Does anyone else think there is NO such thing as an illegitimate child?

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0422pope-secretary22.html

<snip>As the health of John Paul II declined, Sodano was part of an inner circle, including Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who governed the Vatican. On occasion, Sodano issued important policy statements.

Last October, for example, he unveiled a new Vatican stance on Iraq that replaced its unbending opposition to the U.S.-led war, saying that governments must help stabilize and rebuild the country.

"The child has been born," Sodano said then. "It may be illegitimate, but it's here, and it must be reared and educated."

more

Just because a child is born out of wedlock or the childs parent not married in a Catholic church, does that somehow make an innocent child illegitimate?

I always thought that this illegitimate label placed on children was wrong as hell. My wife and I were married by a justice of peace. Does that make my children illegitimate in the eyes of the Catholic church? They sure are not illegitimate to my wife and I. Just what is gained by using this label on an innocent child? Can anyone answer this question?

And I was raised as a Catholic too. And the bullshit about a baby needing to be baptized so they could be absolved of "original sin" has always made me angry as too. Just how in the hell can an innocent baby be guilty of "original sin"? What has any baby done to be accused of having "original sin" or any sin whatsoever? I think this is just about the most crazy shit I have ever heard of.

Don

[Crunchy Frog]

1. I guess it's just being used there as a figure of speech.

It should never be used to describe an actual human being. I think that goes without saying. I don't think it's necessarily a problem to use the word as a metaphor.

[NNN0LHI]

5. Its not just a metaphor in the Catholic churh

http://www.americancatholic.org/Messenger/Sep1999/Wiseman.asp#F1

The Church and Illegitimate Children



Q: Recently I have been thinking about the fate and position of the illegitimate child.

I have been researching Church history and the history of bastardy and have come to realize that the Church rules put men at risk for illicit sexual involvement both through its laws of celibacy and its laws against contraception.

History shows that from the beginning of Church laws supposedly celibate men were occasionally fathering children. The Church claims to care about children so much that it stands firmly against abortion in any and all cases.


<snip>4) Sex outside of marriage and “illegitimacy” continue to tear families and marriages apart. They are the source of grave social problems. The current debate over our national welfare system and other social problems is evidence of that.

5) I found no specific canonical demands on a cleric toward a child he fathered outside marriage. Most penalties are for committing the sexual acts themselves. The cleric who fathers a child, however, has all the responsibilities toward the child that any father has. By natural and moral law he must provide for the child.

6) It remains sadly true that the sins of parents are often visited on their children.

[NNN0LHI]

15. And if it was being used as a figure of speech as you suggest...

>>>"The child has been born," Sodano said then. "It may be illegitimate, but it's here, and it must be reared and educated."<<<

...it would be a damn poor example of using it as one. Because I notice in the statement that they say "it's here, and it must be reared and educated", but the word loved is not used. I agree that war should never be described as something that is loved. But an innocent child regardless of whether his or her parents are married or not sure should be loved. I just wanted to make that clear.

Don

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. Matthew Fox

wrote a great book called "Original Blessing", which, as I recall, basically said that the concept of original sin was, at the very least, outdated. I think this book was one of the things that caused him to be cast out of the Catholic Church.

In the Methodist Church where I grew up, baptism made more sense-it was a public commitment by the parents to raise the child in a Christian household.

And yeah, I get mad at the term "illegitimate". At one time, in terms of inheritance, etc, it might have made sense, but it was never right to call a child illegitimate-like the kid had a choice in the matter.

[OneBlueSky]

16. "Original Blessing" is a great piece of work . . .

in which Matt Fox argues, quite convincingly, that both nature and the great religious traditions, when properly understood, favor the notion that we come into the world not burdened with original sin, but sanctified with original blessing . . . a religious tradition that he calls "creation spirituality" . . .

"We must choose. A spirituality is a way, a path. We do not come to two paths in a road and say, out of timidity and fear to make a decision, 'I will go down both roads at once.' The West has been traveling the fall/redemption path for centuries. We all know it; we all have it ingrained in our souls; we have given it 95 percent of our energies in churches both Catholic and Protestant. And look where it has gotten us. Into sexism, militarism, racism, genocide against native peoples, biocide, consumerist capitalism, and violent communism. I believe it is time we choose another path. The path that is the most ancient, the most healing, the most feminist of the paths, even in the biblical tradition itself. If we throw ourselves into this path, who can predict what the happy results might be? After all, since the fourth century the followers of Jesus have rarely as a body explored this path." from the Introduction

[MADem]

3. A bit off topic, but kinda related

There are many famous Americans named ESPOSITO. It means, in Italian, exposed, and was the last name given to orphans or foundlings that were left at the church door. So, all of those Espositos are descendants of someone who was left at the door. The Italians put the accent on the second syllable, we tend to put it on the third.

