Baptise or not to Baptise?

lawred2

Effects wrote: »

Your pragmatism is wrong. School places should not be decided on Religion. People who pretend to be religious shouldn't get preference.

Children of pretenders getting priority is a bad joke.

livedadream

lawred2 wrote: »

look at you taking offence... settle down petal and maybe take a breath.

firstly dont call me petal. i'm far from it. and its condescending and speaks to someone who is fundamentally a bit ignorant.

lawred2 wrote: »

I wasn't calling your story bullsh!t.

the first line of your post was...

lawred2 wrote: »

well that's bullsh!t

if you arnt going to write full sentences to elaborate then people will take what they read from it.

lawred2 wrote: »

I was calling the supposed 'requirement' for this lad to be baptized as bullsh!t.

Does he have to go through confession, communion and confirmation now too?

he made his communion and confirmation in the 4 month span. all sacraments done and dusted.

lawred2

livedadream wrote: »

if you arnt going to write full sentences to elaborate then people will take what they read from it.

Why would you take from it that I was questioning the veracity of your story?

livedadream wrote: »

he made his communion and confirmation in the 4 month span. all sacraments done and dusted.

unbelievable

and all because of seriously misleading and wholly incorrect advice

livedadream

lawred2 wrote: »

unbelievable

and all because of seriously misleading and wholly incorrect advice

or because he wanted to... ya know coz theres that.

sometimes i think the anti religion police forget not everyone is conned or born into religion.

lawred2

livedadream wrote: »

or because he wanted to... ya know coz theres that.

sometimes i think the anti religion police forget not everyone is conned or born into religion.

That's an entirely different case. If he wanted to do it then all power to him. That wasn't the case you raised. You said it was required of him by the church (which is wrong and not the case at all) and as such parents should plan for the future accordingly by considering baptizing their children.

That's you shifting the goal posts.

ButcherOfNog

"doing it for the sake of more choice"

As long as parents keep doing it for this reason, it'll continue to be an issue as it reinforces the Catholic stranglehold on schools in this country. It keeps the number of people in the Catholic faith artificially high.

eoinzy2000

endacl wrote: »

eoinzy2000 wrote: »

Are people here under some illusion that they are in a majority that abhors the catholic church. I pass the church every sunday, and the car park is overflowing, more than when I was young. Its full of young couples, young families. Mostly young people with a fair scattering of elderly. They may have trouble with people entering priesthood, but don't be fooled, the church has a strong, young active attendance. Change is not forthcoming. Dream away.

Don't let facts and figures get in the way of your anecdote...

http://faithsurvey.co.uk/irish-census.html

90% RC, 42% attend weekly. 38% of the population go weekly. That's pretty big alright. Whats that, about 1.5million a week. serious numbers

livedadream

lawred2 wrote: »

That's an entirely different case. If he wanted to do it then all power to him. That wasn't the case you raised. You said it was required of him and as such parents should plan for the future accordingly by considering baptizing their children.

That's a case of shifting goal posts.

no i didnt, i suggested to the OP that as per my experience sometimes its nice to leave the option open, to think long term, not everyone grows up to hate religion.

and the OP doenst seem to have strong views either way, i simply gave an anecdote of an experience i knew of to give him some advise, its better than ''children of pretenders'' comments at least, he asked for help not abuse.

i said my friend couldnt have the wedding she wanted because her groom wasnt baptised or hadnt received the sacraments necessary for their union. he took the action necessary for them to do what they wanted. including receiving communion at their wedding.

dunno why you care so much and to be honest i think we've taken the thread off point enough dont you?

youve edited your post so ill address it,

i never said in my post it was required by the church. you can feel free to lie all you like mate but it just makes you look stupid. i said it was wanted for the wedding she had planned. never mentioned not being allowed by the chuch,

to help you heres my original post since you were obviously to lazy to read it the first time.

livedadream wrote:

the one thing i do always say it (and just because it happened a friend of mine)
think long term.
a friend of mine got engaged, was planning the wedding when she found out she couldnt get married in the big white church wedding she wanted because her future husband wasnt baptised.
he had to go though the whole thing... over the summer so they could. was a total pain for them.

keyboard_cat

TheDoc wrote: »

Anyway, the wonderful world of parenting, we've made a choice that we feel best for our child, I've tried to outline why we made the choice for the OP, and while I appreciate the critique of said decision, there is a wonderful pair of V's being flicked in your direction

Is it actually the best for your child or was it just more convenient for yourself?

SteM

dottie_lottie wrote: »

OP I wouldn't let the wedding thing be a deciding factor, it's going to be a minimum of 18 years before that's an issue and who knows what position the church will take then, with civil marriage numbers increasing, in 18 years time, I imagine the church will have to adapt to that and amend their rules. Though I already suspect it's not an issue as people of different faiths can already marry in the catholic church.

Indeed. In 18 years time they'll probably be offering a free car with every church wedding. Anything to get people in through the door. My mum is heavily involved in the local church and the drop off in regular attendance over the last decade still shocks me every time I go to pick her up from mass. This is in a town who's population has grown by a huge amount over the last 15 years too.

OP, you need to educate yourself about your local schools. We have a 4 year old who has just started in an Educate Together. We knew there was one opening locally when we had our lad so we didn't feel the need to have him christened just to get him into a local school but I can understand the pressure if your locality is only served by Catholic schools.

lawred2

livedadream wrote: »

no i didnt, i suggested to the OP that as per my experience sometimes its nice to leave the option open, to think long term, not everyone grows up to hate religion.

and the OP doenst seem to have strong views either way, i simply gave an anecdote of an experience i knew of to give him some advise, its better than ''children of pretenders'' comments at least, he asked for help not abuse.

i said my friend couldnt have the wedding she wanted because her groom wasnt baptised or hadnt received the sacraments necessary for their union. he took the action necessary for them to do what they wanted. including receiving communion at their wedding.

dunno why you care so much and to be honest i think we've taken the thread off point enough dont you?

youve edited your post so ill address it,

i never said in my post it was required by the church. you can feel free to lie all you like mate but it just makes you look stupid. i said it was wanted for the wedding she had planned. never mentioned not being allowed by the chuch,

to help you heres my original post since you were obviously to lazy to read it the first time.

You're all over the place.

SteM

eoinzy2000 wrote: »

Are people here under some illusion that they are in a majority that abhors the catholic church. I pass the church every sunday, and the car park is overflowing, more than when I was young. Its full of young couples, young families. Mostly young people with a fair scattering of elderly. They may have trouble with people entering priesthood, but don't be fooled, the church has a strong, young active attendance. Change is not forthcoming. Dream away.

Hate to go off topic but.....

If I had to guess, the church you pass every Sunday with an overflowing car park probably used to have 3 masses on a Sunday or a Saturday evening mass and 2 masses on a Sunday and that amount has been cut. So what you're actually seeing is people concentrated into less masses so it looks busier than years ago. Also, I'm sure car usage has grown since you were younger and that's a reason why the car park is overflowing. Certainly when I was a kid our family and our neighbours walked to mass, whenever I'm near our local church I see people leaving and they're straight into their cars. Very few leaving and walking home nowadays. Whatever about there being a young active attendance now I have no doubts it's a fraction of the attendance there was a generation or two ago.

Sebastian Dangerfield

SteM wrote: »

Indeed. In 18 years time they'll probably be offering a free car with every church wedding. Anything to get people in through the door. My mum is heavily involved in the local church and the drop off in regular attendance over the last decade still.

Attendances may look high, but it's somewhat of an optical illusion at least in my home town. Yes the church looks full as one poster suggested, but they've consolidated the three sunday masses of my youth into one, presumably due to lack of attendance and shortage or priests.

SteM

Sebastian Dangerfield wrote: »

Attendances may look high, but it's somewhat of an optical illusion at least in my home town. Yes the church looks full as one poster suggested, but they've consolidated the three sunday masses of my youth into one, presumably due to lack of attendance and shortage or priests.

I'm 42 now. When I was 6 or 7 our local church (the smaller of the 2 churches in our town) had 2 masses on a Sunday (maybe a Saturday evening too, can't recall for sure). The larger church had a Saturday service and 3 Sunday services (2 in the morning, 1 in the evening). I've just checked the parish website and there is 1 mass on a Sunday in the smaller church and 2 Sunday masses in the larger church, and the masses in the bigger church are only 60% or 70% full if I had to guess. The town's population has increased over that time from 7000 in 1980 to 10,000+ today. Anyone that suggests attendance is the same as years ago is deluded imo.

Anyway, I'll stop babbling about this now. Promise.

witnessmenow

ButcherOfNog wrote: »

"doing it for the sake of more choice"

As long as parents keep doing it for this reason, it'll continue to be an issue as it reinforces the Catholic stranglehold on schools in this country. It keeps the number of people in the Catholic faith artificially high.

Baptism is still something myself and partner are discussing, we are still undecided but I guess the quoted text would be high on the "Why to baptise" list.

Your point is definitely a concern of mine, but my main concern is my daughter. If baptising makes it easier for her in school and inclusion in school, that would mean a lot more to me than how high the numbers of people associated with the Catholic faith are.

Is it selfish to be more concerned about the smaller picture? Maybe, but i wouldn't be sorry about it.

(But as mentioned, still undecided)

eoinzy2000

witnessmenow wrote: »

ButcherOfNog wrote: »

"doing it for the sake of more choice"

As long as parents keep doing it for this reason, it'll continue to be an issue as it reinforces the Catholic stranglehold on schools in this country. It keeps the number of people in the Catholic faith artificially high.

Baptism is still something myself and partner are discussing, we are still undecided but I guess the quoted text would be high on the "Why to baptise" list.

Your point is definitely a concern of mine, but my main concern is my daughter. If baptising makes it easier for her in school and inclusion in school, that would mean a lot more to me than how high the numbers of people associated with the Catholic faith are.

Is it selfish to be more concerned about the smaller picture? Maybe, but i wouldn't be sorry about it.

(But as mentioned, still undecided)

Suit yourself. It wouldn't make a blind bit of difference either way. Always a lot of strong opinions on the matter of course, but opinions are like a-holes!!!!!!

Whispered

witnessmenow wrote: »

Baptism is still something myself and partner are discussing, we are still undecided but I guess the quoted text would be high on the "Why to baptise" list.

Your point is definitely a concern of mine, but my main concern is my daughter. If baptising makes it easier for her in school and inclusion in school, that would mean a lot more to me than how high the numbers of people associated with the Catholic faith are.

Is it selfish to be more concerned about the smaller picture? Maybe, but i wouldn't be sorry about it.

(But as mentioned, still undecided)

We discussed this too but ultimately still decided against it. Firstly I understand this may be a harder line than some people take, but, despite not being atheist myself I feel religion has no place in schools. Further, I'd say that indoctrination from junior infants could be damaging. When you opt out in a RC school it can lead to some difficult discussions (I kid you not when I say that someone I know has a child in first class opted out. The child sat there at the back of a lesson learning how people who turn their back on Christ will not go to heaven. As you can imagine the child was distraught. Another mother heard her opted out child tell his infant brother that "holy god only loves you when you're good". Now these are not my stories and are anecdotal so take them or leave them)

I would also think that no matter what, children will find reasons to make others stand out and not fit in. Whether it's their religion or lack of same, height, weight, clothes etc. So I think that's an issue that will have to be dealt with anyway.

I think people should do what they feel comfortable with, but going against your inclinations and instincts, so you can fit in, is something you will actively be trying to encourage your child to avoid doing as they get older.

Akrasia

ButcherOfNog wrote: »

"doing it for the sake of more choice"

As long as parents keep doing it for this reason, it'll continue to be an issue as it reinforces the Catholic stranglehold on schools in this country. It keeps the number of people in the Catholic faith artificially high.

They should go the whole hog and 'baptize' them Christian, Protestant Jewish and Muslim, and then they'll have the full run of the education system.

eviltwin

There are plenty of non Catholic children in Catholic schools who manage fine. That's assuming you have no other option. I'm with Lazygal here. I haven't baptized mine and we've never been bullied, he's in an Educate Together and gets on just great without the church.

meeeeh

I didn't read the whole thread but I would look at it totally practically. If you are in oversubscribed area (Dublin mostly) then baptize your kids. You will be ahead of those who don't. If there is no real pressure on schools then don't bother. Basically you have time and after kids are born you can call the school and find out how full the schools are. If they are under pressure then baptize kids. But it really depends, there is no real pressure on our local Educate Together, however we opted for smaller school with good reputation and baptized the kids.

Oh and get used of being judged and criticized. It's the entertaining part of parenting.

_Brian

I think there are many factors to be considered. For example there isn't an educate together school within 30 miles of us. So for many people this just isn't an option.

It all comes down to what is the most sensible thing to do for your situation or location. Ask about with other parents with kids going to some of the schools you'd like to use. If there are high class sizes or students being turned away then you will put your child to the back of the que by not having it baptised. Now if your happy fighting that fight then it's simple. But if you want to increase the chances then consider the baptism.
Contrary to other posts children aren't being "handed over" to anyone. I know in our national school religion plays a very small role, bit more in communion/confirmation classes but even then the focus is on the acedemic curriculum and sports.

We have an a-la-cart approach to the church, we do what suits us, go when it suits us. My children have a balanced view of the church and what it represents.

rainbow kirby

I have absolutely no intention of getting my son baptised - I do not want him having any part in anything involving such a hateful organisation and I find the concept of original sin absolutely horrendous.

mohawk

We didn't baptise and my son is in local Catholic in South County Dublin. There are quite a few in his class who opt out of religion so he isn't the only one doing nothing for religion.

Am trying to get the school to arrange his resource hours during religion, no luck with that yet.

galah

Didnt baptise despite a lot of family pressure - i was baptised protestant (shock, horror:D) and left the church officially when i was 18 - possible in Germany by writing a letter and then getting struck off the register. I don't think that that option is available for catholics here, so I'd rather wait until someone actually forces me to baptise the kids (my aunt in law is trying, believe me ).

However, we're lucky, the local school doesnt care about the cert, is not oversubscribed, and i dont mind having the kids listen in to religious education as such.

Although i would prefer if they taught maybe about all diferent religions, or ethics or something instead and left the full on catholic stuff to the church on sunday

And to those who will think about the kids' future and the white wedding etc - what if your child turns out gay? All the time spent at mass when you could have been doing fun stuff with the kids gone to waste...:p

lawred2

Effects wrote: »

I think it would make sense for their to be a sign in at mass, and then the children who have the highest number of sign ins get first preference when it comes to getting into schools.

lol

looksee

We are on post 86 and still no one has defended the preference to Baptise for religious reasons, or even for preferring the 'ethos' argument. Livedadream and SteM have both offered rather wavery views, but it is not clear that either of them are regular church goers or which side of the fence they sit.

This is the Parenting forum, there should be a proportion of users that more or less corresponds with the supposed views of the wider community, but still, not one clear vote for Baptism.

DeadlyByDesign

looksee wrote: »

We are on post 86 and still no one has defended the preference to Baptise for religious reasons, or even for preferring the 'ethos' argument. Livedadream and SteM have both offered rather wavery views, but it is not clear that either of them are regular church goers or which side of the fence they sit.

This is the Parenting forum, there should be a proportion of users that more or less corresponds with the supposed views of the wider community, but still, not one clear vote for Baptism.

That in itself speaks volumes about the way we think in 2016 I would think.

meeeeh

looksee wrote: »

We are on post 86 and still no one has defended the preference to Baptise for religious reasons, or even for preferring the 'ethos' argument. Livedadream and SteM have both offered rather wavery views, but it is not clear that either of them are regular church goers or which side of the fence they sit.

This is the Parenting forum, there should be a proportion of users that more or less corresponds with the supposed views of the wider community, but still, not one clear vote for Baptism.

In fairness with all that was going on that isn't exactly popular stance. Neither it would overly apply to this thread because if you are religious and want to baptize kids and send them to denominational school then there is no conflict.

Digs

looksee wrote: »

We are on post 86 and still no one has defended the preference to Baptise for religious reasons, or even for preferring the 'ethos' argument. Livedadream and SteM have both offered rather wavery views, but it is not clear that either of them are regular church goers or which side of the fence they sit.

This is the Parenting forum, there should be a proportion of users that more or less corresponds with the supposed views of the wider community, but still, not one clear vote for Baptism.

It's entirely untrendy nowadays to actually want to baptise your children, maybe people aren't posting on this thread for fear of being ridiculed judging by some of the previous posters attitudes.

I've baptised both my children for reasons that are no one else's business nor do I need to defend them to anyone, certainly no one on boards.ie! It has nothing to do with schools either. We also don't attend church every Sunday which again is no ones business how we practise our faith! Some of the posts suggesting checking into church etc quite frankly are ridiculously pompous and sanctimonious! For people who claim to be atheists and non Catholics they sure are experts on the subject.

There's my two cents

looksee

Digs wrote: »

It's entirely untrendy nowadays to actually want to baptise your children, maybe people aren't posting on this thread for fear of being ridiculed judging by some of the previous posters attitudes.

I've baptised both my children for reasons that are no one else's business nor do I need to defend them to anyone, certainly no one on boards.ie! It has nothing to do with schools either. We also don't attend church every Sunday which again is no ones business how we practise our faith! Some of the posts suggesting checking into church etc quite frankly are ridiculously pompous and sanctimonious! For people who claim to be atheists and non Catholics they sure are experts on the subject.

There's my two cents

Fine, there is no argument with that, it is, of course, entirely your own business whether and why you baptise your children.

This is however a discussion forum and the question was 'to baptise or not to baptise'. I am simply pointing out that no one so far has offered an argument why children should be baptised, other than to get them into schools. You have given your own stance, but you have not said why, in general, you feel children should be baptised. If you do not wish to share your reasoning with us then there is little point engaging with the discussion .

I don't think non-Catholics and atheists are necessarily claiming to be experts on the RC faith, but since that faith is being taught in primary schools then they surely have a right to an opinion.