No infant Baptism unless parents take class and pay fee?

[jbmccormick]

It appears the dogma of Baptism being required and never refused to a child (infant) has changed. When the local parish was asked to schedule a Baptism for our infant we were told this would not be possible unless both parents took a class and a fee was paid.

I have no problem with the fee to cover costs and instruction is always good. But there are times when this is not convenient or even nearly impossible. Adding insult to injury, “witnesses” were required to attend or the Baptism would be denied.

After decades of study and internal conversion, I have begun to question the Church.

 

[ajecphotos]

This is the norm as far as i was concerned. Our parish does the same. Good idea i think as too many people want to have their children baptised just for the sake of it!

 

[coachdennis]

It appears the dogma of Baptism being required and never refused to a child (infant) has changed. When the local parish was asked to schedule a Baptism for our infant we were told this would not be possible unless both parents took a class and a fee was paid.

I have no problem with the fee to cover costs and instruction is always good. But there are times when this is not convenient or even nearly impossible. Adding insult to injury, “witnesses” were required to attend or the Baptism would be denied.

After decades of study and internal conversion, I have begun to question the Church.

There have been numerous threads on this forum where people have repeatedly said that if there is financial difficulties, the parents have the responsibility to speak with the parish priest. In all cases that I know of, fees have been waived or reduced. In one case I know it was simply a miscommunication between parents and a receptionist.

Godparents, or witnesses as you call them, are are integral part of a child’s faith formation – or should be, and not solely because he or she is a member of the family. They should be properly prepared as the parents through instructions. If they are not willing to make that commitment, well… what statement are THEY making to the seriousness of their role?

If they are physically unable to be there due to long distances there are always solutions – sitting in on classes at their local parish or receiving a letter of recommendation from their local parish/pastor. If the priest is stubborn and will not budge or willing to make accommodations on your particular circumstances YOU have the responsibility t seek out another parish, but also reflect on the “why” of these requirements.

There are usually solutions to our problems and they involve speaking to the people in authority to make decisions directly. The Church is taking a stand on what they consider a serious commitment.

This is probably not what you want to hear.

 

[ChurchSoldier]

but also reflect on the “why” of these requirements.

I think this is part of it. You sound pretty engaged in your faith, but every parish has many families who don’t attend or give, yet expect the parish to be there to conduct the sacraments at their beck & call. They know that the sacrament must be performed, but little knowledge on why or interest in learning. This is probably just a way to cause people to be engaged at a minimal level.

Congratulations to the op on your new child!

 

[PaulfromIowa]

If parents are unwilling to attend a single baptism prep class because it is “inconvenient,” are they truly intending to raise the child in the Faith?

 

[CradleJourney]

It appears the dogma of Baptism being required and never refused to a child (infant) has changed. When the local parish was asked to schedule a Baptism for our infant we were told this would not be possible unless both parents took a class and a fee was paid.

I have no problem with the fee to cover costs and instruction is always good. But there are times when this is not convenient or even nearly impossible. Adding insult to injury, “witnesses” were required to attend or the Baptism would be denied.

After decades of study and internal conversion, I have begun to question the Church.

Try to understand that it’s not the Church - but the flawed individuals who make it up, just like you and I have our flaws. Of course it is possible - as others have posted (asking for a fee waiver, making other arrangements for instruction, etc). I’m just assuming that you are like me and when someone who has authority tells you something is “not possible” - you believe them, and when it contradicts what we hold to be true (that baptism is necessary and should be freely available to the faithful) it is very disconcerting. I’m also assuming that your parish has had to deal with other people and unpleasant situations to the point where they feel it necessary to make it seem impossible to have the baptism without these requirements or else no one would bother with the fee (to cover supplies, I assume) or attend the class which really is beneficial to understanding the sacrament.

My suggestion is to try speaking to your pastor directly and simply let him know how off-putting the wording was and how it effected you. It may not change the situation, but may give you back some of the peace that this has obviously disturb.

 

[Modern_Revert]

We took one pre-Jordan class and gave our pastor a “stole fee” (optional) after the baptism.
It really wasn’t a big deal. And of course, we had Godparents, one cousin from each family.

And of course–a Party!

So…

One one-hour class
A small fee
Godparents
Party

Talk to your pastor directly about your concerns.

 

[Orogeny]

It appears the dogma of Baptism being required and never refused to a child (infant) has changed. When the local parish was asked to schedule a Baptism for our infant we were told this would not be possible unless both parents took a class and a fee was paid.

I have no problem with the fee to cover costs and instruction is always good. But there are times when this is not convenient or even nearly impossible. Adding insult to injury, “witnesses” were required to attend or the Baptism would be denied.

After decades of study and internal conversion, I have begun to question the Church.

First off, there is no dogma that states that baptism is to never be refused. In fact, the reasons to refuse to baptize are in Canon law.

I don’t know what diocese you are in (Galveston-Houston?), but there is no fee for baptisms. Did you request a private baptism? If so, maybe that is what the fee is for, but I have never heard of such a thing.

