News RSS Feed Send your news, pictures & videos


REGISTER NOW TO POST YOUR COMMENTS ON THESE STORIES

It's free and only takes a few seconds. Click here to go to the registration page.

Blackburn priest refuses to baptise child


A FAMILY was left ‘humiliated’ when a priest refused to christen their son minutes before the service was due to start.

As 50 family and friends sat waiting in St Joseph’s Church, Audley Range, Blackburn, Father David Chinnery discovered neither parent was a Roman Catholic.

He told Janine Wood and partner Andrew Craig this meant he could not baptise their five-year-old son Jamie, a pupil at St. Antony's RC School.

The couple said they felt left humiliated at having to tell their guests to leave the church.

They believe Fr Chinnery should have taken more stringent steps earlier to find out if they were Catholics.

Fr Chinnery said it was a very difficult situation but it would have been against the Catholic Church to christen the child.

The priest said he would now request to see certificates before agreeing to baptism in future.

The couple, of Shadsworth Road, Blackburn, had held meetings with Fr Chinnery, and attended the church every Sunday for mass.

Janine, 30, said although she had been born into the Church of England, she had attended Catholic schools and the Catholic church most of her life.

She said she did not want anyone to have to go through the same experience.

The full-time mum said: “I’m appalled.

“It was chaos. Everybody was asking what was going on.

“I have since spoken to friends who have had children christened and their priests have written to them in advance to confirm everything but he didn’t ever do that.

“It is important to me that Jamie is christened because I want him to have the same schooling as me.

"Father Chinnery asked if I wanted to baptise Jamie, he asked if I was a Catholic and I attended a Catholic school.

"I was born into the Church of England but he didn’t ask if I was baptised.

“We attended the church two weeks before the christening and everything was fine and that was the last time we spoke to him until the christening.”

Father Chinnery made the discovery ahead of the service on Sunday when he asked God parents Janine’s brother Keith Wood, 35, and Andrew’s sister Karen Craig, 38, which denomination they were and it transpired both Andrew and Janine were also Church of England.

Andrew, a window cleaner, added: “I felt so embarrassed and ashamed. It was an absolute shambles.”

Father Chinnery, who has been at the church since October, said he had presumed they were Catholics.

He said: “If I had gone on and baptised Jamie it would have been illegal in the Catholic church and it would have caused a bit a scandal. You just cannot do it.

“Once I knew Janine was not a Catholic I could not do it.

“It was very hard for me to walk out and tell them all and that’s what I had to do.

“They’re regular as regular can be so I can understand why they are so upset."

Lee Siggs from the Universe, the weekly Catholic Church newspaper, said that the incident was 'highly unusual'.

He said: "One of the most important aspects of a Catholic baptism is that the parents agree to bring up their child as Catholic.

"It is hard to imagine how that would happen if they were both Church of England.

"The priest should have made sure in the run-up to the baptism that everything was in order because the situation that arose is not ideal."

Catholic priest Father Jim McCartney of St Anne's church, said he had not heard of a baptism being cancelled at such short notice before.

He said it 'probably would' be normal practice to refuse to carry out the ceremony if neither parent was a Catholic.

He said: "There may be exceptional circumstances, and if she wanted to become a Catholic, that could be a way forward.

"I can understand where the priest is coming from, but at the same time it maybe should have been dealt with earlier."

A spokesman for the Salford Diocese said: "Since neither parent is Catholic, such a commitment would clearly have been impossible to make.

"There seems to have been a misunderstanding on this point.

"If either parent would like to become Catholic, then that possibility is always open to them."

Comments(95)

Little Diamond says...
10:15am Wed 17 Mar 10

I would have thought the priest should have checked things out a bit more carefully. But also the parents must share the responsibility. To say that the priest should have taken more stringent steps is ok but why didn't you two say we are not baptised catholics can you still baptise our son?

Akki says...
10:22am Wed 17 Mar 10

If you read the full article its quite clear the parents are to blame, not the Priest.

wackyracer says...
11:01am Wed 17 Mar 10

this shows you how stupid organised religon is. The family want to bring their child up using the teachings of the bible yet this is not good enough for the Catholic Church. I wonder what God will think of this when he find's out one of his flock has been turned away!

burner says...
11:06am Wed 17 Mar 10

A true Christian attitude . . . NOT !!!

wackyracer says...
11:09am Wed 17 Mar 10

well said burner

A Darener says...
11:18am Wed 17 Mar 10

Matthew 19:14
But Jesus said, "Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."
But not if you are not a CATHOLIC apparently.

disgusted tunbridge wells says...
11:25am Wed 17 Mar 10

If this follows the pattern of every Christening I've ever been to the parents and child will never go near the church again

mikebuk says...
12:38pm Wed 17 Mar 10

Religion - **** it

kaotic kaos says...
12:38pm Wed 17 Mar 10

If you agree to raise your child as a catholic it doesn't really matter if you are catholic or not, shame on you Father David Chinnery, anyway the way i see it, until the kid is old enough to recognizes Jesus as his lord and savior it won't make the slightest bit of difference being baptised.

spoonfullofsugar says...
12:47pm Wed 17 Mar 10

parents ask yourself the question, why did you want to get the child christened? i think its because its another excuse to go to the pub, the child goes to the RC primary school (so qualifies) and because everyone does it, you clearly have no intention of taking the child to school, learn the values etc, yes the priest should have checked the parents out, i'm glad he refused as it may (but i doubt it) get the parents thinking about the childs religous upbringing and values.

rjdarwen says...
12:50pm Wed 17 Mar 10

Just one question. why on earth would a couple who are both non-catholics want to have their child baptised into the Catholic church. Is there an ulterior motive. Could it be that they think the child will get a better education at a Catholic school.

