Non Catholic be a godparent?

[Episcopalian]

If a Catholic has a baby and asks their non-Catholic friend to be a godparent, is that ok?

I know the godparent needs to answer on behalf of the baby and help raise them on the faith and such, but if they are a different Christian denomination, or non Christian, would it be allowed?

 

[UpUpAndAway]

A baptised non-Catholic Christian can be a witness to a Catholic baptism, but only Catholics can be sponsors (“godparents”).

See Canon law Can. 874, particularly §1:3 and §2.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2Y.HTM

 

[GLam1761]

I was a Baptist when I was asked to be the Godparent of
a episcopalian couple who had a baby boy.

 

[White_Tree]

I know the godparent needs to answer on behalf of the baby and help raise them on the faith and such, but if they are a different Christian denomination, or non Christian, would it be allowed?

Technically not, but I have seen non-Catholics serve as godparents nonetheless. How strictly that rule is enforced or not depends on the parish.

There are two potential points of failure here: the parish performing the baptism, and the parish issuing the letter of good standing.

Some parishes do not bother to ask for verification of good standing from the potential godparents’ home parish, in which case, it is easy for people to misrepresent themselves.

And in some cases, certain parishes may issue letters for people who are not, in fact, Catholic. In which case, even if the parish performing the baptism is trying to enforce the rules, they are thwarted by the false letter.

I have seen both types of failures occur, but they are always due to some type of misrepresentation on the part of the parents and the godparents. I do not know what those types of situations imply for the “legitimacy” of the godparents, though they are technically recorded as “godparents” in the church records.

 

[TheLittleLady]

How strictly that rule is enforced or not depends on the parish.

Actually, it is Canon Law.

What you have seen is non Catholics serving as Christian Witness. The Catholic party is the baptismal sponsor.

 

[1ke]

Technically not, but I have seen non-Catholics serve as godparents nonetheless. How strictly that rule is enforced or not depends on the parish.

A non Catholic cannot be a baptismal sponsor. It’s simply not possible. If a non Catholic witnesses the baptism they are a witness, not a sponsor regardless of what anyone calls them. You must be Catholic to sponsor a child in Catholic baptism.

The non Catholic can certainly be a good spiritual role model for the child, but they can’t sponsor them for baptism.

 

[1ke]

I was a Baptist when I was asked to be the Godparent of
a episcopalian couple who had a baby boy.

That’s nice, but it actually doesn’t have anything to do with the question, which is about a non Catholic sponsor for a Catholic baptism.

 

[White_Tree]

A non Catholic cannot be a baptismal sponsor. It’s simply not possible. If a non Catholic witnesses the baptism they are a witness , not a sponsor regardless of what anyone calls them. You must be Catholic to sponsor a child in Catholic baptism.

The non Catholic can certainly be a good spiritual role model for the child, but they can’t sponsor them for baptism.

I have seen baptismal records in which non-Catholics were recorded as the Godparents, not “Christian Witnesses” (which are separate).

Based on what you said, does that mean they were actually Christian Witnesses, even if on paper they were the sponsor? Would the baptism therefore have no sponsor?

 

[Cor_ad_Cor]

Yes, that’s precisely what it means.

Both of our children have one of each - a Catholic sponsor (godparent) and a non-Catholic, Christian witness. In one case, to avoid some emotional injury and misunderstanding in the family, a “duplicate” copy of the certificate was made that omitted the “witness” label. The parish records and our official copy are accurate.

The feeling was that as long as the parish records were correct, it was charitable to not squabble over the technical terminology. The witness will perform essentially the same role as the sponsor, less canonical recognition.

 

[TheLittleLady]

There have been times and places where the parish staffer in charge of recording sacraments were not trained, and even priests in small parishes without a secretary who did not have proper training on record keeping.

It happened, in spite of the wrong title in the register, non Catholics were still witnesses not sponsors.

As trained people take over register responsibility there is a process for correcting errant entries.

 

[1ke]

Based on what you said, does that mean they were actually Christian Witnesses, even if on paper they were the sponsor? Would the baptism therefore have no sponsor?

Yes they were a Christian witness regardless of what the records say. If they were the only one, then there actually was no sponsor.

Doesn’t impact validity, but it’s annoying when parishes don’t have their act together.

 

[Phemie]

White_Tree:

Based on what you said, does that mean they were actually Christian Witnesses, even if on paper they were the sponsor? Would the baptism therefore have no sponsor?

Yes they were a Christian witness regardless of what the records say. If they were the only one, then there actually was no sponsor.

Doesn’t impact validity, but it’s annoying when parishes don’t have their act together.

The parish that was once the diocesan see doesn’t record the names of the Christian witnesses. Our parish always did with nothing to indicate they were not sponsors. In fact, it was only when I asked that our last Pastor said, yes, it should be indicated so I write C.W. after their name. I make sure to explain the difference during baptismal preparation.

My biggest problem is that the priest we now have as Administrator will allow non-baptized to stand as supposed “Christian witnesses”, insisting it doesn’t matter since only one sponsor is needed.

 

[1ke]

My biggest problem is that the priest we now have as Administrator will allow non-baptized to stand as supposed “Christian witnesses”, insisting it doesn’t matter since only one sponsor is needed.

UGH.

Honestly, we’ve had international priests since I’ve been here at this parish, and they pretty much leave everything to me. So, no funny business on my watch. If we ever got a priest who did stuff like that, it would drive me bonkers.

 

[BartholomewB]

If a Catholic has a baby and asks their non-Catholic friend to be a godparent, is that ok?

To put it as succinctly as possible, in theory it’s not okay, but in practice it often is. The best thing to do is to have a quiet word with the priest who’s going to baptize the child. It’s up to him to accept or reject you. Canon law doesn’t give the individual priest the right to do that, but it’s a rule that is by no means strictly enforced. And in any case, the baptism is still valid.

 

[Phemie]

Yes, that’s precisely what it means.

Both of our children have one of each - a Catholic sponsor (godparent) and a non-Catholic, Christian witness. In one case, to avoid some emotional injury and misunderstanding in the family, a “duplicate” copy of the certificate was made that omitted the “witness” label. The parish records and our official copy are accurate.

The feeling was that as long as the parish records were correct, it was charitable to not squabble over the technical terminology. The witness will perform essentially the same role as the sponsor, less canonical recognition.

During baptismal preparation I make sure to explain the difference.

Something we have run into in the last decade or so with the influx of Temporary Foreign Workers is the tradition, in some cultures, of appointing multiple godparents. Eight to ten is not unusual. I then have to explain that the Church only recognizes two, one man, one woman, and that they are free to call anyone they want a godparent but will have to chose from that group who will actually be the recorded sponsors.