Mother in law christened our son without our consent <note mod warning post 1>

LegacyUser

My wife and I are not religious and because the church has changed canon law to say that you can't leave any more we decided not to christen our baby son but to leave the decision up to him to make when he is old enough. My parents are religious but were of the view that they raised their kids their way and are happy to leave us to do the same and to only give advice when needed or asked but my wife's parents who are very religious were very unimpressed with the decision and put a lot of pressure on us to change our minds.

Roll on to last week when my wife returned to work, three days a week. Her mother 'kindly' offered to mind our son one day a week and we have a child minder for the other two. At the weekend my mother in law admitted that she had gotten our son christened by the local priest who she knows well on the Wednesday that she was minding him. I am fuming about the whole situation because it is totally over stepping the mark. I don't want our baby to go back to her tomorrow and would rather that we asked the child minder if she could extend to three days. My wife is annoyed but does not want her mother to feel that we do not trust her with him (even though I now don't).

Any views on this? Am I over reacting?

MOD NOTE: Only adding this in here as a last resort
All - please do not make this a thread on bashing religion or comparing religious practices. While you might not agree with any one religion we do expect you to show respect to those among us who are religious - deeply/otherwise.

01-Mar: Further violations of our charter or site rules will now result in red cards and/or bans.

Neyite

I would be furious, and I didnt even know that it could be done without the consent of the parents - can you check with anyone? I am gobsmacked and I would not want her near my child if she has proved she cannot be trusted to respect your views.

But, you and your wife need to approach this together, otherwise your wife will eventually be won around and you will be the bad guy. What happens when communion time rolls around or confirmation? is she just going to override your wishes anytime you dont rear her grandchild the way she wants?

I would engage the childminder, even if its temporary to show that by disregarding your wishes you can and will cut contact with the grandparents if they ignore your beliefs.

Penn

You're not over-reacting. Your mother-in-law abused a position of trust you had with her and shouldn't have done this without your permission. If it's something serious such as christening the child against your wishes, what else will she do should you ask her not to do it?

Religious beliefs aside (because that's a whole different debate), she did something against your wishes, something which should have been the decision of the parents only. I think it's up to her to somehow prove you can trust her again and that she won't go outside your wishes again before letting her mind the child.

Shame on her and shame on the priest for doing this without your consent.

Starokan

No your not over reacting, the only people who should be making this decision is you and your wife. Its an outrageous betrayal of your trust & she should be called up on it. Only after you are happy that nothing will ever be done again without your approval should she mind the child

Neyite

She didnt waste any time in getting the priest to do this, did she? The very first week your wife is back at work she has the child baptised? that shows that she had it planned all along to do the first chance she got.

What a neck. She does not deserve to enjoy her grandchilds company.

cynder

12 years ago my now husband did the same thing, we were broken up for about 2 weeks and he knew i wasnt catholic and when he arrived to collect our baby he told me he was getting her christened in 10 mins, he felt guilty and told me at the last minute.

I was gob smacked he took her and i sat stewing for a few mins and my brother then drove me out to his parents house, we had an almighty show down and he took her to get christened, the priest did it no questions asked.

I got over it, and my daughter is now 12 getting her conformation next month. Ive always told her to question everything and to decide by herself what religion she wants to be.

Whats done is done move on. Dont cause a family rift.

grindelwald

I would not let her near the grandchild for an awful long time. I would also explain the situation with the priest and see about reversing it.


\edited to add:

grindelwald wrote: »

Whats done is done move on. Dont cause a family rift.

He has done nothing to cause a family rift. The grandparents have. If they're your beliefs and it's your child, there is no way I would put up with bull$hit quite frankly

ibarelycare

I am furious on your behalf OP. Your MIL had absolutely no right to do that. If that was me, I would punish her by cutting off contact with her grandchild for a long time, and even after that only letting her see him while supervised. She needs to learn that getting a child christened isn't a flippant thing. I would also tell her that you are not raising him as a Catholic and, even though he has been christened into the Catholic Church, as far as you or your wife are concerned, he is non-religious and can make the decision for himself when he's old enough WITHOUT any interference from her.

