Being a Protestant, I had no idea that there was so much red tape involved in a Catholic baptism.  I can understand the anxiety of parents under these circumstances.  I’ll be interested to hear what the other commenters have to say.

My parish must be a rarity but they allow for all the paperwork to be in place - except the birth certificate - before the baptism and if all involved are in good standing and if the parents have had attended a baptism class in the past few years (2-3 usually) you can bypass even that.

It still creates a lag of 2-3 months but not the 1/2 year you are talking about.  In the end, I am hesitant to agree that doing it yourself is ever permissible except in the case of a child w/ dire medical conditions (whereby the priest is usually called to the hospital).

It is a sacrament and as such I do think we need to do our very best to be obedient to our bishops and priests.  I can just envision the slippery slope of DIY-ers who will surface.  I remember encountering these folks (honestly, at homeschooling conferences)  who proudly talked of trotting their kids off to neighboring dioceses for Confirmation because they didn’t like the bishop, who snuck their kids in the communion line of a neighboring church (therefore the priests didn’t know them) for their kids to get 1st Communion because their parish did things weird.

There has never, ever been a time when getting the sacraments has been convenient but I don’t think we were promised that or even if Jesus hinted at it (the whole carrying of the cross thing).  I understand the struggles but I really think what is being discussed is a rise in Catholics who profess a faithfulness that borders on arrogance as they stand outside their parish and demand the hardworking priests (as you mentioned) make it easier for them.

Are we really concerned about the souls of our babies or just annoyed and frustrated by the process?  In the end, I think we need to see if what we really want is to have our parish and diocese to remove the wheat from the chaff (or the Easter lilies and Christmas poinsettas) from the pews and leave more space for those of us who ‘really’ love the Church.

Not a pretty picture or charitable act.  The solution?  I don’t know, but I also know in my parish that my pastor and DRE never have enough volunteers to teach baptism classes or any of the required sacramental classes so I am wondering if they had more lay help there where we can help, the log jam just might ease up a bit.

Yes. Anyone can administer the sacrament of baptism, if there is a true emergency. That’s what our parish priest told us when we did the little prep session for our daughters baptism. Also, in our parish, a young couple delivered a baby at home, and when the father could see that she was not going to make it, he baptized her then and there. She died a few hours later. I can’t cite where in what document it says that it is ok to do so, but our priest is very faithful to the magisterium, so I believe him.

I forgot to add that I think, having to wait six or more months for a baptism, could count as an emergency. I mean, the first six months of a child’s life are often the most precarious. But I have no idea if there is any official teaching on that.

This sounds like a difficult predicament, to be sure.  Our parish has similar rules, with a couple exceptions: the godparents, while required to be Catholic, are *not* required to go through the baptism class or present proof of their Catholic standing—the parish takes our word for it.  A birth certificate is required prior to performing the ceremony, but not prior to scheduling it.  In our parish, this does not have to be “official”—the paperwork from the hospital will do.  (Our county does not send out birth certificates without a request.)

All that being said, though, our kids have been baptized at 4 weeks of age (and #3 will be probably 3 weeks old).  This is primarily because choosing our godparents is the first decision we make after finding out we’re pregnant.  This way, everyone involved has a good 6 months to sort out all the details.  Further, we can get everything to the parish office during the pregnancy and schedule the baptism in plenty of time to ensure the child is within the first few weeks of life.

The baptismal class should only need to be done once by the parents, not repeatedly for each subsequent child.  If it’s required for the godparents, they should (hopefully) be able to fulfill that during the pregnancy, right?

Maybe you can talk to the parish office about the birth certificate requirement: perhaps they would accept the paperwork the hospital sends home with you.

@Erika Evans : You generalizing. There is tens of thousands of parishes around the world, Ms Fulwiler is only commenting on the situation in her parish, not on “Catholic baptism” in general.

Prior to Vatican II, the chancery and the rectory were relatively simple entities; since Vatican II, chanceries have become huge bureaucracies requiring millions of dollars a year and dozens of personnel, not including the bishop and priests. Some parishes are very similar. A baby’s salvation comes before all the rules, if those rules delay the child’s baptism by more than a few weeks. I would not hesitate to baptize my child if the official Church is so bogged down that I must wait weeks and months. Our last child nearly died 3 weeks after she was born, and I’m glad she was baptized within the first few weeks of her birth. An alternative would be to find a more traditional parish where the pastor is willing to baptize any baby after satisfying himself that the child will be raised by the parents to be a good Catholic. In the long run, many adult Catholics have never been catechized, and the time to begin that process is not after the first child is born, but at the parish level, for ALL adult Catholics. One local pastor requires every parent of a child in a sacramental program to attend a class at least once a month during the school year, covering the basics of the Faith. If parents don’t attend, the child does not receive the sacrament. Parents realize the seriousness of not only showing up for a Sacrament (1st Communion, 1st Confession, Confirmation, but their obligation to attend Mass weekly and live the Faith daily, in particular, raising their children to be Catholics. Conversion is an ongoing process. This is a large parish with only 2 priests and 1 deacon, but many lay people have stepped up to help with all the ministries.

It is an unfortunate reality of our present situation that the vast majority of adult Catholics do not know their faith. They don’t know what it means to be Catholic and they don’t know what Baptism truly is. For far too many, it’s just something they do because grandma will be upset if they don’t. It is the pastor’s responsibility to ensure that there is a reasonable belief that the children they baptize will be raised in the faith. So, there IS a need to meet with the parents to catechize them about the Sacrament and their responsibilities. However, there is no need for that to take 6 months.

Our parish requires that parents meet with our associate pastor for a class on Baptism and godparents must show that they are Catholics in good standing (usually a letter from their pastor). The class is only necessary for the first child/baptism not every child, and can be taken during pregnancy. I could see wanting to have the class meet a couple of times and require the godparents to attend (or attend a similar class in their own parish), but again, allowing people to attend the classes during pregnancy. That way you could even schedule a class with 2-3 sessions every couple of months without unduly delaying the baptisms.

I don’t think we usually schedule the baptism date until the child is born (though that might be because most parents want to wait to schedule it rather than a parish rule), but they can usually be scheduled with a week’s notice. Of course, in danger of death some of the rules go out the window and we get the child baptized as soon as possible.

Having just taken an RCIA course with my now Catholic husband (yay!) what stuck out to me was the _intention_ of baptism. We questioned our priest if babies could still get to heaven if they were not baptized in time, he said, we don’t know (of course), but the Catholic church believes that because the baby was intended to be baptized, should something suddenly happen, the soul would still be saved. It’s still important to follow through with the baptism of course, and if an emergency situation presented itself, a person should baptize the child, but for worry sake, the intention should suffice until the sacrament is completed. Not sure if that helps, but it makes sense on a God-is-forgiving-philosophical-theory.

“Logjam at the Baptismal Font” would be a great Louvin Brothers song if the Louvin Brothers were Catholic.

If you in good conscience believe there is danger to your child’s life, you may baptize the child yourself if the parish will not accommodate you.  That is a matter of conscience, and when the time comes for the formal Baptism you can tell the priest what you have done and why, so that then the child will be baptized conditionally.  I would think that the modern circumstances of crib death, vaccination reaction, and the daily danger of death from car accidents would qualify as sufficient reason to baptize one’s child oneself.  There is no absolute answer here, just a prudential decision of conscience.

I do believe that there is much loss of faith in Baptism.  It is a shame that the Church will not baptize children of non-practicing parents (bringing those children to Church used to be a means of conversion - and, good greif, what ever happened to belief in the power of grace?!).

I have never had my babies baptized that early.  I know my sister in law has her babies baptized within days of the birth—we attended my godson’s baptism when he was just a week old, and it was odd to be talking to her about plane tickets while she said, “Well, I’m due on the 8th, so the baptism should be on the 13th….”  She says she hates taking an unbaptized baby anywhere.

..

Personally, I subscribe to what it says in the Catechism about unbaptized babies, about trusting in the ultimate mercy and love of God.  We do our best, don’t get me wrong, and our babies are baptized at the latest by six months…but if my baby were in a dire emergency, we happen to have holy water on hand at home (and yes, I carry a small bottle in the diaper bag as well) and I would use it.

In answer to “ever” - the answer is of course yes.  Any person can perform a baptism in case of an emergency, provided that it is done with water, the Trinitarian formula, and with the intent to do what the Church intends.  That’s why we can recognize the baptisms of other Christian traditions.  Of course, that’s not really what the question is about.

I do think that the practice we’ve fallen into of baptizing babies several months after birth is problematic.  Even with the provision that an emergency baptism (even if an emergency is suspected), infants can die suddenly, without warning.  That puts parents in a very precarious position, since they are charged with leading their children to salvation, the first step of which is ordinarily baptism.  I think partly we can blame that on a lack of catechesis, for parents/godparents especially, but unfortunately, also at times for priests and deacons.  Too often baptism is just a cultural thing, something symbolic even though it is anything but.  It’s just something you do, rather than something that is of the utmost importance to the salvation of the eternal soul of the child in question.  When seen in that light, it’s no wonder that many have a lackadaisical attitude towards how long it takes to get scheduled. If everyone thought about how vital baptism was, then perhaps things would be far more streamlined.  Take the words of Jesus in John 3:5 “Unless a man is born again of water and the Spirit, he will not see the Kingdom of God”.  Those are serious words!

Having said all that though, we should always remember that while we are bound by the sacraments here on earth, God is not.  Provided that we are indeed seeking baptism for our children, should something untoward happen before it can be accomplished, we can trust that God is merciful, and that He knows of our desire for the baptism of our children, even if circumstances beyond our control denied the actuality of that desire.  Baptisms of desire are real and can be salvific, and we can trust in that.

I think every effort should be made to make this concern clear to the priests and bishops in our diocese, that baptism is a sacrament of utmost importance, but in the mean time, the people of the Church are imperfect, and in some ways it is good that we have such a demand for their service!  Perhaps we can thank God that there is such a need for vocations, pray that He call people to fill them, and in the mean time ask what we can do to make the process easier for all involved.

@Thibaud—fair enough; thanks for pointing out that requirements and processes vary by parish.  Learning every day, that’s my motto!

where do you people live?  we are in the arlington diocese and noonee I know has ever had to supply a birth certificate.  godparents do have to prove good standing but that can be done before the baby is born.  some parishes make first time parents take classes but before the baby comes.  it can be waved by the priest. 

my sister’s newest baby was baptized on the day she left the hospital which was very special.

do you think maybe these priests have forgotten what is important? Mary rose

Jennifer,

The situation you’ve outlined is a sad case of parish administration going to bureaucratic extremes. I would answer that in such a case not only could it sometimes be OK to baptize; it would always be OK to baptize. Canon Law, which you cited via Marshall’s post, is quite clear, and frankly, the universal law of the Church (the most basic tenet of which is that the salvation of souls always enjoys preeminence) takes precedence over local rules.

I come from a small traditional community (FSSP), and the baptisms I have seen in the past three years were generally within two weeks of birth (my godson was four days old at his). However, we are small enough for the priest to know everyone in the parish and to avoid red tape (he may just ignore it, I am not sure).

My heart goes out to the parents that do care about their child’s baptism. It must be incredible frustrating to wait for all the proper papers to be filed and boxes checked before their child can be received into the church.

Also, I wonder how these delays breed an indifferentism to baptism?

Ms. Fulwiler, while I appreciate you trying to make the best of what is surely a difficult situation, it is absurd that a parish require an official birth certificate and make someone wait four to six months for baptism.  The hospital usually supplies a “record of birth” at birth, which should be good enough.  If canon law clearly states “within the first few weeks”, then that should be what parishes should do…period! Also, a priest OR deacon can be the minister of baptism in ordinary situations.  There is nothing preventing a parish from having at least monthly baptisms: the parish should also encourage parishioners to take the baptismal class before the child’s birth so that they know the responsibilities, etc.  This is also important if there is an emergency that would make it necessary for the parent to baptize (i.e., injury, etc.)  The point is that raising a child as a Catholic Christian is one of our biggest responsibilities, and it all starts at baptism.  A layman should only baptize in true emergencies (i.e., car accidents, health problem, etc.) Otherwise, the clergy should try to make baptism happen as soon as possible.  The parish should facilitate this, not fight against the will of the Church.

If there is a 4-6 month lag, it is usually due to the family’s lack of understanding and attention.  Working with families to prepare for the sacrament for more than 10 years has shown me that parents simply are uninformed and end up waiting too long to prepare.  Along with family schedules that quickly fill with many things, sacramental prep gets pushed further and further back. Next thing you know, the baby is here and grandma wants to know when the baptism is!  Families that prepare before the birth (as our parish asks them) simply don’t have this problem.

We generally try for the second Sunday after the baby is born.  We set everything up before the birth.  We have enough kids we haven’t had to take a class, or have a birth certificate, come to think of it.  But then, our parishes are small enough that the priest knows us.  I guess we’re also active in the parish (teaching CCD, serving Mass, etc.)

That being said, we have had several babies go into distress and we baptized them ourselves at the hospital.  My last baby seemed fine until right after my husband and MIL left (to go home to the other kids).  I saw the change in the nurses faces and when they told me they needed to take him to the NICU, I asked to see him for a moment and baptized him with the water from ice chips I had for labor!

