Why not baptise a child unlikely to be raised in the faith?

[carefullytread]

In the Instruction on Infant Baptism, we are told that

In fact the Church can only accede to the desire of these parents if they give an assurance that, once the child is baptized, it will be given the benefit of the Christian upbringing required by the sacrament. The Church must have a well-founded hope that the Baptism will bear fruit.

Why does the Church require a hope that the child will be raised in the faith? Does this mean it’s better for a child who is raised outside the faith not to be baptized?

 

[Phemie]

In the Instruction on Infant Baptism, we are told that

Why does the Church require a hope that the child will be raised in the faith? Does this mean it’s better for a child who is raised outside the faith not to be baptized?

Baptism imposes things on the child that he/she will never know about if not raised in the faith – think about the rules on marriage, for example. As difficult as it is to accept, and believe me that affects me directly where my grandsons are concerned, it’s probably better not to make the child Catholic than to set him/her up to be a non-practicing Catholic from the get-go

 

[PaulfromIowa]

Why does the Church require a hope that the child will be raised in the faith? Does this mean it’s better for a child who is raised outside the faith not to be baptized?

It is best for a child to be raised IN the faith. Those who baptize a child and neglect that child’s religious instruction will have** much** to answer for.

 

[jmcrae]

In the Instruction on Infant Baptism, we are told that

Why does the Church require a hope that the child will be raised in the faith? Does this mean it’s better for a child who is raised outside the faith not to be baptized?

Yes. What if you were baptized Catholic but had no idea that this means you must marry a Catholic in the Church, and you must attend Mass every Sunday, and receive Holy Communion during the Easter season, and go to Confession whenever you are conscious of having committed a serious sin?

But none of these rules apply to non-Catholics, so they wouldn’t be in trouble for not doing them. Once the child is of age, he could choose to be baptized Catholic, and the rules would be explained to him, so it wouldn’t come as a complete shock.

 

[Neofight]

What an interesting, thought provoking question, especially in this Year of Mercy!

“hope” is the key word. Unfortunately, reality does not always meet what is hoped for.

And, as another said, if parents have their child baptized in the faith, and then do not raise the child in the faith, those parents do, indeed, have much to answer for.

However, the shortcomings of the parents should not jeopardize the salvation of the innocent…in many ways, failing to baptize (or allow baptism) is like an abortion of the soul!

Interesting also, in this argument, is the undeniable fact that there are thousands of “cradle Catholics” who were baptized as infants, were never raised in the faith, or worse, walked away from it later in life…baptism, however, was not “wasted” on them.

Baptism and its many saving graces can never be wasted, and should therefore, be offered freely.

 

[Todd977]

Why does the Church require a hope that the child will be raised in the faith? Does this mean it’s better for a child who is raised outside the faith not to be baptized?

Quite possibly. A prayer of exorcism is said at the baptism of the child and Jesus said, "When the unclean spirit has gone out of a man, he passes through waterless places seeking rest, but he finds none. Then he says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when he comes he finds it empty, swept, and put in order. Then he goes and brings with him seven other spirits more evil than himself, and they enter and dwell there; and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. (Matthew 12:43-45)

Peter said, “For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them.” (2 Peter 2:21) I suspect that the worst torments of hell are prepared for those how have the indelible mark of baptism on their souls.

 

[ShrodingersCat]

What an interesting, thought provoking question, especially in this Year of Mercy!

“hope” is the key word. Unfortunately, reality does not always meet what is hoped for.

And, as another said, if parents have their child baptized in the faith, and then do not raise the child in the faith, those parents do, indeed, have much to answer for.

However, the shortcomings of the parents should not jeopardize the salvation of the innocent…in many ways, failing to baptize (or allow baptism) is like an abortion of the soul!

Interesting also, in this argument, is the undeniable fact that there are thousands of “cradle Catholics” who were baptized as infants, were never raised in the faith, or worse, walked away from it later in life…baptism, however, was not “wasted” on them.

Baptism and its many saving graces can never be wasted, and should therefore, be offered freely.

Are you implying that the unbaptised cannot go to Heaven?? Because they can of course go to Heaven. “Abortion of a soul” is a rather extreme view.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

“hope” does not mean a sure thing.

