to a beautiful new child, then setting it aside, saying, okay, I’ve done my part. Let him handle the rest of life on his own.

 

[LongingSoul]

And yet we don’t prevent unworthy women from giving birth.

 

[seakelp]

I’m in awe of some of things posted in this thread.

1. Salvation is necessary for salvation.
2. The CIC states explicitly that hope must be altogether lacking in order for a priest to ***delay ***baptism. Not, “there must be a reasonable chance that the child will be raised Catholic,” not, “there must be more than a remote chance that the child will be raised Catholic,” but, there must be essentially NO hope that the child will be raised Catholic.
3. The CIC says NOTHING about whether the parents must be Catholic, or must be living in some state of grace, etc. The only qualifications the CIC provides are for the godparents.

And yet people in here are willing to exclude a child from the Church for the sins of the parents. This is truly astounding.

 

[JimG]

And yet we don’t prevent unworthy women from giving birth.

Certainly not! And yet, if she is unable or unwilling to care for the child, the child might be removed from her care precisely because of the danger to it’s upbringing.

 

[One_point]

And yet we don’t prevent unworthy women from giving birth.

The church does not grant children to couples that are sexually involved, church grants sacraments. It is God who decides which baby comes to life, not the church. So church can deny babies to gay couples wanting to adopt from church and can say no to baptism of a young baby if no one will teach him. The hurch can also exercise mercy and grant baptism. I heard one Tory an atheist converted in adulthood and found out she had been baptized as a baby and credited her conversion to that grace andnprayers of her late catholic grandmother.

 

[seakelp]

And what do you know:

The document noted that a number of Catholics who responded to the questionnaire felt “a certain unease at the challenge of accepting these people with a merciful spirit and, at the same time, holding to the moral teaching of the Church …”

“However, when people living in such unions request a child’s baptism, almost all the responses emphasize that the child must be received with the same care, tenderness and concern which is given to other children,” it said.

reuters.com/article/2014/06/26/us-vatican-synod-gays-idUSKBN0F11HV20140626

Looks like at least the Magisterium is stepping in the right direction.

 

[seakelp]

From the document itself:

However, when people living in such unions request a child’s baptism, almost all the responses emphasize that the child must be received with the same care, tenderness and concern which is given to other children. Many responses indicate that it would be helpful to receive more concrete pastoral directives in these situations. Clearly, the Church has the duty to ascertain the actual elements involved in transmitting the faith to the child. Should a reasonable doubt exist in the capability of persons in a same sex union to instruct the child in the Christian faith, proper support is to be secured in the same manner as for any other couple seeking the baptism of their children. In this regard, other people in their family and social surroundings could also provide assistance. In these cases, the pastor is carefully to oversee the preparation for the possible baptism of the child, with particular attention given to the choice of the godfather and godmother.

This is the most sensible and correct understanding of the problem.

 

[Tigg]

But the point is that that issue would be more relevant to the Protestant view of baptism of the child which sees it as a mere representation of some effect. The Catholic view of baptism is that we are *literally transformed *by the sacrament itself… apart from the outside influences on us.

Yes, without Baptism there is no spiritual hope or life; that is without question for Catholics. But Baptism does not guarantee eternal life and how hard the life-long journey for those who may have seen a mockery made of the very sacrament that initially brought them a life with Christ.

 

[LongingSoul]

Yes, without Baptism there is no spiritual hope or life; that is without question for Catholics. But Baptism does not guarantee eternal life and how hard the life-long journey for those who may have seen a mockery made of the very sacrament that initially brought them a life with Christ.

So do you believe that the Church is wrong on her position to baptise these babies?

 

[LongingSoul]

Certainly not! And yet, if she is unable or unwilling to care for the child, the child might be removed from her care precisely because of the danger to it’s upbringing.

That would be an extreme last resort but before that time, we provide all the help possible like welfare, food vouchers, an array of social welfare measures. We are all responsible for the welfare of children and helping the parents who struggle to raise their babies. This is even more clear in our religious identity and the spiritual welfare of others. Withholding baptism is reserved only for the extreme of all cases.

 

[manualman]

Yes, without Baptism there is no spiritual hope or life; that is without question for Catholics. But Baptism does not guarantee eternal life and how hard the life-long journey for those who may have seen a mockery made of the very sacrament that initially brought them a life with Christ.

That first part isn’t right either (unless you subscribe to the Limbo theory). The sacraments are gifts from God to man, not handcuffs on God’s ability to give extraordinary infusions of Grace. Baptism is not magic. It’s a gift given freely by God. It’s a grave sin to illicitly baptize the children of your atheist neighbors while babysitting (no consent). Why? Because doing so is an act of superstition! You are attempting to use external actions and words to manipulate the supernatural into conforming to your will. That’s pretty much the definition of superstition. Parents baptizing their own infants in accordance with Jesus’ teaching, on the other hand, are joyfully accepting God’s gift and trusting that that same Grace will work in their children as the parents do their best to raise them in the faith. See how the former case is superstition and the latter is faith?