What was your wife's reaction to the whole thing?

midlandsmissus

That's shocking. Like really bad.

blatantrereg

zhjtsdrz wrote: »

My wife and I are not religious and because the church has changed canon law to say that you can't leave any more we decided not to christen our baby son but to leave the decision up to him to make when he is old enough. My parents are religious but were of the view that they raised their kids their way and are happy to leave us to do the same and to only give advice when needed or asked but my wife's parents who are very religious were very unimpressed with the decision and put a lot of pressure on us to change our minds.

Roll on to last week when my wife returned to work, three days a week. Her mother 'kindly' offered to mind our son one day a week and we have a child minder for the other two. At the weekend my mother in law admitted that she had gotten our son christened by the local priest who she knows well on the Wednesday that she was minding him. I am fuming about the whole situation because it is totally over stepping the mark. I don't want our baby to go back to her tomorrow and would rather that we asked the child minder if she could extend to three days. My wife is annoyed but does not want her mother to feel that we do not trust her with him (even though I now don't).

Any views on this? Am I over reacting?

Not overreacting. She broke your trust. Now you dont trust her. Very straightforward. Put it as simply as that and there is no argument.

cynder

Deleted User wrote: »

I would not let her near the grandchild for an awful long time. I would also explain the situation with the priest and see about reversing it.


\edited to add:




He has done nothing to cause a family rift. The grandparents have. If they're your beliefs and it's your child, there is no way I would put up with bull$hit quite frankly

Not yet he hasn't, but punishing the grandparents by not letting them near the baby will cause a rift and could come back and bite them big time. If I were him I wouldn't do anything that will cause a rift. Let them know you are unhappy with them but do it tactfully. You never know when you will need their help.

R.D. aka MR.D

I think if i was in your position the MIL's reaction to this would influence how I would proceed. Does she realise that she has broken your trust?

LeinsterDub

Coming in to this thread I was thinking sure what's the big deal it's all just a baseless ritual and meaningless words, however I would strongly agree with several posters here the beech of trust is unacceptable .

grindelwald

grindelwald wrote: »

Not yet he hasn't, but punishing the grandparents by not letting them near the baby will cause a rift and could come back and bite them big time. If I were him I wouldn't do anything that will cause a rift. Let them know you are unhappy with them but do it tactfully. You never know when you will need their help.

If you're happy to roll over whenever someone breaks your trust, so be it. Epitomises what's wrong with Ireland. This "Anything for an easy life" mentality.
There is no way I would let them back into my child's life for a very long time. They made their bed going behind the parents back like that when they knew the parents wishes and they may lie in it now.

As for needing their help? They have more than one set of grandparents. I wouldn't take anything from them.

Daisy M

I would be furious. Go to the local Bishop let him know that this was carried out without your consent and see if this christening still "stands". I cant understand how the priest carried out a christening without speaking to the parents, was he been duped too?
For me I would not be able to trust this woman again. I thought it was bad when my sil tried to arrange a different childminder for my son when I already had one arranged, I got over that it would take me a long time to get over this if ever.

Penn

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Coming in to this thread I was thinking sure what's the big deal it's all just a baseless ritual and meaningless words, however I would strongly agree with several posters here the beech of trust is unacceptable .

Exactly. The parents had already shown that they did not want to have their child christened. Doing it behind their backs the first chance she got shows a complete lack of respect for their wishes and shows she can't be fully trusted.

I agree with R.D. aka MR.D. What has your mother in law said to defend herself for this? Has anything been said yet? Her reaction will help you decide how to proceed.

LegacyUser

I wouldn't really give two flying ones myself, but only because i'm not religious. If I were some other religion I guess i'd be raging.

ManOfMystery

It's hard to believe she actually did that.

Setting asides religion and differences of beliefs, it was not her place to put your child through any kind of process like that. And to do so without your prior knowledge or approval is just sneaky and deceitful. If I was in your shoes I'd be absolutely fuming too, and I hope your wife sees sense and doesn't start making excuses for her mother - it was totally, totally out of line.