Regarding instruction, ALL Catholics approaching the Church for baptism or to have children baptized are to be educated on the meaning of the sacrament and the obligations attached to it. That includes sponsors, although in Galveston-Houston, godparents are not absolutely required to attend the classes. That is Canon law and is binding on anyone wanting to enter the Church anywhere in the world. By the way, in case you are interested, it is Canon 851.

Why are you questioning the Church?

Peace

Tim

 

[1ke]

It appears the dogma of Baptism being required and never refused to a child (infant) has changed. When the local parish was asked to schedule a Baptism for our infant we were told this would not be possible unless both parents took a class and a fee was paid.

I have no problem with the fee to cover costs and instruction is always good. But there are times when this is not convenient or even nearly impossible. Adding insult to injury, “witnesses” were required to attend or the Baptism would be denied.

After decades of study and internal conversion, I have begun to question the Church.

I suggest you talk to the pastor. Make an appointment, not a “catch after mass” attempt.

Clearly you are annoyed. The process is set up for the masses, i.e. the parish is trying its best to deal with the volume and variety of parents it encounters approaching the Church for baptism.

Canon law requires parents be “properly prepared”:

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.

Most parishes “properly prepare” parents through a class, because the ratio of pastor-to-parishioner is not conducive to private, one-on-one meetings in most large cities. When I lived in Houston, I attended St John Vianney-- 7000+ families, hundreds of baptisms, only 5 deacons and 3 priests. So, class is the normative way the pastor ensures HE is meeting his obligations and parents are meeting theirs. Normative doesn’t mean “only”.

So TALK to the pastor if you have a problem with the date/time/location/cost or whatever.

As to Godparents, these Godparent classes are popping up recently, but they are not called for in canon law. So again, talk to the pastor. Canon law requires only:

Can. 874 §1. To be permitted to take on the function of sponsor a person must:

1/ be designated by the one to be baptized, by the parents or the person who takes their place, or in their absence by the pastor or minister and have the aptitude and intention of fulfilling this function;

I suppose one could argue that this must be shown through interaction between the Godparent and the parish representative, i.e. “a class”. My husband and I, who do not live in G-H diocese were the sponsors for my nephew a few months ago. Their parish required said “godparent class” but we are out of state. I simply typed up a letter stating we were suitable to undertake the role of godparents, my pastor signed it and sealed it with the parish seal, and voila, all was well.

Please talk to your pastor instead of just venting. Look at it from their perspective, which is really one of numbers-- people asking for baptism versus clergy able to meet with them one-on-one. The class, while you may find it annoying, is just about the only way the pastors can fulfill their own canon law obligations in the matter these days.

And, having worked with oodles of parents in sacramental preparation over the years, parents who know their faith are the minority, a tiny minority at that. if you are well versed in the faith, I am sure the pastor will work with you.

 

[Memaw]

It appears the dogma of Baptism being required and never refused to a child (infant) has changed. When the local parish was asked to schedule a Baptism for our infant we were told this would not be possible unless both parents took a class and a fee was paid.

I have no problem with the fee to cover costs and instruction is always good. But there are times when this is not convenient or even nearly impossible. Adding insult to injury, “witnesses” were required to attend or the Baptism would be denied.

After decades of study and internal conversion, I have begun to question the Church.

I didn’t know either of my Godparents, nor did my family. My Aunt and Uncle couldn’t make it to the Church because of a snow storm, (77 years ago). Father got two other people to be my God parents. One was a funeral director, (Fr.s right hand man, I was told ). We moved away when I was very young. I never met them again.
Years later I moved back to my home town and found out my Godfather had died. At age 50 a priest got me in touch with my Godmother. What a joy to find out that she had been praying for me all these years. I also learned from a friend of his that my Godfather was a very prayerful man, (you can be assured he prayed for you and still is, she told me) and he had a very special devotion to Our Lady. Which I do too. As a kid, I always felt slighted cause I didn’t “know” my Godparents, but God in His mercy gave me the BEST. Choosing Godparents for your children is sooo important and they also need to know their responsibility as Godparents. I am sooo thankful mine did and I try to do the same for my Godchildren. Please trust the Church in Her wise decisions of instructions. I used to teach the Baptismal class and believe me to many Catholics, (parents and Godparents) do NOT understand the seriousness of it. Don’t we want the best for our children? God Bless, Memaw

 

[Jeanne_S]

It appears the dogma of Baptism being required and never refused to a child (infant) has changed. When the local parish was asked to schedule a Baptism for our infant we were told this would not be possible unless both parents took a class and a fee was paid.

I have no problem with the fee to cover costs and instruction is always good. But there are times when this is not convenient or even nearly impossible. Adding insult to injury, “witnesses” were required to attend or the Baptism would be denied.

After decades of study and internal conversion, I have begun to question the Church.

Our parish requires both parents and godparents,if possible to attend an informational class.However,the fee is something I haven’t heard of before this.

 

[Orogeny]

As to Godparents, these Godparent classes are popping up recently, but they are not called for in canon law.