Mike Costa says...
1:09pm Wed 17 Mar 10

Mike Costa says:

Call me cynical but, as is nearly always the case, this will have little to do with religious feelings and everything to do with getting a child into a preferred educational establishment.
Its a shame the parents didn't have enough education, or they would have realised that you can't have your child christened in an RC Church if that isn't your own religious leaning.

Darwendude says...
1:25pm Wed 17 Mar 10

I think the priest should have made sure the parents were Catholics first but without checking I would probably have presumed it too. And the only reason they are banging on about having their child baptised Catholic is to get the child into a Catholic school which are usually better than the non religious schools. Idiots.

TheReason says...
2:05pm Wed 17 Mar 10

The point is being missed here.
NOBODY gives a toss about the childs religious upbringing. The parents are doing it for the schools and the priest was going to it for numbers.
I think the family got away lightly! It would seem that by joining the Catholic cult, your child owes it's seniors a series of sexual encounters.
Look it up, it might as well be in the fine print.

ste.g says...
3:46pm Wed 17 Mar 10

Mike Costa wrote:
Mike Costa says: Call me cynical but, as is nearly always the case, this will have little to do with religious feelings and everything to do with getting a child into a preferred educational establishment. Its a shame the parents didn't have enough education, or they would have realised that you can't have your child christened in an RC Church if that isn't your own religious leaning.
i couldnt agree more.
if the parents had took the time in school themselves they would know the rc church and c of e church are seperate organisations that never meet.unless your prepared to switch faiths.

these are my words according to ste.g.
so let it be written,so let it be said.

Ken Shuffles says...
3:56pm Wed 17 Mar 10

Not being a Catholic never stopped Jesus from being baptised and he wasn't even a Christian.

It seems to me, in this case,The Priest was more concerned with following the rules and pleasing his pension masters than anything else.

Pleasing and consulting the Bishops, that was something Jesus never, ever, ever would have done.

anneyates says...
4:12pm Wed 17 Mar 10

It is regrettable that the Fr. Chinnery was not aware earlier that neither parent was a Catholic but to say maybe one of the parents could have been baptised at the same time is missing the point completely. Baptism into the Catholic Church is a Sacrament and, as such, is not a convenience but is a truly heartfelt, lifelong, religious commitment to the practice of that faith.

archibold says...
4:40pm Wed 17 Mar 10

How refreshing that a debate about religion where there is one faith that has been criticised and not one sniff of the word 'racist'. Even though C of E and other faiths have clearly made their views known...not one person from the Catholic faith has said - racist bigots....God bless the Catholics!

Ken Shuffles says...
4:52pm Wed 17 Mar 10

Jesus however, never said anyone should be baptised according to the rules of ANY institution. The fact is, and for good reason - He never used the words baptism, sanctity, and religion in the same Breath. Religion mixes up all these things into some kind of having-something-to-
do-with the reality of its own brand of God soup.

Ken Shuffles says...
4:57pm Wed 17 Mar 10

If this religion has something to do with the experience of Love and Serenity why did the parents of this child rewarded with humiliation ?

Ken Shuffles says...
5:00pm Wed 17 Mar 10

God blesses the Heart archibold, not the self righteousnesss of those following the right brand of religious dogma.

Totally says...
6:29pm Wed 17 Mar 10

TheReason wrote:
The point is being missed here. NOBODY gives a toss about the childs religious upbringing. The parents are doing it for the schools and the priest was going to it for numbers. I think the family got away lightly! It would seem that by joining the Catholic cult, your child owes it's seniors a series of sexual encounters. Look it up, it might as well be in the fine print.
Hello my friend!! For once I've got to partly disagree with you. I had a Catholic upbringing and my kids have been through baptism, confirmation & communion but don't attend a Catholic school. Not because of the "abuse" concern but because I preferred Westholme to Stonyhurst. Obviously there is evidence of what you refer to and I am not disputing that, but I don't think its rife in regular RC primary and secondary schools.

Michael@ClitheroeSince58 says...
6:36pm Wed 17 Mar 10

Why does a child need to be christened anyway, the child is not able to decide it wants to be a christian, this is forced upon it. I feel it should be something that should be decided at an adult age.

blueandwhitey79 says...
6:54pm Wed 17 Mar 10

in my opinion its parents fault, look at the pic of the mother, looks like some1 who'd frequent jeremy kyle, these sort cant tell religion form one to another, having a christening is just an excuse for a good ****-up, they could christen him buddhist as long as theres a good do after

Veritas10 says...
7:15pm Wed 17 Mar 10

The priest failed in his duty according to canon 851 to instruct the child's parents and godparents. He was also wrong to stop the ceremony a few minutes before it was to start. Canon 868 says that there only has to be a reseaonable hope that the child will be raised as Catholic. The Parents have a good case to sue for damages and emotional distress. They should consult a solicitor. Clearly, the priest concerned did not have a good seminary formation and perhaps needs a refresher course in Church Law.

Davidoff says...
7:50pm Wed 17 Mar 10

Yet another case of parents trying to get away with something - exactly like those who lie on their children's school applications forms to get them into a certain school (then try to wriggle out of it when caught) and it's left unchecked because people don't expect parents to behave in irresponsible ways (coughs) - but this is entirely responsible and should shoulder the blame. They knew from the sounds of it exactly what they were doing and like many when caught out they are now throwing their weight around in public like spoilt or naughty children being caught out in a lie.

