Infant Baptism...Non-catholic parent...Bad Cannon Law advice?

[Honour]

Hi all,
Here is my question/dillema. I working on getting an annulment so my current marriage can be blessed so that I can be confirmed this year…hopefully! I am also pregnant and due in August. My first baby was baptized at about 9 months old. My husband is not Catholic and not interested in converting.

When I spoke to the priest at my new church about starting the annulment paperwork, I also mentioned that I wanted to baptize my baby as soon as possible after birth. He said he saw no problems with that as long as we did the baptism prep and the godparents met all the criteria. Which seemed to be inline with what I had read in the catechism.

Well he apparently asked the the diocese cannon lawyer when he was inquiring about my annulment paperwork about the baptism. He was told that at least one of the parents had to be Catholic in order to baptize the baby (unless the baby was in danger of death). When I asked for references, he said it was Cannon Law. So I did some research and what I read about baptism from the Vatican’s Cannon Law website doesn’t seem to say that to me.

Now I know I’m no expert, but is it possible that either the lawyer or the priest was reading into the situation without all the facts and saying “in this case I would probably” and presenting that as factual Cannon Law? Did I get bad advice? What do I do? Should I talk to the priest again…I don’t want to be argumentative, but baptizing my baby girl as soon as possible is very important to me.

I don’t want to wait until Easter. What if they find that my first marriage was in fact valid and I can’t be accepted unless I leave my husband…my daughter suffers because of my sin?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Can. 851 The celebration of baptism must be prepared properly; consequently:

1/ an adult who intends to receive baptism is to be admitted to the catechumenate and is to be led insofar as possible through the various stages to sacramental initiation, according to the order of initiation adapted by the conference of bishops and the special norms issued by it;

2/ the parents of an infant to be baptized and those who are to undertake the function of sponsor are to be instructed properly on the meaning of this sacrament and the obligations attached to it. The pastor personally or through others is to take care that the parents are properly instructed through both pastoral advice and common prayer, bringing several families together and, where possible, visiting them.

Can. 867 §1. Parents are obliged to take care that infants are baptized in the first few weeks; as soon as possible after the birth or even before it, they are to go to the pastor to request the sacrament for their child and to be prepared properly for it.

Can. 868 §1. For an infant to be baptized licitly:

1/ the parents or at least one of them or the person who legitimately takes their place must consent;

2/ there must be a founded hope that the infant will be brought up in the Catholic religion; if such hope is altogether lacking, the baptism is to be delayed according to the prescripts of particular law after the parents have been advised about the reason.

To me it seem there is certainly a “founded hope that the infant will be brought up in the Catholic religion” since I am promising that that is my intention and I will have appropriate godparents to help ensure that even if I changed my mind".

 

[Oneofthewomen]

I am not a canon lawyer, but the study of it is a hobby, and my boss is a Canon Lawyer, so him & I talk a lot about it. It’s almost like getting “private instruction”, as not too many people are interested, and he loves to teach!

If I understand you correctly, you are not yet Catholic?

If that is the case, I think I can understand why you are being asked to wait.

What happens if you do not get your annulment?
Will you stay in an invalid marriage?
Will you (and your husband) agree to live as siblings?

If neither of you is Catholic, why should the Church have a “well founded hope” that the child would be raised in the faith?

These are just the first questions that pop into my head. I imagine there are many other things that I am not even considering.

My best advice, ask to speak with both priests, together, and try to come to an understanding. And pray!!

Peace & prayers!

 

[Brigid34]

In the event of a negative reply in your annulment decision I would (continue?) to live as brother and sister or separately, confess your sex out of marriage (if necessary) and then you can go ahead with the baptism.

 

[Honour]

If I understand you correctly, you are not yet Catholic?

That is correct.

If that is the case, I think I can understand why you are being asked to wait.

I could understand this as well…but I wasn’t asked to wait. I was told that cannon law says the baby can’t be baptized unless the baby is in danger of death (and I have doubts about the accuracy of that statement).

What happens if you do not get your annulment?A
Will you stay in an invalid marriage?
Will you (and your husband) agree to live as siblings?

