No, infant baptism is not abuse

One of the most striking aspects of our therapeutic age is the increasing inability of many to sustain a sane and coherent moral hierarchy. Perhaps this stems from the omnipresence of social media. Everything, everywhere always demands our attention and yet, with nowhere solid to stand, we have no way of judging what is important and what is trivial.

Or perhaps it’s because the label of “victim” has become the most coveted title. Now many seek the “prize” without having been subjected to real abuse — abuse that no one would wish upon himself.

A prominent Catholic recently argued in the Irish Times for a new category of victim: those subjected to infant baptism, especially as practiced by the Catholic Church. Former president of Ireland and canon lawyer Mary McAleese declared it to be “a long-standing, systemic and overlooked severe restriction on children’s rights with regard to religion.” Really? At the very moment when thousands are being slain in Iran for protesting the brutal religious regime, McAleese apparently lies awake at night worrying about infant baptism. This is an eloquent testimony to the moral disorientation that marks our present age.

Several comments are in order. First, McAleese does not deny that baptism brings certain “spiritual” benefits, such as “expunging original sin” and “opening up ... the flow of God’s grace.” But she objects to the lifelong membership of the Church that baptism claims to involve. Of course, her fear of the objective responsibilities that baptism entails only has force if she accepts that what the Church teaches about baptism is true. Yet, like a good therapeutic consumer of spirituality, she embraces what comforts her and discards what causes discomfort or demands too much.

Continued below.