I recently inguired about this myself and was told very firmly that baptizing a child by a layperson is ONLY to be done in case of emergency. In that case, anyone, even a non-Christian, may baptize using the valid formula. And “emergency” means danger of death.

Baptism at our large parish is only offered four times a year.  You call when the baby is born and they tell you the next available quarterly baptism time.  The required class is two weeks before the baptism.  You must attend the class, even if you already have 3, 4, 5, whatever baptized children.  What is most ridiculous to me is that you can’t attend the class while pregnant, it has to be after the baby is born, which is when it is most challenging to get there!

I’m sure this makes it easier for the administration, but surely they could make it a little better.  For example, they could offer the classes every other month, and baptism monthly.

Lisa, I would buy that.  It just sounded from the original article that the clergy of the church were responsible for a 4-6 month backlog: that would be a grave problem.

Wow, I never realized how blessed we are at our parish.  I’ve never had a problem scheduling any baptisms.  Our church allows us to schedule a date before the baby is born.  I usually schedule for 2-3 weeks after my due date to allow for a late baby, etc.  I think you have to go with your conscience when it comes to baptizing your baby yourself.  Obviously, if you can see the baby is in danger of death soon, do it yourself.  I haven’t read all of the comments, so maybe someone mentioned it already, but isn’t there something the Church teaches on baptism of intent? Is there a point when maybe we can be too legalistic about the sacrament itself?  I’m in no way saying that it’s not necessary, but let’s say the earliest you can schedule the baptism (for reasons not of your own choosing) is two months after the birth.  If the child dies before the sacrament is administered I think there is some sort of “baptism of intent” where the baby (parents acting for the baby) would have chosen to baptize the baby as soon as he was born if they could have…I have to believe God understands that.  Again, I’m in no way saying it’s reasonable for parishes to be putting up so many roadblocks for baptism, but it is what it is and I think God understands.

Lisa, I would buy that.  It just sounded from the original article that the clergy of the church were responsible for a 4-6 month backlog: that would be a grave problem.  I would think if that were the case, it would be best to try to find a new parish: it is difficult to imagine that the parish is really interested in taking care of its parishioners if they are that much in disregard of the Church’s age-old teaching.

I think Lisa is right. It’s been my experience that some families simply wait too long to prepare for baptism. They choose the godparents only weeks before the birth, or sometimes weeks after the birth. In my family, the moment I’m out of the 1st trimester, we choose godparents and get the wheels spinning for baptism prep. I’ve never heard of having to give an official birth certificate either. I think that’s unfair to the child and the parents, especially since there can be delays in getting them, lost in the mail, etc.

It’s important that we, as parents, do all WE can do to move along the process along.  We can see that all the paperwork is submitted, classes taken, and so on, WELL ahead of the babies birth. It’s also an option (if you feel strongly about it) to talk to the pastor of a smaller parish and try to get your baby baptized in a private ceremony there so that it can be done sooner. After that, we have to leave the timing up to God and ask that the Sacrament will be received in a reasonable time.

Baptism isn’t just about entering the kingdom after death.  It provides a necessary spiritual protection in the form of special graces from evil influences here on earth. Since we know that Satan has no hesitation about attacking even the newly conceived, the protection of baptism is an absolute must. Your baby is born on a battle field - the sooner you give baby the armor they need to protect them from harm the less spiritual wounds they incur and the less likely they are to fall into mortal sin later on.

Our parish also requires an official birth certificate, and it’s frustrating. I imagine the requirement stems from liability reasons—i.e., wanting to be able to prove that the parents of the baby are the actual parents so that a baby isn’t inadvertently baptized without his parents’ permission, but surely there have to be easier ways to prove it (the birth record from the hospital, for example)—and if the family is known to the parish in the first place it seems like an unnecessary formality.

Even so, for my youngest daughter, I was able to get a copy of the birth certificate about a month after her birth and my priest allowed us to bypass the baptism class (we’re volunteer catechists in the marriage prep program and he knew that level of instruction wasn’t necessary for us). Our godparents (my sister and BIL) were from out of state so we had to get all their information about being Catholics in good standing faxed to the parish (twice, because it was lost the first time). She was baptized six weeks after her birth but I still would have liked it to be sooner.

The official Magisterium and our local diocese are often at odds.  Your kid is more important than bureaucracy.  Making disciples and savings souls is the work of the whole Church.  So, laypeople should give lay baptism to their children as soon after birth as possible; then begin the artificially tedious process of obtaining an official baptism at their parish.  At our admittedly ‘out there’ parish, babies are baptized promptly after birth.  If you are adult enough to have a baby, and you are a practicing Catholic in good standing at your parish, you are ready to stand up for your kid’s baptism.  You’re also smart enough to pick decent Catholics for godparents.  Otherwise all the parochial school religion classes, your own baptism, and your own confirmation were for naught.  Questionning the readiness of adult Catholics is like calling them garbage.  Are our dioceses prepared to say that about the sacraments they’ve already conferred upon you?  The trend in our country to drag out and make difficult the process of infant baptism is a scandal.  It has nothing to do with priest availability.  It never was so stupid and tedious until our time.  This foot-dragging imperils innocent souls at the one time they need the Church to get on with it and do Its duty.  Also, do not think you are so fortunate to bear a child in the U.S.  Our infant mortality rate is about 16th in the world, just ahead of Slovenia.  For as rich a country as ours, our kids are no better off.  We still face the lingering danger to newborns that generations of families did in the century before the last.  Only the wealthy and well-off steer clear of this statistic—and still a kid can die soon after birth.  God help us all!  God defend His People against bureauacracy!  And God help the children!!  Baptize your kid right away, and deal with the paperwork later.  You should never have to be inconvenienced in this way.

@pam, operative word being “man” not infant child.
i say, look at the positive side of this, if there is so much fruit coming from your parish that you have to wait in line for the sacraments, then the HS is really working in your community. thank God for that first and foremost. in my area, you can have all of the paperwork and prep classes done before the kid is born (well before) and there is absolutely no issue of timeslots available. those of you who have this issue to overcome, be thankful that the guardians of the sacraments (aka the office gals) are taking the issue so seriously and crossing all the t’s and dotting the i’s. your child can be sure that if they ever need to give proof of their Catholic identity, the paperwork will be readily available.
with regard to the question, i think the baptism by desire, or intention argument is a good fit here. our very reasonable and very intelligent Heavenly Father is quite aware of the infants situation and quite sure of whether or not salvation of its tiny soul is appropriate and will deal it out with perfect mercy and justice.

