# Should I be a God mother?



## stano (18 Mar 2007)

My sister has asked me to be God-mother to her new baby, she has asked me each time she has had a baby, this is her 3rd.  I've always said no as I don't believe in any of it.  Think I might do it this time, we are close as sisters and if she wants me to so it this badly maybe I should.
I have 3 kids myself and didn't go down this road with them as I don't believe in it.  My husband and I didn't marry in a church as we are both of the same mind in this regard.
My sister knows all this and doesn't mind, said the people who were god parents for her first 2 are never in contact, so she isn't really expecting a triditional role from me.

Feel a little confused by it all now.


----------



## redbhoy (18 Mar 2007)

I think Godparents are there to assist the parents in bringing up their child. Id say traditionally it means to bring them up with regards to religon. If something was to happen to the parents then the godparents take over. 
What do you mean you dont believe in any of it? Religon? Im not a big fan of organised religon i.e. the Catholic Church, but if asked to be a Godfather i wouldnt think twice. And if God forbid, anything happened the parents I would assist by all means possible to ensure the child was reared properly and to the wishes of the parents.
I have two children and when asking the Godparents, i had that in mind.
Some people these days ask friends but it can be too easy to lose touch with people and I'd always opt for family members as they arent so easy to lose contact with.


----------



## ButtermilkJa (18 Mar 2007)

I know where you're coming from but you don't really have to believe in it to accept. You're sister is just asking that you provide for the child in the event anything may happen to her and her husband. If this is something you don't mind doing then tell her you will look after the child. If you don't want to or wouldn't be able to, then tell her this also.

As redbhoy states, I think the old tradition of passing on religious values etc is gone. It's purely to give your sister piece of mind that the kids wil be well looked after.

I'm also not a fan of religion or the church or any of that nonsense but I would definately become a god-parent to one of my siblings kids.


----------



## Z100 (18 Mar 2007)

Unless you're religious, which I'm not, I think the main duty (and I speak from costly experience ) when you're a Godparent is buying bigger than usual Xmas and birthday presents - and that's about it. So I wouldn't worry about it at all.


----------



## Persius (18 Mar 2007)

I'd go for it, and wouldn't worry about it either. Became a godparent recently despite not being particularly religious. During the ceremony I had to say something a bit bizarre like "I promise to reject Satan", but unless you happen to be a devil worshiper, I can't see how that would be uncomfortable for you.
Other than that, there were no requirements to make promises like "I believe in one god, the father almighty, maker of heaven and earth ..." (I'm sure you know how it goes), or anything else really.


----------



## PM1234 (18 Mar 2007)

You wrote that you are 'close' and she understands you're not going to take care of the child's religious faith. 

I was always under the impression that being asked to be a godparent is an honour. She is trusting you to be there for her child.

Unless you're unwilling to do that, I can't see any reason why someone would refuse. 

There can be a bit of extra expense involved but I'm sure you could single the child out for a bit of extra attention (by including in days out with your own kids etc) if that was a problem.


----------



## Cahir (20 Mar 2007)

I am not religious at all and last year I became a godmother twice.  Both sets of parents know that I wouldn't set foot in a church unless it's for a funeral and maybe a wedding but they know that I'll get good presents for the kids and look after them if anything happens to the parents.

And I got a present and card for "god"mothers day on Sunday


----------



## nelly (20 Mar 2007)

ButtermilkJa said:


> I know where you're coming from but you don't really have to believe in it to accept.


If the child is being christened in a church then a Godparent should believe in what they are promising, so I don't believe this is actually true. 


ButtermilkJa said:


> As redbhoy states, I think the old tradition of passing on religious values etc is gone.


I disagree as a Godmother myself. If someone does not believe I don't see why they want to do it. 
why is your sister is not having a naming ceremony instead if none of the participants actually believe in what they are doing? 
If a parent dies (God forbid) a God parent does not have the legal right as next of kin. As far as I know.


----------



## jake108 (20 Mar 2007)

Bushfire said:


> Unless you're religious, which I'm not, I think the main duty (and I speak from costly experience ) when you're a Godparent is buying bigger than usual Xmas and birthday presents - and that's about it. So I wouldn't worry about it at all.


