Today, I walked in to Wendy's to get a salad at lunch. As I was going to sit down, someone had parts of USA Today on a table, rifling through the sections available, The life section had an article titled "Rite of baptism trickles away." (The article is, of course, linked in the title.)
The story contends that less and less people are being baptized in Christian churches of all denominations. What is happening? Apparently, there is a decline in birthrate, not surprising with our culture of death and contraception, which accounts for less people to be baptized as well as less infants to be baptized in faiths (predominately Catholic, Episcopalian, Lutheran, and Methodist) that have always used infant baptisms. The Catholic Church is kind of peridoxical because although infant baptisms are down, the Church has more than doubled in size over the past 50 years.But, apparently infant baptisms are declining even faster than than the birth rate. But, even evangelical churches who do not baptize infants are experiencing trouble even at the same rates.
So what is causing the disturbing trend? "Experts" cite not only fewer babies, but also an increase in secularization, interfaith mariages, and churches down playing tradition, especially "seeker churches." (For more on seeker churches check out
The Unseen Blogger's article)
According to sociologists, another reason for dwindling infant baptisms is due to the fact that more people are getting into mixed marriages (the cannonical term for 2 baptized people marrying, one Catholic and one baptized into another christian faith, although the newspaper uses the term intermarriage). These mixed marriages for some reason are causing less people to be attached to the sacrements? Well, that's their claim. But according to USA Today, if you are in a mixed marriage, you don't have to promise to baptize your children due to a change in cannon law in 1983. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! Here is proof that you can't trust everything in print. I pulled out the 1983 Code of Cannon Law (okay, so not literally, it was online, but you can too by going
here) to look it up. Here is the section on commitments
Can. 1124 Without the express permission of the competent authority, marriage is prohibited between two baptized persons, one of whom was baptized in the catholic Church or received into it after baptism and has not defected from it by a formal act, the other of whom belongs to a Church or ecclesial community not in full communion with the catholic Church.
Can. 1125 The local Ordinary can grant this permission if there is a just and reasonable cause. He is not to grant it unless the following conditions are fulfilled:
1ƒ the catholic party is to declare that he or she is prepared to remove dangers of defecting from the faith, and is to make a sincere promise to do all in his or her power in order that all the children be baptized and brought up in the catholic Church;
2ƒ the other party is to be informed in good time of these promises to be made by the catholic party, so that it is certain that he or she is truly aware of the promise and of the obligation of the catholic party
3ƒ both parties are to be instructed about the purposes and essential properties of marriage, which are not to be excluded by either contractant.
Can. 1126 It is for the Episcopal Conference to prescribe the manner in which these declarations and promises, which are always required, are to be made, and to determine how they are to be established in the external forum, and how the non-Catholic party is to be informed of them.
Can. 1127 ß1 The provisions of can. 1108 are to be observed in regard to the form to be used in a mixed marriage. If, however, the catholic party contracts marriage with a non-Catholic party of oriental rite, the canonical form of celebration is to be observed for lawfulness only; for validity, however, the intervention of a sacred minister is required, while observing the other requirements of law.
ß2 If there are grave difficulties in the way of observing the canonical form, the local Ordinary of the catholic party has the right to dispense from it in individual cases, having however consulted the Ordinary of the place of the celebration of the marriage; for validity, however, some public form of celebration is required. It is for the Episcopal Conference to establish norms whereby this dispensation may be granted in a uniform manner.
ß3 It is forbidden to have, either before or after the canonical celebration in accordance with ß1, another religious celebration of the same marriage for the purpose of giving or renewing matrimonial consent. Likewise, there is not to be a religious celebration in which the catholic assistant and a non-Catholic minister, each performing his own rite, ask for the consent of the parties.
Can. 1128 Local Ordinaries and other pastors of souls are to see to it that the catholic spouse and the children born of a mixed marriage are not without the spiritual help needed to fulfill their obligations; they are also to assist the spouses to foster the unity of conjugal and family life.
Can. 1129 The provisions of canon 1127 and 1128 are to be applied also to marriages which are impeded by the impediment of disparity of worship mentioned in can. 1086 ß1
(emphasis added)
For anyone that missed it: (Local Ordinary) is not to grant (a mixed marriage) unless the following conditions are fulfilled: the catholic party ..., and is to
make a sincere promise to do all in his or her power in order that all the children be baptized and brought up in the catholic Church.... Good job USA Today, way to do your research.
Although, less infants are being baptized, the Catholic Church is still growing and accepting new members. In 2005, the Catholic Church in the US has almost 68 million members (my fantasy is that they are all devout and practicing) where as its membership was almost 32 million in 1954. Where are they coming from? Some from immigration (probably not all legal), but every year during Easter Vigil Mass across the country (and world for that matter) tens of thousands of catechumens and candidates over the age of 8 will be joyfully brought into the faith. Lets look at the reasons for less baptisms other than infants increased secularization, the Catholic Church isn't budging to go with the flow of accepting worldly practices; interfaith marriages, well we already disproved USA Today's reasonings behind that one; churches downplaying tradition, well not the Catholic Church over all, we still hold fast to our traditions with sacraments, and even some churches having Mass in Latin. The article ends that some churches are trying non-traditional paths to God in order to baptize more people, by trying to put the "hip in discipleship." Maybe these churches need to take a look further up the article as the reasons "experts" are using, and then look at the Church that seems to have been growing steadily for the past 50 years. Maybe non-tradional isn't the way?
In searching for this article online so I could link, I also found this
article in the same edition. Sadly enough, 2 people growing up in Catholic families that will not baptize their children because they are now just Scientologists and not anything else. Well, there is hope when their children grow up that they will be brought into the Church during an Easter Vigil Mass. So sad to see that happen to such a beautiful young Catholic girl like herself. Now, why couldn't she have found someone like me to treat her better ^_- Oh well, I'm looking for greener pastures. If anyone know a good Chrisian (preferably Catholic or otherwise informed of above cannon law) lady with her morals in the right place looking for the same in a man, send her my way ^_^
Paix du Christ!
