Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Can a Baby be Baptized Against the Parents' Wishes?
Canon Law Made Easy ^ | February 14, 2013 | Cathy Caridi, J.C.L.

Posted on 02/14/2013 12:14:09 PM PST by Weiss White

Q: Some Jewish people in my city complained to the local Catholic hospital, saying they were afraid to bring their sick children to the emergency room, because the hospital staff might baptize them. The hospital staff publicly agreed never to do this.

I had always assumed that you can’t baptize a baby without at least one parent’s consent, so I thought the hospital would simply say, “Don’t worry, we’re not allowed to do that anyway!” But the wording of the hospital administrators’ response seemed to suggest that they really could baptize a sick baby if they wanted to. Can a baby be baptized Catholic, even if the parents aren’t Catholic and don’t want the baptism? –Greg

(Excerpt) Read more at canonlawmadeeasy.com ...


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Religion & Culture; Theology
KEYWORDS: baptism; blogspam; canonlaw; catholic; checkoutmyblog; comeseemyblog; didjareadmyblog; ihaveablog; iminteresting; listentome; lookatme; payattentiontome; pimpmyblog; readme; readmyblog; readmyramblings; trollingforhits; unbaptized
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-96 next last

1 posted on 02/14/2013 12:14:26 PM PST by Weiss White
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Weiss White
Archie Bunker did it....


2 posted on 02/14/2013 12:17:38 PM PST by massmike (At least no one is wearing a "Ron Paul - 2016" tee shirt........yet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

In the olden days (of my youth), a Catholic hospital might have the priest baptize a dying baby. I doubt that would happen today.


3 posted on 02/14/2013 12:19:32 PM PST by Ingtar (Everyone complains about the weather, but only Liberals try to legislate it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

If you are not a believer what does it matter? It is just a bath in your mind set. As long as it physically nor mentally invasive (I doubt babies could be affected emotionally) then who cares. I’d be more concerned about the quality/level of care under obamacare guidelines.


4 posted on 02/14/2013 12:21:26 PM PST by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

Legally? I don’t know.
I do know that when the time came for my husband’s dad to allow him to be baptized into the Catholic church he refused. So my mother-in-law and her mother “baptized” him in the kitchen sink.
He chose to be baptized and joined the Baptist church in his late teens.


5 posted on 02/14/2013 12:23:44 PM PST by Wiser now (Socialism does not eliminate poverty, it guarantees it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

If the parents were baptized against their wishes, would that make them Catholics? Or just wet Jews?


6 posted on 02/14/2013 12:24:35 PM PST by LearsFool ("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool

The custom of baptism didn’t just spring up when Jesus came along. The ceremonial use of water is a very ancient Jewish custom.


7 posted on 02/14/2013 12:27:27 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: massmike

yep and only if the babys daddy is a certifiable meathead


8 posted on 02/14/2013 12:28:09 PM PST by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

So Marco Rubio baptized hks self while giving his speech?


9 posted on 02/14/2013 12:30:19 PM PST by al baby (Hi Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool

Best laugh I’ve had all day! lol!


10 posted on 02/14/2013 12:30:31 PM PST by Marie ("The last time Democrats gloated this hard after a health care victory, they lost 60 House seats.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bigbob
yep and only if the babys daddy is a certifiable meathead

And if the baby's mama goes on to gain 300 pounds and shills for programs that supposedly feed hungry kids.

11 posted on 02/14/2013 12:30:49 PM PST by ScottinVA (Gun control: Steady firm grip, target within sights, squeeze the trigger slowly...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Charlie tried to do that on “Lost”... with a completely unrelated person’s baby no less.


12 posted on 02/14/2013 12:32:09 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative
If you are not a believer what does it matter?

Yep.

I'm pretty sure the Mormons reading the obituaries will get me proxy-baptized after I'm dead.

Doesn't bother me. I already know where I'm going, and no two people splashing around in a basin will affect that.

Not that I'd want it to :)

13 posted on 02/14/2013 12:33:18 PM PST by ExGeeEye (It's been over 90 days; time to start on 2014. Carpe GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Sure, but my point is that baptism into Christ is a voluntary act, predicated upon belief in Christ.

Neither Jews’ children nor Catholics’ children nor atheists’ children can be baptized into Christ before they’re of an age to believe in Him.


14 posted on 02/14/2013 12:36:33 PM PST by LearsFool ("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Marie

:-D


15 posted on 02/14/2013 12:37:23 PM PST by LearsFool ("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

This seems like agitprop to make Catholics look bad and create animosity.

____

I think an important issue also is what if someone puts a curse or magic spell on your baby at a doctors office. Or in the supermarket. Or puts magic dust on them.


16 posted on 02/14/2013 12:37:52 PM PST by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative
If you are not a believer what does it matter?

Well, in the past it sometimes mattered a lot.

17 posted on 02/14/2013 12:38:56 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

1) Baptism by a priest doesn’t make a baby “Catholic” anymore than circumsizing a kid makes him a Jew

In fact my Catholic kids were baptized by a Methodist minister, A Christian baptism is a Christian baptism

2) If you don’t believe in the ritual of sprinkling water on a child, why fear it? They think Jahweh will be displeased? If the kid is that sick, is that their main worry so to not take them to the hospital?