 

I agree 100%. I'm a godparent to a friends child. I don't have children myself and don't want any (my friends now this). If anything were to happen to my friends I know that their family members (with their own children) would be much better for my godchild. I think the whole concept of "taking someone's children" if anything happens is crazy. If I'm not going to have my own children I certainly won't take on anyone elses.


----------



## Thirsty (20 Mar 2007)

> I think the whole concept of "taking someone's children" if anything happens is crazy


 

It's not at all crazy - all parents should ensure that they have documented in their wills who they wish to have guardianship of their child or children in the event of their untimely death.  This should of course be first discussed with the people themselves.

God parents have no legal role in relation to guardianship - it is a purely religious tradition.


----------



## zag (20 Mar 2007)

As kildrought says - being a godparent is purely a religious concept.  It has no standing in law as far as I know, and if both parents were to drop dead there is NIL chance of the god parents being allowed keep/mind/raise/whatever the children unless they are close family and even then this chance arises because they are family, not because they are godparents.

Think about it . . . two god parents who aren't related in any way raising a child.  Where's the logic in that ?  Which house would they live in, etc . . .

If this (Godparents raising children) actually was the case I think there would be a big market in godparent-insurance.  Imagine suddenly acquiring a family with food/accommodation/education requirements for the next 15 years.

Your sister is presumably looking for some level of comfort/concern/involvement from you, but if she is looking for guardianship (which I doubt) then god parenting is not the way to go.

z


----------



## ButtermilkJa (20 Mar 2007)

nelly said:


> If the child is being christened in a church then a Godparent should believe in what they are promising, so I don't believe this is actually true.


If the Godparent is promising to bring the child up as a practicing Roman Catholic (or whatever) then yes they should believe in what they do. But my point was that if you don't believe, and are just promising to look after the child you don't have to believe in the religious part.


nelly said:


> I disagree as a Godmother myself. If someone does not believe I don't see why they want to do it.


Because the child still needs to be looked after, given a roof over their head, whether the Godparent believes in God/Religion or not.


----------



## jake108 (20 Mar 2007)

Kildrought said:


> It's not at all crazy - all parents should ensure that they have documented in their wills who they wish to have guardianship of their child or children in the event of their untimely death.


 
This post isn't about wills. I know so many people that are godparents but it's not documented in a will. My point is that is many people that are godparents would not want the responsibility of raising other peoples children. Obviously very different if the children have no other family.


----------



## ClubMan (20 Mar 2007)

PM1234 said:


> I was always under the impression that being asked to be a godparent is an honour. She is trusting you to be there for her child.
> 
> Unless you're unwilling to do that, I can't see any reason why someone would refuse.


There are good reasons why many people might refuse. For example my brother asked me to be godfather to his son but I had to refuse because I am an atheist and would not be willing to make the public religious declarations and meet the undertakings required by this _Catholic/Christian _ceremony/sacrament/ritual and would consider it hypocritical and insulting to actual believers if I just played along for the sake of it.


----------



## Purple (20 Mar 2007)

ClubMan said:


> There are good reasons why many people might refuse. For example my brother asked me to be godfather to his son but I had to refuse because I am an atheist and would not be willing to make the public religious declarations and meet the undertakings required by this _Catholic/Christian _ceremony/sacrament/ritual and would consider it hypocritical and insulting to actual believers if I just played along for the sake of it.


I agree. Whatever opinions you may have about the validity of someone’s religious beliefs it is offensive to others and hypocritical to be a Godparent if you don't believe in God (or the God of the religion in question). For the parents to say it’s not really a big deal anymore just shows that they a hypocrites as well.


----------



## ButtermilkJa (20 Mar 2007)

ClubMan said:


> There are good reasons why many people might refuse. For example my brother asked me to be godfather to his son but I had to refuse because I am an atheist and would not be willing to make the public religious declarations and meet the undertakings required by this _Catholic/Christian _ceremony/sacrament/ritual and would consider it hypocritical and insulting to actual believers if I just played along for the sake of it.


I didn't realise there were religious ceremonies/vows involved. I thought it was merely a case of someone asking you to be a Godparent.

In that case I would have to agree with you. I too am an atheist and would not be hypocritical by playing along with something I didn't believe.


