To not want MIL to “redo” our baby’s name with her priest?

[Bobcomp]

Bit of a weird one. MIL is super Catholic, we’re not religious at all. DH was raised that way but doesn’t really practise anymore. We had a low-key christening for DD (2mo) at our local church - not mega religious, just more of a naming and welcome thing really. We chose her name together - it’s a bit modern but nothing out there. MIL smiled through gritted teeth at the time but didn’t say much.

Fast forward to now - she’s apparently gone and spoken to her priest (very traditional Catholic church she still goes to), and arranged for him to do a “proper” blessing in a couple of weeks. Only she’s told us she’ll be using DD’s middle name during it, because “it’s more suitable for a Christian child” and “closer to the saints”.

She says it’s not a big deal - that it’s just a personal thing between her and God and she’s not trying to change anything officially. But it feels really off to me. She’s literally taking it upon herself to get our daughter re-blessed with a different name because she doesn’t like the one we picked.

DH thinks it’s daft but harmless - says let her crack on, it’s just her being dramatic and it’s not like it’ll go on any documents. But I feel like it’s crossing a line? Like she’s trying to override us or pretend she’s the one naming our child? I don’t want this to turn into some weird power thing where she starts calling DD by her middle name and acting like that’s her “real” name.

Also worth saying - she didn’t even tell us until it was already arranged. Just dropped it in like an FYI on Sunday after church, said we’re “welcome to come” but it’s “mainly for the family and Father Liam”.

AIBU to think this is weird as hell and not ok? Or should I just ignore it and let her have her moment? It’s messing with my head more than it probably should.

‘Mainly for the family’? You don’t get any closer family members than the parents so she can get lost with her bonkers plan.

Absolutely. If it has been validly performed*, the Catholic Church views a C of E (aka Anglian) baptism as having left an indelible spiritual mark on the child baptised, and therefore the ceremony/sacrament cannot be repeated.

*which this one evidently was, as it was performed by a C of E (Anglican priest) in a C of E (Anglican) church

come on...that was in 1858! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortaracase
edit sorry the quote I added seems to have vanished from my post

Not ok. Not her child. You don't take someone else's child to get them a second christening done. You need to set boundaries now before she gets even more ideas. Learn to say no. Your DH probably needs to get a backbone too and present a united front with you. It isn't harmless, it is disrespectful.

Sorry you need to put your foot down and your husband needs to back you up.

You are the parents
You (and only you) choose the name
You (and only you) decide what your child does

"Mainly for the family?" What does she think you are? A human incubator?
I would call the priest yourself and explain the problem. Ask him to talk to your Mother in Law and explain why it isn't appropriate.

Then never leave her alone with your child ever again.

Priest should not be doing that without both parents’ permission.

Say no on principle.

She didn't discuss it with you before speaking to the priest because she thought she couldd effectively bully you into it. Otherwise she'd have spoken to you first.

She’s absolutely batshit and there’s no way on this earth that I’d be leaving my child alone with her!
Oh and knock the fact that she calls the baby by her middle name on the head straight away. Remind her every single time what the baby’s name is.
If she refuses then I’d limit the contact she has with your child because she sounds unhinged.

So many different kinds of batshit!

Is she perhaps worried that your DC won't get a place at a Catholic school if they don't have a Catholic baptism certificate?

If the Catholic priest did think that then he'd be seriously transgressing the Catholic Church's ruling on this, and that would be worth a call to his Bishop.

Mainly for the family? Who does she consider your baby's family?

Agree with the poster upthread she has kept the details deliberately sketchy to avoid involving you and because she knew that you wouldn't agree.

Id allow her to have host a blessing as long as sheusing DDs proper name or even full name - Ivy Catherine for example opposed to just Catherine when everyone knows her name is Ivy.

I think kids benefit from as much love and community is a available so I wouldnt be against a religious bless as long as it wasnt a power grab to control the narrative. I also think DH should be the one agreeing and setting appropriate boundaries of whats acceptable and not so you and MIL dont have a stand off

The support here is honestly overwhelming — thank you again to everyone who’s taken the time to respond.

I’ve now left a message with the parish office asking Father Liam to call me back urgently. I’ll update once I’ve spoken to him directly, but I’m very clear on the points I’ll be making:
— Our daughter has already been baptised in the Church of England,
— We do not consent to any further ceremonies or blessings,
— And under no circumstances is anyone to use a name other than the one given at her birth and at her baptism.

I feel like MIL is clinging to this imagined loophole — that because it’s “just a blessing” and not a “real” baptism, we somehow don’t get a say. But as so many of you have said, it’s not about the formality — it’s the intent and the message she’s trying to send. It’s not about her faith. It’s about control, image, and undermining me as a parent.

DH has finally seen it for what it is (and yes, he admits he left his backbone somewhere around the six-week mark when sleep deprivation and “keeping the peace” became his top priority). But he’s onboard now and will be backing me up when we call MIL later tonight.

She won’t be seeing DD this weekend — or anytime soon, frankly, if she can’t understand why this was so wildly inappropriate. I don’t care if she calls it a “little blessing” or a “private prayer” — if it involves my child and a church service that I wasn’t asked about, it’s a no. End of.

And yes, to those who said this is a slippery slope — I can absolutely see that now. Better to deal with it properly now than be fighting over First Communion dresses or teenage chastity promises down the line 🙄

Final note: “Was God busy the first time?” absolutely finished me. Thank you. 😂

I suspect she has been less than truthful with the priest. ‘Oh, my son knows all about and agrees,’ she will have trilled. And Fr Liam, reading between the lines or not, may not have asked about the views of the baby’s mother.

I’m a Catholic and my kids were raised as catholics. But you need to put your foot down on this one. She gets to have an opinion, not a vote. Before you know it, she’ll be going to the open days for the local Catholic school, and planning the child’s communion. Lunacy!

RC here - she is as others have said Batshit and if a priest contemplates this they should be reported to the diocese. Your baby’s Christening was a proper one - no sensible RC would think otherwise. This is all about power.

Bit suspicious of Fr Liam tbh, MIL said she was doing it for him? Maybe he’s a bad influence.

It’s all been said by previous posters OP. I really really hope it goes well for you.

Unfortunately we had a very insecure and overstepping MIL with respect to the grandchildren. We had to draw boundaries repeatedly and it remains a difficult process, less fraught now that we have had to step a little away from her.

Blatantly placemarking to find out what Fr Liam says.

Good move to contact the priest directly. It will prevent MIL from toddling down to see him while she's babysitting and returning with 'little Mary Francis of the Five Wounds'.

Not ok , especially using the child's middle name .
Phone the priest and cancel.
What else will she take control of in the future if you allow this

Every time she calls your DD by her middle name, you correct her, I would tell her that it’s her first name on birth certificate and 🤣 she was christened with that name.

I agree that informing the priest before telling MIL is the most sensible course of action. It means that there can be no attempts by her to go even further behind your back and telling more lies to him in order to get her own way.

But bear in mind that she will go fucking NUCLEAR when she realises that you have "told on her" to the priest. Having her perfect image ruined in his his eyes will be by far the worst thing to her.

You've had some good advice here and i'm glad your DH can now appreciate your pov.
Also glad you're sticking to your guns. Your MIL has had her own babies, and made her own choices re their upbringing and faith. Your DD is your baby and all choices re upbringing and faith are yours.

So what happens in 3 years time and your DD wonders why you call her one name and Gran calls her a different one? And Gran tells her that the name you use won't let her play with the angels or some other such tosh?

Nope. Though I fully expect this to run and run.....

She knows this isn’t her kid right?