Greetings,

My daughter is 14 and has been raised Catholic since birth. She now lives with me and goes to a Catholic school for girls. I had applied for a scholarship for the school and it asked what church we are members of. I named the parish and everything was fine. The due date to turn in the information was 2 months ago. I couldn't afford the school without out the scholarship so I also had my daughter enrolled in another school simultaneously. Just in case we didn't get the scholarship. Well, a week before school started we were awarded the scholarship and I told the other school that we weren't attending due to the scholarship to the Catholic school. After a week in school, the scholarship was rescinded due to my daughter not being "baptised" Catholic. The due date to turn the information in for the scholarship was mid-summer and they had over 6weeks to review the information. Also, they only asked what parish were we members of. Plus, I lost my spot at the other school because I turned it down. I want to know do we have a lawsuit for breach of contract?

Welcome to AMHD
You should post this in the Law section to get noticed

<moved to law from introductions>

There is no "catholic baptism" if the child was ever baptised anywhere at any time ( in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit) then it is a valid baptism.

They will merely need proof of a valid baptism, To be a church member you are required to be baptised.

If part of the requirement was that you are a church member, baptism is a requirement of church membership ( you can not be a member if you are not) ** that would hold true in almost any Christian church)

So if the child was baptised somewhere in some church, all you need is to provide proof of that. ** Or just get her baptised quickly, sue the priest could do it in the time it took to post this question.

Hello 1:

I'll becha a phone call from a catholic lawyer would get your daughter re-enrolled.

excon

I was told by several people both legal and clerical that I have a strong case because 1) We didn't submit anything that was fraudelant and 2) We should have been told this before school started and 3) We lost our enrollment to the other "good" school because we accepted the scholarship they had offered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1Richkid

I was told by several people both legal and clerical that I have a strong case because 1) We didn't submit anything that was fraudelant and 2) We should have been told this before school started and 3) We lost our enrollment to the other "good" school because we accepted the scholarship they had offered.

---

The one sticking point might be that you say that she has been "raised [Roman?] Catholic" since birth. Which means that she should have been baptised. If she hasn't been baptised, then she hasn't been raised Catholic. Which, given that this is a Catholic school, is an important distinction.

Now, if she has been baptised, then I think you have a pretty strong suit. On the other hand, I would think providing proof of that would be enough to get the scholarship back.

She went to Catholic church basically. Her mom wanted to wait until she was old enough and now since she's with me It's going to happen. The priest told us that we were members of the church since it's impossible for a child to join a church without the parents. And since she's not the emancipated age of 18 that would make her a member.

On the face of it, you appear to have a good case. But froggy makes a good point. If your daughter was never baptized then she was not raised Catholic. More importantly, you should have known this since being baptized is a requirement of being a member of a Christian church. So if your were aware she wasn't baptized then you DID provide fraudulent info to the school, in which case you will lose.

So unless you can show she was baptized, or that you believed she was baptized, then you haven't much of a case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1Richkid

She went to Catholic church basically. Her mom wanted to wait until she was old enough and now since she's with me It's going to happen. The priest told us that we were members of the church since it's impossible for a child to join a church without the parents. And since she's not the emancipated age of 18 that would make her a member.

---

By what this priest has stated and by having a membership of a Catholic parish I meet the requirements.

Yes, if you signed she was a member of the church, that required being baptised. And she could not have done first communion, or any communion at all, she could not have done confession or any of the sacrements without being baptised. *** at least she should not have been doing them, since it is against church rules to partake of any sacarment if you are not baptised first.

So a child not taking communion, not doing confession, would not have been being raised catholic.

If the priest had her in classes and she did a first communion, then they errored seriously but that would have made them and you perhaps assume she was a member.

But I can understand that they would have rules that she could not attend unless she was baptised. The church would see her as unsaved and not a member until baptised.

So the exact wording of the application would be the deciding issue.

According to this site:
Catholic Culture : Library : Questions About Membership in the Church
Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed

This priest apparently gave you incorrect info. However, if he will testify that he gave you that info, it will help your case. But if she wasn't baptized, it will greatly weaken your case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1Richkid
I was told by several people both legal and clerical that I have a strong case because 1) We didn't submit anything that was fraudelant and 2) We should have been told this before school started and 3) We lost our enrollment to the other "good" school because we accepted the scholarship they had offered.

These other factors have to play into it as well. Also, you can't provide fraudelent information if what your were told was to be true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1Richkid

These other factors have to play into it as well. Also, you can't provide fraudelent information if what your were told was to be true.

---

That's not quite accurate. The question is not whether what you were told is true, but whether you believed and relied on the information. This means you have to prove you were given this info by a reliable authority. But it has also to pass a test of reasonability.

For example; a broker tries to sell you a stock and guarantees a return. A reasonable person would know that there are no guarantees in a stock investment.

So, if the requirement for baptism is so integral to membership in the church (as it appears it is), then it might be held that a practicing member of the church would know that.

I have to wonder why she was not baptized for 14 years when this is so integral a part of the religion. Frankly, I think this could easily go either way. The school has religious doctrine on their side, you have an implied contract and the timing of decision on your side.

It doesn't sound like you do. Most scholarships come with some sort of "strings" attached. Granted I find it irregular that you weren't previously informed of the baptism requirement and were awarded the scholarship before the matter was investigated, only to have it rescinded later. But I don't think you have legal grounds for a lawsuit here. One question ; can you just have your daughter baptised and then get the scholarship? Did you look into that possibility?