With baptism, the baby gets GRACE.

Without baptism, no grace.

What’s the worst thing that can happen if the baby is baptised but is raised outside the Church.

Even non-Christians respect the sacrament of Baptism.

Without baptism, the baby lives his or her life in paganism.

What does an adult think or feel if he or she was denied baptism as an infant?

They didn’t want me.

Even as an infant I was not good enough to warrant being baptized.

 

[jmcrae]

“hope” does not mean a sure thing.

With baptism, the baby gets GRACE.

Without baptism, no grace.

What’s the worst thing that can happen if the baby is baptised but is raised outside the Church.

They unknowingly break the laws of the Church to which they have been bound for obedience.

Without baptism, the baby lives his or her life in paganism.

If that’s how the family is living, then he would do so whether baptized or not.

What does an adult think or feel if he or she was denied baptism as an infant?

They didn’t want me.

Even as an infant I was not good enough to warrant being baptized.

If the family doesn’t practice any religion, the child would simply feel just as all of us feel who have never undergone the various tribal rituals that initiate one into tribal life - not my tribe; not my ritual.

If the family does practice the faith, and if they are sending the child to Catholic school then there remains a hope that the child will learn his faith, so in those cases Baptism would not be denied, I shouldn’t think.

 

[MaryHelp777]

It is best for a child to be raised IN the faith. Those who baptize a child and neglect that child’s religious instruction will have** much** to answer for.

I heard a holy person say,
They would have the child baptised, rather than risk the child’s eternal salvation.

 

[InThePew]

Why does the Church require a hope that the child will be raised in the faith? Does this mean it’s better for a child who is raised outside the faith not to be baptized?

In infant baptism (as opposed to adult baptism) the child itself does not have faith, strictly speaking (at least not that they can express…) thus the faith comes from the parents, the godparents and the wider parish community (which, incidentally, is why baptisms normally have to be held in a church). So, for the child to have faith, this needs to be passed on to them since they can’t come to it by themselves. Without a well founded hope that the child will be raised in the faith (which is actually a pretty low threshold) it’s better that baptism be postponed (note: not denied) so that the sacrament can be effective.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I heard a holy person say,
They would have the child baptised, rather than risk the child’s eternal salvation.

If there is not a founded hope that the child will actually be raised in the faith, the parish is to refuse the sacrament in that circumstance. The exception is if the child is determined to be in danger of death.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

What an interesting, thought provoking question, especially in this Year of Mercy!

“hope” is the key word. Unfortunately, reality does not always meet what is hoped for.

Hope is not the keyword. “Founded hope” is the keyword. The parish priest must have a founded hope that the child will be brought up in the faith. Not certainty but the hope must have a realistic basis. If the parents are not practiced and not interested in the child’s spiritual well-being beyond presenting the child for baptism but the grandparents say they will see to the child’s religious education and the parents give assurance they will not prevent it, the parish priest can have founded hope and proceed.

And, as another said, if parents have their child baptized in the faith, and then do not raise the child in the faith, those parents do, indeed, have much to answer for.

However, the shortcomings of the parents should not jeopardize the salvation of the innocent…in many ways, failing to baptize (or allow baptism) is like an abortion of the soul!

Interesting also, in this argument, is the undeniable fact that there are thousands of “cradle Catholics” who were baptized as infants, were never raised in the faith, or worse, walked away from it later in life…baptism, however, was not “wasted” on them.

Baptism and its many saving graces can never be wasted, and should therefore, be offered freely.

Abortion of the soul is a gruesome analogy that is not at all correct.

The Church has determined when baptism is to be conferred and when it is to be withheld. To act in a way that is contrary to the Church’s discipline of the sacraments is entirely wrong – and the person who does so will have to answer to both God and the Church.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

With baptism, the baby gets GRACE.

Without baptism, no grace.

If the person commits serious sin, all grace is lost and, if they never have contact with the Church after baptism, they have no access to its restoration. They would retain the sacrament’s ontological character but if they are never told they were baptised they would only find that out after death.