LegacyUser

Find out who the priest was - surely a baptism has to be arranged in advance AND it would be customary for parents, family and friends to be there too.

Priest could have been in cahoots.

Personally if it was me, I'd have serious issues with MIL -

ask her what she was thinking and why she did what she did considering she knew you guys didn't want the child christened.

Then tell her that she has broken a trust and how, considering the above, does she expect to be trusted again.

God...

Don't back down on this one. That is an absolute disgrace. I'm actually angry at the idea of someone doing that!! I wouldn't let her near the child for a long time and make sure she isn't let mind her on her own again.

banie01

Starokan wrote: »

No your not over reacting, the only people who should be making this decision is you and your wife. Its an outrageous betrayal of your trust & she should be called up on it. Only after you are happy that nothing will ever be done again without your approval should she mind the child

Penn wrote: »

Exactly. The parents had already shown that they did not want to have their child christened. Doing it behind their backs the first chance she got shows a complete lack of respect for their wishes and shows she can't be fully trusted.

I agree with R.D. aka MR.D. What has your mother in law said to defend herself for this? Has anything been said yet? Her reaction will help you decide how to proceed.

I agree with the majority of posters here OP
Your M.I.L has commited an outrageous betrayal of the trust you and your wife placed in her.
She has totally disregarded your wishes to have a ritual cleansing of sin and membership of a church foisted upon the child totally without your knowledge and against your expressed wishes.
Religion is a personal choice, that while beautiful when shared....Should never be forced.
I'm disgusted with her behaviour and to be honest, it would raise serious questions for me about your MILs judgement and willingness to adapt to how you and your wife choose to raise your child!
It sets the precedent that if she doesn't agree she can barrel ahead anyway...

Mighty_Mouse

Whoa!! This the craziest thing I have read in a long time!

If I were in OP shoes......

I would calmly sit down with the mother-in-law.
I would explain in simple detail how utterly underhand, sneaky, psycotic this act was.
I would assume a person has some kind of mental disorder to interfere in a childs upbringing to the point as to choose their religious denomination.

I would explain for the above reasons she could not be trusted and from this point forward her access to the kids would be restricted severly.

I would explain that whilst I would be civil for the sake of my wife's relationship, her relationship with me was over permanently.

I would then discuss the matter with the priest in order to investigate as to how he could take this action without parental consent.
I assume that the priest breached some fundamental standards in taking this action.

I would lodge a formal complaint with the priests superiors.

**Edit*I'll take out the legal threat!

Mighty_Mouse

After-thought............are you sure your wife was not in on this?

strandroad

You are not overreacting, it is a serious abuse of trust in my book.

Imagine her taking your child to have a medical procedure performed on despite knowing that you don't approve - it's the same breach of trust. Grandparents are not allowed to make life-changing decisions if the child's parents are around; and in this case it was even made clear that you do NOT wish the child to be baptised.

What's more, it's not only your trust that has been abused, she also took the choice away from your son. You were generous in allowing him make an informed choice and not implicating him in anything irreversible; she took that gift away from him.

I would certainly make it clear to her how much this breach of trust matters to you. I would not ban visits, they are family after all, but would never leave the two of them unsupervised, unless/until she apologises, sincerely. If anyone asks I would tell the truth, you have nothing to be ashamed of, she has. Do not budge on this: she is probably chuffed now and must have planned it ahead, her offer of help was a ruse. If you let her babysit etc. your son will receive full faith formation before he can speak in full sentences. Also if you roll over now you can expect major fuss around the time of communion, confirmation etc.

I wonder how it works on the church side of things - are priests allowed to ignore or skip communication with parents? Can anyone just bring a child in and have it christened? I would pay a visit to the priest, make enquiries and express your dissatisfaction; if there is nothing you can do formally at least he might be less willing to trick other families in the future.

LegacyUser

Simples. Tell your MIL that you have taken it upon yourself to write on her behalf to the church, requesting that she no longer be a part of the catholic church, and you took the liberty to forge her signature. See how she reacts when the shoe is on the other foot (obviously don't actually do it though!)

username123

zhjtsdrz wrote: »

My wife is annoyed but does not want her mother to feel that we do not trust her with him (even though I now don't).