Every year I saw people at my own church abusing the open nature of the church itself. They'd attend church for a number of months, get a recommendation or reference through attendance for their child to attend a particular C of E secondary school then you'd never see them again once they'd achieve that. Users. Who are not there to pursue a believe but to get what they want. The church is possibly one of the last places in this country that accepts people without question ... unfortunately that trust is being made a mockery of by parents like this!

Maybe the priest should have checked but ... the parents are the ones to blame it was just a matter of time until they were found out. Let responsibility lie where it should through common sense - them!

Also, I think plenty in this country would know there is a difference between faiths - that C of E is NOT Catholic! It's like saying a Muslim faith is the same as a Jewish one!

Are we really being told to believe that the parents were that naive or stupid they didn't know this? Don't think so! Occams Razor.

icannotrace says...
8:07pm Wed 17 Mar 10

Veritas10 wrote:
The priest failed in his duty according to canon 851 to instruct the child's parents and godparents. He was also wrong to stop the ceremony a few minutes before it was to start. Canon 868 says that there only has to be a reseaonable hope that the child will be raised as Catholic. The Parents have a good case to sue for damages and emotional distress. They should consult a solicitor. Clearly, the priest concerned did not have a good seminary formation and perhaps needs a refresher course in Church Law.
The Parents have a good case to sue for damages and emotional distress. They should consult a solicitor......
.
Please get a grip

SammyJ says...
8:08pm Wed 17 Mar 10

"It is important to me that Jamie is christened because I want him to have the same schooling as me".

that says it all really doesn't it? nothing to do with faith, just because they want him to go to a particular school.

typical situation - let's go to church regularly, make sure we're seen by the priest/vicar/etc each time we go. then get the kid into school and never step foot in a church again.

however, i would add - the priest really should have checked on this long before the actually day.

grumpyoldlady says...
8:08pm Wed 17 Mar 10

I think many people have their children christened in order to get them into better schools, just as some people have lied about their true addresses in order to come into the right catchment area. I think the government has a lot to answer for when parents are forced to such extremes to get a child the education it deserves. At the end of the day our schools are just not good enough regardless of the fact that the government has spent billions rebuilding them. All the fancy new names in the world (like adademies, technology colleges etc.) will not change the fact that many of our SCHOOLS are failing and I have seen young people with a string of GCSE passes who can barely construct a sentence, let alone a paragraph.

icannotrace says...
8:13pm Wed 17 Mar 10

archibold wrote:
How refreshing that a debate about religion where there is one faith that has been criticised and not one sniff of the word 'racist'. Even though C of E and other faiths have clearly made their views known...not one person from the Catholic faith has said - racist bigots....God bless the Catholics!
Amen to that brother

bluerover says...
8:38pm Wed 17 Mar 10

Veritas10 wrote:
The priest failed in his duty according to canon 851 to instruct the child's parents and godparents. He was also wrong to stop the ceremony a few minutes before it was to start. Canon 868 says that there only has to be a reseaonable hope that the child will be raised as Catholic. The Parents have a good case to sue for damages and emotional distress. They should consult a solicitor. Clearly, the priest concerned did not have a good seminary formation and perhaps needs a refresher course in Church Law.
"the priest...didn't have a good seminary formation" Spouting canon law you sound a bitter seminarian!!

Where's_the_beef? says...
8:39pm Wed 17 Mar 10

Rather than diplomatically looking for a solution, or at least maintaining a modicum of dignity, this deluded couple publicly demand that their preposterous grievance be taken seriously, no matter how deranged their complaint. Of course the LET is only too happy to conspire in publishing such pathetic bilge; after all, that’s what public ridicule is all about. But never mind all that, I’m really looking forward to the next episode of Janine and Andrew’s insatiable proclivity to parade their dysfunctional down-market lives in order to provide entertainment for the rest of us – little Jamie’s forthcoming Bar Mitzvah party. Everybody’s invited…Oh Wait!!!

huggles says...
9:21pm Wed 17 Mar 10

Churches are no longer seen by some parents as places of worship but a means to an end, used in order to gain educational places at certain schools. This is unacceptable and the mother stating “It is important to me that Jamie is christened because I want him to have the same schooling as me. " well she also says that Jamie is "a pupil at St. Antony's RC School." So doesn't this mean he is already having the same schooling as her already?? So why christen the child?? I would put money on her trying to make sure he gets a place in a R.C. secondary school!! Also in a Catholic Church a child does decide in year 3 if they wish to follow the catholic religion, and if so they do the sacramental programme where they are welcomed into the Church by the congregation!

burnleyite says...
10:12pm Wed 17 Mar 10

very charitable! religion has alot to answer for. organised hypochrisy!

manitou says...
11:39pm Wed 17 Mar 10

Absolutely disgusting and typical of the narrow mindset of the churches today.
Years ago, my grandmother, who was a wonderful, compassionate woman was faced with the fact her mother was dying and she ran down to the local priest and told him of her situation. He would not accompany her to her mother's death bed as she was not a Catholic. Following this very sorry state of affairs, my gran never went to church again, but she remained the caring wonderful lady she had always been. She maintained to the end of her days that something is wrong in the church. Her mom, my great gran died without someone from the Church being with her. This is a story that remains with me now and always will. You don't have to be a Catholic or Protestant to be a good person, just someone who believes in the Lord.