Now we come to the case of parents stubbornly, publicly and persistently in rebellion against God. This isn’t comparable to the couple who screw up in the heat of the moment and commit, ahem, the sin of Onan. It’s more comparable to the couple who actively seek to persuade their fellow catholics that contraception and abortion aren’t sinful regardless of what a bunch of old fools in funny hats and robes say.

So in a way, I suppose both sides have a point here. DOES the church deny baptism when the likes of, say, Nancy Pelosi ask for it for their infants? Probably not. But should the church start asking harder questions to parents about the sincerity of their faith? Probably. It may be a good critique to complain that the line gets drawn for gay people first. That’s worth pondering as a potential double standard.

I do think there is a point where denying baptism for the infant child of utterly unbelieving nominal catholics is an act of charity, not a meanness. Baptism both conveys Grace, but also places a grave responsibility on the parent and on the one receiving that Grace. If it’s clear that the parent isn’t serious about believing, then the child may be better off being introduced later in life to Catholicism than to be taught implicitly that it’s a joke to be ignored whenever convenient throughout childhood.

P.S. A working paper is hardly an authoritative document yet. All manner of utterly bizarre things have been put together in draft form over the years and squashed by the Holy Spirit so that they were never promulgated formally. Neither infallibility nor church authority works by divine protection on Vatican letterhead such that anybody who manages to get some is guaranteed to write the truth on it. Without names, authors or other reliable information, this Reuters report means nothing. If indeed it is a working paper (I haven’t researched it yet), then it has no authority until the bishops actually review and discuss it.

 

[LongingSoul]

The church does not grant children to couples that are sexually involved, church grants sacraments. It is God who decides which baby comes to life, not the church. So church can deny babies to gay couples wanting to adopt from church and can say no to baptism of a young baby if no one will teach him. The Church can also exercise mercy and grant baptism. I heard one Tory an atheist converted in adulthood and found out she had been baptized as a baby and credited her conversion to that grace andnprayers of her late catholic grandmother.

I believe you vastly overstated the powers of the Church here. It is not an act of mercy to baptise an infant. From the Archbishop quoted in the original link… “Baptism is the right of every human person.”

 

[manualman]

The cited Vatican document above also includes this bit of illumination regarding the source of lukewarmness among catholics:

"…some responses point to the insufficiency of pastoral activity which is concerned only with dispensing the sacraments without a truly engaging Christian experience. "

Bingo. Pretty much what I said above. People have in many cases treated the sacraments as a superstitious ritual rather than an affirmation of faith accompanied by an infusion of Grace. One gives the self and receives Christ in return. Without the gift of self, Christ will not force himself on anyone. Sacraments are not magic.

Handing them out as if they were magic is not evangelization, nor is it doing the recipient any real good if there is no giving of self involved (vicariously in the case of parents of infants).

 

[LongingSoul]

Handing them out as if they were magic is not evangelization, nor is it doing the recipient any real good if there is no giving of self involved (vicariously in the case of parents of infants).

But in saying that, do you think that Priests and the Church have the capacity to discern the quality of a parents intent and deny the infants Baptism based on thier personal discernment?

I think those are two different discussions. A Priest can take the opportunity to educate a parent on the meaning of Baptism at that moment, but unless the parent specifically says the child will be actively withheld from all Catholic influence, the Priest, not being God, cannot make that judgement as to whether he will baptise the child or not.

 

[manualman]

A Priest can take the opportunity to educate a parent on the meaning of Baptism at that moment, but unless the parent specifically says the child will be actively withheld from all Catholic influence, the Priest, not being God, cannot make that judgement as to whether he will baptise the child or not.

So if a mob boss came to Pope Francis tomorrow and requested baptism for his child and responded to questioning by the HF that he had no intention of renouncing his criminal ways, the HF would be obligated to baptize that child? Why? Surely there comes a point where the pretense of Catholicism is harmful to the child and it would be better NOT to baptize, no? Are you really asserting that a priest can never discern where that line is? Seems hard to believe to me.

 

[JimG]

That would be an extreme last resort but before that time, we provide all the help possible like welfare, food vouchers, an array of social welfare measures. We are all responsible for the welfare of children and helping the parents who struggle to raise their babies. This is even more clear in our religious identity and the spiritual welfare of others. Withholding baptism is reserved only for the extreme of all cases.