Any views on this? Am I over reacting?

Why does your wife not want the MIL to feel that you do not trust her with your son? Of course you wouldnt trust her with your son after something like that! Would your wife be saying the same thing if the MIL had gotten the child circumcised?

The MIL sounds like a horrible controlling woman, who has absolutely no respect for you, your wife, your child or anyone else. I would never ever allow her to be alone with the child again until he is 18. Never. Supervised visits only. And I would be extremely wary of allowing any contact such as phone calls, emails, texts etc later on, as its obvious the woman cannot be trusted to respect your wishes regarding raising your child.

Rather scarily from here:

Can children be baptised without their parent's consent?
Nowadays, Catholic grandparents are often dismayed if their children announce that they will not be baptising their grandchildren.
Some even wonder if they should covertly baptise such children themselves.
However, to do so is considered by the Church to violate the natural rights of parents to raise their child as they see fit. Nonetheless, a baptism so administered would be valid.

Which just goes to show how sick and twisted the organisation really is, they are willing to claim members even without parental consent!

I mean, to me, this would be a massively serious breach of trust, as serious as abusing the child. It goes against your belief system.

Bride2012

username123 wrote: »

zhjtsdrz wrote: »

My wife is annoyed but does not want her mother to feel that we do not trust her with him (even though I now don't).

Any views on this? Am I over reacting?

Why does your wife not want the MIL to feel that you do not trust her with your son? Of course you wouldnt trust her with your son after something like that! Would your wife be saying the same thing if the MIL had gotten the child circumcised?

The MIL sounds like a horrible controlling woman, who has absolutely no respect for you, your wife, your child or anyone else. I would never ever allow her to be alone with the child again until he is 18. Never. Supervised visits only. And I would be extremely wary of allowing any contact such as phone calls, emails, texts etc later on, as its obvious the woman cannot be trusted to respect your wishes regarding raising your child.

Rather scarily from here:

Can children be baptised without their parent's consent?
Nowadays, Catholic grandparents are often dismayed if their children announce that they will not be baptising their grandchildren.
Some even wonder if they should covertly baptise such children themselves.
However, to do so is considered by the Church to violate the natural rights of parents to raise their child as they see fit. Nonetheless, a baptism so administered would be valid.

Which just goes to show how sick and twisted the organisation really is, they are willing to claim members even without parental consent!

I mean, to me, this would be a massively serious breach of trust, as serious as abusing the child. It goes against your belief system.

That's the part that I wondered about but the church holds it to be valid???? It's incredible! Show your wife this thread, you're not overreacting.

username123

Bride2012 wrote: »

That's the part that I wondered about but the church holds it to be valid???? It's incredible! Show your wife this thread, you're not overreacting.

Its crazy isnt it? Theyll do anything for membership.

I wonder if the OP has any legal recourse about a religious organisation claiming membership of his child without his express consent?

strandroad

username123 wrote: »

I wonder if the OP has any legal recourse about a religious organisation claiming membership of his child without his express consent?

Interesting, isn't it? I can't imagine a principal enrolling a child granny brought into his school, or a GP removing his tonsils - and not answering for it when the guardians show up.

WhyGoBald

Deleted User wrote: »

If you're happy to roll over whenever someone breaks your trust, so be it. Epitomises what's wrong with Ireland. This "Anything for an easy life" mentality.

I doubt that grindelwald, is "happy" to "roll over" given that her husband is the one who went behind her back, thus limiting the punitive measures she can take, from a legal as well as a practical standpoint. (Not inviting a discussion on legalities: just trying to make the point.)

The situation with the mother-in-law is another story. The offence is compounded by the fact of the new canon law, as the OP mentions, so pulling a fait accompli is a very serious matter. The church doesn't condone it (though it won't undo it) so the actions of the priest have to be looked into. And while only the OP and his wife can decide what measures to take, I think it warrants taking a strond stand.

