AIBU to be so cross with PIL over DD

[iamsoannoyed]

Well, I don't think I am being unreasonable to be annoyed but I would also like some perspective, as I am getting more and more annoyed over this. Very long, so apologies.

My DHs parents are very religious (FIL is a vicar). DH is not, although obviously was brought up in a religious household. He has not attended church regularly since he left home to go to university. In fact, I think the last time he went was when we stayed with them for christmas a few years ago. I am definitely not religious.

DH and I got married in a civil ceremony, although FIL gave a blessing afterwards as it meant a lot to him (and DH to have his dad do it)- which was nice. They were a little bit upset we chose not to have a religious ceremony, but it would have felt utterly hypocritical saying religious vows in church when I don't believe in any of it.

However, now PIL (well mostly MIL) are kicking up a fuss because we aren't getting our DD (their first GC) christened. DH and I spoke about it before she was born, and he isn't really bothered either way and I am against the whole idea, so we decided against it.

We hadn't discussed this with anyone else, as it really hadn't occurred to us that we would have to justify this decision.

Anyway, MIL told me a few days ago that they had "spoken to" BIL/SIL and they would be delighted to be god-parents and she was thinking the christening could be in the next few weeks- there were 2 free spaces at FIL church and which did we want? I was because I can't believe she thought it was up to her/them to decide our DD is getting christened, never mind organising said event without being asked to. Also, she has no business deciding who would be godparents, far less asking BIL and SIL to do it on our behalf.

I was pissed off, but I thought that she (mostly) meant well, was probably just a bit over excited and got ahead of herself (as she did after DD was born). I think she assumed that because religion is so important to her and because DH was christened, we would have DD christened too.

I tried to explain that DH and I had discussed it and decided against it. MIL got very upset and said it was selfish to deny our DD a welcoming to the community of the church, how could we exclude them from this etc etc. I told her it was really none of her business and to keep her opinions to herself. I thought that would be the end of it and decided to just ignore the stupidity of what MIL had done, and move on.

But no, we have had SIL (DH's sister) and BIL (DH's brother) on the phone, saying it is very selfish to deny PIL this, as it is really important to them. They are also hurt that godparent request has been revoked (as there is to be no christening).

I explained MIL had organised this and asked them without our knowledge or consent, but I was sorry they were upset re the godparent aspect. I also said that as DH is not religious and I am not religious. Why on earth would I want to stand up in church and pledge to bring my daughter according to the christian faith, when clearly this will not be the case? They still thought it was very unfair on MIL, I left it "we'll just have to agree to disagree".

Anyway, she's been on the phone to DH pleading to him to change his mind. He has said a firm "no", but she has been crying and making him feel terrible. We came up with a compromise- we have heard of other parents who have had civil naming ceremonies and thought that could give everyone the chance to welcome DD in a formal way, and FIL could do a blessing similar to that he did at our wedding so he could be involved.

FIL seemed happy with this, and was really touched to be asked. MIL, however, is still not happy as we are not going to be having a "proper christening" and won't be bring her DGD up in a religious way.

I am getting increasingly angry about this. The final straw was today, when she suggested they do the christening anyway but I "wouldn't have to be there" if I didn't like it.

I am now furious. I admit I lost my temper at the last conversation and told MIL to go take a running jump- there was no way that was happening, and I expected this to be the last conversation we have on the matter and until she could apologise she was to leave me alone and then hung up the phone.

MIL phoned DH, who pointed out she had gone a bit far- not that she was very apologetic to him and still insisted we were being unfair.

AIBU to demand an apology? And to want to minimise contact with MIL until she can accept the way we are choosing to bring up DD- I don't want MIL to ram religion down her throat against our wishes, and feel if she can't respect our wishes then she can only have supervised contact (not such a problem now, as DD is very small).

By the way, FIL has been very reasonable and given he's the vicar, I thought he'd be more upset than MIL.

[Pigsmummy]

Youmustbejoking75 you said that if the priest refused to baptise then the grandparents "would do it themselves"? What did you mean by that?

[HannahG315]

My parents in law and fiancé aren't religious but my family are catholic.

My fiancé was against baptism, but I explained that I except if our son does not want religion/ faith in his life, but I don't want to him to be denied it either.

My religion has been so important to me at times when I felt alone, I felt it was important to expose my son to that also so he can use it if necessary.

The point I'm trying to make, is that I know religion can be viewed negatively by some, but for others it can be a lifeline and your MIL intentions may be that she wants to give your son that community/ faith.

I think she's gone about it in a terrible fashion! I'd be so so hurt in your position.

