It is a relief to drop the liturgical re-education necessary to prevent the mother handing the baby over to the Godmother for the ceremony. The "exorcism" in the newer rite is as bland as possible in contrast to the older rite's determined exorcisms, warning the devil in the name of Christ to get out and stay out.
The "come on now, you renew your baptismal promises" element of the new rite was criticised by Cardinal Ratzinger in "Principles of Catholic Theology" (page 42, footnote) when he lamented the disappearance of the idea of representation. As he said,
the statements now designated as acts of remembrance have no inner relationship with the baptism of the child that is presently taking place. [...]The other prayers - with the salt, the sign of the cross, the anointing with Chrism, the clothing with the white garment and the handing-on of the candle all seem so much more direct and comprehensible. They can all, of course, be said in English according to the rules in force in 1962.
the whole raison d'être for the baptism of children has been nullified; there is no longer any justification for it. Granted, the rite in its new form has gained in immediate comprehensibility - but at what a price!
The rite then finishes with a simple "Go in peace N. and the Lord be with you." No blessing of the father, the mother, and uncle Tom Cobbley and all while everyone is standing there wilting. The blessing of a Mother after childbirth is a separate rite - beautiful in itself and without any hint of the sometimes-alleged "purification after childbirth".
I was pondering all this and questioning in my own mind about a teeny scruple. Don't the parents have to ask for it? So I turned back to Summorum Pontificum:
9 §1. The pastor, having attentively examined all aspects, may also grant permission to use the earlier ritual for the administration of the Sacraments of Baptism, Marriage, Penance, and the Anointing of the Sick, if the good of souls would seem to require it.OK, with my arm twisted up behind my back like that, I'll grant myself permission.
55 comments:
Fr Tim,
I had already made the decision, as has another priest of our diocese, to perform baptisms in the older form come September 14 for most, if not all, baptisms. It is up to the pastor to decide after all. Also, except for the exorcisms and unctions the whole ceremony may be celebrated in the vulgar tongue in England and Wales and so it won't be too inaccessible for the barely churched we get at most baptisms. I think I must prepare a card for the use of the people at baptisms.
I am also planning on celebrating the sacraments of penance and extreme unction in the extraordinary form as an ordinary practice.
Father
Reading your insightful comments I find myself increasingly unhappy with the new rites. I cannot see any alternative but to go the 'whole hog' and just use the older rites in my parish. After all I only have one Mass on a Sunday.
At the same time I feel that there would be something wrong in doing that. I hope you understand my wish to remain anonymous. Can you give me any advice?
I am so cross that my baby was denied the old rite baptism in my parish - earlier this year. I hope he can have the exorcisms done by father Thwaites.
Dominie
It's all fine & dandy Fr Tim but it leaves me feeling my children didn't have the 'best' baptism. Being born in 1962 i probably had a 'proper' one! Are we supposed to take all 10 down to the Oratory & put the missing bits in? Please don't say we have to do a 'de-baptism' & start again! Will check your comment to this one in the morning! Can't wait!
Of course, I agree entirely! And so does Maddy! We were all really privileged to be a part of the wonderful older Rite of Baptism. See my blog for a full treatment of the day.
The Rite of blessing after childbirth which you mention, or "churching," is also something which has sadly been lost. Wendy had hers, and it was definitely a grace for her. Hopefully there will be a wider option and incentive for these things to return. They are real treasures for the Church and a source of much grace.
Dear Fr. Finigan,
I wonder if you would offer more information about the permission to use the Rite in English that was in place in 1962? Was this a permission given by the British bishops (I am in the United States), or given universally? I have a copy of the Collectio Rituum from 1964 which has an English translation approved by the US Bishops. The Latin edition that it prints I think had been approved in 1961. So I had assumed that that would be the edition, in Latin at least, that I could use after 9/14. But I would like to find out more about this permission about which you speak. Many thanks.