ABajaninCork

:eek::eek::eek:

I'm sorry OP. I have no real advice, but wanted to offer my support. I am a practicing Catholic, but would never DREAM of pushing my religious beliefs on another. My motto is live and let live. I have nieces and nephews - only one is Catholic, one is CofE, the other two are not christened. The fact that two are not christened upsets my mother (In our culture, it's not the done thing not to christen a child). But she knows better than to go ahead and do it herself!:D

But what you MiL did was bang out of order. She deserves a very long spell of being sent to Coventry. Maybe that will make her understand what she did was very wrong...

Oh - And no way in hell would I leave her alone with the child. I would be making it very clear that she visits the child at your house only, and certainly not unsupervised.

I wish you luck in getting this sorted. But sorted it must be.

Taltos

All - please do not make this a thread on bashing religion or comparing religious practices. While you might not agree with any one religion we do expect you to show respect to those among us who are religious - deeply/otherwise.

200yrolecrank - I have deleted your comment - further off topic / flaming posts like that will result in a ban.

Regards
Taltos

tinkerbell

OP, that was a downright low rotten thing your MIL did. It doesn't matter whether she thinks YOUR child should be baptised or not, the thing is - it's YOUR child, not hers! She had absolutely NO RIGHT going behind your back and baptising your baby.

As others have said, your MIL has no respect for you nor your wife, your beliefs, your rights as a parent, etc. That was a downright underhanded stunt she pulled, I'm just shocked. I really am. The trust now is completely broken - it has proven that no matter what you disagree on, big or small, she will go behind your back and do it. I mean how can you trust her now with your baby to know that she'll do as you intend to do? Like if you want to raise your baby eating a certain type of food (homemade, puréed up, rather than the shop stuff you buy in jars), etc. and she doesn't agree with that, she'll just do her own thing!

I also suggest that you confront the priest / bishop, for a person who is supposed to be upholding good faith, etc. well he sure did help with the deceit of the whole thing. And I also suggest that you demand for the whole thing to be undone (I dunno how that happens) since it is not something you and your wife wanted in the first place.

Morag

You need to find out the name of the priest, if they are not the parish priest but one of the priests in the parish then you write a letter of complaint to him and to the parish priest and also send a copy to the local bishop.

What they have done is an abuse of the trust they were given and I would never ever let those grandparents be around the child unsupervised and I would be very clear about why.

200yrolecrank

Taltos wrote: »

All - please do not make this a thread on bashing religion or comparing religious practices. While you might not agree with any one religion we do expect you to show respect to those among us who are religious - deeply/otherwise.

200yrolecrank - I have deleted your comment - further off topic / flaming posts like that will result in a ban.

Regards
Taltos

Namaste

Sleepy

I'd go with the worst punishment I can think of for the sort of busy body that would interfere in such a manner:

1. Only allow her supervised access to the child.
2. Contact the local rag and kick up a fuss about the priest carrying out religious rites without the proper parental consent: mention that granny's no longer allowed near the child unsupervised.

In other words: make a holy fvcking show of her.

username123

A lot of posters, including myself, jumped straight onto the religious aspect of this. The reality is that this woman has shown that your own wishes towards your own child are not to be respected if 'she knows better'.

So the day could easily come where you discipline your child in whatever manner you have agreed with your wife, and if the MIL is present and she thinks she knows better - she will undermine your parental responsibility.

If you dont want your child eating chocolate or ice cream or whatever, and the MIL knows better, she will be slipping the child the bars of Cadbury and the tubs of Ben and Jerrys.

If you tell your child that it is morally wrong to break trust, she will be in there telling the child that its ok to break trust - if she knows better!

This kind of thing could be a deal breaker in terms of a relationship with her. Im not sure that I could stomach a relationship with an in-law who disrespected my wishes towards my own child so much.

LegacyUser

OP here. Thanks everyone, I didn't expect such a big response so soon. It is the trust issue that gets me most. My wife is a kind hearted woman who would be anything not to hurt people which is both her most endearing and her most annoying quality. It took a lot for her to come to the decision that she would go against her parents' wishes and let him decide himself. She is really annoyed about it but doesn't want to hurt her mother by changing the arrangements because of this. I do like the suggestion of showing her this, it has reassured me that I am entitled to be angry and to have trust issues.

