My son secretly baptized Catholic

[yukonbrad]

Resist yes but that does not equate to putting church law above secular esspecially in this particular case with the infringment on the fathers rights (mostly by the mother I might add as I susspect the church was unaware of the custody issue and may even have been decieved in this regard). With regard to Erie - I was born and raised in Portadown Northern Ireland during the 1970’s. (Erin Go Bragh)

 

[yukonbrad]

That’s how it is supposed to be, but the government is pushing anyway. Pushing into something that they shouldn’t have the authority to do under the constitution. That is why we are having to fight against it.

Constitutional law yes not the specific beliefs involved. The church lawyer is not going to simply state beliefs regarding abortion/ contraception etc are against the beliefs of the church end of story … he/she has to prove that imposition of the HSS is in violation of the constitution with regard to religous freedom and clearly demonstrate that such legislation impinges upon the religous freedom of its members (a much more involved task). But with regard to this case it would be a difficult matter to prove as it is not the beliefs of the boy that are at issue but those of the father as respecting his secular rights as a father with custody in addition to his constitutional right to freedom of religion.

 

[Corki]

It would be a difficult matter to argue in a court as the age of majority is 18. While the church may consider the boy capable of making such a decision the courts would not should the father choose to sue the church and/or the mother for the infringment of his parental rights.

It is more than courtesey as the church does not wish to deny the legal rights of the father. To do so goes not just against the law but our own integrity as a church and christians.

The OP did not indicate his location but if he was in the US, consent is implied for spouses, There is no joint custody unless there is a legal separation or divorce. Either parent is empowered to make decisions for the child and to sign authorizations for the child. There is no need to seek the second parent’s explicit permission unless there is a contractual or property agreement. It does not seem from the post that the father had a restraining order prohibiting his son from receiving Catholic Sacraments. That’s the only way, here at least, that he could assert that his rights were infringed.

 

[1ke]

Canon Law requires only requires the consent of one parent in infant baptism. For a child over the age of reason parental consent does not enter into the equation.

 

[gazelam]

Thanks to everyone for the outpouring of kindness to me.

By “undoing” a baptism I meant either removing the record of the occurence administratively, or some other way of making it ineffectual (like Peter was told in Mark 16:19 KJV - And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.) Does the catholic Church believe they have the authority to loose something in heaven, especially when something wasn’t done in a kosher manner? I know full well that the past cannot be changed.

Stylite - I don’t know whether I’ve baptized someone for the dead against their will - They’re dead! But seriously, this case is of a minor over who I have a legal responsibility jointly with my wife. And as an aside my grandfather was born, married in the Mormon temple, and died Mormon, and other Mormons had him baptized for the dead twice!! Sometimes the record keeping is less than stellar. And I believe there’s some sort of 110 year rule where a deceased person was born more than 110 years ago he/she is fair game to have the vicarious baptism done, whereas for a deceased individual born later than 110 years ago family permission is required, but I don’t know the particulars.

Mountee - My wife has been through painful experiences too numerous to detail here and it’s not my place to say whether The Man Upstairs condemns her ignoring me on purpose or not. I’m hoping for some sort of compromise where he goes Catholic one week and Mormon the next, but my wife simply does not tell me her intent now and I have to react after the fact.

Santi2 - My son is currently choosing whatever my wife is suggesting. If my wife suggested that he be baptized in a different church each month he’d do it currently.

Corki - 10,000+ posts?!?!
JRKH - 16,000 posts?!?!
(name removed by moderator) - 18,000+ posts?!?!

Thanks all and God bless.

 

[1ke]

Certainly I was not implying that it was the prudent thing to do, merely that is was not prohibited by (canon) law.

 

[1ke]

Thanks to everyone for the outpouring of kindness to me.

By “undoing” a baptism I meant either removing the record of the occurence administratively, or some other way of making it ineffectual

The answer is no.

Does the catholic Church believe they have the authority to loose something in heaven, especially when something wasn’t done in a kosher manner? I know full well that the past cannot be changed.

It does not work that way. And, while it was certainly imprudent to mak such a decision behind your back, that does not mean it was done invalidly or illicitly. For a child under 7, the Church requires consent of at least one parent (or guardian) outside danger of death, and those over 7 can ask for baptism themselves.

Corki - 10,000+ posts?!?!
JRKH - 16,000 posts?!?!
(name removed by moderator) - 18,000+ posts?!?!

Thanks all and God bless.

