It’s not about deserving it, but about whether it will be beneficial for them.
Baptism, being a sacrament and thus a grace from God, will always be beneficial to them, quite probably also in supernatural ways that we mortals cannot comprehend.
You can’t just go around baptising everyone you see on the off chance that they might learn the faith one day. They have to make baptismal promises or the parents / godparents have to make them on their behalf
Consider how many people receive Holy Communion frequently and don’t advance spiritually. Sacraments are not effacious if there isn’t any work on their part.
As long as they are living an actively homosexual lifestyle (i.e. engaging in homosexual activity), they are in ongoing mortal sin and therefore not in communion with the Church.
Can’t imagine why someone would have a vested interest in seeing a host of saints declared to be homosexual. Nope. Just can’t imagine.
Got to speak up here. Where in the world do you get these ideas from? Slander? Hardley. Remember, being homosexual is not sinful. It isn’t an insult to speculate someone may be homosexual.
Also, I know a lot of LGBTQ people. They live normal lives and really don’t worry about what other people, straight or gay, do sexually. This concept that anyone in the LGBTQ community thinks everyone should be having sex all the time with anyone or everyone is so false, and is really uncharitable. I would encourage you to re-evaluate where you get your beliefs from on this issue, HD. You usually seem so reasonable, even when I disagree with you.
Yes The church teaches there are different types of sins, a sin is a sin big or small if God will forgive a person for murder or taking a penny it’s all the same.
You are 100% correct. I should have been more specific. I was referring to the couples that have been denied an annulment or who refuse to apply for one for whatever silly reasons
I’m pretty well versed in the LGBT and Catholic communities as I’ve been members of both (though always been strait)
Trying to "“out” a saint is scandalous. As is accusing someone of being gay with no ability to defend. This is childish and wrong at best. Insidious and evil at worst.
There are no gay saints. There very well may be an “LGBT” type saint in the future. But the saints have not given us this particular hero yet. And the type of hero this saint would be would be reviled by the LGBT community. Because he/she would have rejected acting on the disorder.
Slightly off topic question. Baptismal promises on a child’s behalf are made before you know what the child’s future will be like. Let’s say a godparent has custody of a child in the UK or Canada, and then the child comes out as gay. If the godparent keeps the baptismal promises, which would implicitly include passing on truths of the faith that have to do with sexuality, children’s services could come and take the child away. What can the godparent do?
If the baptism is denied, what would preclude the couple from baptizing the baby themselves, at home. The Church would be required to record it, etc., if they report back that the did so, yes?
Seems silly. “Raised in the Catholic faith” doesn’t equate to “raised by two parents who 100% subscribe to everything the Church teaches, and follows Church teachings 100%”. How many parents, is it reasonable to assume, have their babies baptized while, as a couple, they are using artificial birth control to keep from getting pregnant too soon after the birth they just experienced? I would say the percentage is quite high.
A gay couple can raise their child in the Catholic faith just as well as a heterosexual couple can. They can explain Church teachings to their child, and everything that comes with it. I get tired of people worrying about appearances. None of us is perfect.
I agree 100%
By “gay,” do you mean striving to live in celibate chastity, or actively engaging in homosexual intercourse?
Why not? How is it that you can judge whether someone will be active in the faith? What if the gay parents state that they will raise the child as a Catholic? Are you in a position to disbelieve them? There are probably millions of heterosexual Catholics who made that same promise and failed it, yet they weren’t under such scrutiny.
Truthfully, I am a liberal, cafeteria Catholic. I don’t concern myself with what other people do behind closed doors. I don’t have an opinion either way. I do use “gay” and “homosexual” interchangeably. I don’t really care for “SSA”, since it is used exclusively by Catholics typically, and nobody else knows what it means.
There needs to be contrition and repentance for that to happen.
I"m starting to think we need to change the whole Catholic approach to baptism.
Baptism shall be performed only on adults who have discerned their faith and agree to live by it. No more infant baptisms for Catholics. Henceforth, the Catholic Church shall be known as the Anabaptist Catholic Church.
Otherwise, we risk placing one of God’s sacraments on the wrong people.
I only use SSA on CAF.
Then you can baptise them, as I said in a much earlier post. I was just replying again more to address the people who point out that baptism is beneficial for a child - that’s true, but it doesn’t mean that you’re allowed to baptise them for their own benefit without worrying about the rules of baptism