My mother in law knows that we are angry but thinks that our son is better off christened which does have implications for future actions as she doesn't seem to be sorry.

It is incredible that the christening is valid without either of us, he's only 8 months old, he can't agree to anything and we are his legal guaridans. I am considering reporting the priest to his superiors but I'd be slow to go public, not really our style but I get where you're coming from.

Thanks again.

LegacyUser

You're overreacting.

My mother has sent us christening gowns twice and numerous christening cards to encourage us to have our baby christened.

But I know her generation and an unchristened baby would be unheard of and shameful.

Now that's not quite an excuse, but you need to see things from her point of view of her generation.

Yes, she has gone behind your back, yes she has taken the moral high ground, but is this all worth denying her access to her grandchild.

I think not.

Mothers are meant to be interfering old busybodies.....that is their job.

My advice....tell her straight what you think of this, in a threatening way if you like, but don't have a major fall out over this. It's not fair on your grandchild.

Ickle Magoo

200yrolecrank taking a weeks holiday for ignoring clear mod warning.

Please take the time to read the [URL=" http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056181484"]forum rules[/URL] in the charter before posting here again.

Many thanks.

tinkerbell

zhjtsdrz wrote: »

OP here. Thanks everyone, I didn't expect such a big response so soon. It is the trust issue that gets me most. My wife is a kind hearted woman who would be anything not to hurt people which is both her most endearing and her most annoying quality. It took a lot for her to come to the decision that she would go against her parents' wishes and let him decide himself. She is really annoyed about it but doesn't want to hurt her mother by changing the arrangements because of this. I do like the suggestion of showing her this, it has reassured me that I am entitled to be angry and to have trust issues.

My mother in law knows that we are angry but thinks that our son is better off christened which does have implications for future actions as she doesn't seem to be sorry.

It is incredible that the christening is valid without either of us, he's only 8 months old, he can't agree to anything and we are his legal guaridans. I am considering reporting the priest to his superiors but I'd be slow to go public, not really our style but I get where you're coming from.

Thanks again.

OP, I recommend you show your wife this thread. What your MIL did was dispicable. And I really think you should be reporting that priest, what he did was underhanded and really sly. He baptised the child without the parents consent, that is such a major breach of his power. Don't bother with going public, just report him to his superiors. And if you both feel that strongly about it, get the baptism undone, however that works. The priest has made the mess in the first place, so he has to fix it.

looksee

The whole point of this thread is the break of trust. It was very serious and underhand, and totally deplorable. Unfortunately I don't think there is much you can do to make the MIL understand the problem, she would no doubt be glad to be a martyr in the interests of saving the child's soul. As she saw it.

I agree you need to make sure she does not have unsupervised access to the child, she has demonstrated that she is more interested in her own views than the parents'. Don't expect her to understand this though.

However, to bring the rest of it into perspective, just remember that anyone can baptise a child. You don't need a Priest, a lay person can do it. There are supposed to be limitations on the occasions that it is acceptable to the RC church for a lay person to do it, but the baptism would 'stand'.
http://catholicexchange.com/when-may-a-lay-person-perform-a-baptism/
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=5091179
In this case it was done by a Priest, which makes it 'legal', but does it matter any more?

If you are not a believer, then nothing has happened in terms of what has happened to the child. The Priest has performed a ceremony but it has no more significance than if she had, say, told an older child that the tooth fairy had left money, knowing that you did not want the child to be told fairy stories.

Yes, she has broken trust, and seriously so, and that is an issue that needs to be addressed.

For the rest, I can only suggest that you write a brief, formal letter to the effect that your child has been baptised against your wishes by persons, including a priest, who had no right or authority to do that. You do not recognise this baptism and require the priest to remove the child's name from his records.Then send it to the Vatican, the priest, the head of the Catholic Church in Ireland (maybe mention 'oaths of secrecy' as inappropriate ceremonies) and pretty well anyone else you can think of, make sure the MIL sees it.

You will not get anywhere with it, the Church still pleases itself and hasn't learned any lessons, but it might help you get it out of your system.