CAF has been online since 2004. Some of us have been here since day one. That doesn’t count the numerous posts that got wiped out in the great hacking scandal of about 2007 or 2008.

 

[yukonbrad]

Thanks to everyone for the outpouring of kindness to me.

By “undoing” a baptism I meant either removing the record of the occurence administratively, or some other way of making it ineffectual (like Peter was told in Mark 16:19 KJV - And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.) Does the catholic Church believe they have the authority to loose something in heaven, especially when something wasn’t done in a kosher manner? I know full well that the past cannot be changed.

Stylite - I don’t know whether I’ve baptized someone for the dead against their will - They’re dead! But seriously, this case is of a minor over who I have a legal responsibility jointly with my wife. And as an aside my grandfather was born, married in the Mormon temple, and died Mormon, and other Mormons had him baptized for the dead twice!! Sometimes the record keeping is less than stellar. And I believe there’s some sort of 110 year rule where a deceased person was born more than 110 years ago he/she is fair game to have the vicarious baptism done, whereas for a deceased individual born later than 110 years ago family permission is required, but I don’t know the particulars.

Mountee - My wife has been through painful experiences too numerous to detail here and it’s not my place to say whether The Man Upstairs condemns her ignoring me on purpose or not. I’m hoping for some sort of compromise where he goes Catholic one week and Mormon the next, but my wife simply does not tell me her intent now and I have to react after the fact.

Santi2 - My son is currently choosing whatever my wife is suggesting. If my wife suggested that he be baptized in a different church each month he’d do it currently.

Corki - 10,000+ posts?!?!
JRKH - 16,000 posts?!?!
(name removed by moderator) - 18,000+ posts?!?!

Thanks all and God bless.

No the record will not be expunged it will remain as far as I am aware - you may want to discuss this with a priest. From what you have mentioned here the church was unaware of the parental issue and I would assume they would consider the baptism valid. Yes you need to communicate with each other on these matters and I think you have an excellent solution - let him learn about both faiths and when he comes of legal age where parental issues are no longer an issue in and of themselves he can decide for himself. Who knows he may choose neither.

 

[Santi2]

Thanks to everyone for the outpouring of kindness to me.

By “undoing” a baptism I meant either removing the record of the occurence administratively, or some other way of making it ineffectual (like Peter was told in Mark 16:19 KJV - And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.) Does the catholic Church believe they have the authority to loose something in heaven, especially when something wasn’t done in a kosher manner? I know full well that the past cannot be changed.

The Parish Register will contain your son’s Baptismal record and cannot be removed or altered. Sacramentally, what has been bestowed is bestowed. Administratively, what has been written, is written. Even clerical errors e.g. spelling mistakes, cannot be altered albeit one can put a notation in the margin alongside the name of the baptised. I doubt the Chancery would allow notations of parental protest or lack of consent, as one has to consider Canon 852.

Santi2 - My son is currently choosing whatever my wife is suggesting. If my wife suggested that he be baptized in a different church each month he’d do it currently

Your son would have been interviewed without his mother being present. Baptism would not even have been considered by the Catechist (or the Priest) at that time as the Catholic Church is not in the habit of baptising everyone who comes knocking at Her door asking to be baptised. What would have been of paramount scrutiny in your son’s case is his desire to be Catholic (not your wife’s), manifest a willingness to be adequately instructed in the truths of the Catholic faith, and show an interest in the practice thereof e.g. a period whereby he had been attending Mass even as a non-Catholic.

Most certainly, your wife’s interest in the Catholic Church would have played a significant role. All parents influence choices for their child that which are essential to that child’s life and orientation towards his/her values. It just so happens in this case that you and your wife have different views towards the religious upbringing of your son.

 

[april32010]

is anyone posting in this thread a canon lawyer,if not i would suggest not giving advice you are not qualified to give, and if one is i would remind everyone per forum rules the ban on giving legal advice .

 

[HonoraDominum]

Thanks to everyone for the outpouring of kindness to me.

By “undoing” a baptism I meant either removing the record of the occurence administratively, or some other way of making it ineffectual (like Peter was told in Mark 16:19 KJV - And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.) Does the catholic Church believe they have the authority to loose something in heaven, especially when something wasn’t done in a kosher manner? I know full well that the past cannot be changed.

…

Thanks all and God bless.

Gazelam:

As a former LDS, I may be able to bring a bit of insight into what you’re asking, and explain to the Catholics here why you are asking this.