----------



## nelly (20 Mar 2007)

http://www.corkandross.org/html/sacraments/baptism/baptism_overview.jsp

the Godparent is required to take part in the ceremony as a member of the christian community (catholic baptism)


----------



## ClubMan (20 Mar 2007)

ButtermilkJa said:


> I didn't realise there were religious ceremonies/vows involved. I thought it was merely a case of someone asking you to be a Godparent.


Normally being invited to be a godparent involves acting as a witness at the sacrament of baptism. In addition one normally makes some commitment to overseeing the child's _Christian _spiritual/religious upbringing. That is what I was assuming here.


----------



## Purple (20 Mar 2007)

ClubMan said:


> Normally being invited to be a godparent involves acting as a witness at the sacrament of baptism. In addition one normally makes some commitment to overseeing the child's _Christian _spiritual/religious upbringing. That is what I was assuming here.


So was I.


----------



## Oilean Beag (20 Mar 2007)

You should only commit to being a *god*parent if you can participate & follow through on the promises made at the ceremony & under the Church. The link below, although from a UK website clearly outlines what is required:-

http://www.babyguideuk.com/birth/articles/naming_romancatholic.asp

Being a *god*parent does mean that you are responsible for the childs religious upbringing should anything happen to its parents. If you are in for any other reason , you are right to question the correctness of it.


----------



## nelly (20 Mar 2007)

getting back to the OP, you could suggest to your sister that she not have a christening at all once the child's name is registered. 

she could have a naming ceremony (info is here: [broken link removed] ) and it is something thing the whole family can be involved in, in their own home. 

I actually agree with Clubman, as a practicing catholic it annoys me when people use the church and priest "facility" without reverence and respecting the sacrament.


----------



## ButtermilkJa (20 Mar 2007)

ClubMan said:


> Normally being invited to be a godparent involves acting as a witness at the sacrament of baptism. In addition one normally makes some commitment to overseeing the child's _Christian _spiritual/religious upbringing. That is what I was assuming here.


Yes, you're right. Sorry, I've been out of the loop for so long I completely forgot what was involved. This is indeed a full commitment and should not be entered into lightly.


nelly said:


> getting back to the OP, you could suggest to your sister that she not have a christening at all once the child's name is registered.
> 
> she could have a naming ceremony (info is here: [broken link removed] ) and it is something thing the whole family can be involved in, in their own home.
> 
> I actually agree with Clubman, as a practicing catholic it annoys me when people use the church and priest "facility" without reverence and respecting the sacrament.


This is actually more along the lines of where I was coming from. Something informal where you just promise your sister that you will be there if anything happens. Religious vows should not be taken if they are not intended.


----------



## Taximan (20 Mar 2007)

Its called "a la Carte Catholicism", Its quite bizarre really, but you hear of brides/grooms getting stroppy with the priest cause he wants to celebrate mass as well as giving the wedding vows at a catholic wedding. 

There is no way you should accept your misguided sisters invitation. As a non-believer you are not in a position to make the commitments you are required to fulfil as a Godparent at a Christian baptism.  The PP should have clearly explained this to your sister.

As a previous poster stated you have to renounce the Devil but you also have to admit the existence of the "one true God" etc. 

Tell your sister you will gladly do the guardianship thing but you are not in a position to be the child’s spiritual guide in case of anything happening the parents.


----------



## Purple (20 Mar 2007)

Just say to your sister, "I'm an atheist, thank God".


----------



## Z100 (20 Mar 2007)

Taximan said:


> Its called "a la Carte Catholicism".



Which beats Catholicism off a set menu, as written by the Pope of the Day! (I’m still laughing after reading John Paul II was a Bob Dylan fan, but Benedict thinks his music is “the music of Satan”!).

As my old Granny used to say, ‘God is badly served on earth by men’. Do the boys in the Vatican, all through the years, not interpret the Bible to their own liking and pick and choose from it - a la Carte? - to suit their respective dogmas? I don’t think, for example, there’s a passage in the Bible that says HIV positive husbands shouldn’t wear condoms when they have intercourse with their wives, but the Vatican is happy enough to see thousands of such women die, in Africa in particular. 

Is it any wonder some of us have long since walked away? Maybe the questioning a la carte Catholics are the bona fide ones? 



Taximan said:


> There is no way you should accept your misguided sisters invitation.



Ah now, it’s that class of condescending talk from devout Catholics that turns some of us off! *Misguided*?! 