Don’t worry be happy.

think you should get some prayers for vocations goin for your diocese in particular jennifer!!! We didn’t have that problem with our first daughter because she had an emergency baptism at birth (she lived, by the grace of God and awesome doctors!) and our second we texted and fbed our priest til he made time for us hehe

Our parish requires not a birth certificate but certificate of eligibility from at least one godparent.  You must take a class but it can be done before the baby is born.  My almost three month old was baptized recently and I felt like we had waited too long-our son was baptized at three weeks—(due to Lent, Easter, etc, baptisms were more difficult to schedule but our parish does do them most Sundays.) until I saw the other four babies at the baptism: one was two going on three, and the other three babies were almost walking!  Our little was definitely the youngest so I don’t know if that’s common to the parish, the archdiocese or culture in general. I do know I was very aware that our baby was unbaptized and had holy water handy just in case.  Very interesting read on other dioceses here..I guess we are pretty lucky.

I am not aware of what *most* dioceses and parishes are like, but my sister in Chicago didn’t have that problem and neither does my other sister in Minneapolis.  I don’t have that problem here in Madison, WI.  I feel for those who are made to jump through those hoops.  It seems odd that one can’t get most of that stuff out of the way before the baby is born and set up the date for the baptism when the next “round” of baptisms is taking place at that particular parish

My parish allows us to take the class before the birth of the baby (and you don’t have to take it again for the second baby) and we can have our babies baptized before we recieve the birth certificate we just don’t get a copy of the baptism certificate until we’ve shown the birth certificate.  I wonder if enough people in a parish were vocal about a change of policies with a specific plan in mind could they get their parish policies to change to something more like this?

My real issue with the sacraments as they are administered at most parishes isn’t with baptism, it’s with First Communion.  We homeschool, and teach our children the faith using materials faithful to the Magisterium. It seems ludicrous that my kids have to go to a weekly class where the lay person usually is just having them do some silly paper plate craft, and then the First Communion service is turned into a mini pageant.  Seriously, the last First Communion service we saw at our parish, the coordinator was walking around tweaking the girls’ veils and adjusting their dress hemlines, like that was the most important issue of the day.  And they paired boys and girls together so they looked like brides and grooms. It was ludicrous. 

..

I would love to find a local parish that would allow us to teach our child the faith, and then let the priest test our child’s knowledge to see if he was truly ready to receive.  That’s how it should be done. I don’t understand when or why we took religious education out of the hands of the priest and parents.

Jen- it is time to smile and wave like a Madagascar penguin and inform the gatekeepers that your baby will not be 6 months old when he/she gets baptized- time for an action plan- like one ‘class’ per family, not per baby- baptism can happen before birth certificate (just wait for baptismal certificate until you can show them official birth cert)—-maybe rounding up a few pregnant friends and asking for an appointment with the pastor would help.

or you could go Byzantine (just kidding- sort of) - the priest and people will be doing back flips to accomodate you

I’ve done a lot of baptism prep.  I even once wrote a book on it.  (Out of print.)  I’ve done this in two different dioceses and never heard of having to have the birth certificate.  Never,ever.

And I’ll echo what someone above noted - if the preparation of the parents and godparents is attended to before the birth, the lag disappears.

However, I also don’t think that there is a huge rush to ‘have to baptize the baby.’  In effect, the child is a catechumen (not actually, but effectively) and not outside the household of faith.  We are clear that we entrust the souls of unbaptized infants to God. 

On the one hand, there is no need to rush break neck to get the baby baptized.  On the other hand, the time to start thinking about it is before the child is two months old.

Ok, why in the world are people being required to show baptism certificates? Can anyone explain that?

I have NEVER had to do that. We have also always taken the class before teh birth and had all our paperwork filled out and in place. It really wasn’t that big of a deal. All my family has been able to baptize babies quickly.

I would be tempted to do it myself too if there was that much silly red tape delaying baptism. Honestly Jennifer it sounds like a bureacracy isse not a priest shortage issue

Large parishes s/b able to schedule baptisms at least monthly (for example, the third Sunday of each month, after the noon Mass) and allow expectant parents to attend classes, if needed, prior to giving birth.  Requiring paperwork that causes waits exceeding a month reflects bureaucracy out of control.  The pastor in that case has something to answer for.
TeaPot562

Claire,

We’ve had to show our children’s baptism certificates when registering them for religious education classes at our parish.

This is what our church bulletin says about baptism preparation:

“To have your child baptized at [Parish] you need to be a registered, participating parishioner of [Parish] for a minimum of three months, complete a Baptism inquiry form with the help of our Baptism Coordinator
and register for a Baptism Preparation Session. For more information contact our parish office. The next session is scheduled for [date, time] in the parish hall. You need only attend one session. Please bring your child’s birth certificate with you to the session. Also, please do not bring children to class. Thank you.”

Elizabeth and others: the problem is that in some dioceses and parishes parents are *not* allowed to begin any of the paperwork, processes, classes etc. until after the baby is born.  For instance, in my parish (and I think these requirements are common in the diocese where I live) parents must take a baptism class but can’t even *register* for the class until they have the baby’s birth certificate in hand!  Classes are only offered four times a year, and the godparents must also take the classes (or bring a letter from their home parish showing that they’ve taken the classes there).

So it wouldn’t matter if you chose the godparents early and tried to take the classes ahead of time; you’d be told that you could come back and sign up for the classes after baby is born and you have his or her birth certificate.  And the classes are only held four times a year—so good luck getting into one before the baby is a year old.

My brother and sister-in-law recently took their brand-new baby to another state to have him baptized (with their parish’s permission, of course) by her brother who was recently ordained a deacon (and will be a priest in the near future).  Had they not done this, and with two other small children at home, it might have been months before my little nephew could be freed from Original Sin and become a full member of the Catholic Church.

Frankly, the “sacramental hoops” game is becoming a scandal and a stumbling-block to the faithful.  Why should people who are active, registered members of a parish in good standing have to take baptism classes at all?  A five-minute meeting with Father or the parish D.R.E. should be enough to verify whether or not the people requesting baptism understand what it is they are asking for.  If they don’t, then by all means drag out the hoops and schedule the classes—but if they do, don’t treat them like spiritual ignoramuses who can’t be trusted to understand what they are doing when they ask for baptism for their children.

*oops i meant BIRTH certificates.

Claire - I don’t know for sure, but as I said previously, I imagine the requirement stems from liability reasons—i.e., wanting to be able to prove that the parents of the baby are the actual parents so that a baby isn’t inadvertently baptized without his parents’ permission.

JoAnna- But why would that be required if the parents are married members of the parish?

Claire - I did a little Googling and a post on the Catholic Answers forums said the following:

“the baptismal record must be accurate because it has to list the child’s name, birth date and place, and parents’ names. the birth certificate is the document that provides this, the official one from the state, country or city, (not from the hospital which often has errors). you want this right from the get go or there will be problems later in life when the child prepares for confirmation or marriage, when an error becomes much harder to correct.”

Which I guess kind of makes sense, but not really. Can’t the parish request a copy of the birth certificate after the fact and make any necessary changes then? What kind of parents would spell their child’s name wrong on the baptismal certificate in the first place?

