Something tells me that isn’t what Jesus would say.
Oh, I gotta know what you would think Jesus would say to two gay men wanting to baptize a baby in His Church that specifically teaches what they are doing is wrong.
But Pope Francis (When cardinal in Argentina) has said in the past that two homosexuals raising a child is a form of Child abuse.
Predictable after a while, yes?
Christ blessing a relationship and “parenting” founded on sodomy. Yeah, right. That such a couple can persist in a sin that cries out to Heaven for vengeance and raise a child according to the faith? No. Child abuse indeed!
SSA occurs at a rate of approximately 2% in the general population…this increases to 30% in children raised by homosexual couples.
I think Jesus was pretty clear about letting the children come to Him. I could be wrong, but I don’t remember him listing exceptions based on parental sexual orientation.
Actually that’s very true and I agree.
Also completely irrelevant. Jesus didn’t speak out on “transgender,” either, for the same reason He didn’t need to address same sex homosexually active couples “parenting.” Such diabolical novelties would have been inconceivable.
As much as i am defiant of the homosexual resurgence in our world. As evil as I think it is in regards to the attack on the family. And even to the extent that I disagree with Pope Francis often, the idea that baptism should be freely and liberally given to any and all who approach is something I think the Pope is dead on about. There is not a single person, infant or ancient that should not recieve this, the gateway to all the sacraments and salvation itself. The current pontiff wants this to be more liberally applied and it’s one point I can stand with the Pope 100 percent with. Baptisms in the early Church as described in Acts were immediate and available to all.
I don’t remember hearing about Jesus giving any exceptions at all about letting little children come to Him. Do you?
The issue is that the two so-called parents are utterly unfit to raise the child in the Catholic faith. They could hold PhDs in theology–doesnt matter. They are putting their own lust before Christ.
You might be holding the parents to too high of a standard. Half of hetero parents probably wouldn’t be fit to raise their children Catholic by a similar standard. The parents do need to be serious about raising the child Catholic, but they don’t need to be saints
If they’re really serious about the child’s spiritual welfare, they would find an orthodox, loving heterosexual couple to adopt the child.
Are we going to posit a “virtuous sodomite” couple, now?
If not putting your lust before Christ was a requirement to baptize then hardly anyone would be baptized. Not me. Probably not you.
I was baptized in the Anglican Church with a mormon father and a Anglican mother, neither of whom practiced any faith. I’m sure glad I was baptized. I’m sure my wife and kids are too. I was my wife’s sponsor in RCIA and got to be there for her baptism 6 months before our wedding when we were as sexually sinning as any gay guy. Alas. My sister was never baptized and you can say the same for her kids
Let’s clarify then. Most unnatural lust. No reasonable comparison between heterosexual and homosexual activity.
I don’t know if anyone addressed this already, but what about single moms? Divorced/unmarried couples?
Abusive spouses? Those who watch porn?
Most of our parents wouldn’t fit this standard. But I’m pretty glad I was baptized anyway.
I do agree that it’s weird for a gay couple to want a Catholic baptism in general, but I have heard of gay catholics/catholics who disagree with some teachings but still believe in Christ, go to church and all of that. And hence, it’s possible for someone to see that the child will be raised in the faith.
"In order that a child be baptized, it is necessary that the parents consent, or at least one of them, or someone legally standing in their place, and that there is reasonable hope that the child will be brought up in the Catholic Faith.
GODPARENTS: A person may only have one or two godparents (also called sponsors); if two are chosen, they must be male and female.
In order for someone to be eligible as a godparent they must be chosen by the parents, have the ability and the intention to fulfill the role, be at least 16 years of age, and be a confirmed Roman Catholic, who has already received the Most Holy Eucharist, is leading a life in harmony with the Catholic Faith (including Marriage) and will be a good role model for the one being baptized, and be neither the father nor the mother of the child."
Is the standard for godparents higher than the standard for parents?
And, I don’t see how there can be “reasonable hope” when two practicing homosexuals are doing the child raising. I guess that’s up to the priest, though. Or they might find a loudly dissident celebrity priest who would be happy to do the honors.
I can’t access that link from my country. But there’s a good reason for the standard for godparents to be higher than the standard for parents. A godparent is chosen. A parent is just the person who happened to have the child. Having high standards for godparents wouldn’t keep anyone from being baptised
I don’t see how there can be “reasonable hope” when two practicing homosexuals are doing the child raising. No comparison with a man and a woman who are truly married, in Holy Matrimony. In fact I believe any such comparison to be a diabolical lie.
Yes, I’m willing to bet many Catholic gay couples have spent much time soul-searching and struggling with their faith that, when they choose to baptize a child, they are doing so intentionally.
Meanwhile, just as well many heterosexual couples are just “checking the boxes” and going through the motions.
No one is perfect. But Christ wants to bring the best out of the good and would rather uphold the good than simply cast someone aside because of an imperfection.