CATHOLIC BAPTISM FOR SAME-SEX OFFSPRING?
J. Grant Swank, Jr.
It’s getting quite confusing, quite sinful as well.
In the Roman Catholic Church, infants are baptized. In evangelical Protestantism, infants are dedicated to the Lord, not baptized. Baptism is reserved for those who know their commitment to Christ is real, that is, it is reserved for children and adults who can reason through the salvation acceptance.
Why do evangelical Protestants vary from the Roman Catholics on this matter? It all comes down to the biblical information.
Evangelicals point out that in the New Testament there is no instance of a baby being baptized. Everything there regarding baptism relates to an individual realizing he has come to Christ as Savior, experiencing the One who has forgiven the person’s sins. A baby does not have that awareness.
Understanding then the Roman Catholic position on baptism in contrast to the evangelical Protestant position, note that the Quebec archbishop Cardinal Marc Quellet has stated that same-sex offspring cannot be baptized as Catholic when two fathers or two mothers sign the baptismal certificate.
Quellet states that canon law simply does not permit those kinds of signatures on a child’s baptismal papers. However, if one signature appears from a twosome of the same sex, then that is all right. It’s just a matter of two signatures versus one signature.
Now that in itself is not logical nor moral. If it all comes down to one or two names on a piece of paper, what are we dealing with here? It’s more than one versus two signees. It’s a matter of Christian morals versus worldly, sinful doings — plain and simple.
I would think that those who drew up the canon law on this matter were not writing it up to deal with one versus two signings. It was because of a New Testament understanding of sin versus Christian morality.
Therefore, let’s return to the original intent on this matter. Simply to dilute the issue to one versus two is to grant certain legitimacy to the same-sex twosome. And that can never happen in the context of New Testament morality; therefore, that should never happen in the context of any part of the worldwide Christian community.
No evangelical worshiping community would consider baptizing same-sex twosomes or anything related to same-sex twosomes. It would not be up for discussion let alone splitting signature hairs.
Instead, the evangelical witness would attempt to present to the homosexuals an alternative lifestyle, that is, coming into a Christ experience by which practicing homosexuals would cease their activity for the celibate commitment.
Starting at that point the evangelical church would then welcome the celibate homosexual one or two or three or four or whatever, working with them to a real life surrender to Christ as Lord of life. That would yield a New Testament morality lived out daily.
It’s getting quite confusing, quite sinful as well.
In the Roman Catholic Church, infants are baptized. In evangelical Protestantism, infants are dedicated to the Lord, not baptized. Baptism is reserved for those who know their commitment to Christ is real, that is, it is reserved for children and adults who can reason through the salvation acceptance.
Why do evangelical Protestants vary from the Roman Catholics on this matter? It all comes down to the biblical information.
Evangelicals point out that in the New Testament there is no instance of a baby being baptized. Everything there regarding baptism relates to an individual realizing he has come to Christ as Savior, experiencing the One who has forgiven the person’s sins. A baby does not have that awareness.
Understanding then the Roman Catholic position on baptism in contrast to the evangelical Protestant position, note that the Quebec archbishop Cardinal Marc Quellet has stated that same-sex offspring cannot be baptized as Catholic when two fathers or two mothers sign the baptismal certificate.
Quellet states that canon law simply does not permit those kinds of signatures on a child’s baptismal papers. However, if one signature appears from a twosome of the same sex, then that is all right. It’s just a matter of two signatures versus one signature.
Now that in itself is not logical nor moral. If it all comes down to one or two names on a piece of paper, what are we dealing with here? It’s more than one versus two signees. It’s a matter of Christian morals versus worldly, sinful doings — plain and simple.
I would think that those who drew up the canon law on this matter were not writing it up to deal with one versus two signings. It was because of a New Testament understanding of sin versus Christian morality.
Therefore, let’s return to the original intent on this matter. Simply to dilute the issue to one versus two is to grant certain legitimacy to the same-sex twosome. And that can never happen in the context of New Testament morality; therefore, that should never happen in the context of any part of the worldwide Christian community.
No evangelical worshiping community would consider baptizing same-sex twosomes or anything related to same-sex twosomes. It would not be up for discussion let alone splitting signature hairs.
Instead, the evangelical witness would attempt to present to the homosexuals an alternative lifestyle, that is, coming into a Christ experience by which practicing homosexuals would cease their activity for the celibate commitment.
Starting at that point the evangelical church would then welcome the celibate homosexual one or two or three or four or whatever, working with them to a real life surrender to Christ as Lord of life. That would yield a New Testament morality lived out daily.
<< Home