It sounds to me like she knows exactly what she is doing and asking of her sister. You might think she’s wrong, but she’s guided by her own conscience, which, I’d guess, is good enough for her God, whatever about his servants on earth.

So Stano, if you respect your sister’s beliefs, without believing in them yourself, go ahead and accept her invitation. But if she thinks Bob Dylan composes the music of Satan I’d probably say ‘no thanks’.  Mind you, some of his albums...........


----------



## KalEl (20 Mar 2007)

I think the concept of being a godparent nowadays means an extra person looking out for the child under normal circumstances and trying to ensure the child was brought up the way the parents would like if there was a tragedy.
Reeling off quotes about renouncing Satan and one true God isn't very helpful. I don't have any kids but wouldn't hestitate to ask a non-Catholic to be a godparent if they were the right person were I lucky enough to be in that situation.


----------



## Z100 (20 Mar 2007)

nelly said:


> I actually agree with Clubman, as a practicing catholic it annoys me when people use the church and priest "facility" without reverence and respecting the sacrament.



Nelly, I don't think this is really about a lack of reverence or respect for the 'sacrament', more a lack of reverence or respect for the men who run the church these days. That's why I have respect for people who believe in God, but not the church, if you know what I mean. 

The more the laity try to reclaim _their _church from the politicians in the Vatican, the more I like it.  Those infallible days are long since gone.


----------



## Z100 (20 Mar 2007)

KalEl said:


> I think the concept of being a godparent nowadays means an extra person looking out for the child under normal circumstances and trying to ensure the child was brought up the way the parents would like if there was a tragedy.
> Reeling off quotes about renouncing Satan and one true God isn't very helpful. I don't have any kids but wouldn't hestitate to ask a non-Catholic to be a godparent if they were the right person were I lucky enough to be in that situation.



Excellent


----------



## ClubMan (20 Mar 2007)

KalEl said:


> Reeling off quotes about renouncing Satan and one true God isn't very helpful.


I agree but that's part and parcel of the deal when it comes to _Christian_ baptism and being a witness/godparent. That's why some people (such as myself) would have to say no as this would conflict with their own deeply held beliefs (or non beliefs). Others might be happy to play along and just consider the sacramental declarations to be a form of words and nothing more. Personally I would consider that hypocritical and I'm sure that believers and clergy might (should?) consider it unacceptable. But each to his/her own I suppose.


----------



## Persius (21 Mar 2007)

stano said:


> My sister has asked me to be God-mother to her new baby, she has asked me each time she has had a baby, this is her 3rd. I've always said no as I don't believe in any of it...


 
I guess it really depends on what you mean by _I don't believe in any of it_. If you mean that you're a committed athiest, and don't believe in any god, or the possibility of a divine being, then I'd agree with the posters who say you shouldn't do it.

However if you mean, you don't really have alot of time for the rigamarole of the Catholic Church (I'm assuming it's a Catholic baptism, but the same could apply to any of the other Christian denominations which baptise infants), but do still sort of believe in the general concept of the Christian God, then I'd say go for it. I think Bushfire states this case quite well.


----------



## Z100 (21 Mar 2007)

ClubMan said:


> Others might be happy to play along and just consider the sacramental declarations to be a form of words and nothing more. Personally I would consider that hypocritical and I'm sure that believers and clergy might (should?) consider it unacceptable. But each to his/her own I suppose.



Fair enough Clubman, it's a principled stance, but I don't think there's any harm either in taking part in the religious ceremonies of friends and family, it's just a mark of friendship and respect for their beliefs, it doesn't mean you have to give up on your own non-beliefs or regard the ceremony as anything other than a "form of words" that have no meaning for you. Your mere presence is what your friends want, it's a sign of what you mean to them. 

Personally, I don't see it as hypocrisy or playing along, it's just a sign of maturity, a mark of respect and friendship, regardless of the religion. Whether it should have been allowed or not my brother's best man was C of I (the brother being RC), he found aspects of the ceremony comical, but was honoured to be asked and thrilled to be part of it. It wouldn't have been the same if he wasn't best man, being my brother's life long best friend. But some would say my brother should have chosen someone who was a devout RC, even if he wasn't a particularly close friend. Each to their own. Surely lifelong friendship and loyalty should rank above anything else, in _any _religion??

PS I wouldn't worry about what the clergy consider as unacceptable. Being a touch anti-clerical myself, whatever they regard as unacceptable usually does for me. But that's just a mark of my complete immaturity.


----------



## nelly (21 Mar 2007)

Bushfire said:


> The more the laity try to reclaim _their _church from the politicians in the Vatican, the more I like it.  Those infallible days are long since gone.



your challenge (I am assuming here that you are baptised) should you choose to accept it....

Its about time that people seperated the religion / christianity / faith and priests actions. If you don't believe in God thats one thing - if you do but can't be arsed getting out of it on a Sunday morning and blame it on the priests actions decades ago thats another. 
If the OP believes in God and can renounce Satan and all associated then she should take part, if she doesn't she is actually pretending to be something she is not - something she probably detests about the catholic church of yesteryear - the hypocracy. 

I wouldn't worry about a COI dude smirkin about a catholic service - I bet he would have had the same comments at a COI service because they are quite similar last i attended one and anyway each part of a wedding service is chosen by the couple. His reaction seems to me to say more about him than the actual service IMO. To be fair a best man does not have to do anything except hold rings and sign as witness. 

thats it - me and me soap box are going home....


----------



## Seagull (21 Mar 2007)

I read a quote from someone a while back. I can't remember who. It was along the lines of

More and more people are leaving the church and turning to God.


----------



## ClubMan (21 Mar 2007)

Bushfire said:


> Your mere presence is what your friends want, it's a sign of what you mean to them.


Yes - but taking an active part is different to just attending in this case. Another good example would be our _President _taking _CoI _communion (when this is fundamentally incompatible with the _Catholic _beliefs which she purports to hold) rather than just attending such a service and declining communion.


----------



## BlueSpud (21 Mar 2007)

Do all you good folk who refuse to be godparents actually avoid the ceremonies as well, and do you ever attend church weddings?

People, you will be dead a long time, do the deed for your family/friends.  If you are so sure there is no god, why do you let down your friends/family because of him (or not-him)?

Are you trying to prove to yourself or to others that you are not a hypocrire?

If your friens/family want you to be godparents, ask them what they mean.  If it is loaded with religion, and you object/dont-believe, then fair enough.  However, to many people today being a godparent means having a special secular position in the childs life.  How can you object to that?


----------



## ClubMan (21 Mar 2007)

BlueSpud said:


> Do all you good folk who refuse to be godparents actually avoid the ceremonies as well, and do you ever attend church weddings?


Of course - but there's a big difference between just *attending *and actively/officially *participating in *proceedings as I have tried to explain above.


> People, you will be dead a long time


 We already were.


> do the deed for your family/friends.  If you are so sure there is no god, why do you let down your friends/family because of him (or not-him)?


 Well, speaking personally, I have a strong aversion to mumbo jumbo and its propogation so always do whatever I can (no matter how small) to avoid this.


> Are you trying to prove to yourself or to others that you are not a hypocrire?


 And what would be wrong with that? I would have a lot of respect for anybody who always strove to avoid hypocricy in their actions even if I had no time for their beliefs.


> If your friens/family want you to be godparents, ask them what they mean.  If it is loaded with religion, and you object/dont-believe, then fair enough.  However, to many people today being a godparent means having a special secular position in the childs life.  How can you object to that?


 Because in most cases it can involve the godparent (as well as other participants) being expected to hypocritically profess in public to beliefs that they do not hold at all. To me that is at best silly and at worst hypocritical and insulting to those who do hold such beliefs genuinely.


----------



## Purple (21 Mar 2007)

BlueSpud said:


> If your friens/family want you to be godparents, ask them what they mean.  If it is loaded with religion, and you object/dont-believe, then fair enough.  However, to many people today being a godparent means having a special secular position in the childs life.  How can you object to that?


 Because being a godparent in a CofI ceremony involves giving your word that you are a practicing Christian and that you will ensure the child in question is raised as a Christian.
If you do so and you are a non believer you are a hypocrite.


----------



## Z100 (21 Mar 2007)

nelly said:


> a COI dude smirkin


----------



## ClubMan (21 Mar 2007)

nelly said:


> your challenge (I am assuming here that you are baptised) should you choose to accept it....
> 
> Its about time that people seperated the religion / christianity / faith and priests actions. If you don't believe in God thats one thing - if you do but can't be arsed getting out of it on a Sunday morning and blame it on the priests actions decades ago thats another.


Huh!??


----------



## extopia (21 Mar 2007)

Isn't it time we got over this superstition? Or mumbo jumbo as Clubman so eloquently put it...


----------



## ClubMan (21 Mar 2007)

Our 18 month old recently went through a spell of not sleeping well. We put it down to teething. A family member wondered if it might be because we hadn't had the child baptised saying that "things like that can play on a child's mind"!


----------



## extopia (21 Mar 2007)

The poor thing was probably worrying about missing out on all that communion and confirmation money.


----------



## ClubMan (22 Mar 2007)

Actually maybe I'm only an atheist because I only got £7 (c. '74?) for my communion and £30 (c. '78) for my confirmation!


----------



## Z100 (22 Mar 2007)

nelly said:


> your challenge (I am assuming here that you are baptised) should you choose to accept it....



That wasn't a challenge Nelly, just a very odd rant.


----------



## ClubMan (22 Mar 2007)

nelly said:


> your challenge (I am assuming here that you are baptised) should you choose to accept it....


Maybe a good "god"parent should intercede and suggest to the parents that they hold off on baptism until the child has grown and can make an informed choice for themselves? Maybe that's what I should have done with my brother and my nephew?


----------



## Purple (22 Mar 2007)

ClubMan said:


> Maybe that's what I should have done with my brother and my nephew?


 You were asked to be your own brothers godparent? That's strange...


----------



## ClubMan (22 Mar 2007)

It's not impossible but that's not what I meant.

Who were _This post will be deleted if not edited immediately's _godparents by the way?


----------



## Purple (22 Mar 2007)

I didn't say it was impossible, just strange...
This post will be deleted if not edited immediately wasn't a Christian so he didn't have any godparents.


----------



## ClubMan (22 Mar 2007)

Purple said:


> This post will be deleted if not edited immediately wasn't a Christian so he didn't have any godparents.


I know but...


> A *godparent*, in many denominations of Christianity, is someone who sponsors a child's baptism. Judaism has this equivalent in the circumcision ceremony.


----------



## Thirsty (22 Mar 2007)

> My point is that is many people that are godparents would not want the responsibility of raising other peoples children.


And my point is that that is not a requirement; the religious tradition of god parents does not extend to a legal responsbility.



> Who were _This post will be deleted if not edited immediately's _godparents by the way


 
As a Jew born to Jewish parents it would be safe to assume that his parents followed in that tradition in regards to his upbringing and teaching - but I think you knew that!



> You were asked to be your own brothers godparent? That's strange...


 
No, I know of a few families where this was done - as long as the prospective god parent is confirmed its quite acceptable.


----------



## Purple (22 Mar 2007)

I hate arguing with people who know more than me...
what does Wikipedia say about it then, eh?


----------



## ClubMan (22 Mar 2007)

http://judaism.about.com/library/3_lifecycles/bris/blbrit2.htm


> *Honored Roles*
> 
> It is considered an honor to be given a special role in the circumcision ceremony.
> 
> ...


So who were _This post will be deleted if not edited immediately' Kvatter/Kvatterin_?


----------



## Purple (22 Mar 2007)

ClubMan said:


> So who were _This post will be deleted if not edited immediately' Kvatter/Kvatterin_?


 Dunno


----------



## Vanilla (22 Mar 2007)

I thought This post will be deleted if not edited immediately was baptised by John the Baptist? Don't remember any mention of Godparents...could God be his Godfather/mother?


----------



## BlueSpud (23 Mar 2007)

ClubMan said:


> Of course - but there's a big difference between just *attending *and actively/officially *participating in *proceedings as I have tried to explain above.
> We already were.
> Well, speaking personally, I have a strong aversion to mumbo jumbo and its propogation so always do whatever I can (no matter how small) to avoid this.
> And what would be wrong with that? I would have a lot of respect for anybody who always strove to avoid hypocricy in their actions even if I had no time for their beliefs.
> Because in most cases it can involve the godparent (as well as other participants) being expected to hypocritically profess in public to beliefs that they do not hold at all. To me that is at best silly and at worst hypocritical and insulting to those who do hold such beliefs genuinely.



I still don't buy it.  Sounds like your fear of being considered a hypocrite is getting in your way.  If the parents understand where you are comming from & are still want you to be godparent, then anyone who takes insult in that will have to deal that themselves.  

Suppose I smoke, and tell people that smoking is bad for them.  Is it wrong for me to tell them that smoking is bad for them????


----------



## extopia (23 Mar 2007)

BlueSpud said:


> Suppose I smoke, and tell people that smoking is bad for them.  Is it wrong for me to tell them that smoking is bad for them????



Only if you're lying.


----------



## jake108 (24 Mar 2007)

Goodness is this still being debated?? I'm sure this child is planning her wedding by now!!


----------



## Z100 (24 Mar 2007)

jake108 said:


> Goodness is this still being debated?? I'm sure this child is planning her wedding by now!!



The child is now looking for a godparent for her child.


----------



## jake108 (24 Mar 2007)

Bushfire said:


> The child is now looking for a godparent for her child.


 

Glad to see that someone thinks like me!


----------



## stano (25 Mar 2007)

Thank you all.  I understand that my sister want's me in her childs life, But my husband and I are in her will as the people to mind her children if anything should happen.  She would take mine.  It's been something we talked about a lot.

I don't believe and others might so I'm not sure if it's a good thing to stand up and let on.  Doesn't seem straight

Can't decide.
Thankd for all your thoughts.


----------



## Gordanus (25 Mar 2007)

Vanilla said:


> I thought This post will be deleted if not edited immediately was baptised by John the Baptist? Don't remember any mention of Godparents...could God be his Godfather/mother?



Yes but I don't think J the B circumcised him!


----------



## liteweight (26 Mar 2007)

When my sisters asked me to be godmother to their children I had the same dilemma. However, I came to the conclusion that it was an honour to be asked. I justified standing in the Church and saying what was asked of me by realising that I do reject evil and that's what Satan represents. More importantly, I realised that, if anything were to happen to one of my sisters and I was left to raise the children, then I would do so in a way they wanted me to and that would include religion. I'd do this until the children either looked after their own faith or told me they did not want to continue in the religion of their parents.


----------



## Z100 (26 Mar 2007)

liteweight said:


> When my sisters asked me to be godmother to their children I had the same dilemma. However, I came to the conclusion that it was an honour to be asked. I justified standing in the Church and saying what was asked of me by realising that I do reject evil and that's what Satan represents. More importantly, I realised that, if anything were to happen to one of my sisters and I was left to raise the children, then I would do so in a way they wanted me to and that would include religion. I'd do this until the children either looked after their own faith or told me they did not want to continue in the religion of their parents.



Superb post and brilliantly put, _exactly _how I feel about the subject only you found the words!


----------



## Trish2006 (26 Mar 2007)

Very well put liteweight.  I would never ask my bil and wife to be godparents to my child because they don't believe in it.  2 of their kids were baptised but not the third.  I also think they'd refuse.  I want to pick someone who'll stick around and be there for my child if he/she ever needs help and who has the same sort of spiritual attitude as I do.  I'm a catholic, I go to mass every now and then and my kids wil be brought up as catholics, although more so just as christians.  So personally I wouldn't select an atheist as a godparent because it would be unfair to ask them to ignore evrerything they believe.  
If someone was prepared to include my religious views when advising my child if I was no longer around then that's enough for me and I also think it's an honour to be asked.

By the way, I'm my brother's godmother.  I was 12 and my other bro was 15 when he was born so our parents asked us to be godparents.  We were also legal guardians as soon as we turned 18.  These days though (bro is 18 now) I think you have to be 16 to be a godparent.


----------



## Darth Vader (21 Jun 2008)

on a slightly separate note -

if i child is not baptised, that would mean they could not be buried in a catholic / christian graveyard. is that correct? 

question number 2 - baptism and christening is one and the same thing, isnt it?


----------



## eileen alana (21 Jun 2008)

Darth Vader said:


> on a slightly separate note -
> 
> if i child is not baptised, that would mean they could not be buried in a catholic / christian graveyard. is that correct?
> 
> question number 2 - baptism and christening is one and the same thing, isnt it?


 

I am unsure of Q1 but in many parts of Ireland there are only catholic graveyards so I persume they are also used to bury unbaptised people.

Q2. Yes


----------