No I disagree that we can baptise our children by ourselves unless there is a danger of death.

With regards to sudden death syndrome, the church teaches that parents have the ‘‘baptism of desire’’ and this means that should the child die before baptism, that the child is already considered to be baptised.

Stephen
www.loyaltothemagisterium.wordpress.com

Definitely agree with your assessment JoAnna. Plus I don’t see parents getting the birth date and city wrong. Or their own names. LOL! I think our church trusted us to get all of those right. :)

I taught Baptism Prep for many years in my parish. Sadly, it was my experience that over 50% of the attendees saw this sacrament as a rite of passage, or were doing it to please the parents/family (I saw my class time with them as a valuable opportunity for eager evangelization). I would suggest the average age of babies being baptized was five months.
In some parishes, Baptism Prep classes are held monthly and are required for Baptism. For those parents who wish their child to be baptized soon after birth, and who have not been aware of the time constraints of these classes, a solution could be to go ahead and baptize the child and withhold the Baptism Certificate until the parents had completed the class. Having said that, it would seem that parents who saw the importance of early Baptism for their child are already cognizant of their role as Catholic parents and may not even need a class. 
Finally, a priest’s first priority is the administration of the sacraments. If faithful parents are forced to wait for baptism, it is clear they are in the wrong parish. Look around; there will be a parish who will baptize the baby in a timely manner.

Stephen, the Church does not teach that the child can be saved via the parent’s baptism of desire.  That is one theological opinion, but the church teaches only that an individual can be saved by baptism of desire.  Now it would seem logical to extend the premise of this to the faith of the parents on behalf of the child, but if neither the Church nor the parents have enough faith to baptize the child right away, t hen maybe that faith doesn’t exist.

Karen, one does not need holy water.  Plain water suffices.  Also, trusting in the mercy of God is what should happen AFTER a child dies without Baptism.  It is not the tack to take before.  Doing that beforehand smacks of presumption.  We should make every effort to baptise children as early as possible.

I had a traumatic birth and wasn’t expected to make it through the night.  My parents called our parish priest to ask if he could drive into Boston from Sudbury to baptize me in case I didn’t make it.  As it was 4am, he told my father to have one of the nurses do it.  When all else fails, baptize him/her immediately in cases of emergency!

One never needed a birth certificate in the past.  I suspect this new requirement in some places is for the sake of being sure that the baby belongs to the parents and that the parents are who they say they are - an entirely new need, indeed, and probably due to identity theft, kidnapping, illegal immigration, and just plain weirdness.  ALso due to the transitoriness of our population.

I knew a super-orthodox priest more Catholic than the Pope who would race to hospitals to baptize a sick baby.  Totally unnecessary.  He should tell the parents to go ahead and do it (why a nurse, for goodness sake?), and then show up and say some more prayers and be with the parents.

I do know that doctors used to be routinely taught how to baptize babies in medical emergencies for the sake of Catholics.

I haven’t read all the comments yet, but why in the heck does the baby have to be born before you take classes?  And why can’t the godparents turn in their letter of good standing and take their classes beforehand too?  We have a big parish and we can do that.  And we have baptisms after the last Mass every Sunday (unless it’s Christmas or Easter, etc.).  Very odd.

I echo all of the above, and we’re lucky to belong to a small parish where they trust us to know how to raise our kids Catholic. We save time and effort by having one godparent who is the same for all the kids (each kid has one or two others), so the parish has her information on file.

My issue is with the implication that all these baptisms are being scheduled outside of Mass times. Why worry about priest shortages and the like when there is a priest at every Mass (by definition) and probably a deacon or two, and the baptisms can easily be worked in then? Our parish doesn’t have a resident priest (we have a permanent deacon Pastoral Leader), so almost all of our baptisms are during regularly-scheduled Masses. Added benefit: the rest of the parish gets to celebrate with the family, and it’s a teaching opportunity for everyone. Who doesn’t like to see a cute baby in a baptismal gown?? We all love when we have baptisms in the middle of Mass, just as we all love seeing the First Communion kids receive with their families.

I was also going to ask if infants were covered by baptism of desire.

This is news to me: We attended classes while still pregnant. My first was baptized at about 2 months, my second at 3 weeks old.

One other note:  Things can back up even when you do baptisms every week, as we do in our parish (except during Lent.)  And we often do ‘back to back’ baptism groups in the high season (spring and early summer.)  Even with that, we sometimes have people waiting for some weeks to get into the queue.  (Well, they are a fertile bunch.) 

I also can’t see the point of forcing parents of multiple kids to sit through the same class over and over.  I had a mom come in once, who was new to the parish, but on baby number four.  She said, “And I suppose, I have to take the class.”  I just looked at her and said, “If you haven’t figured it out yet, I don’t know that anything I’ll say will help much!”  We both laughed pretty hard, and she eventually did a lot of volunteer work for me with other families.

When we talk about ‘baptism by desire’ I don’t think we’re necessarily talking about the desire of the parents.  What about an implicit if unspoken desire on the part of one of God’s younger creations to be baptized?  Is this an absolute impossibility?

Given that the desire of the parents is often just the desire to “get the kid done” I don’t think the idea that the infant may in an undeveloped way desire baptism is entirely farfetched.

I think that sounds absolutely abusive for a parish to make people wait for baptism.  Someone suggested very large, busy parishes could have a set montly baptism - great idea!

What the heck are priests doing that is keeping them so busy that they CAN’T OFFER SACRAMENTS?  How long do they make you wait for confession, for crying out loud?

I think if a parish is comfortable with everyone waiting 4-6 months, the parish priest must not understand that sacrament well.  Yipes.

For both our children, we did the classes and had the paperwork done before the child was born. One was baptized within two weeks, the other within a month. It probably helped that we did private baptisms for both, not at a Sunday Mass.

My preemie daughter was baptized the day she was born. We had a priest come to the hospital because 1) by the time all of the intervention and resuscitation in the first few minutes after birth were over and we were able to get close to her, her prognosis was good enough that we could “afford” a few hours’ delay, and 2) I requested anointing of the sick for both her and myself.

Here’s my question. There’s a difference between “licit” and “valid.” If laypeople have the capacity to perform a baptism—something attested by the fact that we accept Protestant baptisms done according to the trinitarian formula as valid, why not a lay minister’s baptism, even outside the parameters of a strict emergency? I can understand why baptism “should” be done by an ordained minister, but I was unaware of the “must.” in fact, I remember a different debate about whether family members should coverty baptize children, for example grandchildren, without the consent of non-practicing parents. Some of the arguments against it—the idea that to do so would deprive the child of the necessary catechesis and sacramental life to live as a child of God, and of the absolute forgiveness unique to the sacrament should she later choose it for herself, I.e. after accumulating some personal sins—these presume that grandma’s performance of the baptism was in fact valid.