And get another babysitter, at least for now.

KittyeeTrix

I would be furious OP if any member of my family did something like that and you have every right to be.

I would caution however a knee jerk reaction to her with regards not allowing her access to the child. What's done is done and all that jazz............The baptism cannot harm the child and if your not religious the actual sacrament itself shouldn't matter. It wouldn't to me anyhow is what I mean

I would however make it very clear to her that she has broken your trust with regards any future care of the child and I would only allow supervised visits unless of course ye are dependent on her for minding the child. My issue is that if she could go behind yer backs to do this well then she has no regard for yer wishes regarding the upbringing of the child whether they be big or small issues.

I too had an episode where one grandparent really messed up while minding my 2 youngest when I was away on holiday many years ago. It resulted in my 2 youngest being taken into care overnight (long story in that it was unavoidable what happened the grandparent who had a breakdown but they could have contacted other relatives to take the kids till I got back the next day)...............

I never considered cutting access as it wasn't a deliberate thing but I ensured it could never happen again..

Is your wife close to her mother or would she be able to tolerate access cut?

looksee

Just in response to some of the other replies, and probably more suited to a religion forum than PI, but you can't 'undo' a baptism. Its a matter of belief. If you believe in it, then it has happened and you cannot make it that it didn't happen.

If you don't believe, then nothing happened. Some people performed a ceremony but if you don't believe, it was meaningless.

If you believe and you didn't want it to happen then all you can do is ask for the physical evidence - the Priest's records - be altered.

Be annoyed with your MIL, be annoyed with the Priest and the institution, but hassling yourself about the spiritual aspect is really rather pointless.

LegacyUser

Jgiles wrote: »

You're overreacting.

My mother has sent us christening gowns twice and numerous christening cards to encourage us to have our baby christened.

But I know her generation and an unchristened baby would be unheard of and shameful.

Now that's not quite an excuse, but you need to see things from her point of view of her generation.

Yes, she has gone behind your back, yes she has taken the moral high ground, but is this all worth denying her access to her grandchild.

I think not.

Mothers are meant to be interfering old busybodies.....that is their job.

My advice....tell her straight what you think of this, in a threatening way if you like, but don't have a major fall out over this. It's not fair on your grandchild.

I somewhat agree with this post. I do not think you are overreacting but I do think your MIL is acting according to her generation and views. Remember she is a practising and religious Catholic. I am sure most of the posters on here were baptised and beyond because that is what many of us were raised to do. Whether we continued or not became our choice when we turned into independent adults.

There is one thing that you need to ask yourself, put the religion aside and ask how is she in general as a grandmam. Has she done other things to you that demonstrates she is untrustworthy or interferes too much when it comes to your son? If you answer yes, then determine what course of action you would like to take as far as access to the child. If the answer is no, does not mean let your MIL get away scot free from her actions. Both you and your wife need to speak with her about this and that this behaviour will no longer be tolerated. Then go to the church in question and address your concerns as anyone-practising or not in today's generation would be disturbed that they would proceed with a baptism without parental consent.

LegacyUser

Reporting the priest is really uncalled for.

No doubt the Priest knows the grandmother very well and may well have been misinformed.

I know it is very fashionable, especially on Boards, to bash the catholic church but it is a church built on "recruitment".

As is said many times in the new testament of the bible, preaching the message and gathering followers is a fundamental part of being a catholic.

So to try and publicly disgrace the Priest for doing his "job" is not on.

The person to blame here is the Grandmother, and as I said before, she is of a different generation to you and me and this HAS to be taken into consideration.

To deny her seeing her grandchild over this is awful....two wrongs do not make a right.

"Oh sorry son, I know you never got to know your grandmother, but we fell out when she had you christened and I cut back her visits"

strandroad

not logged in atm wrote: »

I somewhat agree with this post. I do not think you are overreacting but I do think your MIL is acting according to her generation and views. Remember she is a practising and religious Catholic.

I don't think that practising deceit and disrespect are how religious Catholics conduct themselves... There is no need to bring religion into this, trust and truthfulness (or the lack of them) are strong enough criteria to form an opinion.

