The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1911-08-12
SECTAR|AN ZEAL
CURBED BY Law
A Court Decision Which Testifies
to Breadth of Religious Toler-
alton in America.
Orphan Children Must be Brought
up in the Faith of Their
Parents.
Re-baptizing Child Does not
Change the Religion of the
Child.

A case has just been decided in
Philadelphia which will be of general
interest to persons Of all creeds in as
much as it concerns the religious
rights Of orphan children. The case
Sessions for the County of Philadcl-
phia and the opinion was handed down
by Judge Stake.
The case involved the question
whether or not it was legal for Pro-
testant orphanage to bring up a
| Catholic child as a Protestant. In
September, 1909, Margaret Riley, who
was then six years of age, was picked
up OH the streets of Philadelphia and
sent to Presbyterian orphanage.
Both of the child's parents were dead.
| her nearest living relative being an
aged and destitute grandmother. Last
March the case was brought to the at
tention of certain Catholics who APP
pealed to the court for the transfer
of the child to Catholic orphanage
in as much as the child's parents both
died Catholics and had the child bap-
tized and brought up in that faith.
The Presbyterian orphanage there
upon asked leave to procure other evil
dence, ana subsequently notified The
court that the child had been re- bap-
tized a Presbyterian. and requested
court in it's opinion refers to this with
scorn.
In his opinion Judge Stake said:
"Since the hearing Of the case, dur
ing which the Judgment of the court
was suspended, as it had been inti
mated to the court that another hear
ing would be asked upon the part of
those who claimed that the child
should remain in the Presbyterian or
phanage, the court was Informed nj
chambers. when the maternal grand
mother and young man, the mater.
nal uncle of the child, Margaret Riley.
appeared in company with a Mrs. Ger
trude NJ. koerncr, that the child was
now Protestant; that she had been
at the instance Of Mrs. Koerner. re-
baptized by Protestant Clergyman:
whercupon the court expressed It's re-
gret that such course had been talk
en-, and it's opinion that such second
baptism was entirely nugatory, of nc
validity and should not have taken
place: that the Roman Catholic
Church recognized the baptism Of q
Church, and that even where there was
doubt as to whether the person haC
been baptized or not. conditional hap
tism is given, with the proviso that II
the person had not already been bap-
tizcd, then 1t was not baptized bu
that such conditional baptism was
whether a valid Christian baptism
had Heretofore been given the person
by II non-'Catholic.
1t is common knowledge that bap
I tism is the first Of the two great sac
rHments ordained by the Lord Jesus
Christ. He having commanded th'
making of disciples of all nations
"baptizing them in the name Of tn
Father and of the Son and Of the Hol.
. Ghost Matt. xviii, 19): also that b.
i. baptism the person baptized became a
once member Of the Christian
Church. it being necessary for ever.
one to submit to baptism. to be bap
tzed and to keep to that baptism. il
which the Church teaches God give
and seals unto those baptized al
eternal salvation. 1t Is also recorded
in Mark xvi, 16: "Hc that believctt
and is baptized, shall be saved I
, is clear, therefore, that there can b
no such thing as a second or re-bap
tism of the same person.
It was further shown that the stat
! laws pTONlue dIHpIe sdles udiuo l.
q cases of this kind. The court Is re
!. quired by statute in making commit
t. ment of children to place them as ia
Il as possible in the care of persons hav
e ing the same religious belief as tha
of the child or with associations whicl
D