I don't think there is such a thing as an illegitimate child, but I don't worry or get upset about pronouncements of people who have never had to worry about the raising of a kid themselves. I forgive them, for they know not what they say (which is just a nice way of saying, ignore them, for they talk out their ass!).

[ugarte]

4. These old priests are out of touch and out to lunch

In many places in Europe I suppose the majority of kids are illegitimate, by Catholic definitiion. My first child was born while his mother and I were just living together. Then we got married and had two more.

All three were baptized, and the Church couldn't care less as long as they're getting new Catholics.

[Fescue4u]

6. You are confusing the two definitions of illegitimate

A child born out of wedlock is by dictionary definiton illegitimate

But illegimate has another meanings, including false.

A child does NOT fit the 2nd definition.

Obviously the child is a child, a human breathing bady deserving of a good life. It is certainly a legitimate person.

I do agree that its a poor label, but it is what it is. Having said that..there IS a much worse name for a baby born out of wedlock that start with a B.

[enlightenment]

8. And that "B" word is used in more places than you'd think

I had my only child in 1980, in Colorado. I was single. Not only was I not allowed to note the father's name on the birth certificate, I discovered that Colorado Statute (which may have changed by now -- one would hope) referred to children born outside of marriage as, you guessed it, B******Ds.

"Legal" terminology or no, there is no reason to blame a child for what society perceives as a fault on the part of the parent/s.

Ridiculous.

[Crunchy Frog]

11. It's also an obsolete label IMO.

And I suppose the B word fits the definition also. You could simply say "the child of a single parent".

[Solly Mack]

7. I think there is no such thing

It's a mean, low, spiteful and petty label. It's meant to be used as a form of control. It's just one more way a group tries to control other people through (conveniently defined terms like) shame.

The only real shame comes in how society treats the child and it's parent.

[NicRic]

9. I have a better ?

Is there such a thing as a child that is not a beautiful gift from God ! I have'nt come accross one baby I did not want to hold and give love to !

[janx]

10. No child is illegitimate, literally or figuratively.

Whoever came up with that should have his/her head examined. It's deplorable.

[brook]

12. My final break...

came when I sought counseling after my divorce. I had married in another Church - and the Catholic priest I spoke with informed me that my two children were illegitimate in the eyes of the Catholic Church.

Though
I have rarely been to Mass since that time, I consider myself a Catholic. I pay no attention to their man-made rules. I just cut out the middle man. The God I know doesn't abandon anyone.

[Straight Shooter]

13. "Illegitimate" child? I refuse to recognize the term as legitimate.

However, there are some parents who have earned the term and some politicians who are clearly deserving of the term.

edit typo

[mcscajun]

14. All children are Legitimate. But if there must be some distinction in law

and custom, the archaic use of "natural" for children born out of wedlock sounds far more pleasant...and accurate.

"Natural issue" were distinguished from "lawful issue".

[Cleita]

18. That's just plain wrong.

All issue is natural issue. Lawful has nothing to do with it. Where the law has a right is to make rulings is on paternity and child support, no where else. If the couple should chose to be married then the child care arrangements should be specified or implied in the contract, like they have for over a millenium.

[mcscajun]

25. Exactly...all issue is natural issue. Whet they distinguished was that not

all natural issue was lawful.

[Cleita]

17. They used to put illigitimate on birth certificates and

baptismal certificates at one time. I had a friend who was plagued by this through her growing up years. It made it look like her mother was a slut and her father had abandoned her. There is no such thing as an illigitimate child and it goes to show how out of touch with reality those celibate old men in the Vatican are about family issues.

This is one of the reasons why I am so adamant that the concepts of family and marriage be clearly defined and separate. A marriage is a legal contract, nothing more and nothing less. A family is a biological unit usually, but can be a cobbled together one of unrelated people for the purpose of raising children or adults wishing to share their lives together. A marriage may end in divorce or the death of a partner but the family always remains even when the marriage contract is done.

[bush_is_wacko]

19. I see several posters that recognized the "figure of speech"

here. He's referring to Iraq. The war that led to this "re-construction" was "illegitimate" but now that the country is in ruins, it's leader deposed, and a new Parliament elected the world has an obligation to help it (Iraq)-the "child") rebuild, by giving it the knowledge and power to succeed.