Having worked as a priest in a similar ‘understaffed,’ ‘mega-parish’ environment, a 4-6 month minimum wait for a baptism seems outlandish. However well-meaning the priests and lay assistants in any such cases, I would question their practical prudence if they’re requiring as Jennifer describes above. As such, I do not hesitate to ask just how frequent such cases are; I would guess that a 4-6 month wait is rare.

First off, canon law does not require a birth certificate to be baptized; so no need to wait for the state. Second, baptism classes can be done before the baby arrives; in fact it’d be better before because the parents will be much busier after the baby arrives! Third, in big parishes where baptisms are combined (e.g., a particular time on Sunday afternoons, or the first and third Sundays of a month) and where there are lots of baptisms, the priests or deacons are probably not going to care if there’s another kid to be baptized. If you’ve already got four to baptize, what’s the big deal with a fifth? A fourth point, requirements for godparents (e.g., an attestation by their pastor that they’re good, practicing Catholics) can also be handled before the baby arrives.

So, given all of that, if your parish still practically requires a 4-6 month wait, chances are one needs to find another parish. Good classical, orthodox priests are going to want to baptize babies sooner rather than later, and they’re not going to throw up a 4-6 month waiting period for baptism.

@Nicole (or anyone): How did the debate re baptizing others’ babies come out? Would it be licit, e.g., to baptize the child of Protestant relatives who are committed to raising their children as Christians but don’t believe in infant baptism?
Re baptizing one’s own baby, the lag time in our parish is only a month or so if we take care of the class and paperwork in a timely fashion, but I’ve stillbeen tempted to baptize my kids myself just in case.

Our first baby was baptized at 3 months, and the second around 5 months. I honestly didn’t know until recently that they recommended baptism much earlier. I’m pretty sure I was baptized at 4 months.

There is one issue no one has mentioned yet: recovery from childbirth takes a long time, especially after a c-section. I can’t imagine dragging myself to my child’s baptism two weeks after giving birth, especially after my second, which was a c-section. It took a long time to emerge from the fog of those early weeks to get myself to the point where I would be able to get to the baptism (on time), buy a little baptism outfit, plan a small get-together with godparents and family afterwards, etc. It sounds like the celibate men who made this recommendation have no idea what recovery from childbirth and taking care of the baby the first month or two is like.

And I don’t believe for one minute that an unbaptized baby who died would go to hell. That makes no sense; they have no personal sin and it’s not their fault they haven’t been baptized yet. I’m not saying it’s ok to be lazy about it; I definitely wouldn’t wait until my baby was almost walking. We planned the baptisms as soon as we felt we reasonably could. But people really need to realize what a toll childbirth takes on you.

It took a long time to emerge from the fog of those early weeks to get myself to the point where I would be able to get to the baptism (on time), buy a little baptism outfit, plan a small get-together with godparents and family afterwards, etc.

The thing is, none of these trappings are required for the Sacrament of Baptism. All that’s needed is a priest or deacon and some water, and the godparents. Priests used to visit a family’s home to baptize a baby; it doesn’t have to be done in the Church.

My baby is due in December and we’ve already picked godparents (a local couple). I think I’m going to see about getting him/her baptized as soon as possible after his/her birth, thanks to this article.

JoAnna, I was just thinking that it would be a good idea for priests to visit the couple’s home to baptize the baby, if it’s that important for it to be done early. I’m not sure why they don’t do that more often.

I don’t think they do that at our church, though. I know a party after the baptism isn’t necessary, but even if we didn’t have a party, doing it two weeks after birth just sounds like a bit much to be, especially since I know I’ll be having another c-section with the baby I’m currently expecting. We can certainly get the ball rolling before the birth by choosing godparents, having them fill out the forms, etc., but I’m very wary of planning the date before the baby is born, because I don’t know how I’ll feel.

When my youngest daughter was born, our priest came to visit us in the hospital to bring us the Eucharist. I should have asked him to baptize the baby then and there, except that the godparents couldn’t be present. :D

The main topic of this thread has wavered way off course :), but since it has ... Regarding waiting until you feel great or a party can be arranged,it is a solemn and grave responsibility of the parents to have their children as soon as possible.  You may think God won’t blame it on the baby, but He may blame it on the parents.  There was a day when the mother didn’t worry about herself making a baptism.  Pope Benedict was baptized at his parish church the day he was born, his mother certainly didn’t go with him!  In this day of modern medicine, that may be a bit much, I certainly wouldn’t want to miss my child’s baptism if I could help it.  But really you don’t need much strength to be driven to the church.  Leave the “perfect party” until later, but get that baptism done.  Celibate men didn’t impose this responsibility, the Lord gave us the gift to baptism, certainly we’d want to open His gift just as soon as possible for our children!  He said go out and baptize, not go out and plan the perfect party with the perfect clothes :)

My parish’s policy is that if it has been more than 12 months since the last time you attended Baptism class, you have to go again.  And I had to get a special dispensation from our pastor to schedule the Baptism without all of the paperwork including birth certificate in place (which I really had to do because one of the godparents was coming from out of town).  We barely missed the 12-month deadline, and the godparents had to take the class again, too.

I understand that ideally the Church would like the parents to have a clue about what they are doing by baptizing their kids, but I think they are driving the luke-warm Catholics away, making it less likely for them to revert.  And all of the hoops make it seem less urgent to baptize babies, too.  I think they should save all of the hoop jumping for the other sacraments, because the delays really only hurt the babies.

@Magista Bona

“Making disciples and savings souls is the work of the whole Church.  So, laypeople should give lay baptism to their children as soon after birth as possible; then begin the artificially tedious process of obtaining an official baptism at their parish.”

Whoa now - this is very problematic.  First of all, the Church teaches that Baptisms are illicit (not invalid - there’s a difference) if performed by someone other than an ordinary minister of the sacrament except in cases of danger of death.  So its a serious matter to “take the law into your own hands” on this front.  But as this discussion indicates, the local parish sometimes doesn’t make it easy to go through the official channels quickly, so let’s leave that aside.

But more importantly, one cannot be Baptized twice.  So if you Baptize your own children (for whatever reason) then you should indeed approach your parish after the fact to get that fact recognized, and maybe (depending on the judgment of the pastor) have a conditional Baptism performed.  But if you Baptize your own child and then go through the process at your parish to have him or her “Baptized again” then you are committing a grave disrespect to the sacrament.  The parish MUST be told that you Baptized the child yourself.

I have to completely disagree with Magistra. . . whatever the rest of his name was!

I don’t know if you were really serious, but your answers smacks of pride and misunderstanding of the sacrament of baptism. Not really sure if I want to go in to all of that here, but a holier than the church thing is really getting old. . . If you really were “holier” than you might understand your catechism a little better!