Our daughter was baptized according to the usus antiquior last Sunday week, and it was simply wonderful. Both the parish priest and the priest (a family friend) who administered the sacrament were enthusiatically supportive of our decision to do it this way, despite never having used the old ritual before, and a mixed gathering of Catholics (of both 'ordinary' and 'extraordinary' tendencies), Protestants and non-Christians found the ceremony beautiful and moving. I would warmly recommend it to any parent or prospective parent reading this blog. The text is to be found in the 1961 'Excerpti e Rituali Romano' (if I've got my endings right), with the authorised English versions of all but the most solemn prayers & exorcisms; it's also to be found on the 'Lacrimarum Valle' blog. The Angelus Press publishes a handy booklet with the Baptism rite and things like the Churching of Women, but I don't know whether their translations were ever approved for use in the USA.
As a fellow priest, albeit one who is a tad ignorant, which version of the usus antiquior do you use? That is to say, which year's edition of the Rituale corresponds to the 1962 Missal? Presumbaly we can't just use any pre-Vatican II Rituale anymore than we could use a 1920s Missal. I'm a bit stuck about this. Farborough Abbey shop (www.theabbeyshop.com) has a three volume Latin-English Rituale, but no mention of a publication date. I don't want to spend £150+ and then find out its not the right edition anyway. Sorry this "comment" is a bit long, but I wonder if you can help?
Very pertinent post.
I remember too well when Matt Doyle (Lacrimarum Valle) and I were discussing what rite of baptism to use for Maddy (my god-daughter). I remember the comparison that Matt drew up of the new and old rites of baptism and the difference was shocking, sobering and sometimes quite angering. The idea of orginal sin and redemption is very much more explicit in the old (1962) ritual. The new is just a mere "welcoming into the community" ceremony. Needless to say what ritual we ended up going for.
I would also mention that the concession to have the whole thing in vernacular, is not a good idea as some may think. This was a mere stepping stone to the over-haul of the traditional rites under Paul VI, orchestrated by the same people who devised the "new" Holy Week of 1956 and "new" Pius XII psalter.
Really all the sacraments have been protestantized, since the council under the false guise of "renewal".
Well Father, if it was good enough for us....it seems like a very "pastoral" decision! I think that anointing had more about it then too..and matrimony...and penance...
I agree with you. I went to a "Tridentine" baptism in America recently and I was quite bowled over by the momentousness of it. It was partly in English but when the priest uttered the Latin version of the baby's name followed by "ego te baptiso" I suddenly had an extraordinary sensation of two thousand years of history, generations, saints, martyrs, thrones, dominions, the whole bunch, supporting this little baby. Quite a start to a new life!
Your comments seem to indicate that one might celebrate the 1962 Rite of Baptism in English? Is this the case?
You begin by saying the old rite is more pastoral and end by giving yourself permission to impose it on parents. You give the game away - it is all about you.
Gerry
In relation to "purification after childbirth", do we not need to recover the Jewish understanding, according to which, to "purify" something is not to clean that which is dirty, but to bring something which has been in contact with the holy back into everyday use? After all, we speak of "purifying" the sacred vessels after Holy Communion, and a reductive, utilitarian understanding of what we mean by this term would be inconsistent with Catholic doctrine on the Eucharist. The implication is obvious. Childbirth is not something which makes a woman "unclean" or "impure", so that she has to go through a special ceremony before she can cross the doors of the Church again. It is, rather, an incredibly holy act, and the ritual should be seen in this light, not in the light of the secular feminist hermeneutic, which detects signs of "patriarchy" and "oppression" at every turn.
General
I'm afraid I don't know much about the detailed history of when and where the vernacular came into the rites. However, Knox in "The Mass in Slow Motion" (1948) speaks of the Church having the vernacular for the parts that the people said. This is nothing to do with "dialogue Mass" but I think refers to the sacraments. It would certainly apply to the marriage vows.
Fr S Fisher
I agree with you - most people are unfamiliar with the ordinary form of the sacraments and if it is more pastorally effective to use the older forms, I think it is sensible to do so. I will be doing much the same as yourself.
Father
If you only have one Mass, why not keep that NO and put on another in the Old Rite. It could presumably be at a convenient time for the faithful.
Jackie
NO! The most important thing is that the Baptisms were all valid. It would not make much sense to "put in" the bits from the older rite out of context. It is a question of what we can do now that the Holy Father has "opened the windows of the Church" :-)
And you have the prospect of several dozen grandchildren in due course ...
But I suppose you could ask, belatedly, for the blessing of a woman after childbirth.
Gerry
Sigh! Of course I would use the newer rite if any parent asked for it or objected to the older rite. Many parents would not have much of a clue about either rite and would be happy to be guided in this. My reason for being inclined to use the older rite is that it is pastorally better.
Auricularius
That is a very good point about purification and makes sense of the instances where the Church uses it.
Sadly, the misunderstanding of this concept gave rise to the idea that the Church thought childbirth was somehow "bad" (the opposite of what she actually teaches).
I've always wondered [re Jackie's comment] about my own baptism. I was attending C of E then, not baptised as a child, got to 16 or 17, wanted Baptism, but thought total immersion was a better way. [Can't remember why now!] The dear old vicar got permission to do it at the Strict and Particular Baptists' place where there was a pool. [Looking back, that was quite an ecumenical thing in the 1960s!] Have long been a Catholic - but was never even given conditional baptism. What do you think Father? - I'd rather know now than when it's too late!
Andrew: I suspect you may be right that the permission for a totally vernacular Baptismal rite (which, if I understand other comments correctly, was given in around 1964) opened the way for an unCatholic understanding of what Baptism is and how sacraments work.
The use of English is some parts of the rite, is, however, a practice with impeccable Catholic precedents. In the medieval Baptismal rites of Sarum and York, the dialogues between priest and godparents were all in English, as was the recitation of the Creed, Pater noster and Ave Maria. The point was that at these points the candidates (represented by the godparents) are being asked to pledge themselves publicly to renounce Satan and believe the revealed truths of the faith. It is essential that they understand, and are seen to understand, what it is that they are pledging themselves to. It is the same rationale, in fact, as the use of venacular marriage vows.
Going back further, research by Dr Helen Gittos and others has shown that the vernacular was used extensively in the administration of the sacraments in Anglo-Saxon times, and that only the Norman conquest put an end to this. That is not to say that Latin was not used for the most solemn prayers and invocations. There is a wonderful late medieval treatise which discusses baptism by layfolk in extremis, and lays down rules about precisely how bad the layman's Latin has to be before the sacrament is invalid!
For some time before the birth, I recommend the blessing for expectant mothers.
My two children were baptised using the "extraordinary form" (SSPX), and I was churched each time too.
I sometimes wonder if the exorcisms "took" though! lol!
They were consecrated to Our Lady as well.
Anon - if it was water, you were immersed, and they said "I baptise you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit", then the Baptism was valid. If there is doubt about its validity, you can be conditionally baptised ("N. if you are not baptised, I baptised you ...etc.")
Clare - yes, the blessing for expectant mothers is a very good thing. Reminds me to put something in the newsletter about it. Also prayers to St Gerard Majella.
Re blessing of expectant mothers..all my babies were blessed in the womb..many by Fr Guy.
Re the churching of mothers..yes i think it's a good idea..but in the NO there are explicit prayers for the blessing of mother & father, so i feel we received a lot of grace at their baptisms. i do agree the new rite is a bit bland. However being baptised at the Oratory..they were all consecrated to Our Lady at Our Lady's Altar. A couple of them had a special dedication as a child of Mary & old prayer of dedication, with a blue garment being used. i no longer sadly have the ancient prayer.
Yes Fr i look forward to all those grandchildren. The other thing i might like is although Andrew & i had a wonerful 'Nuptial Mass' for our marriage in a couple of years we celebrate 25 years & i would like an old rite Mass of renewal of our vows..do you think that might be possible?
the only thing i think we need to avoid..well Ok i need to avoid is a spirit of competition...like my kids were all blessed in the womb..& i always received the mother's (St Gerard Majella in some cases) blessing & then prayers for a happy delivery..i used to gather groups of expectant moms & take them to be blessed..i digress..what i mean is who is it that was baptised themselves in the old rite (me!) Married in it, had all the blessings, baptisms..confirmations..etc..come on Fr Tim..can you tick all the boxes? Ordination??
Who gets the most brownie points? or am i off the beaten track? most likely! But you get my point...
Fr. Tim,
Just picking up on Alenka’s comment, “When the priest uttered the Latin version of the baby’s name followed by ‘ego te baptiso’ I suddenly had an extraordinary sensation of two thousand years of history…”
I just can’t wait to hear the Latin versions of our wonderful North American faddish-but-basically-pagan names that are all the rage: Kyle, Ryan, Tyler, Dexter, Tiffany, Chelsea, Britney, Tate, Jayden, Hunter, Cody…
All those 2,000 years of history, tradition and carefully picking patron saints for one’s child!
We are opting for the old rite Baptism as well, for Mary.
Fr Tim,
Is there provision for the 'usus antiquor' of Baptism and Confirmation to be celebrated during Mass? It seems to me that this was a good innovation.
If 'I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit' is all that is required for valid baptism, whether performed under the kitchen tap or at the font, why get into such a stew about using the old and new forms? This is carrying a pharisaical mentality to extremes as well as bordering on sacramental dilettantism. One of the comforting elements of Catholicism was that it once did everything the same throughout the world. We are now in for a free-for-all and few of the ordinary laity will know where they are or what to expect as they will be at the mercy of clerical whims. I am sure that this is not what the Holy Father intended although I hope he was aware of some of the consequences. At this rate the Church in England will become even more like the Church of England than it is already, broken into High, Middle and Low Church factions. Heaven help the newcomers amongst us from all over the world. Many won't know where they are.
I agree the old rite baptism is far better. However, where I live it is very unlikely that any priest would agree use the old rite. What is the church law position about getting a child baptised outside of one's usual novus ordo parish and diocese?
Aside from the 'form' used for Baptism, one issue that has always bothered me is that of the godparents. I fear many Catholics do not appreciate the true role of the godparent. Often it is just seen as an honorary thing to be bestowed on 'Uncle Joe', a family friend, someone who will be good for presents later - or even non-Catholics!
I expect this is dealt with in Baptism preparation classes, but I think some broader catechesis for everyone should be given periodically, so that everyone understands the requirements and obligations of being a godparent.
I suspect you probably do this Father Tim, but I haven't heard it addressed in church in a long time!
Father, after September 14th, when I want to go to confession using the Older Form, do I go into the confessional and begin by saying "Father can you give me the older form of absolution?" Or should I wait till after I've made my confession? What would you recommend? I usually go to the London Oratory, so I don't forsee any problem with refusal or the priest not knowing what to say.
Also, I heard this on EWTN the other evening. It was from the question and answer session on their Family day:
Question: What does Mother Angelica think about the Tridentine Mass approved by Pope Benedict?
Mother Catherine (Vicar of Our Lady of the Angels Monastery): Well, the day she heard about it, she was really excited :::loud applause::: she was just… if she could have jumped she would have been jumping for joy you know. Mother, even before her stroke, I remember her commenting that she hoped that would come back because it’s more contemplative; it’s a beautiful Mass. The Mass we have now is beautiful, but, you know, I heard this exorcist priest telling me once that the devil hates Latin, and that’s why they always exorcise in Latin. And if the devil hates it, I think we need to go back to it. :::very loud applause:::
different Clare
No, the old rite of Baptism was not carried out during Mass. With the older rites, the Mass simply remained integral the sacraments were celebrated separately.
invocante
Canon 857 §2: "As a rule an adult is to be baptized in his or her parish church and an infant in the parish church of the parents unless a just cause suggests otherwise."
"Just cause" is a fairly weak condition. A legitimate desire to have the Baptism carried out in the older form would be a just cause. Often it is considered good form to mention it to the parish priest although his "permission" is not necessary.
Anon
"why get into such a stew about using the old and new forms? This is carrying a pharisaical mentality to extremes as well as bordering on sacramental dilettantism.
Reading this makes me wonder just who is in a stew about this. In case you hadn't noticed, there is already a liturgical free-for-all. The older rite will reduce this, not increase it because at least the Baptisms carried out in the older rite will all be pretty much the same.
I spoke of the elements necessary for validity in a particular context. There is much more to the celebration of the sacraments than the elements necessary for validity (as any modern liturgist will tell you.) The manner in which the rite is celebrated, and the devotion of the priest, can contribute to the way in which people are disposed to receive the graces available to them when participating in the rite.
So the discussion of the rite is a reasonable one regarding something important for the life of the Church. To dismiss it as pharisaical and dilettante is insulting. Do so so anonymously is, well... go figure.
Jason
I think the best thing would probably be to say it at the end of your confession.
Thank you for that snippet of Mother Angelica. Of course there is a little confusion over the "Latin" question (the typical edition of the "ordinary form" is Latin) but it is good to hear of Mother Angelica saying that the old Mass is beautiful. I know many people would love to see it on EWTN and her comments, being published, give grounds to hope that this will be done.
Dear Father, I pressed 'publish' instead of 'preview' with my litany for an expectant mother: please disregard it - I'll post a corrected version presently!
Ben Whitworth
I put together the following litany for an expectant mother. The response, except where otherwise given, is 'ora pro nobis'. The saints invoked are all patrons of pregancy, childbirth or nursing.
Letania propter Mulierem Prægnantem
Kyrie eleison, Christe eleison, Kyrie eleison.
Christe audi nos, Christe, exaudi nos.
Pater de cœlis, Deus, miserere nobis.
Fili, Redemptor mundi, Deus, miserere nobis.
Spiritus Sancte, Deus, miserere nobis.
Sancta Trinitas, unus Deus, miserere nobis.
Sancta Maria,
Sancta Dei Genitrix,
Mater Christi,
Mater boni consilii,
Mater Creatoris,
Mater Salvatoris,
Auxilium Christianorum,
Domina nostra lactis et partus boni,
Domina nostra de Guadalupe,
Sancta Anna,
Sancta Elisabetha,
Sancta Margarita Antiochenus,
Sancta Basilissa,
Sancta Monica,
Sancta Silvia,
Sancta Lutgardis,
Sancta Catharina,
Sancta Gianna,
Omnes sanctæ patronæ partus, orate pro nobis.
Sancte Joseph,
Omnes sancti innocentes, orate pro nobis.
Sancte Erasme,
Sancte Leonarde,
Sancte Egidi,
Sancte Udalrice,
Sancte Dominice de Silos,
Sancte Antoni,
Sancte Raymunde,
Sancte Gerarde,
Sancte Dominice Savio,
Omnes sancti patrones partus, orate pro nobis.
Sancti Angeli custodes nostri, orate pro nobis.
Omnes sancti tutores hujus domus et familiæ, orate pro nobis.
Salvam fac ancillam tuam, Deus meus, sperantem in te.
Oremus.
VISITA, quæsumus, Domine, habitationem istam, et omnes insidias inimici ab ea, et a præsenti famula tua Victoria, longe repelle: Angeli tui sancti habitent in ea, qui eam et ejus prolem in pace custodiant, et bene+dictio tua sit super eam semper. Salva eos, omnipotens Deus, et lucem eis tuam concede perpetuam. Per Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen.
Fr.,
My two sons, ages nine and ten were baptized in the Old Rite. We belong to an FSSP parish.
My question would be that if you are going to use the Old Rite of Baptizm, shouldn't you be using the water from the Easter Vigil in the Old Rite? It is different you know!
Mrs. Jackie Parkes MJ said:
"Married in it, had all the blessings, baptisms..confirmations..etc..come on Fr Tim..can you tick all the boxes? Ordination??"
I fear that Fr. Tim might go balistic, if he were to do a blog post on the comparisons between the traditional and newer forms of ordination. It's enough to make anyone cry...