In the LDS religion, the fourth article of faith states, “We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the gospel are first, Faith in the lord Jesus Christ, second, repentance, third, baptism by immersion for the remission of sins, fourth, laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.” (Not sure how old you are, but I was singing the song in my head from Primary that helped me memorize that and helped me to get a little button on my Merrie Miss banner.)

To be put on the records as a member of the LDS church, all four of these things must occur, under the authority of a holder of the LDS priesthood. During baptism, any sins that occurred before this time were washed away according to LDS teachings. Also, while going through the washing and anointing ceremonies, which are a precursor to the endowment ceremonies in the LDS church, there was a phrase in the ceremony that basically said I was “clean every whit”, amounting to a second baptism, which I found very comforting at the time.

When I decided to leave the LDS church, I had to write a formal letter to the LDS church headquarters in Salt Lake City, which removed me from the membership rolls of the church and in effect “unbaptized” me and took away my temple blessings (from being endowed). In essence, leaving the Mormon church for good involves and administrative process. Were I to revert back to the LDS church, I would need to be rebaptized to fully join the church and reconfirmed.

In traditional Christianity (Catholicism), the baptism is a supernatural ceremony which in essence replaced the circumcision ceremonies of the Jewish tradition. As the Jewish circumcision ceremony represented a permanent mark on the child to represent the sign of the covenant between God and Man, so too does the sacrament of baptism leave a permanent “mark” or change of state on the soul of Man that represents the new covenant of God and Man after the sacrifice of Christ.

In addition to the “mark”, the apostles taught that the baptism was a supernatural form of the natural purification rites of the Jews, which were a type in the Old Testament leading to the true purification of being washed free of sin by the blood of Christ on the cross.

Looking at baptism in this light, it should be a bit clearer on why the Catholic/Christian sacrament of baptism is looked upon differently than the baptism of the LDS church. While the LDS church does see the rite of baptism as an initiation into the LDS church, the Catholic/Christian tradition sees baptism as an intrinsic transformation of soul and a mark of a covenant between God and Man. Because of the transformational properties of the Catholic/Christian baptism, this cannot be reversed in any way.

Even when faced with excommunication from the Catholic church (which is a much more complicated affair than LDS excommunication), excommunicants remain Catholic because of baptism and are still obligated to attend Mass. However, they are no longer able to receive any sacraments except for the Sacrament of Penance (confession). To have the excommunication lifted does not require a rebaptism, but instead an absolution from the proper ecclesiastical authority. Excommunication is very similar to disfellowship in the LDS church, in that there are still obligations required, but very little options for benefits from God through the authority of the church.

On a related note, when I converted from Mormonism to Catholicism, I was baptized at the Catholic church after a series of classes for adults similar (but a bit more involved) than the missionary classes of the LDS church. The Catholic church does not consider the Mormon baptism a valid baptism due to the fact that while the baptism is said in a Trinitarian form, the intent behind the words does not baptize in the name of the traditional Christian Trinitarian view of God. Because of the nature of God is drastically different in the LDS church than in the Catholic church, the intent is considered invalid. Had I come from a protestant church such as Baptist or Presbyterian, I would not have to be rebaptized. The Catholic church recognizes any baptism done in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit as recognized in the Trinitarian view of God.

Also, the sacrament of baptism is the only sacrament that can be performed by a lay person in an emergency situation (dying baby, etc.), as long as there is the proper form (I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost) and with the proper material (water). If your wife had decided to give your son an emergency conditional baptism in her home, as long as she said the proper form, and had the proper intent, and used the proper material, the mark would at that point be on the soul of your son and the effect would be valid.

It does sound like your family is in a very painful struggle. You and your wife and child will be in my prayers.

 

[Zooey]

Thanks to everyone for the outpouring of kindness to me.

By “undoing” a baptism I meant either removing the record of the occurence administratively, or some other way of making it ineffectual (like Peter was told in Mark 16:19 KJV - And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.) Does the catholic Church believe they have the authority to loose something in heaven, especially when something wasn’t done in a kosher manner? I know full well that the past cannot be changed.

It doesn’t work that way. A sacramental baptism is a permanent mark on the soul. (Yes, this is true for Methodists, too).