I’ll bite here:
If you baptize to bypass whatever “red tape”, then you’re assuming the baptism was valid.  You would not (could not) have it done again at the church.  Baptism is NEVER, EVER done more than once.  (That’s like saying the holy spirit didn’t take the first time.)

If you say that you’ll baptize with the intention of getting a “real” baptism done later, what are you saying? That the original wasn’t valid? Then what was its purpose? See what I’m saying?

I guess I would just try to get an appointment with the pastor or at least the DRE if you are in this kind of situation. See what you can do ahead of time.  I understand your frustration, but I hesitate to go behind the back and just do it.  I would honestly just tell the priest all your concerns, and what you are tempted to do.  Sometimes they aren’t aware of the temporal realities of young ones(like SIDs, etc).  The Church while having to have guidelines and such is also utterly practical.  It is for reasons like this that things have changed over time. You could be a catalyst in your parish. Good luck!!

(PS Honestly, I couldn’t see myself bringing my baby out in the parish that soon. I was afraid to send him to the barrage of old ladies in our parish bc I know I’m too chicken to say “no, you can’t hold him” so I kept him away for a while!!)

Well, nowadays is different.

Babies won’t go to hell or even limbo (which doesn’t exist).

Babies (and children) have their angels always in the Presence of God (as Jesus Said).

So I’m not “scared” if a baby is not baptized as soon as possible.

I think a situation of emergence for me it would be a “non-baptized” adult wanting to be converted but in a dramatical situation (for example an accident).

Francisco - you are mistaken. The Church does not teach that unborn babies who die automatically go to heaven. She teaches that we don’t know and we can only trust in God’s mercy. Limbo is still a legitimate theological opinion to hold; it MAY exist.

Please read “The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptized” for a longer, more thorough explanation of what the Church teaches: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html

Good answer “sd”.  Once the baptism is done it’s done.  We don’t go around baptizing people over and over again like some other Christian communities do.  You need to tell your pastor that you already baptized your baby and the Church then can only supply the other rites such as the applying the oil, the lit candle and special blessings.  Some should read on up on the Catechism and Canon Law before giving people false directions.

Well… You could just say your prayers handing it over to God"s control and asking Him to work with you on getting the baptism take care of or put you in a position to baptize the baby if an emergency occurs. After all when we invite Him into our lives, He is the one in charge, not us. And we really aren’t suppose to be worrying about the what ifs.

@Heidi:  I’ve wondered the same thing. 
@Brandy Miller—thank you for your excellent point.

My priest once held a sort of discussion/teaching session about miscarriage, in which he said that there are good grounds in Church teaching for thinking that (some) miscarried babies go to heaven. He pointed out that in infant baptisms, the intention of the parents (for the child to join the faith) is substituted for the intention of the child, since the infant is incapable of such intention, and the parent has that authority over the child. The Church also teaches that we can be saved through a baptism of desire, if we desired baptism but died before being able to carry through with it.
//
The priest pointed out that if you take both of these teachings together, then the parent’s intent to baptise the child can give the child a baptism of desire, if the child dies before making it to baptism. While he was referring to children who die in the womb, I can’t think of any reason why this would not also apply to parents who are going through their church process to get their newborn baptized. If we didn’t believe in baptism by desire, then putting people through the whole 8 to 12-month RCIA process instead of baptizing them on the spot would be just as messed-up as some people think it is to wait 4-6 months for an infant baptism.
//
(Lest you think my priest was just going out on a touchy-feely limb, when someone in the audience suggested that the intention of the church as a whole might save all the aborted babies in the same way, he said that would definitely be going beyond Church teaching. It is the parents’ intention that substitutes for the child’s, not just anyone’s intention. This argument can’t reassure us about children of friends and family who don’t get their kids baptized, but it can reassure us about our own children whom we intend to baptize.)

When my son was born with Trisomy 21 and a heart condition, we’d hoped to have the baptism at a time when his grandparents would be able to attend from out of town.  He took a turn for the worse and we wound up spending a month at a hospital.  A week before the surgery, my son started to really struggle and a priest happened to be there so I made the split second decision to have him baptized under the extreme conditions.  I was never so grateful for the presence of a visiting priest as I was for Fr. Phillip; but I would have baptized Paul myself if he had not been there to bring a measure of grace not only to his life, but peace to my own when his fever spiked to 104 and his heartrate was over 140 and the alarms and bells and whistles of the monitors were going off right and left.

Merciful Heavens!  I suppose I am fortunate, being well into my 8th decade, but what a lot of time and paperwork seems nowadays to be required.  All the more reason to be grateful to the priests who performed the baptisms of our children who knew us and our knowledge of the faith well enough not to require a class.  And when we married (wife convent-schooled English, I American and between postings in the Foreign Service) our “window of opportunity” was not one that would have accommodated much of what seems to be required now.  My wife’s priest did ask for a letter from my pastor—and he, knowing me and my schedule, kindly dispensed with the Cana program.  So the wedding took place as it should have.  However, I do recall 40 years ago two friends with demanding government jobs in different parts of the country.  They had most of the bona fides in place, but the parish which was new to the bride put up difficulties. (We are not talking about 18 year olds here, but mature people of solid background whose word and circumstances should have been given some consideration.)  Finally, she called her father; he happened to know the Nuncio who called the pastor.  (A priest friend remarked “Do you know how much one would hate it were the Nunciature to call and pull rank?”  To which the answer might be “But if everyone exercised a little common sense and appropriate respect for the intelligence and good faith of the laity,  then the Nunciature wouldn’t have to call.”)  As I say, I have always found my pastors reasonable and helpful, but in some of the circumstances described above, “reasonable” and “helpful”  are not the terms that would leap to one’s lips.

I don’t know if anyone’s mentioned this, but at a number of churches I’ve been to, they don’t baptize babies born during Lent.  It was a problem that I ran into and had to wait.  I don’t think churches should be allowed to delay a baptism because of Lent.  I understand the practice is nice, but as you pointed out some babies die very suddenly without warning and Canon Law says that you should have a baby baptized in weeks not months.  So maybe a good compromise would be a special ceremony instead of at regular Mass during Lent.  Don’t know.  But it’s really annoying.

I’m honestly shocked at all the requirements.  At our parish, we took our baptism class before our daughter was born.  Once she was born, we scheduled her baptism with the office.  No birth certificate required.  Our parish offered two baptism ceremonies a month after the last mass.  There were 9 babies at our daughter’s baptism.  Godparents were not required to attend the classes, just encouraged.  The bonus - since our next two were born within the 5 year window of our original class, no further classes were needed for our younger children.  Just call and schedule.  Baptism class only required every 5 years. And, the deacon who married us, performed two of our children’s baptisms in a private ceremony.  I just had to call and ask him.