18 posted on 02/14/2013 12:40:13 PM PST by silverleaf (Age Takes a Toll: Please Have Exact Change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool

My guess is that in the days of high infant mortality, the Church baptized babies to ensure that they get to Heaven.


19 posted on 02/14/2013 12:40:37 PM PST by Squawk 8888 (True North- Strong Leader, Strong Dollar, Strong and Free!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

1) Baptism by a priest doesn’t make a baby “Catholic” anymore than circumsizing a kid makes him a Jew

In fact my Catholic kids were baptized by a Methodist minister, A Christian baptism is a Christian baptism

2) If you don’t believe in the ritual of sprinkling water on a child, why fear it? They think Jahweh will be displeased? If the kid is that sick, is that their main worry so to not take them to the hospital?


20 posted on 02/14/2013 12:41:56 PM PST by silverleaf (Age Takes a Toll: Please Have Exact Change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool

You and I might believe it’s restricted, but Catholics and many Protestants don’t agree ~


21 posted on 02/14/2013 12:43:38 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

They used to baptize them then take the child! Sort of how the Muslims in Egypt claim a young woman converted so now they can take her from her family.


22 posted on 02/14/2013 12:45:19 PM PST by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ingtar
In the olden days (of my youth), a Catholic hospital might have the priest baptize a dying baby.
I recall being taught that anyone, not just a priest, can baptize any person.
Dip your finger into a little water, and while making the sign of the cross on the person's forehead recite - I baptize thee in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
23 posted on 02/14/2013 12:48:03 PM PST by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

Who is “they” and where would they take them? A source for this claim would be nice, too.


24 posted on 02/14/2013 12:51:11 PM PST by LibertyRocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

Take it for what it is; an act of love. I would not object to a prayer for the dying being said by a Rabbi (or any faithful Jew) over myself or any relative.


25 posted on 02/14/2013 12:55:35 PM PST by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed &water the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS, NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool

“Neither Jews’ children nor Catholics’ children nor atheists’ children can be baptized into Christ before they’re of an age to believe in Him.”

Of course they can, at least in the Catholic faith... However the Catholic Church also has Confirmation once the child is of the age of reason.


26 posted on 02/14/2013 12:55:42 PM PST by babygene ( .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

Interesting legal question. Probably no statutes on the point since it is, well, weird. Can they? Probably. Should they? Absolutely not. It should be the parents call.


27 posted on 02/14/2013 12:56:25 PM PST by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool

An adult baptized by the Catholic Church will often be given a Conditional Baptism. Basically acknowledging that the subject may have been baptized, but if he or she wasn’t... They are now.


28 posted on 02/14/2013 1:01:49 PM PST by babygene ( .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

It really doens’t matter if you baptize a baby WITH or WITHOUT parental consent.

Nothing spiritual happens. You just end up with a wet baby.

(Catholics are now free to flame away)


29 posted on 02/14/2013 1:04:26 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White
Because if the child dies, God will torture the child forever if not baptized.

Right?

Sorry folks, the universe was not created by an infinitely evil boogie man.

30 posted on 02/14/2013 1:06:53 PM PST by Salman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative
If you are not a believer what does it matter?

Clearly, it matters to these parents. Don't you think it should be their call?

It is just a bath in your mind set. As long as it physically nor mentally invasive (I doubt babies could be affected emotionally) then who cares.

So you wouldn't object to hospital staff performing a non-invasive Muslim purification ceremony for your infant?

31 posted on 02/14/2013 1:07:32 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

The better question might be — why in the world would anyone baptize a child without the parents’ consent?


32 posted on 02/14/2013 1:08:19 PM PST by gdani
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks
Who is “they” and where would they take them? A source for this claim would be nice, too.

See the link in post #17 of this thread. Short version: as late as the 19th century, the governments of some Italian states would confiscate Jewish children from their parents if someone (typically a servant) claimed to have baptized the child.

33 posted on 02/14/2013 1:12:44 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

It is their call. Go to another facility.

Yes I would, see second sentence above.


34 posted on 02/14/2013 1:12:59 PM PST by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: gdani

If the baby was in danger of dying and you wanted to save the soul.


35 posted on 02/14/2013 1:13:59 PM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Salman

Are you, like, in Junior High?


36 posted on 02/14/2013 1:16:02 PM PST by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

Baptism is a conscious choice. You cannot be baptized against your will, anymore than I can force you to believe in unicorn’s, fairies, or leprechaun’s. You can consecrate a baby, or a young child, to be an instrument of God, but unless they have an understanding, it just isn’t a baptism.


37 posted on 02/14/2013 1:17:16 PM PST by ro_dreaming (G.K. Chesterton, “Christianity has not been tried and found wanting. It’s been found hard and lef)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

Excuse me, but with all due respect for whatever religion one might be, here is the kicker. We ALL SAY we believe that G-d is omnipotent, then refuse to acknowledge that claim while waging religious warfare amongst factions. G-d is justice. The first, last, and final justice. NOTHING man does will change that. Nothing.


38 posted on 02/14/2013 1:19:33 PM PST by MestaMachine (Sometimes the smartest man in the room is standing in the midst of imbeciles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ken H; Resolute Conservative
So you wouldn't object to hospital staff performing a non-invasive Muslim purification ceremony for your infant?

I wouldn't, assuming they didn't disrupt treatment somehow and that they didn't charge me for the service.

39 posted on 02/14/2013 1:23:18 PM PST by Sloth (Rather than a lesser Evil, I voted for Goode.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Yes, a venerable Jewish practice to indicate the intent to be restored ritually clean (to be able to enter the Temple, etc) . But it had nothing to do with any remission of sin (ritual impurity is and was never the same thing as sin, indeed it often resulted from perfectly natural processes like menstruation or involuntary emissions, or from complying with God’s commands like His first one about being fruitful and multiplying— no sin involved and thus no remission of sin needed). And of course Jews don’t require baptism to become People of God because they’re born with that status. The Christian baptism therefore resounds in Jewish religious practice but as a Christian sacrament it serves quite different purpses. (Interestingly, there are a couple of verses in the Dead Sea scrolls indicating that that sectarian Jewish community did see baptism as inclusive of sin recissionary import. This is one of several DSS sect distinctives of special interest, but of course they had their dissimilarities also). At any event, Christian baptism came from rge Church’s Jewish roots but has a substantially different theological significance. If we just look at the visible aspect of the water ritual, yes quite the same. But much different meanings so it is best not to confuse the two.


40 posted on 02/14/2013 1:24:26 PM PST by faithhopecharity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

“If you are not a believer what does it matter?”

—Clearly, it matters to these parents. Don’t you think it should be their call?—

You two are really talking about different things.

As to “Don’t you think it should be their call?” — obviously, yes. But I don’t know why it would be of any concern unless one thought the act imparted some sort of mystical something on to the child.

Same for the “non-invasive Muslim purification ceremony” (what ever that is). If it is non-invasive how can it affect anything?

That parents may not want these done for whatever reason — that’s a different issue than whether or not it causes harm or any sort of tangible change.


41 posted on 02/14/2013 1:24:40 PM PST by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

The involuntary baptism and then effective kidnapping of children (because the new “christian” child could not be raised by evilll Jooooos) was a standard practice of Roman Catholics for years.

Indeed, it was an organized effort for some centuries.

The last case was in 1858 in Italy, where a maid who hated the Jewish family she worked for claimed to have baptised their son Edgardo Mortara, and the Pope himself participated in the kidnapping and brainwashing of the child against his parents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgardo_Mortara

So, it’s not exactly a far-fetched fear.


42 posted on 02/14/2013 1:28:31 PM PST by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative
It is their call. Go to another facility.

Suppose that option is not available, say the nearest maternity hospital is 100 miles away.

What do you do next, sit back and let the Imam perform the ceremony?

43 posted on 02/14/2013 1:29:33 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative

For years, the Roman Catholics used forced baptism as a method of kidnapping children.

That’s why it matters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgardo_Mortara


44 posted on 02/14/2013 1:31:07 PM PST by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

“For years, the Roman Catholics used forced baptism as a method of kidnapping children.

That’s why it matters.”

Actually, that’s why its agit-prop in 2013.


45 posted on 02/14/2013 1:36:49 PM PST by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan
That parents may not want these done for whatever reason — that’s a different issue than whether or not it causes harm or any sort of tangible change.

No one is arguing that it causes harm, so I'm not sure how your comment is relevant. Parental prerogative is the issue being discussed.

46 posted on 02/14/2013 1:40:20 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
If the baby was in danger of dying and you wanted to save the soul.

If it's not your baby, it's none of your business.

Unless you think it's completely acceptable for Muslims, Scientologists, Rastafarians, Satanists, etc to do the same to/for your children.

After all, they are all convinced they're doing good, too.

47 posted on 02/14/2013 1:43:07 PM PST by gdani
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan

Just because you have no memory or concern of recent history, doesn’t mean the rest of us should not.

It tends to repeat itself.


48 posted on 02/14/2013 1:44:23 PM PST by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White
Two of my three daughters were born in the same Catholic hospital.

When I was leaving the hospital with each baby, I was given a little packet that included a card that indicated a baptism had taken place and a St. Christopher's medal for each baby.

At first, I was upset as I am not a Catholic nor was I asked for permission for the baptism and told them so.

Later, I determined that as I am not Catholic, nor do I believe I infant baptism (what can a new born "repent" of), the baptism meant absolutely nothing here or in Heaven.

49 posted on 02/14/2013 1:46:16 PM PST by zerosix (Native sunflower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

Do you think they are doing this (if they actually are) so that they can then take the babies later?

I’d be against that too.

You’re probably on to something.


50 posted on 02/14/2013 1:47:34 PM PST by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-96 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson