You sometimes hear about people being asked to delay receiving the sacraments because they are not performed at certain times of year--like Advent or Lent or Holy Week or Good Friday or other days.
There are a few restrictions on the times when sacraments can be celebrated, but not as many as people think.
Recently I was asked whether it's possible for babies to be baptized during Advent, which is almost upon us.
Here's the story . . .
No Baptisms Till January???
A Facebook friend writes:
My son and his wife were told that their baby (born at the beginning of October) can't be baptized until January because there are no baptisms during Advent. Is there a Church rule that babies shouldn't be baptized during Advent?
There certainly is not a rule that babies can't be baptized during Advent.
In fact, the Code of Canon Law expressly states:
Can. 856 Although baptism can be celebrated on any day, it is nevertheless recommended that it be celebrated ordinarily on Sunday or, if possible, at the Easter Vigil.
This establishes the possibility of celebrating baptism on any day of the year, though within that universal scope there are certain preferred days: Sundays and, if possible, Easter Vigil.
Though Easter Vigil is the most preferred, that usually applies more to adults than to babies, for the following reason . . .
When Should Babies Be Baptized?
The Code gives more specific instructions regarding when infants should be baptized:
Can. 867 §1. Parents are obliged to take care that infants are baptized in the first few weeks; as soon as possible after the birth or even before it, they are to go to the pastor to request the sacrament for their child and to be prepared properly for it.
Since most babies' first few weeks don't include Easter Vigil, it normally isn't possible for them to be baptized on this day and stay within the first few weeks timeframe. The latter, which is specifically written to address the time of infant baptisms, takes priority.
It thus is mandated that a baby will be baptized within the first few weeks after birth, preferably on a Sunday, though it can be done on any day.
How Long Is "the First Few Weeks"?
There is no clear answer to this question. The fact that the Code doesn't specify a number of weeks indicates that the Holy See does not want people to be scrupulous about this.
However, it is speaking of a "few weeks," and some time periods clearly would violate that.
Half a year, for example, would not be a "few weeks." It would be twenty-six weeks, or six months.
If we're talking four to eight weeks (or perhaps even twelve at the outside), that probably would satisfy the requirement of the law.
Given that the baby, in this case, was born at the beginning of October, not having it baptized until January would really be pushing it (especially if the baptism wouldn't be done until late January).
Thus it would be reasonable to inquire further with the parish about whether an exception could be made (good luck with that; your chances of success depend entirely on the parish).
No Advent Baptisms?
I'm at a bit of a loss as to why the parish would say that there are no baptisms done in Advent. As we've seen, there is no such rule on the level of the Church's universal law.
I've also checked the U.S. bishops' complementary norms, and there is no requirement in them, either.
The policy thus may be a diocesan one or a parish one.
It may simply be a matter of a parish deciding not to schedule any baptisms in Advent.
Which raises a question . . .
Why Would They Do That?
I can think of two possible reasons off the top of my head, one theological and one practical.
The theological reason would be that they think that there is something about the Advent season and what it is meant to signify that makes it somehow "inappropriate" to celebrate baptism within it.
This is the same kind of impulse that leads some parishes to (wrongly) take the holy water out of fonts during Lent to help symbolize spiritual dryness.
There is no requirement from the Church that they do that. It's just an idea they've gotten into their heads.
It's possible that the local parish has a similar idea about baptism and Advent.
If so, the idea is misguided, for the reasons we've seen above.
But there may be another reason . . .
How Practical Is This?
The second reason I can think of that they might not schedule baptisms in Advent is practical: Advent is often hectic.
They may have found from experience that it's difficult to arrange baptisms during Advent.
Often times, families bring in members from all across the country, and travel in the pre-Christmas season can be hard.
Lots of people are going to Christmas parties, putting up Christmas trees, doing Christmas shopping.
You might think that these shouldn't interfere with a simple baptism, but the matter is a bit more complicated than that, because the Code also says this:
Can. 851 The celebration of baptism must be prepared properly; consequently:
2/ the parents of an infant to be baptized and those who are to undertake the function of sponsor are to be instructed properly on the meaning of this sacrament and the obligations attached to it. The pastor personally or through others is to take care that the parents are properly instructed through both pastoral advice and common prayer, bringing several families together and, where possible, visiting them.
The parish may have determined that it's too hard to get all the parents, godparents, and parish staffers together to do pre-baptismal instruction at this time of year, and so they don't schedule baptisms for Advent.
Is that a good reason?
Ihh . . . I'm not wild about it.
I understand that Advent can be hectic, but that seems to me more like a reason not to have baptismal seminars in Advent and thus no baptisms in January.
Still, the practicality issue may shed light here.
Fortunately, there's a failsafe . . .
Emergency Baptisms
The Code provides:
Can. 867
§2. An infant in danger of death is to be baptized without delay.
One thus can be somewhat reassured about a parish not scheduling baptisms during Advent. If the child begins to experience alarming health problems in this period, that takes priority.
Further, in such a situation, you don't need the parish. Anybody can do it. The Code provides:
Can. 861
§2. When an ordinary minister is absent or impeded, a catechist or another person designated for this function by the local ordinary, or in a case of necessity any person with the right intention, confers baptism licitly. Pastors of souls, especially the pastor of a parish, are to be concerned that the Christian faithful are taught the correct way to baptize.
So if the child becomes alarmingly ill and matters can't be coordinated with the parish, the parents (or anyone else who is there) can perform the baptism.
What Now?
If you like the information I've presented here, you should join my Secret Information Club.
If you're not familiar with it, the Secret Information Club is a free service that I operate by email.
I send out information on a variety of fascinating topics connected with the Catholic faith.
In fact, the very first thing you’ll get if you sign up is information about what Pope Benedict says about the book of Revelation.
He has a lot of interesting things to say!
If you’d like to find out what they are, just sign up at www.SecretInfoClub.com or use this handy sign-up form:
Just email me at jimmy@secretinfoclub.com if you have any difficulty.
In the meantime, what do you think?
Comments
Post a Comment
This may sound strange (and a little off topic) to some, but for those Catholics who have ectopic pregnancies, and must have the fallopian tube removed, why don’t we encourage baptism for these infants? A simple injection of water via syringe over the unborn baby, directed by sonogram before the surgery, and the words of baptism would be all that is necessary to know for certain that the child will be in heaven. I think this idea should be spread, especially in all Catholic hospitals!
If you are Catholic, you follow the the church 100% of the time. If you want to pick and choose everything like a menu, I recommend you shop for a non-catholic church that suits you. Either be Catholic or leave!
Posted by Dave on Tuesday, Nov 13, 2012 2:56 PM (EDT):If you are Catholic, you follow the the church 100% of the time. If you want to pick and choose everything like a menu, I recommend you shop for a non-catholic church that suits you. Either be Catholic or leave!
Dave, to whom are you refering to?
Rubric #1 for Good Friday in the Roman Missal reads: “On this and the following day, by a most ancient tradition, the Church does not celebrate the Sacraments at all, except for Penance and the Anointing of the Sick.” So this would seem to preclude Baptism on those two days, except in a terrible emergency. I have never heard of a diocesan restriction, or one of the Universal Church, on the other 363 days. I believe that the wise pastor (or associate pastor, or DRE) doesn’t put more restrictions on people than does the diocese or the Universal Church.
I remember one time, however, that I “put my foot into it.” (Actually, I’ve done that more than once in my 39+ years, but those are other stories.) Once I made a family very angry by telling them that if they wanted a wedding on the Saturday before Palm Sunday, it would have to be an extremely simple wedding with no Mass and the bare minimum of music and that no, they wouldn’t be allowed to take down the red bows and sprays of palm and re-decorate the church with the bride’s colors. The family was quite indignant that I didn’t know that the bride’s special day superseded any silly Church custom like Holy Week.