Hi 1ke. I agree with all of what you wrote with the exception of this minor point. Godparents (sponsors) are to be included in the instruction with the parents. Canon 851 says:

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

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.

I assume that each bishop can modify this law since we don’t require (but do strongly recommend) that godparents attend preparation classes.

Peace

Tim

 

[Kount_C]

It appears the dogma of Baptism being required and never refused to a child (infant) has changed. When the local parish was asked to schedule a Baptism for our infant we were told this would not be possible unless both parents took a class and a fee was paid.

I have no problem with the fee to cover costs and instruction is always good. But there are times when this is not convenient or even nearly impossible. Adding insult to injury, “witnesses” were required to attend or the Baptism would be denied.

After decades of study and internal conversion, I have begun to question the Church.

I don’t remember at any time, St. John in the gospels charging people for Baptism.

 

[Corki]

I don’t remember at any time, St. John in the gospels charging people for Baptism.

St. John did not administer Sacramental Baptism. His was a call to atonement for adult sinners.

 

[FrDavid96]

I don’t remember at any time, St. John in the gospels charging people for Baptism.

Book of Acts
34 The community of believers was of one heart and mind, and no one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they had everything in common.
33 With great power the apostles bore witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great favor was accorded them all.
34 There was no needy person among them, for those who owned property or houses would sell them, bring the proceeds of the sale,
35 and put them at the feet of the apostles, and they were distributed to each according to need.

Have you sold all your possessions and given the money to the Church yet?

 

[Rob_Arnzen]

It appears the dogma of Baptism being required and never refused to a child (infant) has changed. When the local parish was asked to schedule a Baptism for our infant we were told this would not be possible unless both parents took a class and a fee was paid.

I have no problem with the fee to cover costs and instruction is always good. But there are times when this is not convenient or even nearly impossible. Adding insult to injury, “witnesses” were required to attend or the Baptism would be denied.

Generally the parents, and godparents, are expected to engage in some pre-baptism instruction. I assume the “witnesses” refers to the godparents.

A sacrament can never be withheld for lack of payment of a fee. However, Catholics are expected to support the Church and unless financial circumstances are such that the fee is excessive, the situation is probably one of some miscommunication which can be ironed out with your pastor.

Here is the parent’s requirement for the baptism of children under Canon Law:

Can. 867 §1 Parents are obliged to see that their infants are baptised within the first few weeks. As soon as possible after the birth, indeed even before it, they are to approach the parish priest to ask for the sacrament for their child, and to be themselves duly prepared for it.

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

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.

.

 

[HelenRose]

I don’t remember at any time, St. John in the gospels charging people for Baptism.

Probably he didn’t have to make payments on a building and have paid staff either.

 

[PaulDupre1]

If parents are unwilling to attend a single baptism prep class because it is “inconvenient,” are they truly intending to raise the child in the Faith?

Exactly! Baptism in the Catholic Church is not just a ritual or a rite of passage or a cultural quirk, it is a holy sacrament. When parents bring their child for baptism, they are making a commitment to raise that child in the Catholic faith to the best of their ability.

It’s not “witnesses” that are required, it is at least one God-parent. The God-parent’s very serious and sacred role is to make sure that the child is raised in the Catholic faith even if the parents are killed or are otherwise unable to fulfill this responsibility themselves. It is a shame that many parents and God-parents do not understand what baptism means or the solemn promises and sacred vows that accompany it.

That is why there are pre-Jordan classes required in many a diocese, including the Diocese of Orange, wherein I worship.

BTW, the pre-whatever classes are often the spark that re-ignites a Catholic’s faith. I know that the pre-Cana class that my wife and I were required to take before we could marry in the Catholic Church re-introduced me to the faith of my fathers and set me on a path of reversion to the true faith. In that class I glimpsed what I had been missing in all my years of agnosticism and Mormonism and atheism. The frequent references to the CCC and the spirit of enthusiastic faith from the elderly couple that taught the class impressed me (a few years later - I’m slow) to purchase and read the CCC. That, in turn, brought about my reversion.

Paul (formerly all kinds of miserable, now happily Catholic)

 

[House_Harkonnen]

It appears the dogma of Baptism being required and never refused to a child (infant) has changed. When the local parish was asked to schedule a Baptism for our infant we were told this would not be possible unless both parents took a class and a fee was paid.

I have no problem with the fee to cover costs and instruction is always good. But there are times when this is not convenient or even nearly impossible. Adding insult to injury, “witnesses” were required to attend or the Baptism would be denied.

After decades of study and internal conversion, I have begun to question the Church.

The four close parishes near me all attempted to charge me 150 dollars to baptize my daughter. I told them I was poor. They agreed to lower the fee to 50 dollars.

I still refused to pay, I won’t pay for any sacrament. It’s the principle of the thing you know?

 

[ChurchSoldier]

Where your money lies, there your heart lies also…

Why is it that people who have jobs would scream bloody murder if there boss shorted them $5 in a paycheck, yet somehow think Priests should work for free…

Btw-There should never be a mandatory fee for a Sacrament, but like anything else in life, if something brings us value, it is appropriate to compensate the one providing it.