It appears that you all are in a very fraught situation, & all I can do is to offer your whole family my prayers. (My grandmother, God rest her, would have said that "Prayer is the** best** thing we can do,& there is no "all I can do about it).

gazelam:

Stylite - I don’t know whether I’ve baptized someone for the dead against their will - They’re dead! But seriously, this case is of a minor over who I have a legal responsibility jointly with my wife. And as an aside my grandfather was born, married in the Mormon temple, and died Mormon, and other Mormons had him baptized for the dead twice!! Sometimes the record keeping is less than stellar. And I believe there’s some sort of 110 year rule where a deceased person was born more than 110 years ago he/she is fair game to have the vicarious baptism done, whereas for a deceased individual born later than 110 years ago family permission is required, but I don’t know the particulars.

Mountee - My wife has been through painful experiences too numerous to detail here and it’s not my place to say whether The Man Upstairs condemns her ignoring me on purpose or not. I’m hoping for some sort of compromise where he goes Catholic one week and Mormon the next, but my wife simply does not tell me her intent now and I have to react after the fact.

Santi2 - My son is currently choosing whatever my wife is suggesting. If my wife suggested that he be baptized in a different church each month he’d do it currently.

As I say, you have a situation that needs a lot of prayer for everybody concerned–most especially for your son, who is very possibly no end of confused as to what is going on in his young life.

Corki - 10,000+ posts?!?!
JRKH - 16,000 posts?!?!
(name removed by moderator) - 18,000+ posts?!?!

Thanks all and God bless.

Yeah, some of us a just a** trifle** addicted.
OK, we are raving loonies who can’t take our hands off the keyboard long enough to eat a normal dinner. (Have you ever had deli macaroni salad & string cheese for Sunday dinner?)

God bless you as well, along with the rest of your family.

 

[adrift]

is anyone posting in this thread a canon lawyer,if not i would suggest not giving advice you are not qualified to give, and if one is i would remind everyone per forum rules the ban on giving legal advice .

Would you please link the forum rule. I have not come across such a rule. It probably is wise not to get legal advice from anyone but a lawyer. I don’t recall a post that has given legal advice just opinions.

 

[1ke]

is anyone posting in this thread a canon lawyer,if not i would suggest not giving advice you are not qualified to give, and if one is i would remind everyone per forum rules the ban on giving legal advice .

Discussing canon law is not “legal advice” in the context of the forum rules.

Canon law is a topic discussed here very frequently. There is no forum rule against discussing canon law or giving canon law citations.

 

[Vico]

Toward the end of 2011 my wife started distancing herself from me and now speaks to me as little as possible. In May 2012 she apparently started looking into Catholicism based on clues I’d find in our house, but she never told me so. In mid-july she stopped attending church with our 10 year old son and I and started taking my son elsewhere. After some sleuthing I determined they were going to the local Catholic parish. No legal steps have been taken toward divorce so my wife and I are still joint custodians of my son. I called the Office of Religious education which confirmed that my son was enrolled in a class for the new school year. I contacted the parish asking that my son not be formally instructed without my consent. While waiting for a reply I was kindly sent my son’s baptism certificate in the mail. (The parish website states that older children are baptized at Easter after being trained accordingly, so I didn’t think a baptism was imminent.) So, do I have any recourse as far as “undoing” my son’s baptism? Is it proper for the parish to baptized without any say from the custodial father? Doesn’t Canon Law 851 apply here? (“the parents of a child who is to be baptised, and those who are to undertake the office of sponsers, are to be suitably instructed on the meaning of this sacrament and the obligations attaching to it.”) Is there any other Canon Law pertinent to this situation? Thanks in advance.

I suspect that your wife is Catholic now because it is not normal to baptize a child without a Catholic parent or guardian. The Catholic is bound to raise the child as a Catholic giving the child a Catholic religious education. Since it is lawful to baptize an infant with only the consent of one parent, or in danger of death, it seems it would be possible that only one parent is suitably instructed.

Can. 868
§1 For an infant to be baptised lawfully it is required:
– 1° that the parents, or at least one of them, or the person who lawfully holds their place, give their consent;
– 2° that there be a well-founded hope that the child will be brought up in the catholic religion. If such hope is truly lacking, the baptism is, in accordance with the provisions of particular law, to be deferred and the parents advised of the reason for this.

§2 An infant of catholic parents, indeed even of non-catholic parents, may in danger of death be baptised even if the parents are opposed to it.

Can. 867 §2 If the infant is in danger of death, it is to be baptised without any delay.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Thanks to everyone for the outpouring of kindness to me.