In my country (Slovakia, people usually do not choose to do baptisms and weddings during Advent and Lent, because those seasons are considered solemn. Advent is pretty much regarded as a shorter Lent. Our people tend to go pretty loud and big with these celebrations, so it is like fasting from partying. Usually in smaller towns and villages the last “disco” is on feast of St. Catherine in November and the first one starts on feast of St. Stephan, the first martyr on Dec. 26. That applies even more during Lent. No big parties. And during the year families usually wait first 6 weeks after baby’s birth to have them baptized. It has to do with women’s health condition after giving birth.
During advent the days I would feel most comfortable celebrating Baptism would be on Dec 8 (which is a feast so falls outside the penitential service) Dec 6 (the Feast of saint Nicholas) and the third Sunday of Advent as joyful anticipation. Of course out of pastoral necessity I would be able to celebrate the sacrament, but I can see why the pastor didn’t want to celebrate the sacrament until January for theological and practical reasons. Another reason may be that the parents and family combine the sacramental celebration into a larger Christmas party which then the sacrament would just serve as an accomplishment for their family rather than something separate from a holiday party.
What about weddings?
And if a priest chooses not to baptize and infant during Advent, what does he tell the family of a baby who dies on December 23rd?
While I agree that the level of celebration that occurs during Advent is often inappropriate, the importance of baptism cannot be overstated. And at the very least, it is (to my mind at least) a legitimate reason to celebrate during Advent as opposed to getting Christmas off to an early start. Maybe we should start observing the 12 days of Christmas again, as opposed to trying to make a solemn period a feasting period.
@buckeyepastor, on what possible grounds could you have denied *Mass*? The decorations issue, sure, I agree. Considering Mass in its simpliest form is a 30 minute prayer, you have no basis to deny that sacrament to the faithful, even on that saturday.
This pre-Jordan training deal is getting a bit ridiculous. Marriage is oriented to children. Baptism prep should all be done as part of marriage preparation. No couple has any business asking for Catholic marriage if they don’t understand their Catholic obligations to their future children. —Or quite frankly if they say they are going to “wait”. If they have a grave, just reason to wait on children, then they have a grave reason to delay marriage.
What speed demon priest can get through a nuptial Mass in 30 minutes? It takes me 40 or 45. A wedding on Saturday before Palm Sunday would have to be wedged in between church decorating time and all the Confessions. And it frequently happens that there’s a funeral on the Saturday before Palm Sunday, because employers won’t let people off during a working day, and families want the Mass of Christian Burial to happen before they have to get into their Easter preparations. If you’re the only priest in a parish with 1500-2000 people, and about to do 3-4 Palm Sunday Masses, with processions and readings of the Passion, you’re going to be mighty worn out by the last Mass. All that being said, if it were a truly Catholic couple who were more interested in the presence of Jesus Christ than in the style show, I’d find a way to do a wedding Mass for them on that day.
@buckeyepastor, You’ve got some basic nuptial rituals in any case. If you can do a nuptial mass in 40-45 minutes, you making my case that the elements of the Mass are only adding about 30 minutes.
You even have the option of the nuptials in the Sat. vigil Mass.
OTH, as you are stating “if it were a truly Catholic couple” which suggests a greater problem with your marriage prep. If they are NOT a “truly Catholic couple” why are you witnessing the marriage in the first place? So you can have a “truly Catholic divorce” and annulment later?
I like what you said about Advent season being too hectic and that would be a reason not to do baptisms in January rather than December. It seems to me that the advent season being too hectic is an excuse to keep from doing something additional at the parish during a busy time of the year. However, if advent season is too hectic to do such things, then the Easter Vigil should not be one of the preferred days for baptisms. I understand that the Easter Vigil preference applies more so to adults than babies, but there is a lot of activity at a parish in the days leading up to Easter. The Masses and services held over Holy Week are unlike those held at any time of the year. Adding another thing like baptism to the Easter Vigil would seem to make it even more hectic. Then we see that such adults spend the year preparing for this through RCIA. Why would the Church have this program setup only to make things more hectic? The reason is that this is the most appropriate time of the year for an adult to enter the Church. So why not allow for a little more hectic activity during Advent? It seems to me that it is an excuse to take a few Sundays off from performing baptisms rather than keeping down the hectic activity.
My diocese has come up with a policy that babies of unwed parents, that is in the Church, will not be administered baptism. Please comment…
This question is related to Fred Magallano’s. I’ve heard Catholic pastors say that people should not (secretly) baptize the infant children of atheists or former Catholics. I’ve never understood why not. Sure, the Church would prefer that their parents promise to raise them in the Faith, but when that’s unlikely, what’s the harm in their being baptized?
@Dan,
Because baptism confers rights to the child to be raised Catholic. It also subjects the child to Final Judgment as a Catholic, rather than one “who through no fault of their own do not know Jesus”.
This exact situation is the basis for one of the Jewish attacks against the Church. in the 1800’s (?) when papal states existed, a Catholic servant baptized the child of Jewish parents (Catholics were at the time forbidden to serve in Jewish households to avoid this). The Church then had to judge what to do about the situation and *rightly* judged that the right of the child to be raised Catholic superceded the rights of the parents & the papal state authorities took the child and placed them in a Catholic home. This is a very sore spot in Jewish relations.
The Church no longer has the civil power to do things like that, but the principle remains.
@Cassandra
Numerous mainstream Protestant churches use the same Trinitarian formula as Catholics do to baptize infants, so it seems odd to be that simply being baptized by a lay person confers a “right” to be raised Catholic. If the parents are Catholic, they of course undertake an obligation to raise the child as a Catholic, but I’m not sure that a lay person walking by and baptizing a baby without the parents’ permission has the effect you describe (do you believe that it depends on the religion of the lay person?).
Second, the Mortara affair, in which a Jewish child was baptized by a Catholic servant, involved a civil law of the Papal States that barred non-Christians from raising Christian children. While it was canon law that held the child to be a Christian after its baptism, I don’t think that Catholics are obliged to believe that the civil law was “rightly” enacted or applied in removing the child from his parents. That seems like an awfully strong assertion to make without much support.
But who are we to judge the child? Infants are denied membership into the Church because of biases from adults?
@Jay, the problem with your first argument is you are not recognizing what baptism does. Baptism is entry to the Church. there is *one* Church. Protestant parents commit sin by teaching the errors of protestantism even though their culpability may be limited by ignorance.
In the second case, judgment depends on how seriously you take the salvation of souls and the pains of hell. Baptism is real and has real effects. A baptized child raised to blaspheme God will suffer greater pains than an unbaptized child.
@Fred Magallano, the actions of parents have effects on children. I submit the Fall.
In the old rite of baptism, the parents were asked what they desired of the Church. the reply was “The Faith”. Parents not practicing the Faith are rather hypocritical to ask baptism for the child. Worse they cannot give the child what they themselves do not have.
“Let the children come to me.”
@FredMagallano,
Lots of Protestants like to try to interpret scripture for the Church.
I think it’s more the practical reason, at least in my parish it is. For example, it is the case that the same people serve in different ministries like lectors, prayer group, bible study, choir, apostolic group meetings, catechists, retreats, etc. The time of Advent has a lot going on depending on the parish, for example, in addition to the 4 Sun. of Advent, you have th Immaculate Conception feast on 12/8, then the Virgen of Guadalupe celebration on 12/12, and for the parishes with Hispanic communities, you have the posadas, which are traditionaly a novena of posadas, but most parishes only do about 2, because they are a lot of work. For the Virgen de Guadalupe, in some parishes they do the Mariachi at 5am (Las Mananitas), then Mass @ 6am and also in the afternoon. Then you have the ladies that make the Ojarascas, tamales, hot chocolate to share after the celebration. And for all of these activities, it’s almost always the same people serving.
In my case, I teach the preparation classes for baptism, and in my parish we’ll continue to teach them through Dec (3rd Sat. of the month), but there won’t be baptisms until Jan. because of how busy our priests (1 is 80 years old), our deacon, and the parish volunteers are going to be.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.
The time period for commenting on this article has expired.