I just want to offer my view on baptism, so that you can try and empathise with her when you get a chance to sit and discuss together. You need to hear why it's so important to her, but more importantly she needs to be told your willing to take her opinions and this is a decision YOU have made.

Good luck. I hope you can resolve the matter and that she respects you more in the future xxxxx

[CSIJanner]

Actually, I disagree with PP and think you should go for supervised contact. Whilst someone can christen a child without parental permission if the child is gravely ill for example, a relative or guardian (like a babysitter in the parents absence) can still have a child christened even though they dont have the right to under church law if they are unscrupulous about it. Whilst it is against church law, the christening will still be valid. If you feel that strongly about religion, then you should go supervised.

[innisglas]

I didn't feel so strongly about this and let her DD's grandparents organise a Christening for her because it was obviously important to them. Next thing I knew they were deciding what school she was going to go to.

Your MIL sounds awful. I would go a long way to please grandparents, but that is a step too far.

But I do think it is important for children to learn about religious beliefs as they are growing up, I have always thought that, even when I was an atheist, because I've known so many adults fall for the first bit of spiritual teaching they hear, through ignorance.

[pgwispa]

I thought that the point of a christening was to state your intention to raise the child in the faith. Many vicars and priests refuse to christen children without proof of commitment from the parents - usually in the form of regular church attendance. It seems wrong that your fil would disregard that for the sake of family pride.

[Armadale]

I'm with FrontForward, I'm also a Christian and also don't believe in infant baptism.

Jesus got on with everyone, excepting the religious types who went around telling everyone else how to live their lives. Them, not so much.

[HermioneWeasley]

YANBU and I'd be ignoring her until she apologises.

I suspect it's symptomatic of other boundary issues with MIL

[youmustbejoking75]

The pp told me anyone can baptise a child in rc. For example if u were in an accident with an unbaptised child and u thought they might die any Catholic can do it. He telks me loads of grannies sneak up to him saying"father I baptised him last weekend etc!"

Its just the idea that having no religion makes it ok to insist on it. Nobody would think it ok were the op in a different faith.

I understand people's fears and all that, but it doesn't invalidate the op s choice to be an atheist.

[FixItUpChappie]

The worst that could happen is the MIL having a Christening for the OP's DD without the OP's knowledge or presence...

Yes, this would make me furious. Really - my head would spin around 360 degrees too...I'm just saying OP doesn't KNOW her MIL would do that, its pure speculation. Would you curtail what could be a great relationship for the kids on speculation? Her MIL TOLD her the suggestion of doing it without OPs presence - that is not exactly sneaky

[youmustbejoking75]

And the pp says it is so funny the way they go on he tells them not to do it but they don't listen

[GertyD]

My aunt by marriage asked me how I would cope when DS and I were separated. I had no idea what she was on about and said so. She then went on to explain that as I was baptised as a Catholic and my DS was not then we would never meet in heaven when we died, as he would be in hell as an unbaptised bastard. My DS was 17 weeks old when she said this.
Last conversation I ever had with the horrible trog.

[rainraingoAWAYNEVERCOMEBACK]

You poor thing.

Your MIL is only actually putting into words how lots of them feel on a wide range of subjects...can we get it done, but without you there, you the fly in my ointment.

Oh dear...FWIW I think you handled yourself well.

You need your DH to be the negotiator to explain you understand how imp religion is to them and they in turn baptised DH however, they must understand your take on it too and your child is well...your child.

I think go ahead with the naming ceromony and the blessing. invite her and let her stew.

To me a baptism is a little party to welcome baby to the world really...a naming ceromony would be just as lovley.

[PortofinoRevisited]

You know what, I think that if you marry someone whose father is an actual vicar, you can't be surprised that they have strong feelings on the subject.

[iamsoannoyed]

As I said, FIL has actually been very gracious about it all. Which did surprise me, as I thought he'd be more upset about this than MIL.

MIL hasn't actually threatened to have the christening in secret and I don't think FIL would allow MIL to do anything of this sort against our will (assuming she involved him).

I recognise religion is important to her, and it is likely that some of this is coming from a genuine concern for DDs soul etc, but I do think there is an element of wanting to show off to friends etc and being embarrassed that the whole thing won't be happening.

I am more than happy for DD to learn about religion (all of them) and to come to her own decisions as she gets older. I just don't want her DGM to be forcing it down her throat either.

And if MIL is this way about a christening- what else is she going to totally ignore our wishes over? I can't trust her anymore, and don't want to leave my child with someone who doesn't respect our wishes and I don't trust.

