Children and Religion: An Objective Opinion (myths, atheist, priest, punished)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Perhaps one of our regulars who is a Catholic will come by and explain what kinds of papers the Church might be requesting. Maybe some of you can go ask our resident Catholics.
We really can't say what they are because at this point we have not been told, other than that it's some kind of agreement someone wants a signature on.
It may be, as I think Martin guessed, joint permission to send the child to a Catholic school, which would be fine to sign in my view if that ALL it is and doesn't include some sort of carte blanche to indoctrinate a child without any sort of input or dissent from either parent. And even then it is a moot point because a child can be withdrawn at any time over such a dispute. The problem of course is that even if both parents are (1) Catholic and (2) still married, the school wouldn't want to get in the middle of a touche-kicking contest between the parents regarding whether or not the child remains. It is reasonable of them, or of any school really, that the parents present a united front about the child being in the school and some fair degree of commitment to the school's process.
It may be a joint permission slip with similar intent for catechism classes.
If it is either of those things then refusing to sign represents in practical terms denial of the mother's desire for the child to receive instruction from those sources, which could violate a lifelong dream and constitute in her mind child neglect.
If either of these things are true then I am a bit less adamant that it should not be signed. It may be one of those "would you rather be right or happy" situations. The wife will indoctrinate the children one way or the other, and if she does it herself she can add the bitter narrative of what a douchebag the father is ... either overtly or deniably / passive-aggressively. In that case the children can be manipulated to think that the father is the one who is insecure and afraid of the Truth.
In that event I would consider signing it and just quietly modeling and teaching objective reality. It might not be a wise battle to pick.
If on the other hand it is just as the OP represented, some sort of coercive document designed to get him to agree to never contradict the dogma, then of course I would not sign it and damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead.
Of course even THAT document is unenforceable by its very nature, and another tactic is to sign it and disregard it. I do that all the time in my work as a software architect and developer. Clients are sometimes fearful that I will walk out the door with what they fancy are unique trade secrets and will routinely want me to sign documents that forbid me to work for competitors, either open ended or for some rather long period of years. Over against that is the legal reality that you can't prevent someone from earning a living. Similarly they may try to forbid me to write substantially similar software for another client, but legally you can't patent or copyright or assert ownership over anything but the current expression of an intellectual property, not over methods and algorithms.
I sign such things if I can't negotiate them away, as they are unenforceable, and the client knows it, or should know it. Much of what goes on with contracts is just bluster and bluff in support of someone's fantasies about what is fair or just. I have worked for a client for the past 9 years who is a direct competitor to the one just before it (and without any time lag in the transition) and if this were somehow wrong I could be sued for it successfully, with or without such an agreement in place. I have not been sued, much less brought to heel. That would be like a factory worker at GM taking a job at Ford and getting sued for it. Absurd on its face.
So if for practical reasons in order to continue to have cooperative visitation rights for my child I might sign some inherently ridiculous document asserting something over me that the other signatory has neither the right to nor really the ability to even detect noncompliance. Give them the symbol they want, might also be a rational tactic. Sometimes standing on "the principle of the thing" is a Pyrrhic victory. Always ask in such decision points, "if I do x ... to what purpose, or to what end am I doing it? What will it ACTUALLy accomplish?" And if the answer is a lot of arguing and a reduction in the amount or quality of the time you spend as a presence in the life of your child, then maybe it's not the right action even if it is in some sense just and right by your lights, or flattering to your ego investments.
When you have children and then get divorced, it's just a suboptimal situation. Lines of authority and discipline get screwed up, Other People get involved (just wait until your ex wife remarries, if she hasn't already) and you just don't get to have your way all the time, however "right" or "better" your way might be. Even, however much better it would be for the child. It's one thing if your wife wants to let her ex fondle the child or if she burns them with cigarettes or something society will not tolerate like that. But teaching them fairly standard Christianity? Standing in the way of that is often a losing battle, sad as I am to say it.
I feel bad for the child under the VERY acrimonious circumstances. Looks to be a 'power' game going on. Really everybody loses in that 'trinity'. In Catholicism, the family acts as a bonding unit personally and community-wise. Unfortunately, some families get off at the wrong stop.
Neither of you can tell your child what to believe. Their belief belongs to them.
Uhhh. Where did you get this? Did I miss something when I was reading? As I understood things custody had already been settled. In fact I asked who has custody and the OP said, "We have joint custody."
Yes, my child was baptized. I wasn't OK with it, but there was nothing I could do about it.
Did your wife sneak off and find a priest to baptize the child? Unless the child was in danger of dying after she was born....priests aren't randomly baptizing children. There IS paperwork for a Catholic baptism.
Last edited by DewDropInn; 01-14-2016 at 01:12 PM..
Did your wife sneak off and find a priest to baptize the child?
I'm not going to give the OP a hard time on this one as I know how it is to have family pressure on such things, and the OP may not have foreseen where this was all going to go - i.e. a big fight following a divorce.
He may not have wanted to make waves during his marriage. Just guessing. And he may have thought of the baptism as just a ritual and not something the wife would use against him in the future - again, just a guess.
I can say that if my husband had asked if we could baptize our children, and his entire family was asking for it as well, I'd probably have gone along as I wouldn't have felt (at the time) that it could do any harm. I mean who would foresee a future ex-spouse using such a thing against a person...?
I'm going to make one teeny suggestion which might have a big impact on the situation. You may disagree.
If you haven't already, can you simply acknowledge to your ex-wife that you understand that this is a very important topic to her? Validate that. Where it goes from there is up to the two of you, but I find that when someone validates to me that, even though they don't agree with me, they understand that my feelings and wants matter simply because I have value, it goes a long way towards disarming me, letting me put my defenses down. I'm more likely, then, to listen to the other person's wants and feelings. Which will allow you to get to crux/root of it: what are the real NEEDS here, for your ex-wife, for you, and, of course, for your daughter...
(Nonviolent Communication (NVC) is based on the principles of nonviolence-- the natural state of compassion when no violence is present in the heart.
NVC begins by assuming that we are all compassionate by nature and that violent strategies—whether verbal or physical—are learned behaviors taught and supported by the prevailing culture. NVC also assumes that we all share the same, basic human needs, and that each of our actions are a strategy to meet one or more of these needs.)
I'm not going to give the OP a hard time on this one as I know how it is to have family pressure on such things, and the OP may not have foreseen where this was all going to go - i.e. a big fight following a divorce.
He may not have wanted to make waves during his marriage. Just guessing. And he may have thought of the baptism as just a ritual and not something the wife would use against him in the future - again, just a guess.
I can say that if my husband had asked if we could baptize our children, and his entire family was asking for it as well, I'd probably have gone along as I wouldn't have felt (at the time) that it could do any harm. I mean who would foresee a future ex-spouse using such a thing against a person...?
Just trying to see the OP'S POV here.
I'm wondering if he's a former Catholic who left the Church. He said HIS family is upset, and calling him a bad person, because he won't sign the papers. Why would they be upset unless they were themselves Catholics?
His posts are vague. Hard to say what's going on, besides his unhappiness with Catholicism, since he hasn't said what the papers are.
I never read any where the OP states the age of the child. If she is old enough to understand then perhaps both parents should sit down & explain it to her. It would be a bad idea for both of you to sit down with her at the same time though. Both of you would end up fighting in front of the child & it would only hurt the child.
She needs me to sign papers to raise our child Catholic. I do not want to sign them.
So, now my ex-wife and my family are upset with me. Saying I'm wrong and a bad person for not cooperating.
If I don't believe that Catholicism is the truth. Then I don't feel I should sign papers allowing my child to be taught something that I don't believe is true.
I told her she can teach our child whatever she feels is true, but I want no part of her process. It's not my fault her religion requires papers for me to sign.
My ex-wife and family have become very aggressive about this and even threatened to take me to court to get full legal custody, just so she can have the right to raise her Catholic.
If she's this adamant about her beliefs, she should've married someone with the same beliefs.
I tried to keep my post as neutral as possible. Without going into what my beliefs are and why I don't agree with her beliefs. And just stick to the facts.
And I feel the facts are, I should not be forced to participate in someone else's beliefs. I should be able to have my own beliefs. And we should be able to peacefully coexist.
I would like an objective opinion please.
Thanks
I really need more info.
Are you particularly active in your church? If so, were you active in that church when you were married to her?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Unless the child was in danger of dying after she was born....priests aren't randomly baptizing children. There IS paperwork for a Catholic baptism.