Ken Shuffles says...
10:17am Thu 18 Mar 10

If these comments tell us anything they tell us that Faiths and an Education have nothing to do with each other. Whoever heard of Institutionalised Love and Serenity? Serenity and Love are Higher than all of mans institutionalised ditherings put together.

We need People who actually Love The SERENITY of their Soul. Show me the Religious rule number that is fit to be The Ruler of The Soul ?

Veritas10 says...
11:57am Thu 18 Mar 10

Why are people having a go at me for stating the Church's law on the matter. It was the parish priest who said it would be illegal according to church law to go ahead with the baptism - and he is wrong! He had a duty of care to inform the parents and godparents of the requirements for baptism, and for checking that they would be able to meet them. That is why he is required to provide a course of instruction and to complete necessary checks. In this matter he completely failed. Imagine the humiliation of the couple when they were told that it was off, in front of their assembled guests. They may have incurred expenses in organising a reception etc, and they are legally entitled to recover them from the Church. That's why they should consult a solicitor. Also in canon law there is the concept of Omnia Parata - everything is prepared. This refers to a situation, such as an impending marriage, or baptism, in which all the preparations are complete; therefore, if a sudden impediment is discovered at the last moment that, if it were to become public, would cause difficulty, a dispensation from the said impediment might be granted in view of the state of affairs omina parata, in which everything is prepared and a cancellation might unjustly compromise the reputation of one of the parties. If this is not a case of omnia parata than what is?

Veritas10 says...
12:10pm Thu 18 Mar 10

Furthermore, the child is already attending a Roman Catholic school - so there is certainly a founded hope that the child would be raised in the faith. Don't catholic schools provide instruction in the faith? The priest simply over- reacted. He should have got on the phone to the Dean or the Bishop and asked their advice.

Veritas10 says...
12:24pm Thu 18 Mar 10

Father Chinnery check your faculites received at ordination from the bishop of Salford. You should read in your pagella "you can dispense omnia parata sunt if recourse to the local ordinary is impossible, from all impediments of ecclesiastical law except the impediment arising from sacred ordination to the priesthood and diaconate as well as from the impediment arising from a public perpetual vow of chastity in a religious institute of pontifical right. Neither may they dispense from the canonical form of marriage. A dispensation is never given from the impediment of consanguinity in the direct line or in the second degree of the collateral line." Clearly you could have gone ahead with the baptism, which would have been legal!

Mison says...
12:43pm Thu 18 Mar 10

Well I would like to say that i very much doubt that any of this religious nonsense is in the Bilble. The Word of God can and has been distorted by all types of religion. As for this poor family i would like to suggest that maybe you find yourselves a good strong bible believing church of non denominational standing; and start building a relationship or build on your relationship with Jesus Christ. This relationship is very very scriptural, as you probably know.

bwithd says...
3:12pm Thu 18 Mar 10

john the baptist baptised all, all day long ,refused none and not one of them was catholic. when is a church not a church..when they go against the true teachings and meanings that are written in the good book. some churches may look like a church and sound like a church but be ye not deceived for they deceive many so that ye shall not know ye truth and ye shall not be set free and their coffers fill with more gold and their robot converts grow all the more in number, ye hath been warned.

Veritas10 says...
3:23pm Thu 18 Mar 10

Stop using this as an opportunity to promote barmy born again nonsense. The priest messed this up, and it is not representative of the whole Catholic Church. The kid is already in a catholic school, though not baptised, and I thought that this would have been an ideal opportunity to regularise the situation and baptise the poor pagan. The only one who has come out badly in this is the barmy priest!

bwithd says...
3:39pm Thu 18 Mar 10

and i say unto ye that it is easier for a camel to pass thru the eye of a needle for it is written..' ye can lead a horse to water but a pencil must be lead'

BarneyHK says...
3:53pm Thu 18 Mar 10

The RC church is a farce from top to bottom. This institution has no credibility at any level. This family got off lightly with 'embarrassment'. Hundreds of thousands of others were not so lucky. This anachronistic organisation which for decades condoned the rape and abuse of children should never be forgiven. Even the present pope is having to duck for cover. No surprises here. Better to get off your knees of a Sunday morning and take a brisk walk in the country. Clear your head of superstition and nonsense and understand that your life today has everything to do with biology and nothing to do with 2000 year old codswallop.

Mison says...
4:06pm Thu 18 Mar 10

BarneyHK wrote:
The RC church is a farce from top to bottom. This institution has no credibility at any level. This family got off lightly with 'embarrassment'. Hundreds of thousands of others were not so lucky. This anachronistic organisation which for decades condoned the rape and abuse of children should never be forgiven. Even the present pope is having to duck for cover. No surprises here. Better to get off your knees of a Sunday morning and take a brisk walk in the country. Clear your head of superstition and nonsense and understand that your life today has everything to do with biology and nothing to do with 2000 year old codswallop.
Why 2000 years just a number in your head or r u referring to something more significant.

Ken Shuffles says...
4:07pm Thu 18 Mar 10

This Child has shown everyone, that education and dogma are not compatible without some degree of Clerical and very Catholic humiliation being haphazardly dished out as a result. Dogma, in this case Catholic once again, has been invited to assist in this ritualistic process of humiliation.

BarneyHK says...
4:10pm Thu 18 Mar 10

Veritas10 wrote:
The priest failed in his duty according to canon 851 to instruct the child's parents and godparents. He was also wrong to stop the ceremony a few minutes before it was to start. Canon 868 says that there only has to be a reseaonable hope that the child will be raised as Catholic. The Parents have a good case to sue for damages and emotional distress. They should consult a solicitor. Clearly, the priest concerned did not have a good seminary formation and perhaps needs a refresher course in Church Law.
Yes - they may indeed have a cause of action but in which forum? The civil courts don't have locus standi over church law. On the other hand they could bring an action in tort on the basis that the priest had a duty of care to ensure that the costs the family were to incur for the christening were not unreasonably wasted by making sure the chil was 'eligible' to be a part of the ceremoney. Emotional distress - uhmmm - not sure if that would have legs. If I were representing the priest I'd argue that the RC church is incapable of inflicting emotional distress for such a low level negative act when their reputation for paedophelia, child rape and emotional torture so clearly sets out their moral benchmark. The most this family would likely win would be the taxi fares and the cost of the do afterwards, but even then damages mitigation would suggest that they had to eat lunch anyway!! Hardly worth it - but then again, why are we surprised. The RC would easily be dismissed as a joke if their real crimes were not so bloody serious.

Ken Shuffles says...
4:34pm Thu 18 Mar 10

Kids need Hope not Pope!

Veritas10 says...
4:54pm Thu 18 Mar 10

Yes I know what you mean Barney - our area has had a few nasty priests, and I couldn't think why anyone would want to do the job now. A senior canon in Blackburn was done for drink driving - the former hospital chaplain about 10 years ago was done for child ****. A priest at nearby Stoneyhurst done for child abuse, and recently a catholic priest next door in Preston was done for waving his bit around in a public toilet. They should let them get married !

jakdekipper says...
5:55pm Thu 18 Mar 10

the church and its religion is based on trust as is any church and religion, and as a trust based system when people lead you to believe that they are practising members of that religion, you should be able to trust in what they say.
father David was misled to believe that they were practising memebers of the RC church and when he found out this wasn't the case his hands were tied.
maybe if they didnt try to lie thier way in in the first place the whole incident wouldn't have arisen.

Veritas10 says...
6:03pm Thu 18 Mar 10

I don't think it is fair to say that the couple lied - even the priest says "they are as regular as regular". The fault is fairly on the priest's shoulders - he admits that he needs to do more thorough checks and ask the right questions. Besides, as I have already made clear, he could have gone ahead with the Christening and it would NOT have been against church law.

jakdekipper says...
6:12pm Thu 18 Mar 10

only the mother has been attending services and that only for the last 3 months. and when asked a long time before the plan service she told the father and i quote " i was rasied a catholic". if that isnt decieving i dont know what is.

Veritas10 says...
6:26pm Thu 18 Mar 10

She could have been raised as an anglo-catholic? besides she could have been baptised as a child in the C of E received communion in the catholic church as a child, and would hence have become a catholic de facto. You are expecting simple lay folk to know all the intricacies of canon law and doctrine. The pastoral approach would have beeb to proceed with the baptism, and invite the parents to become full members of the RC chuch. Love how the spokesman for the diocese says that "if either parent wants to become a catholic then that possibility would be open to them" - hardly warm enthusiasm or the missionary call of Christ to welcome new disciples! No wonder the church is dying in the UK!

jakdekipper says...
6:38pm Thu 18 Mar 10

sorry c of e dont get baptised they get christened, and as for being cristened c of e then being allowed and RC holy communinion thats a no go. and my final comment on the subject is, if the parents wanted to be honest they could have been honest in the interview for the paper and told them that, the priest actually phoned the bishop to ask for his advise. it was the bishops who said that he couldnt carry on with the service

jh372 says...
6:53pm Thu 18 Mar 10

knowing father chinnery as i do,i'm pretty sure he made a genuine honest mistake.priests are human like the rest of us.i'd be more concerned as to why the need to sensationalise this matter and run to the press and heve this traumatic ordeal splashed all over the front cover.

Totally says...
7:59pm Thu 18 Mar 10

It looks like the Jeremy Kyle factor.

blylad says...
9:12pm Thu 18 Mar 10

At my children's catholic school there are 211 students- 205 of which are baptised catholics, however only 30 or so of these kids are at mass on Sunday so to refuse baptism to a child at a catholic school who does go to mass seems very odd.
Also, people keep using this thing about a 'very small minority' of priests who have been involved in sex scandals to tar and feather the whole catholic faith- some fathers have abused children but we don't believe that all dads are like that- also there was a paedophile nursery nurse but everyone still sends their kids to nursery! It is abhorant that these things happen and I certainly don't condone it but not all priests are the same.

e=mc says...
9:47pm Thu 18 Mar 10

bwithd wrote:
john the baptist baptised all, all day long ,refused none and not one of them was catholic. when is a church not a church..when they go against the true teachings and meanings that are written in the good book. some churches may look like a church and sound like a church but be ye not deceived for they deceive many so that ye shall not know ye truth and ye shall not be set free and their coffers fill with more gold and their robot converts grow all the more in number, ye hath been warned.
Maybe because John the Baptist was Jewish and he was baptising Jews. Jesus himself was baptised in the river Jordan by John the Baptist.

Veritas10 says...
11:14pm Thu 18 Mar 10

jakdekipper wrote:
sorry c of e dont get baptised they get christened, and as for being cristened c of e then being allowed and RC holy communinion thats a no go. and my final comment on the subject is, if the parents wanted to be honest they could have been honest in the interview for the paper and told them that, the priest actually phoned the bishop to ask for his advise. it was the bishops who said that he couldnt carry on with the service
Baptism and Christening are just different names for the same sacrament. In fact the Roman Catholic Church recognises the validity of Baptisms conducted according to the rites of the Anglican Church. I find it hard to believe that the Priest phoned the bishop for his advice. He would have mentioned that he was carrying out the bishop's instructions to the parents. The parents have every right to be aggrieved, they were humiliated in front of the friends and family, and were sincerely looking forward to the baptism of their son. It is even more ridiculous when the priest had the authority to go ahead with the ceremony, but his misinterpretation of the Church's code of canon law prevented him from doing so.

Veritas10 says...
11:18pm Thu 18 Mar 10

Pope John Paul II gave communion to Tony Blair when he was still an Anglican. He also offerd holy communion to Prince Charles and Diana when they visited Rome, but they respectfully declined. It is possible for Anglicans, if they believe in the sacrament of the eucharist as taught by the catholic church, to receive Holy Communion whilst on holiday and there are no Anglican churches in the area.

Totally says...
11:32pm Thu 18 Mar 10

Veritas10 - you show a great level of knowledge of the laws of the Catholic church and judging by your name you place a lot of emphasis on the truth and yet you appear willing to judge this story simply on how it is related in the news.
I get the impression that Jakdekipper has reliable information that the family misled the priest and that the priest DID contact the bishop so this story (like most) may not be quite the way it is being portrayed. Often the simple truth does not make a newsworthy story.

Veritas10 says...
12:31am Fri 19 Mar 10

You have to be careful about using the word misled - are you saying that the parents actively sought to deceive the parish priest? Or were they simply ignorant as to requirments for baptism? If they did deceive the priest intentionally then he was well within his right to stop the ceremony. If it was a case of ignorance then the blame is fully at the priest's doorstep. I do know a little about ecclesiatical law, but wouldn't have raised the issue if the priest had not have said that "it would have been illegal to go ahead", which is quite clearly not the case.

aussie odg says...
9:27am Fri 19 Mar 10

my niece is not catholic but applied for a catholic school and was accepted,it costs money but the rules""always wear your attire until you get home,laptop supplied you pay you keep it not like secondry schools here in oz.the rules are like consantration camp,my nephew her dad did not want her to go but mum says yes.there is a local school 2 mins away my 3 kids went ther and have got good jobs etc.i am convinced catholic schools are there to make money as i find my kids did ok,maybe you have different requirements in uk ps i went to bangor st lol

Ken Shuffles says...
1:51pm Fri 19 Mar 10

Thank God Jesus didn't follow the black and white Catholic rules of Bishops and Popes.

Ken Shuffles says...
1:57pm Fri 19 Mar 10

As far as the organised religion of his day was concerned he had no time whatsoever for it. All he had to say about religion was - Let the dead baptise the dead.

michael106 says...
7:34pm Fri 19 Mar 10

It is good that the Priest made a decision based on what he felt to be correct. It is a historical fact that Jesus was Crucified for doing this. Ignorant and unjust judges condemmed him to death for it.
How is it that the family did not know they were not Catholics before the morning? This can not be the fault of the Priest alone. It also sounds like the only reason they are trying to have the child Baptised is to go to a school similar to the one the mother went to - This is another reason why the Priest should not have continued.
It makes me see the Catholic church in a very positive light to think decisions are made based on belief, truth and integrity - rather then for popular demand or to increase favour!

Ken Shuffles says...
9:16pm Fri 19 Mar 10

Belief ? you mean the Priest was trying to impress a Papal regulation. I don't see anything resembling any Truth in a Catholic Rule being followed or not followed. What are all these thousands of rules for anyway ? Can't be much integrity left if Gods Grace depends first on someone following the right rule. It seems to me, all those rules have ever resulted in is a lot of misery and confusion and struggle.

BarneyHK says...
10:16pm Fri 19 Mar 10

Ken Shuffles wrote:
Belief ? you mean the Priest was trying to impress a Papal regulation. I don't see anything resembling any Truth in a Catholic Rule being followed or not followed. What are all these thousands of rules for anyway ? Can't be much integrity left if Gods Grace depends first on someone following the right rule. It seems to me, all those rules have ever resulted in is a lot of misery and confusion and struggle.
Hear hear!

Ken Shuffles says...
10:37pm Fri 19 Mar 10

If there is only one God, then mans own God given logic would suggest a supreme God must be an Atheist or at the very least, certainly NOT a believer.....

If it's good enough for God not to believe in a God.......

Cheers Barney, I've been to Ipswich a couple of times.

BarneyHK says...
10:50pm Fri 19 Mar 10

Hey - someone reported my post suggesting the self-abolition of the RC church for the horrendous crimes it has condoned!

And the LET took it down!!

If it was good enough for Henry VIII...

BarneyHK says...
10:53pm Fri 19 Mar 10

The irony here is that I was actually baptized in that self-same church 47 years ago! Of course, I had no say in the matter!

Veritas10 says...
11:04pm Fri 19 Mar 10

michael106 wrote:
It is good that the Priest made a decision based on what he felt to be correct. It is a historical fact that Jesus was Crucified for doing this. Ignorant and unjust judges condemmed him to death for it. How is it that the family did not know they were not Catholics before the morning? This can not be the fault of the Priest alone. It also sounds like the only reason they are trying to have the child Baptised is to go to a school similar to the one the mother went to - This is another reason why the Priest should not have continued. It makes me see the Catholic church in a very positive light to think decisions are made based on belief, truth and integrity - rather then for popular demand or to increase favour!
The problem was that it was a subjective decision based on his own personal views, not the objective teaching of church law which would have permitted the baptism. Perhaps the parent's thought that the main thing to being a catholic is going to a catholic school and church now and again. It was the priest's duty to instruct the parents as to the demands of baptism. Not to simply say, turn up in two weeks time at noon! Instruction sessions are designed to check the parent's level of understanding, and to supplement what is lacking. If the priest had done his job then none of this would have happened. Finally, the priest should have gone ahead with the baptism, and informed the school so that extra provision could be made to educate the child and his parents in the faith. That would have been the pastoral approach, and the one favoured by Our Lord. To humiliate them like this in front of friends and family for his own error was abhorent. I hope he apologises to the family, and reaches out to them.

BarneyHK says...
11:25pm Fri 19 Mar 10

I reckon the kid got off lucky!

Ken Shuffles says...
11:59pm Fri 19 Mar 10

:))))))..... The Child could quite easily have been spiritualy confused for an eternity!!!! Your a very wise soul Barney. (when will they learn, we are just supposed to delight in ourselves)

are you ten behind or ten in front, I can never remember.?

lady88 says...
12:01am Sat 20 Mar 10

this is silly as my son was christened at this church and Fr Chinnery is a lovely man. When you arrange a date with the Fr he asks if one of the parents is RC and also one of the godparents are too. SO this woman lied to him. Its her own fault !!

Ken Shuffles says...
12:14am Sat 20 Mar 10

Veritas, as long as I am alive, as long as I Breathe, The Heaven AFTER D?E?A?T? approach is never going to be anything at all, either remotely or clericly possible, let alone correct or pastoral. I would even say, thinking about it, the whole book of rules thing is more pissterical than pistorial I reckon.

Either way...

Ken Shuffles says...
12:28am Sat 20 Mar 10

As long as I Breathe, Heaven before Death is an opportunity. Immortality is an opportunity. It was Religions error that reduced it to only a possibility. In the meantime, to cover their tracks of deceipt with a reason, they blamed Woman...

Ken Shuffles says...
12:45am Sat 20 Mar 10

As long as I am alive, Heaven, the residing place of the Immortal, Heaven, is strictly a BEFORE death opportunity for 6-7 Billion People. +/-

Ken Shuffles says...
12:50am Sat 20 Mar 10

Atheists and Theists alike are warmly invited.....

BarneyHK says...
10:14am Sat 20 Mar 10

Ken Shuffles wrote:
:))))))..... The Child could quite easily have been spiritualy confused for an eternity!!!! Your a very wise soul Barney. (when will they learn, we are just supposed to delight in ourselves)

are you ten behind or ten in front, I can never remember.?
Ken: WA +8 QLD +10. A bloody long way away from St Joseph's on Audley Range. I still have my baptism certificate!! (the old draughty one, not the hi-tech centrally heated one there now). The child needs pipes not popes!

Veritas10 says...
11:27am Sat 20 Mar 10

lady88 wrote:
this is silly as my son was christened at this church and Fr Chinnery is a lovely man. When you arrange a date with the Fr he asks if one of the parents is RC and also one of the godparents are too. SO this woman lied to him. Its her own fault !!
So that's the extent of his preperation for the gateway to christian life?
No wonder it turned into a fiasco!

michael106 says...
12:15pm Sat 20 Mar 10

Veritas10 wrote:
Yes I know what you mean Barney - our area has had a few nasty priests, and I couldn't think why anyone would want to do the job now. A senior canon in Blackburn was done for drink driving - the former hospital chaplain about 10 years ago was done for child ****. A priest at nearby Stoneyhurst done for child abuse, and recently a catholic priest next door in Preston was done for waving his bit around in a public toilet. They should let them get married !
Dear Veritas10, you are full of judgment and quite clearly have issues with either the priest in question or the Catholic Church. This was illustrated quite clearly when you brought the ridiculous argument to the debate yesterday about celibacy of catholic priests being linked to paedophilia. Your superficial attack on another catholic tradition suggests that all single people are potential paedophiles and conversely that all married people should not be paedophiles. What does this say about your line of reasoning to debate these issues? All the main world religions hold that sex outside of marriage is not ideal. Therefore all unmarried people are as celibate as a catholic priest. And just for your information, not all marriages prove to demonstrate fidelity. Hence the start of the Church of England! But it is good that everyone can see the depth of your augment is not personal to this priest in Blackburn but is clearly just an opportunity for you to have a bash at the Catholics! Keep going if it makes you feel better.

BarneyHK says...
12:27pm Sat 20 Mar 10

michael106 wrote:
Veritas10 wrote:
Yes I know what you mean Barney - our area has had a few nasty priests, and I couldn't think why anyone would want to do the job now. A senior canon in Blackburn was done for drink driving - the former hospital chaplain about 10 years ago was done for child ****. A priest at nearby Stoneyhurst done for child abuse, and recently a catholic priest next door in Preston was done for waving his bit around in a public toilet. They should let them get married !
Dear Veritas10, you are full of judgment and quite clearly have issues with either the priest in question or the Catholic Church. This was illustrated quite clearly when you brought the ridiculous argument to the debate yesterday about celibacy of catholic priests being linked to paedophilia. Your superficial attack on another catholic tradition suggests that all single people are potential paedophiles and conversely that all married people should not be paedophiles. What does this say about your line of reasoning to debate these issues? All the main world religions hold that sex outside of marriage is not ideal. Therefore all unmarried people are as celibate as a catholic priest. And just for your information, not all marriages prove to demonstrate fidelity. Hence the start of the Church of England! But it is good that everyone can see the depth of your augment is not personal to this priest in Blackburn but is clearly just an opportunity for you to have a bash at the Catholics! Keep going if it makes you feel better.
Excellent! Lots of stuff for us to get our teeth into here! Bring it on guys!

disgusted tunbridge wells says...
2:05pm Sat 20 Mar 10

To avoid this problem in the future why not have the service carried out in the pub by the barmaid?
Pubs could be linked to specific schools
Happy days

bbarrett says...
2:10pm Sat 20 Mar 10

It has taken great courage for the priest to stand up and not collude with the 'farce' the family had intended to make of this sacrament. To continue would have been offensive to God and the child.

It is imperative that a church has ‘rules’. These have been instituted by God and in turn, passed to St Peter “Upon this rock I build my church”. Without rules it could not uphold Jesus teaching. Therefore a Pope, Bishop or priest cannon overturn them on a whim.

It must have been such a painful position for Fr Chinnery to be placed in. So unfair for the family to do this to him. However, he has stood firm to and I am sure he will be rewarded and one day here the words “Well done my good and faithful servant you have served your master well”.

bbarrett says...
2:28pm Sat 20 Mar 10

Veritas10 wrote:
The priest failed in his duty according to canon 851 to instruct the child's parents and godparents. He was also wrong to stop the ceremony a few minutes before it was to start. Canon 868 says that there only has to be a reseaonable hope that the child will be raised as Catholic. The Parents have a good case to sue for damages and emotional distress. They should consult a solicitor. Clearly, the priest concerned did not have a good seminary formation and perhaps needs a refresher course in Church Law.
Cannon law has to be applied in the context to the situation. In this case, to bring all the family into the church on that day contradicts your argument. completely. 'Reasonable hope' does not apply in this case, on THE day there appeared to be no evidence that the child was to be raise a Catolic in the true sense of the word. To explore the family intentions further could take a long time, not a quick chat. Fr Chinnery had no option by acll alccounts. I suspect you know this already but you appear to have a personal grievance with the preist concerned by how emotive your messages are.

bbarrett says...
2:28pm Sat 20 Mar 10

Veritas10 wrote:
The priest failed in his duty according to canon 851 to instruct the child's parents and godparents. He was also wrong to stop the ceremony a few minutes before it was to start. Canon 868 says that there only has to be a reseaonable hope that the child will be raised as Catholic. The Parents have a good case to sue for damages and emotional distress. They should consult a solicitor. Clearly, the priest concerned did not have a good seminary formation and perhaps needs a refresher course in Church Law.
Cannon law has to be applied in the context to the situation. In this case, to bring all the family into the church on that day contradicts your argument. completely. 'Reasonable hope' does not apply in this case, on THE day there appeared to be no evidence that the child was to be raise a Catolic in the true sense of the word. To explore the family intentions further could take a long time, not a quick chat. Fr Chinnery had no option by acll alccounts. I suspect you know this already but you appear to have a personal grievance with the preist concerned by how emotive your messages are.

Ken Shuffles says...
12:42pm Sun 21 Mar 10

I suppose as long as the child understands he/she is doing it for God it's a sacred sacrament thing. ?

Ken Shuffles says...
12:43pm Sun 21 Mar 10

WE DONT NEED RELIGIONS ANYMORE!

Ken Shuffles says...
1:53pm Sun 21 Mar 10

Too much Incest!

BarneyHK says...
1:57pm Sun 21 Mar 10

This just in from API...

German archbishop says abuse covered up for years


Buzz up!0 votes
SendSharePrint
15 mins ago
BERLIN – A news magazine reports that the head of the German Bishops Conference admits the Roman Catholic church consciously covered up cases of sexual abuse by priests.
Weekly magazine Focus reported Sunday that Archbishop Robert Zollitsch of Freiburg, who also heads the Bishops Conference, said that "sexual abuse was covered up for decades by society."

Say no more.....

Ken Shuffles says...
2:07pm Sun 21 Mar 10

THE POPE REPRESENTS THE RELIGIOUS ORGANISATIONS OF SATAN! as far as True Human development is concerned. Religion is the poison of Satan. Dressed in the white cloak of Satan.

When was the last time Nafeesa Shan interveiwed an Atheist ?

BarneyHK says...
2:09pm Sun 21 Mar 10

I wonder how many priests join the RC church to prey not pray?

Totally says...
11:21pm Sun 21 Mar 10

BarneyHK - I don't know what the Equality laws are like in Australia but in the UK it is against the law to abuse someone because of their faith. You are posting absolute filth on a public website which could be read by children - who is abusing who?

BarneyHK says...
11:34pm Sun 21 Mar 10

I am not abusing anyone. I am stating pure fact. I have not pointed the finger at any one individual. I am poitning out that the RC church, by its own admission, has stated categorically its priests have sexually abused children. Sexual abuse takes many forms; I could describe a few more forms of the abuse, but I think you get the picture. Perhaps if this abuse was more properly described for what it is, and the subject was not subjected to 'sweep it under the carpet' censureship, such as that practised from time to time by the LET, then these poor kids would not have to suffer this abhorrent abuse of their human rights.


‘LEFT IN CHAOS’: Mum Janine Wood and her son Jamie SHOCK: St Joseph’s Church, Audley Range.

‘LEFT IN CHAOS’: Mum Janine Wood and her son Jamie

SHOCK: St Joseph’s Church, Audley Range.



Most popular


Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses