Homosexual Couples Adopted Baby Baptised in Catholic Church

This appears to be going ahead with the approval of the Archbishop .

Pope Francis has said that all babies have the right to be baptised.

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2014/01/pope-francis-baptized-baby-of-couple-with-civil-marriage-only/





Pope Francis baptized the child of an unmarried couple (not pictured) during a ceremony in the Sistine Chapel in Rome.

"The Church must have a well-founded hope that the baptism will bear fruit" (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on Infant Baptism, 1980).

 

I am sorry , but in saying that, 'All babies have a right to be baptised', the Holy Father is in clear breach of the current teachings of the Catholic Church. Not only in what he says but in what he is actually doing.

Clearly he can change the teaching (I suppose ) but given things as are as they stand he appears to be in serious breach? The correct path would have been to change the teaching first, then act. If the person who makes the laws and is charged with enforced them publically breaches such laws and directives at will, then where are we? How can we be expected to obey the Teachings, Laws or Directives of the Church when the Holy Father does not believe it to be necessary himself to keep them?

Is he who makes the Laws above the Law?

I am open to correction, if anyone thinks I am wrong here you are welcome to point out where.

I hope I am wrong.....

 

To me, this is a very challenging issue and I believe one that should be handled case by case on a pastoral level. We should first consider all what the Church has to say and then I think it must be applied by a pastor who knows each situation that comes before him. It's a balancing act between defending the teaching of our Church versus the immortal soul of an innocent baby. I'm not condoning or excluding the baptisms of same sex parents, just as I would not take a position fur example on a non- practicing married or non- married heterosexual couple.


Can. 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.

-------- Combined with --------------

CCC 1283 With respect to children who have died without Baptism, the liturgy of the Church invites us to trust in God's mercy and to pray for their salvation.

CCC 1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,"63 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.

 

While these baptisms were not in the US, I think this link about same sex adoption and baptism by the USCCB is also informative and calls out the sensitivity of this issue

• Baptism of children in the care of same-sex couples presents a serious pastoral concern. Nevertheless, the Church does not refuse the Sacrament of Baptism to these children, but there must be a well founded hope that the children will be brought up in the Catholic religion.41 In those cases where Baptism is permitted, pastoral ministers should exercise prudential judgment when preparing baptismal ceremonies. Also, in preparing the baptismal record, a distinction should be made between natural parents and adoptive parents.42

http://www.usccb.org/about/doctrine/publications/homosexual-inclination-guidelines-pastoral-care.cfm

 

Padraig,

In Canon Law, apart from emergency situations, the parents of the child to be baptized must agree to raise the child in the Faith. In fact, in the Rite of Baptism, the word, "faith" plays a prominent role. The sad situation today is that many nominal Catholic parents who do not live out the Faith bring their children to be baptized. Perhaps it is due to the urging of grandparents who are concerned for the baby's spiritual welfare. Perhaps it is a cultural sensitivity, but it is difficult to see how non-practicing Catholics will fulfill this paramount prerequisite. However, it is also true that this celebration of Baptism has proven time and time again to be a bridge for these same parents to return to the sacraments and a life of grace. So it is a great dilemma which the Church is experiencing. It is a pastoral as well as canonical issue.

In the States, it is almost universally required for some form of baptismal preparation and teaching to take place. Pray for the instructors of these parents, that they will lovingly and firmly confront these mostly ignorant parents with both the love of Jesus and the awesome responsibility that baptism brings!

Safe in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary!

 

Yesterday while at a Divine Mercy retreat, the woman who founded the Catholic Grandparents Association spoke about the unique role grandparents can take on in family life. Interestingly enough, they are an Irish organization but were personally invited to speak yesterday by His Eminence Cardinal Dolan!

http://www.catholicgrandparentsassociation.org

 

My response is to encourage all Catholics to trust the Pope. He is the leader we have been asked by Jesus to follow. I believe Pope Francis is an immense gift to our dying world and if we are surprised by some of his actions that is ok but I don't think we should be judging his actions or him.

Canon law is a structure that helps to guide the faithful but canon laws are not God's laws, they are man's laws created to help us get to know, love and serve God. They are laws that can be changed at any time by the church but I suspect that to do so might take quite a lot of bureaucratic work! Pope Francis clearly believes that if a child is offered for baptism, then it should, as a general rule, be assumed "that the baptism will bear fruit".