However, I don't want to cause a rift unnecessarily and I know my DH is also upset about this. I am just so angry, and also hurt that she would behave this way- previously, although I find her a little irritating at times, we have got on ok, and I thought she was actually quite a nice person. This is a little out of character, although since DD was born she has been behaving quite OTT on a number of fronts (excessive visiting- wanting to come and stay for a couple of weeks, buying lots of stuff we don't need). TBH I thought she was just over-excited by the arrival of her 1st grandchild and just needed time to calm down. It seems I was wrong and she actually thinks she has every right to dictate how we bring up our child.

[YouTheCat]

I think a sensible and calm chat with your fil is in order. If you can get him to explain to your mil it might go some way to smoothing things over a bit.

I think your idea of a naming ceremony and blessing was a fair compromise.

[DoJo]

PortofinoRevisited Anyone is entitled to have strong feelings on a subject, but to actively try to force those feelings onto someone else and their child against their wishes is a different matter. I don't think the OP is surprised that they want a christening, just the lengths that her MIL will go to to get her own way, even if it means alienating her own son, his wife and therefore damaging her relationship with her grand daughter.

[HoratiaDrelincourt]

And if MIL is this way about a christening- what else is she going to totally ignore our wishes over? ... I thought she was just over-excited by the arrival of her 1st grandchild and just needed time to calm down. It seems I was wrong and she actually thinks she has every right to dictate how we bring up our child.

So that's the angle you need to aim at. That is, DH with your support.

[mumbaisapphirebluespruce]

Agree with YouTheCat. One more, face to face calm conversation with you all present. You sound like a pretty sensible, rational person to me and so does FIL. Just relay to them exactly what you have just said in this last post, about how you are having serious issues trusting her in light of recent behaviour and that as a direct result of her actions you are considering limiting/supervised contact. I think it is fair to give her one last opportunity to regain your trust/apologize, before you instigate supervised visits.

[GingerNinja28]

C

[bramblina]

YANBU, my PILs well actually my MIL was horrified at teh name we chose for dd and thought she could suggest one better after phoning dh in tears....I basically reminded her she brought up her kids how she wanted (and dFIL did as he was told!) and we will raise ours as we wish. I understand they have an interest but they have to realise we are now where they were 30-40 years ago, raising our own children. Don't think this helps you in any way, OP I just like to tell my story about cheeky MIL!!!

[flamby]

My DF is a vicar also and I had the conversation about christenings with him last year (I am pregnant atm but wasn't when we had the chat). My DH feels quite strongly that he wishes he hadn't been baptised and had been allowed to choose and I am happy to support his view on this.

My parents were definitely a bit upset - my dad would absolutely love to do the baptism and it would mean a lot to him. Part of me thinks that since it means nothing to me and so much to him, what is the point of denying him that opportunity. But in the end, my DH has a strong sense that it isn't what he thinks is right so we won't do it. I would like our children to know about the church, to go with my parents when we visit them and to understand Christianity/know the key Bible stories because it was such a huge part of my upbringing but I would like them to make their own choices. It may be that one day they will ask my dad to baptise them and it will be very special to them and to him if that happens.

If my parents pressured me on this (I don't think they will - they know me!) I would be absolutely furious and it would harden my resolve, if anything! You are being very thoughtful and reasonable in looking for a compromise. Your mother-in-law seems to have set this up almost like a test of you or a challenge or something - surely this can't seem like a wise course of action to her? Could your DH talk to your FIL, say he is worried about the impact of this on your relationship with them and ask him to talk to your MIL and calm things down? No-one's interests are served by her doing this. She is behaving really oddly, honestly, and I'd be surprised if your FIL would even consider baptising a baby knowing that it was against the wishes of the parents.

[Ericaequites]

Having the child christened is not that big a deal. It will make the ILs very happy. Try to see it from their point of view.
I was christened Episcopalian, whilst my older sibs were christened Catholic. I've never had a good explanation for this.

[Littleen]

yanbu at all!! Your MIL sounds totally out of order. We're not doing a christening for our baby, as we're not religious, though my OH would quite like one (it's not an option however, as I'm not member of the church so they won't allow it). We're having a nice naming party with all the same stuff as christenings in the area have, just without the whole church and religious stuff. We will also have "god parents" (guardians) so that will not be lost either. Could be a way for you to compromise, though I wouldnt even invite MIL with her behaviour!!

[Bells76]

Just because this means so much to the grandparents is no reason to allow your child to be Christened Ericaequites if it's againsts the parents wishes.