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 previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-96 next last
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]

To: zerosix

Yeah, exactly. In your case the children have a keepsake of their birth in the little medals.

My kids were born in a totally secular hospital. They gave out info on how to get welfare benefits (even if you aren’t a citizen) and some video on parenting.


51 posted on 02/14/2013 1:51:07 PM PST by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Weiss White

Well, I read the article. It appars the Roman Catholics do permit forced baptism at hospitals:

“If Jewish parents are (understandably!) opposed to the notion that their child might be baptized in a Catholic hospital, the hospital staff CAN honor their wishes, even if the child is at death’s door. At the same time, as we’ve just seen, canon law DOES NOT REQUIRE Catholic hospital workers to defer to the wishes of a dying child’s parents. The staff is PERMITTED by the law to perform an emergency baptism in danger of death . . . .”

Well, I guess it matters less since they don’t support kidnapping -— yet.


52 posted on 02/14/2013 1:52:32 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: ifinnegan

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

No, but that was the past history.

And it was not isolated, at all.

While the practice has been banned for several hundreds of years, there were mass kidnapping of Jewish children in this manner in Europe.


53 posted on 02/14/2013 1:56:26 PM PST by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks
A maid baptized the Jewish baby, and the Papal State police squad kidnapped him six years later based upon the report of this maid that she did an ‘emergency’ baptism.

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

http://www.davidkertzer.com/book/export/html/24

“Although such kidnappings were not uncommon in Jewish communities across Europe, this time the political climate had changed.”

The Jewish community has long memories - so it is hard to dismiss it as just a sprinkling of water by well meaning Catholics when just a couple hundred years ago it was a means used to kidnap children away from Jewish parents.

54 posted on 02/14/2013 2:01:26 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 24 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven

I recall being taught that anyone, not just a priest, can baptize any person.

***
According to what I learned as a child, this was just for cases in which the recipient was in danger of death and a priest was not available.


55 posted on 02/14/2013 2:16:14 PM PST by Bigg Red (Restore us, O God of hosts; let your face shine, that we may be saved! -Ps80)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Bigg Red

“... the recipient was in danger of death and a priest was not available”.

I think we must have gone to the same Catholic schools, Bigg Red. I was taught we could do a Baptism (in an emergency) or last rites (in an emergency); however, WE had to be Catholic. A neighbor of mine worked as an RN at a local, public hospital. She was a Catholic in good standing and did several emergency Baptisms during her career as a nurse. However, the parents requested the Baptism. The same for Last Rites but the family requested it because they knew death was imminent and the Priest was due in a half an hour.


56 posted on 02/14/2013 2:23:04 PM PST by momtothree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Yes, Archie Bunker is an apt example.

There are probably MILLIONS of babies that were baptized by their Catholic grandparents because their parents for whatever reason would not do it.

The Church teaches that anyone can baptize if a Priest is not available, and there is a danger that baby could die without it. I know a number of older women in my family who did this because they were terrified of the baby going to Hell before they could convince the parents to baptize.


57 posted on 02/14/2013 2:28:02 PM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: faithhopecharity

John the Baptist also offered Baptism ~


58 posted on 02/14/2013 3:17:37 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

Comment #59 Removed by Moderator

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

No one can save souls except God.

hunosehu, baptism is a decision made when a person is well into the age of reason.

It's an outward gesture of dying to yourself and living for Jesus.

Children who have not reached the age of reason will have their souls saved by a loving God.

No, he will not let the soul perish when a small child or infant dies.

Catholics it seems have a ritual of infant baptism which cannot be backed up by scripture.

It makes them feel better in a situation such as the situation discussed.

60 posted on 02/14/2013 3:41:01 PM PST by Syncro ("So?" - Andrew Breitbart The King of All Media (RIP Feb 1, 1969 – Mar 1, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-96 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