An official document has been issued by the Holy Synod strongly condemning the practice of surrogate motherhood and placing restrictions on the baptism of children born in this manner. You may read it here. I'd say this document is pretty definitive and leaves no room for confusion on the subject.
HT: Byzantine Texas
Election Day USA
9 hours ago
7 comments:
Restrictions on baptism for the children, not on communion for the parents? Perhaps I just don't understand, but that sounds like punishing the child for the sins of the parents.
Matthew
From the document...
In the case of the possibility of baptizing infants born to a “surrogate mother,” the following factors must be taken into consideration.
On the one hand, any infant who has been born can be Baptized – in accordance with the faith of those who intend to Baptize it. The child cannot be responsible for the actions of its parents and is not to blame if his birth is connected with reproductive technology condemned by the Church.
On the other hand, the responsibility for the Christian upbringing of a child is borne by the parents and sponsors. If the parents do not bear explicit repentance for their deed, and the sponsors in fact concur with the sinful act that has been performed, then there can be no talk of a Christian upbringing. Refusal to Baptize an infant in such cases will correspond to the Orthodox tradition, which assumes the agreement of the Baptized – and, in the case of infant Baptism, of its parents and sponsors – with the teachings of the Church. Such refusal will also have pastoral significance, inasmuch as society will thereby receive a clear signal from the Church that the practice of “surrogate motherhood” is unacceptable from the Christian point of view.
A child born with the assistance of “surrogate motherhood” can be Baptized according to the wishes of the party that will be raising it, if such are either its “biological parents” or its “surrogate mother,” only after they have recognized that, from the Christian point of view, such reproductive technology is morally reprehensible and have borne ecclesial repentance – regardless of whither they ignored the Church’s position consciously or unconsciously. Only in this case can the Church expect that the Baptized child will be brought up in the Orthodox faith and that Christian moral concepts will be instilled in it. If such recognition does not occur, then the question of Baptism is deferred until the child can make a conscious personal choice of its own. In the latter case, the fact of “surrogate birth” in and of itself is not an obstacle for one’s Baptism, since one is not responsible for the behavior of one’s parents.
In the case when an infant is brought to Church who has been born of a “surrogate mother,” the question of its Baptism can be decided in accordance with the instructions of the diocesan bishop, who is bound to be guided in concrete cases by the norms contained in the present document. The performance by a priest of the sacrament of Baptism in such cases without the blessing of his bishop serves as the basis for applying canonical sanctions to this priest.
In cases of mortal danger, it is blessed to Baptize infants regardless of the circumstances of their birth.
The position stated is based on the teachings of the Church regarding the inadmissibility of the Baptism of infants in families whose members explicitly and deliberately neglect ecclesial tradition and do not share the Christian teaching about marriage and family, which practically eliminates the possibility of the child’s Christian upbringing. This concerns not only the question of “surrogate motherhood,” but also any consciously expressed unwillingness to live in a Christian manner.
Thanks! That makes sense. A repentant mother can have her child baptized.
People will go to great lengths refusing to believe that Nature has declared them not fit for motherhood.
This is certainly a clear statement; on the other hand, I wish an equally clear statement would be published on the orthodox acceptance of articficial birth control, methods and under what circumstances: to date I have not read one statement that is clear and cogent. Perhaps someone could enlighten me on the subject?
Archimandrite Gregory
I don't think there is a clear consensus on all aspects of this subject within the Church at the present time. That said, the historic position of the Church has been negative. And even those jurisdictions which appear to have relaxed the ancient proscriptions a bit in the name of Oikonomia have been very cautions in their language.
Broadly speaking the points on which there is agreement are that birth control is not normally admissible in a marriage. (Some jurisdictions permit it in exceptional cases. Others do not.) Couples who do not want children may not marry. Even in the case of an exceptional situation, the use of abortificient birth control is never allowed.
Thanks, John, that is what i have understood the situation to be, which leaves a lot of room for questioning our position(s).
Post a Comment