Honestly I do not know EXACTLY what I would do. But my husband would never agree to a sexless marriage. (My cases are fairly cut and dry, so I can’t imagine them finding that the marriage was valid…but I know its possible). What I do know for sure…regardless of how the case goes, what the church says, if I can make the hard decisions or not. I know the Catholic church is in fact “One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.” I know what she teaches about the sacraments and salvation are true and I will continue to bring my children to church and seek for them the sacraments and religious education. Because I love them and want the best for them…want them to understand the truth of church’s teaching.

If neither of you is Catholic, why should the Church have a “well founded hope” that the child would be raised in the faith?

The way it reads to me is that the baptism should only be delayed if that hope is altogether lacking…which I don’t understand how that could be possible with my strong desire to bring her up in the Church and godparents that are vowing to step in to ensure that if I do not…seems hope enough to me.

I would be taking this better if I felt like the priest was saying that, considering everything, he feels it best to wait for her to be baptized…but that’s not what he is saying. Yesterday he was happy to be baptizing her even though I was not Catholic yet…thought it was great that I was seeking the sacrament for her. Today he says he can’t because of cannon law.

My best advice, ask to speak with both priests, together, and try to come to an understanding. And pray!!

Peace & prayers!

Thank you! I really appreciate your comments. I think I will certainly need to address this again, I need to get a better understanding of the legalities and everything involved and talking to yall on here helps!

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

When we had someone in RCIA who wanted to baptized her daughter, we had her wait until about the time she was being received into the Church, then we scheduled the baptism. I say “we” but it was the pastor’s decision. His thought was that to have a “well founded hope” the child would be raised Catholic, the parent had to be Catholic. Perhaps your canon lawyer thinks the same way.

 

[Honour]

When we had someone in RCIA who wanted to baptized her daughter, we had her wait until about the time she was being received into the Church, then we scheduled the baptism. I say “we” but it was the pastor’s decision. His thought was that to have a “well founded hope” the child would be raised Catholic, the parent had to be Catholic. Perhaps your canon lawyer thinks the same way.

I understand this line of thinking…I really do. If that’s what’s going on then I wish they would just say that. One if my biggest fears is that me being accepted into the church will be delayed again…it’s been a long process so far. I just don’t want my sins and decisions effect her receiving the sacraments and being brought up properly in the church. Why make her wait if not necessary? But I do understand…it’s just so important to me that my kids grow up in the church understanding her teachings…something that I didn’t get, and the decisions I made while clueless of those teachings have greatly effected my relationship with God and the church now. I don’t want that for them.

 

[1ke]

You are correct that the law does not state that a child cannot be baptized in the Catholic Church unless at least one parent is Catholic.

However, in such a case, yes the pastor is making a judgment call on whether or not there is a well founded hope that the chld will be raised Catholic. And, it is within his discretion to delay baptism.

 

[aemcpa]

I could understand this as well…but I wasn’t asked to wait. I was told that cannon law says the baby can’t be baptized unless the baby is in danger of death (and I have doubts about the accuracy of that statement).

It sounds like the pastor is interpreting the “founded hope” phrase in canon 868 very strictly.

What I do know for sure…regardless of how the case goes, what the church says, if I can make the hard decisions or not. I know the Catholic church is in fact “One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.” I know what she teaches about the sacraments and salvation are true and I will continue to bring my children to church and seek for them the sacraments and religious education. Because I love them and want the best for them…want them to understand the truth of church’s teaching.

You might want to tell the pastor this, or even the bishop, in writing. You might also want to contemplate whether you truly believe this if your first marriage is upheld by the tribunal, given the Church’s teaching that “those who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it, cannot be saved.”

 

[ellzeena]

I’ll be criticized for sure because of this reaction to your question, but:

Jesus came for sinners. He was surrounded by them. It was, actually, “scandalous” because he hung out with the uneducated, the uninitiated, the blatant sinners, etc. Would God refuse baptism to an infant for any reason…would Jesus? Really?

Since you are not yet confirmed, I gather you have been baptized and have received the Eucharist. THIS MAKES YOU A ROMAN CATHOLIC. If the Church REALLY refuses the baptism of a newborn because It cannot determine whether or not that child will be raised as a Roman Catholic, well, that to me is anathema! WHAT WOULD JESUS DO, stupid question isn’t it, but very valid.

I was raised in the Roman Catholic Church. My daughter was baptized in the Roman Catholic Church. My marriage was quite odd; we were not married by clergy (even though I did obtain an annulment from my former husband and did have the Vatican approval to marry in the Church). NO ONE ever questioned me, they baptized my newborn daughter. I just don’t understand the legalism here and it smacks of the sort of false legalism that Jesus detested (yes, detested).

 

[Iron_Donkey]

It sounds like the pastor is interpreting the “founded hope” phrase in canon 868 very strictly.

The pastor didn’t seem to think it was an issue, a cannon lawyer she talked to did. I believe it’s ultimately the pastor’s decision though (whether or not he thinks there’s a well founded hope), so I’d suggest just doing pretty much whatever he says. It might be worth mentioning this to him in case he’s just over looking things, but he should know.

 

[1ke]

Since you are not yet confirmed, I gather you have been baptized and have received the Eucharist. THIS MAKES YOU A ROMAN CATHOLIC.

This is not correct.

A person baptized outside the Catholic Church is not canonically a Catholic. Their profession of Faith brings them into full communion with the Catholic Church. She has not yet made her profession of faith.

If the Church REALLY refuses the baptism of a newborn because It cannot determine whether or not that child will be raised as a Roman Catholic, well, that to me is anathema! WHAT WOULD JESUS DO, stupid question isn’t it, but very valid.

The Church takes quite seriously the binding of a person to the laws of the Church for life.

I was raised in the Roman Catholic Church. My daughter was baptized in the Roman Catholic Church. My marriage was quite odd; we were not married by clergy (even though I did obtain an annulment from my former husband and did have the Vatican approval to marry in the Church). NO ONE ever questioned me, they baptized my newborn daughter. I just don’t understand the legalism here and it smacks of the sort of false legalism that Jesus detested (yes, detested).

It is not legalism. It is a very serious matter.

 

[St_Francis]

I’ll be criticized for sure because of this reaction to your question, but:

Jesus came for sinners. He was surrounded by them. It was, actually, “scandalous” because he hung out with the uneducated, the uninitiated, the blatant sinners, etc. Would God refuse baptism to an infant for any reason…would Jesus? Really?

YES!!! The sacrament of baptism places a mark on one’s soul, and the person is thus more obligated to God than one who is not baptized; this the Church, *the Body of Christ, *protects those who do not have a high likelihood of being Catholic by refusing baptism.

Since you are not yet confirmed, I gather you have been baptized and have received the Eucharist. THIS MAKES YOU A ROMAN CATHOLIC. If the Church REALLY refuses the baptism of a newborn because It cannot determine whether or not that child will be raised as a Roman Catholic, well, that to me is anathema! WHAT WOULD JESUS DO, stupid question isn’t it, but very valid.

Apparently the OP was not baptized Catholic and is planning to convert

I was raised in the Roman Catholic Church. My daughter was baptized in the Roman Catholic Church. My marriage was quite odd; we were not married by clergy (even though I did obtain an annulment from my former husband and did have the Vatican approval to marry in the Church). NO ONE ever questioned me, they baptized my newborn daughter.

Was your marriage blessed by the Church? If not, that is something to look into.

I just don’t understand the legalism here and it smacks of the sort of false legalism that Jesus detested (yes, detested).

This is strong rebellious language about a situation you do not fully understand. The Catechism says that Catholics must assume good intentions rather than saying derigatory things. Seek first to understand…

Yes, Christ came for sinners, but He also told His Apostles to shake the dust off their sandals when a town would not listen to them. God is merciful, true, bit He is also just.

 

[St_Francis]

The pastor didn’t seem to think it was an issue, a cannon lawyer she talked to did. I believe it’s ultimately the pastor’s decision though (whether or not he thinks there’s a well founded hope), so I’d suggest just doing pretty much whatever he says. It might be worth mentioning this to him in case he’s just over looking things, but he should know.

OTOH, the pastor seems to have been concerned enough to ask a canon lawyer about the situation.

 

[St_Francis]

That is correct.

I could understand this as well…but I wasn’t asked to wait. I was told that cannon law says the baby can’t be baptized unless the baby is in danger of death (and I have doubts about the accuracy of that statement).

Well, yes, you were asked to wait; they told you the baby cannot be baptized because neither parent is Catholic, *thus *as soon as the baby has a Catholic parent, they will baptize the baby, right?

I was baptized but not raised Catholic, and it is really hard to raise one’s children Catholic under the best of circumstances when one is learning the Faith oneself at the same time. Were worse to come to worst in your situation (annullment denied and you stay with your husband), then do what you said you would do and work very hard to raise your children Catholic. Take them to Mass, enroll them in CCD, etc. Once you have shown that there actually is a well-founded hope your child will be raised Catholic, then *maybe *(I can’t speak for Canon Law and/or any priests involved) they will be able to baptize your child and receive your other child into the Church despite your inability to convert.

However, the priest is in a difficult situation. I have seen Catholic/non-Catholic marriages end with the Catholic spouse no longer practicing. Now you are discovering God, He sends you consolations as you learn, but there will come a time when He will expect you to walk more independently, and it will be more difficult for you. Suppose he were to baptize your baby but a year of two later you fell away? Then some responsibility for the state of your baby’s soul will rest with him.

You sound very disappointed and confused; this is not surprising. It can be very difficult for people to explain well issues which are outside their expertise (Canon lawyers get a lot of extra training). I hope that you will take this up in prayer as well as do what else you need to do to understand what is happening, because the sacraments are actual events, they are not just symbolic or something like that. So just as we need to be careful about the laws in our state or nation, so do we have to be careful of Church law, because the repercussions are real, altho on the supernatural plane, and this can be very difficult for us to grasp.

And in addition, it seems that there is a good likelihood that the issue won’t even come up, long-term, so waiting prayerfully to see what happen will probably be more peaceful for you.

Congratulations on your baby!!! And I do hope we will be able to soon welcome you into the Church

 

[angeldia30]

In my humble opinion, I believe that it’s the pastor’s decision. I think that they don’t know or realize that you really are willing and committed to raise your child within the teachings of the Catholic Church. Another thing I thought of was this: In many parishes I’ve been in they usually want to see if you’re registered in that parish as a regular member. It deals with paperwork that needs to be done in the Archdiocese in order to administer the sacrament and issue a Baptism certificate. Registering yourself in a parish tells them you’re serious about being a regular member and committed to raising your child with the Catholic faith and teachings. I would ask someone in the Parish Office of the church you want to baptize your baby and ask the secretary there what you need to do to have your baby baptized in the church. Also ask the priest if you should wait until after you’re confirmed or maybe a week or so before to baptize the child.

Good luck!

 

[Honour]

However, in such a case, yes the pastor is making a judgment call on whether or not there is a well founded hope that the chld will be raised Catholic. And, it is within his discretion to delay baptism.

I just wonder if he is fully informed…the first time he said it was fine, then after he spoke to the lawyer he said no. I wonder the full thought process and what he was told…that’s why I really think I need to talk to him again…I just want to make sure I’ve got my information correct.

 

[Honour]

The pastor didn’t seem to think it was an issue, a cannon lawyer she talked to did. I believe it’s ultimately the pastor’s decision though (whether or not he thinks there’s a well founded hope), so I’d suggest just doing pretty much whatever he says. It might be worth mentioning this to him in case he’s just over looking things, but he should know.

Actually, he didn’t have a problem until after HE talked to a cannon lawyer…not me. And now he says it can’t be done because of cannon law.

 

[Honour]

Since you are not yet confirmed, I gather you have been baptized and have received the Eucharist. THIS MAKES YOU A ROMAN CATHOLIC.

I was baptized and grew up Baptist. I have not received the Eucharist.

I just don’t understand the legalism here and it smacks of the sort of false legalism that Jesus detested (yes, detested).

I don’t nessisarily think it is legalism…I don’t know first hand what the lawyer said to the priest…this whole thing may be a misunderstanding…I’m just trying to gather the facts and query people on advice for handling this in the most appropriate manner.

 

[Honour]

OTOH, the pastor seems to have been concerned enough to ask a canon lawyer about the situation.

Good point.

 

[jmcrae]

Actually, he didn’t have a problem until after HE talked to a cannon lawyer…not me. And now he says it can’t be done because of cannon law.

This is actually true. We are actually not allowed to baptize children into the Catholic faith if they don’t have Catholic parents. When you become Catholic, your children can be baptized at the same time, or shortly afterwards, with their father’s consent.