As far as illegitimate children go. My husband and I are ALSO not married in the eyes of the Catholic church. We were married by a "minister for hire." I don't really care what the Catholic church thinks of our children, they are perfectly legitimate to me and the result of our love for each other and they have taught us a great deal about how to love and appreciate ALL children, regardless of whether they were born under less than perfect circumstances. I really do believe that "you can't know until you've been there" with regards to children. I also KNOW that MANY "legitimate" children are NOT loved and appreciated the way they should be. I have learned this through my children and their association with OTHER peoples kids.

Sadly, too many parents believe that their children are chattel and their only obligation to them is to keep food in their bellies and make sure they can spread capitalism (if that) when they have reached adulthood. Parents let their children run wild and teach them to believe in entitlement way too much anymore. They do not teach them to feel obligated to make the WORLD a better place anymore. They ONLY teach them to be competitive and trample over whoever they must to get ahead in this world. Often times they don't even bother to speak to them about societal obligations. Society is creating automatons out of their OWN children in large numbers and government is encouraging them to continue that process. Churches IMO, don't offer much guidance either. Making children sit through sermons discussing abortion, pedophilia, and homosexuality doesn't really provide much of a moral compass! And these are only the children living in parent/child homes! Not many people even give a shit about the ones living in foster homes or third world, poverty stricken countries!

I wish churches, schools, government, and PARENTS would make them the priority they need to be without condemning how they came into the world or "legitimizing" one parental relationship over another. The world has gone mad with power and labels IMO!

[Cleita]

21. Amen. My very liberal leanings would have

each child born in this country have a "nest egg" entitlement that would get them through their first eighteen years no matter what circumstances they are born in. This would be health care, education and safety net programs for those born in poverty that would ensure they and their parents or caregivers have adequate food, shelter and clothing for a secure and safe childhood.

I don't think even the most conservative of thinkers believe that a child shouldn't have these things because he should get a job or his parents are too lazy to get a job. Our collective children are why Mother Nature allows us to live beyond the age of twenty and that is to look after them, not just to make money and acquire possessions. That is our true purpose in life, nothing else.

[bush_is_wacko]

23. Without a doubt!

Unfortunately those without children consistently gripe about that obligation and are pissed as hell they aren't given special compensation for NOT procreating. They don't seem to understand the fact that every living thing on earth was meant to procreate. I am NOT trying to condemn them for not being able to do so or not choosing to do so. Only not being able to escape their little self centered existence long enough to recognize the reality of our existence!

If there is any "Liberal" group of citizens I have little sympathy for, it is the group who INSISTS on complaining they have no obligation to the worlds children because they have chosen not to or are unable to procreate. THIS group, which is MUCH smaller than they would have everyone else believe are some of the greediest and most selfish people I have EVER had the displeasure to come across. They will spout of at he mouth night and day about how unfair it is to give tax breaks and favoritism to people that are unable or unwilling to STOP procreating!

My children are the ONLY accomplishment in my life that will ever matter to me. The reality is, they are also the ONLY accomplishment that will ever matter to the world as a whole after I am gone!

[Cleita]

24. Yes, those people even have more of an obligation to

share in the welfare of the earth's children. Since they don't have their own to look after it is more important that they help at those who do whether on a personal level with relatives and friends and more so at a community level by paying those taxes that help raise the next generation.

How do they know that the next great leader of the world won't come out of that poverty stricken background if s/he has a good start in life? This in turn would benefit everyone.

On a more mundane level, if these people are business owners, wouldn't a pool of educated and healthy workers be beneficial to them? People don't undertstand that by giving to others in need ultimately benefits them in the end.

[Igel]

20. Some people like to purposely misparsenoun phrases and

compound nouns. I suspect many of them like words to have the meanings their etymologies would entail, as well.

Language doesn't work like that. "Greenhouses" don't need to be green; the horrors of having one made of clear glass! surely the English language is corrupted! "Custard pie" in some areas is a euphemism refering neither to something that may be eaten, in some sense, but is not food. And if you try to find the rules that govern English compounds and collocations, you're in for a headache. Compare "Come in and try our kiddie meal!" versus "Come in and try our corn meal!" And let's not consider rye bread vs. white bread. Applying logic here is misguided; language isn't logical in that sense. Trying to parse below the level of a lexicalized phrase is pointless.

If a society finds it appropriate or necessary to make some sort of legal distinction between a child born to a single mother and one born to an umarried parent, it may do so, and will find the linguistic means to make the distinction. As far as bastard sons were concerned, it was an important distinction for society at the time: bastards did not have the same inheritance rights, but a son born to a mother who lacked a husband because he died after she had conceived potentially could. Some people still make this distinction, for less weighty legal reasons. There is no real social stigma attached to being a bastard now, except in very narrow circles that such children are not likely to frequent when the label would matter; and precious little to producing one. Whether this is in everybody's best interests rather varies on the person possessing the interests, who's defining 'best', and what that definition is.

Wrangling over how a phrase is used isn't the problem, and frequently comes off as benighted or misguided by those that believe that language does not, in fact, shape reality in all its various aspects. We've chucked prescriptionist ideology long ago in favor of linguistic usage; why it's so hard for people to stop reverting to Renaissance thought for their linguistic views is difficult for me to understand.

[Cleita]

26. This is why there is legal language and illigitimate child

and bastard needs to be struck from it. As far as everyday usage, it can't be controlled except by the people who use it so those of us who feel that this language is sexist and bigoted need to work on that.

To explain, it is sexist because it attaches an unfavorable label to the woman who bore the child, and bigoted because most likely the child born to an unmarried couple might be members of an underclass in our society.

[Igel]

31. Sexist language can only be struck after the attitudes that give it

impetus are gone. African-Americans (and gays to a lesser extent) have had a long series of "empowering" names, only to have each, in turn, be rejected as something that did not bestow sufficient dignity. This altered as their personhood came not to be something offensive.

I'm unaware of the inheritance laws in the majority of the states that I've lived in, but from what I've noticed in the news illegitimate children can apparently freely petition the courts for a share in their father's estate. The legal language is mostly, and quite possibly, entirely expunged.

Neo-prescriptivism has not kept "gay" or "African-American" from being used as insults in some circles, nor did it prevent their antecedents from becoming pejorative. The terms' semantics shifted to match usage, as is expected. The word 'bastard' has shifted completely out of usage refering to children, in my experience, except as a conscious archaism or revival; it may be that the new sense drove out the older sense 'illegitimate child', since people did not wish to insult the child, and 'bastard' has come to mean little more than an insult.

When children being born out of wedlock not only has no social, but also no societal consequences for the children, the women, and others less directly involved, the term 'illegitimate child' will become obsolete except in a few narrowly religious circles. Should it undergo prescribed obsolescence by the language police, another will term will, no doubt, arise in its place to express the same idea. Prescriptivism, for all its glorious history, has yet to preserve a meaning that was dispreferred by speakers, or prevent a coinage that speakers thought apt.

[AzDar]

22. Good grief...who amongst us is qualified to pronounce someone

"legitimate" or "illegitimate"? Organized religion is a travesty.

[deadparrot]

27. I think it's a way-outdated term.

I mean, for the most part, the time of heirs and heiresses is over for most Americans. So the idea of whether or not a child is legitimately allowed to receive huge inheritances is both silly and insulting.

[LuPeRcALiO]

28. my mom used to call me a bastard son of a bitch regularly

but as far as I know I'm neither :)

[countryjake]

29. Just in terms of continued domination over women & children!

Ask most women who have gone thru nine months of pregnancy...the experience is very real, either with or without wedlock; it is very logical, in terms of sperm meets egg then your womb develops your offspring, with or without the presence of whomever presented that sperm. It is only deemed "illegitimate" when laws of mankind step in to judge any woman going thru such a natural process, in relationship to her status as being a member of any "family" or her "legal" connection to the man who presented said sperm. Seeing that the very definition of "family" goes back to the days of property owners or lords possessing chattel and slaves, as the way to identify their own collected wealth, thus "marriage" was instituted as the legal method of tranferring said wealth onto his "legitimate" descendants, you get a good picture of that age-old problem of patriarchy & how total domination is achieved by labeling human beings & natural processes as dependent on "fatherhood" or any woman's or child's "legal" relationship to any man.

Recognizing that all are created "equal", in relation to the earth's community, as a whole, & realizing that there is no legitimate reason for either a woman or her children to be judged according to their status in some "marriage" might go a long way in eliminating the stigma of illegitimacy.

[seabeyond]

30. that would make my two boys illegitimate

what if the bonds of illegitamacy far out way the what, legitamate?

so, my children wont mind the label in support of their fellow illegitimate brothers and sisters

[The Gunslinger]

32. Thanks for the post.

I 've never thought about that before. and I will never use that term again.