Feeling frustrated and annoyed by something...

[Gnarwhal]

My son was born January 14th, and he's still not baptized. We found out our parish holds classes for the parents and godparents before a child's baptism that are mandatory. I emailed my priest and asked if we had to go thinking that my wife and I leading RCIF classes ought to count for something, but the bottom line was yes, we did. So the last class came upon us too quickly and my wife was still recovering from the C-section, so we missed the classes and subsequent group baptism.

I spoke with my friend who heads all the formation classes and she said this is how things are done in our diocese, and there aren't any baptisms during Lent because the priests are too busy.

I feel very strongly that my son should've been baptized weeks ago as it's a sin against charity to delay.

I floated the idea of having him baptized at the SSPX chapel here, but they only have Mass here twice a month and it's in the middle of my Sunday work schedule. If I were able to get ahold of the priest I still think he'd be more likely to baptize my son immediately than our diocesan priests.

 

[AveChristusRex]

My son was born January 14th, and he's still not baptized. We found out our parish holds classes for the parents and godparents before a child's baptism that are mandatory. I emailed my priest and asked if we had to go thinking that my wife and I leading RCIF classes ought to count for something, but the bottom line was yes, we did. So the last class came upon us too quickly and my wife was still recovering from the C-section, so we missed the classes and subsequent group baptism.

I spoke with my friend who heads all the formation classes and she said this is how things are done in our diocese, and there aren't any baptisms during Lent because the priests are too busy.

I feel very strongly that my son should've been baptized weeks ago as it's a sin against charity to delay.

I floated the idea of having him baptized at the SSPX chapel here, but they only have Mass here twice a month and it's in the middle of my Sunday work schedule. If I were able to get ahold of the priest I still think he'd be more likely to baptize my son immediately than our diocesan priests.

As an individual of the eastern tradition, I cannot speak for the contemporary Latins, but I believe in the R&R position and deeply appreciate the work of Lefebvre, so I somewhat know the SSPX position. That being said, the eastern tradition (i.e. lung of the Church, cf. Ut Unum Sinct) baptizes immediately upon the ability to do so, no time wasted [unless the parent has a specific reason to delay]. As we all very well know, the Church has contingencies for emergency events, so obviously this is a necessity. To writ from Pastoralis actio, adopted at an Ordinary Meeting of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and was approved at an Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect by His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, who ordered its publication, at the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, October 20, 1980: ""The first consideration is the welfare of the child, that it may not be deprived of the benefit of the sacrament; then the health of the mother must be considered, so that, as far as possible she too may be present. Then, as long as they do not interfere with the greater good of the child, there are pastoral considerations such as allowing sufficient time to prepare the parents and for planning the actual celebration to bring out its paschal character." Accordingly, "if the child is in danger of death, it is to be baptized without delay"; otherwise, as a rule "an infant should be baptized within the first weeks after birth.""

This ruling by the SCDF, promulgated under the order of Pope St. John Paul II, shows that in an emergency, they are to be baptized without delay, but if not, and they specifically state that "otherwise", meaning that in any other situation that does not constitute an emergency, they are to be baptized in the first weeks after birth. Thus, in my view, this is an error from your parish, and it should be alerted to your bishop. I would highly suggest to take him to an SSPX chapel, which will [most likely] follow the necessary laws, and if they will not do so, take him to an Eastern Catholic Church, as they are in visible communion with the Holy See and will preform the baptism as described by the eastern rite.

I'm sorry this has happened to your family, praying for you!

 

[joymercy]

Call the Archdiocese and ask if you can have your son baptized by someone there asap.

Surely, they would know the answer!

 

[Michie]

My son was born January 14th, and he's still not baptized. We found out our parish holds classes for the parents and godparents before a child's baptism that are mandatory. I emailed my priest and asked if we had to go thinking that my wife and I leading RCIF classes ought to count for something, but the bottom line was yes, we did. So the last class came upon us too quickly and my wife was still recovering from the C-section, so we missed the classes and subsequent group baptism.

I spoke with my friend who heads all the formation classes and she said this is how things are done in our diocese, and there aren't any baptisms during Lent because the priests are too busy.

I feel very strongly that my son should've been baptized weeks ago as it's a sin against charity to delay.

I floated the idea of having him baptized at the SSPX chapel here, but they only have Mass here twice a month and it's in the middle of my Sunday work schedule. If I were able to get ahold of the priest I still think he'd be more likely to baptize my son immediately than our diocesan priests.

Ehhh… that would bother me. Sounds a bit like straining gnats to me.

 

[RileyG]

Call the Archdiocese and ask if you can have your son baptized by someone there asap.

Surely, they would know the answer!

I agree!