It seems to me that a same sex couple having wed in a same sex wedding or otherwise firm in their intention to remain in their lifestyle IS an extreme case. How can there possibly be a founded hope that the child will be raised in the Catholic Faith?

Of course, a same sex couple, an unmarried couple, or any couple engaged in a lifestyle in conflict with moral principles can intend to change their lifestyle, to repent and make a turnaround, and as a result seek baptism for their child.

But I can’t see how we do any child a favor by baptizing him or her into the Church while also placing him in a living situation that will certainly lead him or her by example and parental teaching into moral decay.

Do we say to the godparents, “well, we know the parents will not raise this child Catholic. They reject Catholic teaching. So it is entirely up to you to ensure that the child must be raised in the Faith!” How is that fair to the godparents or to the child? How is it even possible? Why not just open a “Baptism clinic” where people can walk in off the street to be baptized!

 

[LongingSoul]

It seems to me that a same sex couple having wed in a same sex wedding or otherwise firm in their intention to remain in their lifestyle IS an extreme case. How can there possibly be a founded hope that the child will be raised in the Catholic Faith?

Of course, a same sex couple, an unmarried couple, or any couple engaged in a lifestyle in conflict with moral principles can intend to change their lifestyle, to repent and make a turnaround, and as a result seek baptism for their child.

But I can’t see how we do any child a favor by baptizing him or her into the Church while also placing him in a living situation that will certainly lead him or her by example and parental teaching into moral decay.

Do we say to the godparents, “well, we know the parents will not raise this child Catholic. They reject Catholic teaching. So it is entirely up to you to ensure that the child must be raised in the Faith!” How is that fair to the godparents or to the child? How is it even possible? Why not just open a “Baptism clinic” where people can walk in off the street to be baptized!

I guess I’m seeing Baptism not as a spiritual privilege, but more as a spiritual right. Similar to food for the body. If a person asked me for money to feed their child and I was pretty sure they were going to go to McDonalds rather than buy ingredients for a home cooked meal as I would provide my children… I would still feel obliged to give. The quality of the nutrition may be less, but at least the child is being fed.

If the person was drunk and standing at the door of the pub… I wouldn’t give… but if he had a child with him and that child was hungry, I would give money and a private petition to the Lord for that child along with it.

As human beings, there are limits to how much control we have over the faith journey of others.

 

[Holly3278]

I see nothing wrong with the children of same sex couples being baptized so long as the couple intends to raise the children Catholic and with orthodox Catholic teaching. A child should not be denied baptism just because his/her parents are living in sin.

But then again, I also feel that same sex couples should not be allowed to raise children. A child should only be raised by a mother and a father who are married to each other. Unfortunately there are situations such as with single parents where this cannot happen. However, those situations are not ideal.

 

[JimG]

I guess I’m seeing Baptism not as a spiritual privilege, but more as a spiritual right. Similar to food for the body. If a person asked me for money to feed their child and I was pretty sure they were going to go to McDonalds rather than buy ingredients for a home cooked meal as I would provide my children… I would still feel obliged to give. The quality of the nutrition may be less, but at least the child is being fed.

If the person was drunk and standing at the door of the pub… I wouldn’t give… but if he had a child with him and that child was hungry, I would give money and a private petition to the Lord for that child along with it.

As human beings, there are limits to how much control we have over the faith journey of others.

Consider that it takes adult converts to Catholicism about one year to complete RCIA, and then be admitted to full union with the Church. One year. And if they have children, those are usually baptized along with them, or if they are old enough, go through the RCIC.

That whole process certainly shows that they are dedicated to entering the Church and being serious about their Faith.

Baptism of children requires a founded hope that the child will be raised in the Faith.

 

[LongingSoul]

Consider that it takes adult converts to Catholicism about one year to complete RCIA, and then be admitted to full union with the Church. One year. And if they have children, those are usually baptized along with them, or if they are old enough, go through the RCIC.

That whole process certainly shows that they are dedicated to entering the Church and being serious about their Faith.

Baptism of children requires a founded hope that the child will be raised in the Faith.

But you are talking two different things there. Baptism is of a different nature to the other sacraments. Many converts are already baptised when they come to RCIA and they don’t need to be re-baptised as Catholic. The other sacraments require some measure of maturity to consent and understand what one is doing.

Baptism is like the planting of a seed. The soil does need to have some evidence of an ability to support its life and if there are other plants growing around somewhere, even sparsely there is a founded hope that this one might too. There’s really no way of knowing which seed will sprout and which won’t before they are planted. The most we can feel assured by is not the quality of the seed or the quality of the tree it came from… but the evidence of other growth in the area around it. That’s why the sponsers are the most important element in this ‘seed planting’ process.