By “undoing” a baptism I meant either removing the record of the occurence administratively, or some other way of making it ineffectual (like Peter was told in Mark 16:19 KJV - And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.) Does the catholic Church believe they have the authority to loose something in heaven, especially when something wasn’t done in a kosher manner? I know full well that the past cannot be changed.

.

I really encourage you again to talk to the priest at the parish. To enter the Church, your son would have to be confirmed. Christian Trinitarian baptism: in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, is a Sacrament that is* the same for all Christians*. If someone already baptized converted to Catholicism, they are not baptized again. So, it doesn’t mean he joined up. It does mean that in some churches, I’m not familiar with yours, I don’t even know your baptism formula.

Baptism as a Sacrament means something real takes place between God and the soul of the person baptized. The record is kept, but it only affirms that the Sacrament was administered - nothing else.

Please tell the Pastor what is going on, he really needs to know. The Church is not interested in stealing children away from Mormon parents to make more little Catholics. But the Church is vitally interested in the preservation of the family and the unity of the couple which is the key to the welfare of the child. If your wife is very serious about the Church, then she knows she must listen to the pastor. The Pastor, who is of course a priest, is not going to be in “her side” or yours, either. He’s going to be on the side of your marriage and Jesus Christ.

That’s how we roll.

 

[Vico]

I really encourage you again to talk to the priest at the parish. To enter the Church, your son would have to be confirmed. Christian Trinitarian baptism: in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, is a Sacrament that is* the same for all Christians*. If someone already baptized converted to Catholicism, they are not baptized again. So, it doesn’t mean he joined up. It does mean that in some churches, I’m not familiar with yours, I don’t even know your baptism formula.

Baptism as a Sacrament means something real takes place between God and the soul of the person baptized. The record is kept, but it only affirms that the Sacrament was administered - nothing else.

Please tell the Pastor what is going on, he really needs to know. The Church is not interested in stealing children away from Mormon parents to make more little Catholics. But the Church is vitally interested in the preservation of the family and the unity of the couple which is the key to the welfare of the child. If your wife is very serious about the Church, then she knows she must listen to the pastor. The Pastor, who is of course a priest, is not going to be in “her side” or yours, either. He’s going to be on the side of your marriage and Jesus Christ.

That’s how we roll.

The Catholic Church does not accept the baptismal formula of the Latter Day Saints.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20010605_battesimo_mormoni_en.html

 

[JRKH]

I really encourage you again to talk to the priest at the parish. To enter the Church, your son would have to be confirmed. Christian Trinitarian baptism: in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, is a Sacrament that is* the same for all Christians*. If someone already baptized converted to Catholicism, they are not baptized again. So, it doesn’t mean he joined up. It does mean that in some churches, I’m not familiar with yours, I don’t even know your baptism formula.

Baptism as a Sacrament means something real takes place between God and the soul of the person baptized. The record is kept, but it only affirms that the Sacrament was administered - nothing else.

Please tell the Pastor what is going on, he really needs to know. The Church is not interested in stealing children away from Mormon parents to make more little Catholics. But the Church is vitally interested in the preservation of the family and the unity of the couple which is the key to the welfare of the child. If your wife is very serious about the Church, then she knows she must listen to the pastor. The Pastor, who is of course a priest, is not going to be in “her side” or yours, either. He’s going to be on the side of your marriage and Jesus Christ.

That’s how we roll.

Excellent post…

Peace
James

 

[Liturgy_Geek_1]

And does the Mormon Church ask consent of dead people, or their estates’ personal representatives or the families of the deceased for permission to baptize them?

The irony here is fascinating.

No, it doesn’t. I found out during my genealogical research that my great-grandmother and great-great grandparents were “baptized” by some Mormon somewhere without my family’s consent. I’m still really angry about that.

 

[g_ncl]

I think a meeting with the Pastor of the Parish she is attending, with your wife in tow is in order. (…) for some straight talk on the duty a wife owes her husband and what the Church says about these behaviors

Well… I would also ask the OP why his wife felt the* need* to do this in secret?

As others have said, the baptism cannot be undone and the records will stay in the register forever. The father could (depending on local laws - I am not in the US) prevent his son to receive further sacraments but I would advise against this. It will only be a few years before the child becomes a teenager and the father would not be able to watch him 24/7 anyway. Especially after getting a driving licence or going to college/university.

I think it would be most important for the father to make sure that his son (and wife) do not doubt that he loves them and is there for them even if they are no longer mormons (I do hope this is the case!).