 

If it is simply the responsibility of , '... all Catholics to trust the Pope' Then clearly St Paul was wrong to , 'Defy Peter to his face', when the first Pope got it seriously wrong, as Peter says the first Pope , 'Was condemned' . As scripture tells us:

Galatians 2:11

Paul Confronts Peter
11But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision.…

St Paul not only did not trust the Pope he defied and condemned him as a hypocrite.
. Events,as it turned out proved St Paul right. We are called to trust and obedience it is true but not to a blind trust or a blind obedience as scripture here indicates.

I find that like St Paul I cannot turn my conscience off and on like a light switch. Like most people I find it hard to find that something that is wrong one day is right the next.

 

If both parents, Terry were members of a golf club or political party I could well see how they might introduce their child to the Faith . I cannot see how people whose lived Faith is clearly dead can bring their children up in it.

The danger is that baptism becomes seen as a social convention. The Church itself as a kind of gold club, a human institution .At least that was how I understood how the Church understood things up to very recently.

Forgive me if I find it difficult to change gears to this new understanding.

Let me put it like this if Padre Pio or the Cure of Ars had been approched by an unmarried couple to baptise the child; or a lesbian couple ..if it comes to that... they would have chased them with a four by four. .

Pope Francis appears to welcome them.

I think Padre Pio and St John Vianney would have been right.

I find it hard to keep up. I don't want to keep up.

 

Yes this is exactly me reservation , the Church is not a golf club.

But apart from this if the law is not changed then the law has been broken.

I struggle with all this. I really,really do.

 

• This leaves me deeply perplexed and confused.

The godmother, a politician, was chosen because if her support of gay rights but sent a representative instead. The cardinal supposedly stated that this baptism was a sign of social change in the Catholic church. One of the ladies said she would now fight toget married in the church.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-26910139

 

Please check out this group called Courage faithful to the magisterium, which provides support for those trying to overcome same sex attraction.

http://couragerc.net/

 

It seems very clear to me that the Archbishop in Argentina who did the baptism of the Lesbian couples child was simply taking Pope Francis lead in baptising the baby of the unmarried couple in the Sistine Chapel .

When the Pope said, 'All babies have a right to be baptised' , the clear logical inference is that it is alright to baptise the adopted baby of a lesbian couple so he went ahead and did it.

The lesbian lady is quite right, if you baptise the baby , why not marry the couple? Why not go the whole hog and be done with it?

Once you open a door like this there is no shutting it, as our sisters and brothers in the Anglican Communion found to their cost.

 

It is the message that is being sent out - you can behave whatever way you want but we will still baptise your baby! It is how this act will be interpreted that the church has no problems with certain lifestyle choices therefore giving a green light and false hope to those living in sin.

Let us remember behaviour has eternal consequences.

Yes, we want children to receive the great grace of baptism but someone has to be responsible for raising the child in the faith. Otherwise, the Church risks becoming a social club with dwindling numbers.

 

According to this news report the Archbishop allowed the lesbian couple to receieve the sacrament of confirmation before the baptism of the child.

http://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/637/0/baptisms-boom-down-to-francis-effect-

 

we live in such confusing times. may the good lord guide us in the great apostacy.

 

So if it is now okay for anyone to baptize a baby, I suppose the next ones to do it will be Satanists. Why not? This way they can sacrifice a baptized baby instead of a pagan one. There has to be more points in hell for doing so. You see the illogic of Pope Francis to allow non-practicing Catholics to have their babies Baptized in the Catholic faith. It leads to scandal. At least one of the parents must be a practicing Catholic to baptize their child in the faith.

 

Yes I think the Pope's phrase that anybody can get baptised like this just has to be considered an unwise statement because it opened the door for events like this.

I thought he was wrong about that when he spoke about it ages ago: http://www.politics.ie/forum/cultur...-following-traditional-catholic-teaching.html .
I think we just have to say that he is entitled to the odd mistake but is still a great Pope!

 

Here again...I step in a fire...with my unpopular opinion. Yes...most definitely... that baby has a right to become a adopted child of God. I don't care if the parents are from Mars, a pagan or a Jew or whatever...this child is a son/ daughter of God our Father. John the Baptist...remember when John was in the desert baptizing those...and the Pharisee's showed up and asked by what authority he baptized? How can one presume to know Gods will... if that child where to die next week as a unbaptized baby? Can your own child be baptized if you yourself are a sinner. No...this is a child of God and one has no right to deny him/her their grace/salvation because the parents are sinners. Baptise the baby and trust in the grace of God our Father.

 

Is the Pope doing anything in this issue that is outside of the existing Canons and CCC?