Our experience was like a lot of commenters’...we did all the prep/classes/paperwork before our babies were born. I suppose we could have baptized them sooner, but one was baptized at four months (after I came out of the fog of awful, heinous PPD) and the other at three months (because I couldn’t resist having her baptized on my birthday!).

We never had to provide a birth certificate…heck, when I was baptized at age 20 they didn’t ask for one either. The running joke was that I could have told them I was born a year earlier, then used my baptismal cert. as a form of ID. ;)

I would think most experiences would have been like mine or Lisa’s who just responded on June 17.  If they aren’t, I’d just start shopping for a new and more reasonable parish and priest that care more about the spiritual well being of your child than about having all the “t’s” crossed and “i’s” dotted.  :)  Sad, but sometimes you just have to do it.

Our parish baptism process has improved. You don’t *have* to have the birth certificate to complete the classes {which I think is absurd in the first place}. Over the years, and as our family has grown, we have shifted towards taking the classes before the baby is born. The juggling of a newborn and lack of sleep is tough all on its own without having to prepare for the paperwork side of baptism.

The toughest part for us, this time, was finding godparents for #5. It pays to ask around at the parish and not accept the first answer {i.e. obstacle/roadblock} as the be all and end all of answers.

I am fine with the process because I understand that it is an opportunity to bring lacksadaisical parents back into their Faith, but the flip side of that is that those of us with a solid understanding have to endure - with patience {spiritual works, uh hem} - the same process that makes it difficult for those who faithfully attend Mass and participate in the parish at various levels.

My suggestion is to get a membership card that shows you are free to bypass all the red tape. ;-)

Holy Cow Batman!  I don’t even have a birth certificate for my 2 year old!  I can’t believe you have to get one to baptize.  I have never gone past 6 weeks- and that is the latest I would do it.

wow. at my parish we called a day or two after the baby was born and had her baptised at the Sunday mass when she was 12 days old.  No classes, birth certificates or anything.  I can’t believe it isn’t like this everywhere.

Wow, I’ve never heard of such a thing as you describe.  Even when we lived in a fairly big city (Nashville, TN), and attended a large parish, it was not too hard to schedule a baptism when the baby was one to two months old, or maybe even a bit less than one month.  Baptisms were held on a regular basis at one of the weekend Masses (with a rotating schedule, so that it wasn’t always the same Mass), and there was no limit (that I’m aware of) to the number of babies that could be baptized during a single Mass.  So scheduling really wasn’t a big problem.  (Private baptisms were an option too, and didn’t seem difficult to schedule at all.)

Also, we were able to take the baptismal class while my wife was still pregnant with our first child, and we did not have to take the class again for our second child (it was assumed that there was no need to repeat the class, since we had taken it once already).  And in our current small parish in a small town, we have had our third and fourth children baptized around 3 to 4 weeks of age with no problem at all. 

I am distressed to hear that there is so much red tape in some parishes or dioceses, and I sincerely hope the situation you described is NOT the norm for most parishes and dioceses.

This discussion is informative and helpful however I have the reverse question. I was baptized as a Catholic, my children were also baptized.  I would like to reverse this. What is the protocol for getting unbaptized? (This is a serious question)  Thanks

James Francis,

There is no way to get “unbaptized.” Baptism leaves an indelible mark on your soul, put there by God, and there is no way to remove it.

The bigger question is, why would you want to?

Thanks for the reply JoAnna.

The issue comes up for me - because I was baptised as an infant. I had no choice in the event. As for my children, well that’s a little tougher. My family believed that a religious foundation was important and the Catholic church was our regular place of worship. In the years since we did this we’ve since read and learned about different theologies. The increased activism from the Vatican and numerous Bishops has also caused us, as a family, to conclude that our faith is no longer in keeping with that of the Catholic church.

I guess we will have to live with this mark until it is our time to go.

Thanks

James Francis,

I’m sorry to hear that. However, you should be aware that most mainstream Protestant denominations use the exact same baptismal formula (the Trinitarian formula and the pouring of water) as the Catholic Church, and the Church considers many non-Catholic baptisms to be valid.

For example, when I converted from the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America to Catholicism, I did not have to get rebaptized in the Catholic Church because my original baptism was considered valid.

This was something I learned early, I’m one of those hybrid pre/post Vatican II kids.

Who can baptize?  The ordinary minister of Baptism is a priest or a deacon.
But in an emergency, anyone can baptize—even a non-Catholic or non-Christian. All that is required is that the person baptizing:

  Intend to do what the Catholic Church does in this sacrament
  Pour water upon the head (ordinary tap water is fine in an emergency)
  Say audibly the words of Baptism while pouring water, similar to:

“I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”

These are words that every Catholic should know as well as he knows his own name. Someone’s eternal salvation may one day depend upon the knowing of these words.

My brother baptized his daughter at birth because she was born 2 months early.  She had ALL the rites completed 4 months later at their parish with a complete Baptism by their Pastor.

Such opportunities to administer Baptism may never come to us, but it is of profound importance that we be prepared.

I think I, oh snap my songs on PEACE OUT

-JADIE

I baptized both of my children moments after they were born.  They were baptized months later (as soon as we could get in) by a priest.

Procedural question then.  We believe in ONE baptism (once you’re baptized, even in a emergency, you’re not supposed to be RE-baptized.)  Although a conditional baptism is possible.

But you need a baptismal certificate for later sacraments, usually.

So if you or your child is baptized in an emergency, what do you do about the certificate?  What if some doctor says, “Oh, by the way, when we thought your baby was going to die I baptized him, hope you don’t mind?”  How do you know the doc did it correctly?  Do you have your priest administer a conditional baptism later when the danger is over, and then get a baptismal certificate from him?

Keep making it as complicated and bureaucratic as possible; not as simple as say reading a 40 page Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship voter guide but complicated enough that the marginalized, those already struggling in mixed marriages, transitory immigrants will readily end up falling through the cracks and be driven to more accommodating Protestant Churches where they will at least feel welcome and what the heck they can still get a valid baptism.

Making the parents wait for the birth certificate before they can start the paperwork for the baptism is just crazy.

That would be like making a couple wait for the marriage certificate before they could start Pre-Cana.

When my kids were baptized 20+ years ago we did the class before the birth and the baptism was performed well within 2 weeks.

What happened that this process got so messed up?

While both of my parents were raised Catholic, they left the Church to become Evangelical Christians before I was born. My grandmother, a very devout Catholic wanted me to be baby-baptized. My parents weren’t for it. So, my grandmother took it upon herself to, during one of the times she baby-sat me, baptize me, herself, in her kitchen. She had asked a priest at her church beforehand for advice/guidance and used holy water from some sacred site (I’m not sure which).