Christening/ baptism should I or shouldn't i?

Person_one

Lotus-eater wrote: »

Well duh , you would have to know first whether they were or weren't, otherwise it wouldn't work would it? :rotfl:

Why? Probably because the majority of religious people I've met have been lovely people, who have good morals and a strong belief in doing the right thing.
Their right thing, usually fits in with my right thing.

Your first sentence is the clue as to why that's a pretty stupid idea.

poet123

Person_one wrote: »

I think you read it in an entirely different way than she meant it, have another look.

I would suggest that the basic morals shared by most religions, don't kill, don't steal, try to be nice to each other, are actually a function of social evolution and its only because the religious were the ones doing the writing that we have this idea that 'morality' originated with belief in a deity.

I have re read it and she said

"The idea that 'they can decide for themselves when they're old enough' is fine just so long as they DO decide on something rather than nothing. Wasn't it Hilaire Belloc who said that 'when people stop believing in God they don't believe in nothing, they believe in anything'. And that, in essence, is what's wrong in today's world. We have lost the 'moral compass' that we once had, the Ten Commandments, the Golden Rule.

I take that to mean establish their own moral compass, their own Golden Rule, not just believe that anyone can behave as they wish without consequences or that to have standards is necessary for society to function properly.

We have lost the moral compass that we once had and for many that has not been replaced with a personal compass which knows right from wrong as a separate entity to the religious connotation of right and wrong.

Person_one

poet123 wrote: »

I have re read it and she said

"The idea that 'they can decide for themselves when they're old enough' is fine just so long as they DO decide on something rather than nothing. Wasn't it Hilaire Belloc who said that 'when people stop believing in God they don't believe in nothing, they believe in anything'. And that, in essence, is what's wrong in today's world. We have lost the 'moral compass' that we once had, the Ten Commandments, the Golden Rule.

I take that to mean establish their own moral compass, their own Golden Rule, not just believe that anyone can behave as they wish without consequences or that to have standards is necessary for society to function properly.

We have lost the moral compass that we once had and for many that has not been replaced with a personal compass which knows right from wrong as a separate entity to the religious connotation of right and wrong.

Ok, we're reading it differently.

GracieP

Lotus-eater wrote: »

If they decide in the future to not care about religion, then it won't matter an iota. If they decide they do, then it will help them.

Sorry but this is so, so wrong. The Roman Catholic Church is a political organisation and they use their baptism figures as political leverage. (They are very open about this when questioned on it, so it's not paranoia.) And they almost never remove people from their register once they are on it.

I was baptised at 6 weeks and for the last 14 years I have been trying to get myself off the register and they won't do it. There is currently a strong possibility of a case been taking against them to the European Court of Human Rights as a couple of years ago they refused to process the applications of all Irish people who want off their register, citing that too many Irish people wanted to leave and it would adversely effect their influence in the country.

I adore my parents, we have unusually close relationships, but I hate, hate, hate that they baptised me. Nothing caused more arguments in our house when I was a teenager than the fact that they baptised me, especially when I turned 18 and started to try to get myself off their register but couldn't. (And again when I was 22 and a friend of mine was temping in the local diocesan office and was privy to how regularly the baptism figures are used politically.) Two men in my close family were raped as children by clergy members and one of them killed himself just after Christmas last year because of it, leaving his 3 year old son fatherless. It makes my skin crawl to think that I am a member of that disgusting organisation.

And yes every single person within the church is responsible for the abuses as long as they continue to cover them up, protect abusers, criticise governments for prosecuting the rapist clergy and known conspirators. Only a couple of weeks ago they pulled their Papal Nuncio from Ireland because the government said they would prosecute anyone who knowingly covered up child abuse. They are refusing to pay damages which have been awarded by the courts to their victims in countries where civil cases have been taken against them, trusting that they won't have their assets seized. As an organisation the Roman Catholic Church hasn't changed and has no intention of changing, and every baptism that happens while they continue on this way gives them no need to change.

JBD

To get back to the OP, I don't think it matters. If you feel that your child will feel excluded from their peer group or extended family then I would consider having it done. Young children often don't like the feeling of being 'left out' or different from other children. You have already made the decision to take them to Church so why not go the whole hog if you think they will be happier?
If they don't become religious in their own right then their baptism [or christening] will become meaningless to them. I was baptised as a baby, I no longer believe in 'God' or have any religious beliefs, therefore my baptism means nothing to me. It was simply words and a ritual, one of many things done to me as a baby that I have no memory of. In other words, no harm done.

poet123

GracieP wrote: »

Sorry but this is so, so wrong.

It may be wrong to you/for you, in your particular and very sad situation, but it is correct in most cases. If something holds no meaning for you, the rites and rituals are also immaterial, and have no impact on your life.

JBD

Sorry, I have just read Gracie P's post. I was speaking from the perspective of the Cof E. I agree that is a different situation.

Person_one

poet123 wrote: »

It may be wrong to you/for you, in your particular and very sad situation, but it is correct in most cases. If something holds no meaning for you, the rites and rituals are also immaterial, and have no impact on your life.

I think GracieP's post was very interesting.

Religions are a lot like political organisations these days. Imagine if your parents signed you up to be a member of their political party when you were a baby and you couldn't come off the 'books' as an adult! It might not have any major impact on your life but it would still be galling to know that officially, your name is forever associated with something you want no part of.

Pee

I think you are right that there is no wrong or right answer.

If I was your child's father - apart from the fact I am female - I would be more than happy to let them be baptised, even though I am actually Church of England. In fact I have a definate preference that children should be baptised, so they do belong and they can choose to lapse or be more or less invloved as they grow up.

It is a matter for the two of you as parents to agree on. I would just be very honest about what you want and your concerns about whether you want it for the right reason and see what he thinks.

GracieP

poet123 wrote: »

It may be wrong to you/for you, in your particular and very sad situation, but it is correct in most cases. If something holds no meaning for you, the rites and rituals are also immaterial, and have no impact on your life.

No it's wrong factually, lotus-eater made a statement that was incorrect in saying a baptism is of no consequence. It does make a difference because once you have been baptised you are a number which they use for political influence and you can never make them stop using you thus. That's an objective situation with nothing subjective about it.