Ickle Magoo

Jgiles wrote: »

Reporting the priest is really uncalled for.

Completely disagree - if he did nothing wrong he has nothing to fear. How dare any religious officiate sign a child up for life to their church without it's parents express permission, it's an absolute disgrace that his own greed and want for fresh blood on his baptism books overtook basic manners and common sense.

OP, I'd be absolutely disgusted if a relative of mine abused the absolute trust I'd shown them by taking it upon themselves and doing anything with my infant that was completely against my wishes and absolutely not their place to do.

I would also ensure they are not left alone with my young child in the future as I just could not trust that my wishes for my own child's care would be respected. It's not just an abuse of trust, it's also a deliberate two fingers to you, your wishes and your rights as parents to choose what is best for your child - and that's a very dangerous precedence she's set. I think it would be long time before I wanted her anywhere near me or my kid/s - she sounds like a complete nightmare to deal with if not completely unhinged to assume to do such a thing.

All the very best.

LegacyUser

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Completely disagree - if he did nothing wrong he has nothing to fear. How dare any religious officiate sign a child up for life to their church without it's parents express permission, it's an absolute disgrace that his own greed and want for fresh blood on his baptism books overtook basic manners and common sense.

These are men of God - "fresh blood on his baptism books" is a ridiculous statement to make.

You do realise they spend almost six years training in isolation in Rome, away from their families studying scripture etc. before being ordained as Priests? It's not the TA's you're talking about. They deny themselves marriage, sex, normal relationships and all that goes with it to be a Priest, never mind being called out at 5am to deliver the last rites to some unfortunate pensioner. This "Father Ted" type nonsense has to stop.

Neither you nor me knows what the Grandmother said to enable the christening. It is not a business contract, it is a holy sacrament. It's not signing contracts and e-mails to the receptionist you're talking here.

The Grandmother is to blame, let's focus on that please. We don't know what happened with the church at all. The OP has given no details.

Morag

Jgiles wrote: »

Reporting the priest is really uncalled for.

No it is not.

Jgiles wrote: »

No doubt the Priest knows the grandmother very well and may well have been misinformed.

That does not mean that any priest can baptise a child with out the permission of the child parents. There are policies as to how a baptism is conducted and the parents have to request it and meet with the priest and attend meetings with the parish baptismal team.

For a preist to disregard all of the above and not even confirm over the phone with the parents is a shocking breach. He over stepped his bounds, it is that simple.

Jgiles wrote: »

So to try and publicly disgrace the Priest for doing his "job" is not on.

He failed to do his job correctly.

Jgiles wrote: »

The person to blame here is the Grandmother, and as I said before, she is of a different generation to you and me and this HAS to be taken into consideration.

To deny her seeing her grandchild over this is awful....two wrongs do not make a right.

"Oh sorry son, I know you never got to know your grandmother, but we fell out when she had you christened and I cut back her visits"

I am sure she could earn back trust over time but I would be very wary of anyone who'd disrespect a parents wishes when it comes to thier child.

In this case it was done by a Priest, which makes it 'legal', but does it matter any more?

It does in terms of if the baptismal was registered and the child's name entered in the parish records as being catholic and as it is a legal and historical record they are in it for ever more.

LegacyUser

not logged in atm wrote: »

There is one thing that you need to ask yourself, put the religion aside and ask how is she in general as a grandmam. Has she done other things to you that demonstrates she is untrustworthy or interferes too much when it comes to your son? If you answer yes, then determine what course of action you would like to take as far as access to the child. If the answer is no, does not mean let your MIL get away scot free from her actions.

I think this is the key point. Speaking personally, my mother-in-law has recommended out 9-month old boy "suck on a chip" as a cure for his teething, and I am under no illusions that she would offer him just this behind my back.

Does she think she knows better than me? Of course she does. She's raised two successful, normal adults.

Am I gonna raise hell about her interference? No. I will be reasonable and try and show alternatives. But she will always think she's knows better. I would never deny her seeing her grandson, nor would I deny my boy his Granny.