Can the church licitly baptize a baby of a lesbian couple that intends to get civilly married? Are not they required to make a promise to "renounce Satan and all his evil acts…etc?
There has to be reasonable hope that they will raise child in spirit of Catholicism. That is in Canon law 868, so look it up if you want. Priests who baptise babies that have parents living in sin are modernists and they care more about the world than about God. Only exeption is when child is probaably going to die.
In such a case, can someone else take the child to be baptized then like a grandma or grandpa? Or do the parents have to be present at the baptism?
And the way we raise a child “Catholic” is by our example, thoughts, words and deeds. So how can their lifestyle be a proper example. Kids only learn from what they are exposed to. So enrolling in religious instruction is not the only requirement. This is really a moral dilemma because it is one we are soon facing at our parish. I suggested that the item should first be submitted to the hierarchy of the diocese and let them make the decision before attempting it at a parish level. Do you think this is appropriate?? Delaying the baptism for sure.
If I may poke in, by delaying the baptism won’t you be reducing the chance of a child later becoming a Catholic to zero?
A hypothetical scenario…The child of a lesbian couple grows up, asks why she was never baptized and is told that is because the Church refused because of her mothers lesbian relationship. She’s now offended on two fronts, the first being that the Church offended her mother (she being raised in a lesbian household likely becoming pro-LGBT herself) and also that the Church already refused her; why sign up to somewhere who already kicked you out once when there’s hundreds of churchs vying for her attention (again, I know believers say the Catholic Church is the only church founded by Jesus…But pretty much every other denomination claims that too).
The alternative is that the child grows up in a Lesbian household, but with a constant Catholic influence in her life from the Church who can seek to indoctrinate the girl into it’s ways. Certainly, she’s unlikely to ever become an anti-gay marriage campaigner but she’ll grow up with faith at least. The first case, denying her, sounds like a recipe for Atheism and more than that, Anti-Theism (an active hate of faith itself rather than simple disbelief and uninterest).
So, the baby should be punished by being denied baptism?
It would be more likely said the parents are the ones punishing the child by exposing it to a sinful lifestyle.
It’s not too far out there neither is it a first, I understand Pope Francis had to press a few buttons regarding allowing bastard children in south America to be baptized. It may be normal for them to be baptized in Europe and the US now but over there many Clerics are reluctant or unwilling to do it because the child without a father, much like the offspring of the lesbian is part of or the reminder of sin.
This is really no different than situations where the couple is cohabitating.
Most priests interpret “reasonable hope” quite liberally. And I think it is good that they do so. If Baptism is necessary for salvation, it seems preferable that they give them the benefit of the doubt.
It will probably depend on the situation, though. I’m sure that some counsel would be in order.
Are you saying that the Archbishop of Cordoba in Argentina is a Modernist?
Wow. Interesting that you can see into the heart of every priest that has baptized a child of a couple living in sin.
I would imagine that there are times that the priest simply doesn’t know that the couple is not married.
I was civilly married, had our child baptized , THEN my husband and I were married in the Church.
I don’t think anyone realized it.
Perhaps they care more about the soul of the child. You would potentially condemn a child to hell because of the sins of the parents? :rolleyes:
Not under most circumstances. Yes, the parents or someone licitly representing them normally needs to be present at the baptism.
Canon 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.
§2. An infant in danger of death is to be baptized without delay.
Canon 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.
§2. An infant of Catholic parents or even of non-Catholic parents is baptized licitly in danger of death even against the will of the parents.
I see 2 fronts here. 1st, front is to have a baby baptized which is the ideal. But in the case of a couple who may be cohabitating or married couple, there is the greater chance that by the child’s baptism, they may be led to marry in the church.
But to ask a lesbian couple to outright make a baptismal promise…and a proclamation of faith that they outwardly are discarding…“I renounce Satan and all his evil works and promises…” is not a good thing for any priest or deacon to expect. I think is irresponsible and a sin on the part of the celebrant.
We meet Christ in each sacrament…and to expect them to lie to his face, does not seem rational to me.
2nd, The baby is in an unnatural state, and as a church we are to protect children. Are we failing our duties here??
The children of gay couples should be baptized as well as the children of single parents, remarried divorcees, and unmarried couples living together. I’m not sure why sexual sins are singled out as being evil. Straight couples who married in the Church under the right form are also sinners and no one is denying their children baptism. The Synod documents suggest that the Church will come out in favor of baptizing children in most situations (as well as insisting that they aren’t discriminated against when it comes to Catholic education, Catholic youth groups, and catechism classes.)
I have been doing a lot of researching on this topic, plus a lot of praying as well for the Holy Spirit to lead me in this issue. In Sept of 2015, there is going to be World Synod on Families held in Philadelphia. Our Pope Francis may be attending. Prior to this synod, there has been a document issued by the Vatican in June of 2014 called
Instrumentum Laboris. familia…Here is its link…vatican.va/roman_curia/synod/documents/rc_synod_doc_20140626_instrumentum-laboris-familia_en.html
It has a section it dealing with this real issue. They also want to see more pastoral guidelines but until then, our catechism and canon law requires strong godparents to be involved in the teaching of these children. So I am praying that our pastor will meet with these godparents in this situation and find out if they are willing to take their vows seriously in helping these children. All godparents take this vow, but sometimes they are critically needed from Day 1 in my opinion. It’s all up to the mercy of God.
I also want to see the parents get to heaven as well! Maybe their children will lead them.
Exactly. Is the hatred for lesbians by just some enough to condemn possibly to hell by denying it baptism?
If punishment of some is required, let it be the “mothers” and not the innocent baby.
You do realize that Baptism of an infant “alone” without the instruction of the Gospel, or even the contradicting lifestyle of the Gospel is far from assurance of salvation?
I am not opposed to Baptizing an adopted child of a gay couple, but the Catechism clearly expresses the necessity of the Gospel message to be taught the child in order for the Spirit of salvation to be beneficial.
It’s not an easy situation. But the fact that a gay couple would be willing to Baptize their adopted child, would be encouragement that they would be willing to, in some manner, teach the child the Gospel.
Where infant Baptism has become the form in which this sacrament is usually celebrated, it has become a single act encapsulating the preparatory stages of Christian initiation in a very abridged way. By its very nature infant Baptism requires a post-baptismal catechumenate. Not only is there a need for instruction after Baptism, but also for the necessary flowering of baptismal grace in personal growth. The catechism has its proper place here.
The parents need to consult with the parish and consent to the Baptism. Also, the official Church teaching is not to ever DENY Baptism, only to DELAY it. There is a difference although a delay would still be painful I believe.
A child denied once will not seek a potential second rejection from the Church. What if it dies in the meantime of this “delay” I wonder, are any priests happy to have that on their hands?