What’s the worst thing that can happen if the baby is baptised but is raised outside the Church.

A theologian could write a book in answer to that question.

The Church is very protective of the sacraments…because she has been entrusted with them. That is why, for example, she does not baptise every child that comes through her care. There are extreme consequences to conferring a sacrament upon a person.

Baptism is not a magic rite; it incorporates the person receiving it into the Mystical Body of Christ and that has very broad ramifications for the baptised person…even their ability to validly contract marriage is altered.

The fact that baptism removes original sin is only one small aspect of what the sacrament effects in the soul of the person receiving it. The other effects are, actually, of greater significance ontologically.

 

[MorEphrem]

The Eastern question would be “why not, indeed?”

 

[otjm]

I heard a holy person say,
They would have the child baptised, rather than risk the child’s eternal salvation.

So is holiness now decided based on either denying what the Church teaches, or violating the rules which the Church lays down?

Interesting…

 

[Liturgy_Geek_1]

None of my grandchildren are baptized. My son, who was raised Catholic, is engaged to a woman who had no belief in God and thus my son has fallen away from the Church. I wish he would have been stronger but he’s not.

My son’s fiancée has 2 children from previous relationships and then a child with my son. I admit that I have been sorely tempted to baptize these children but I know that it is not the right thing to do since they would receive no support, no teaching and no understanding of the Catholic faith.

That being said, I do carry holy water in case they are seriously sick or injured. If they are in danger of death, I’m going to baptize them. Period. But, I do pray for their safety each day.

I prayed every day for my unbaptized husband for almost 25 years to come into the Church. Finally, he announced one day that he was ready. I wept with joy at his baptism. I pray every day for my grandchildren in that hope.

 

[Phemie]

None of my grandchildren are baptized. My son, who was raised Catholic, is engaged to a woman who had no belief in God and thus my son has fallen away from the Church. I wish he would have been stronger but he’s not.

My son’s fiancée has 2 children from previous relationships and then a child with my son. I admit that I have been sorely tempted to baptize these children but I know that it is not the right thing to do since they would receive no support, no teaching and no understanding of the Catholic faith.

That being said, I do carry holy water in case they are seriously sick or injured. If they are in danger of death, I’m going to baptize them. Period. But, I do pray for their safety each day.

I prayed every day for my unbaptized husband for almost 25 years to come into the Church. Finally, he announced one day that he was ready. I wept with joy at his baptism. I pray every day for my grandchildren in that hope.

I’m in the same boat where my grandsons are concerned. Daughter doesn’t go to church except at Christmas and even that is for sentimental reasons and if Midnight Mass weren’t available I doubt she’d bother. She’s in an invalid marriage as is her brother who has no kids yet.

I, also, have been tempted to baptize them and it’s been a struggle with myself at bath time. But I know it would be a bad thing to do – even if a priest who knows me well expressed surprise that I hadn’t done so. And I too have said, “If they get really sick all bets are off.”

 

[LoveMercyGrace]

What an interesting, thought provoking question, especially in this Year of Mercy!

“hope” is the key word. Unfortunately, reality does not always meet what is hoped for.

And, as another said, if parents have their child baptized in the faith, and then do not raise the child in the faith, those parents do, indeed, have much to answer for.

However, the shortcomings of the parents should not jeopardize the salvation of the innocent…in many ways, failing to baptize (or allow baptism) is like an abortion of the soul!

Interesting also, in this argument, is the undeniable fact that there are thousands of “cradle Catholics” who were baptized as infants, were never raised in the faith, or worse, walked away from it later in life…baptism, however, was not “wasted” on them.

Baptism and its many saving graces can never be wasted, and should therefore, be offered freely.

Baptism and its many saving graces can never be wasted, and should therefore, be offered freely.

Amen. LoveMercyGrace

 

[otjm]

Baptism and its many saving graces can never be wasted, and should therefore, be offered freely.

Amen. LoveMercyGrace

It is offered freely; but when those who are the parents, have no intention of raising the children as Catholic, one is binding the child to the rules of the Church with no possible way they will know what those rules are.

Our God is a loving and merciful God, and not a God who is bound by the rules which he gave us.