Ben - thank you for posting that.
A couple of typos. Correct versions:
Litaniae
Sancta Margarita Antiochena
(and I think "Gianna" should be Ioanna.)
Anon - yes, the water should be blessed according to the older rite (a great enrichment btw). Although it is blessed at Easter, there is a rite for blessing the water at other times if necessary.
Andrew & Jackie - Baptism: old rite (1958). 1st confession: old rite (1965). Confirmation: old rite (1973 - therefore new rite Mass).
Ordination: new rite (boo hoo). Interesting that the form in Latin is exactly the same as the old rite. But ICEL added the theologically biased "co-workers of the Bishop" as a "translation" of secundi meriti munus (office of the second rank).
Francis,
I highly doubt any "Kaylees" or "Quaneeshias" will be baptized with the old form.
Just a guess.
;)
-Mary Elizabeth's mom
Ma, i hope you don't me noticing..but our babies were baptised at about 10 days old..i think even sooner is preferable..
& just for the record Fr on this wonderful post you've absolutely convinced me to have all the future babies in our family baptised in the Novuus Ordu...it being one form of the same & equal rite.
Fr continuing to be pedantic..i didn't think we had 'old-rite' anymore but one 'rite' in two forms..but perhaps i misread the situation?
When we had my son baptised 3 years ago, we asked our parish priest for an Old Rite baptism. He refused (or rather said that the Bishop would refuse, which was almost certainly correct).
However he also told us that we would need his permission to have the baptism celebrated outside the parish (we knew another priest who would do it in the Old Rite), and that he would not give it.
Fr Tim,
thanks for the corrections.
different Clare,
Baptism within the Eucharistic celebration makes a lot of sense in the Eastern rites, where the infant receives chrismation (i.e. confirmation) and holy communion (by touching his/her lips with the spoon containing the Precious Blood) there and then. This was the primiive practice in the West, which is why you see altars in ancient baptisteries. There is, of course, no reason why Mass should not be celebrated immediately before or after Baptism in the older form - if you have the stamina.
Jason,
at the time of the transition to the vernacular rite of penance, parishioners at the London Oratory were told they could still use the old rite if they asked for it. A dear friend of mine, now no longer with us, duly went into the 'box' and said: 'Father, may we use the older form, please?' 'We'll have to,' the priest replied, 'It's the only one I know.'
Recent anon - I'm open to correction here but I do not think that the Parish Priest has the right to forbid his parishioners from having their children baptised elsewhere. Not something I would ever try to do, anyway.
Jackie,
And my priest will not baptize Mary until the adoption is final.
Mrs Parkes,
the true pedant will distinguish between a Rite and a rite. A Rite is used to refer to the whole liturgical and disciplinary culture of one of the historic Churches of Christendom. So we, for example, belong to the Roman Rite, whereas Greek Catholics belong to the Byzantine Rite, Lebanese Catholics to the Maronite Rite, &c. The different Rites have not only different liturgical forms but different codes of canon law and even, to some extent, different theological traditions.
At the same time, 'rite' is also used simply as a synonym for ritual, ceremony, &c. without any special ecclesiological implications. 'Sacramental rites' is a phrase that trips off the tongue, and in fact I think the American edition of the book containing Baptism, Confirmation, &c. is simply called 'The Rites'. The liturgical books actually talk about the 'Ordo Baptizandi' or 'Ordo Baptismi', and I think 'the rite of baptism' is better English than 'the order of baptism'.
So it's possible to talk about the old rite and the new rite as both being part of the one Roman Rite.
Know your Rites!
Q. Who led the Pedants' Revolt?
A. Which Tyler.
Oh i hadn't realised Ma..that sounds a bit harsh to me..
Oh it was probably me who first got pedantic wasn't it? Alritey!
Jackie,
Because Baptism is so serious a matter, he wants to ENSURE that if this child is baptized, she is raised in the Faith. He just wants to ensure that the adoption won't fall through and a baptized child will end up being raised in a non-Church household.
Also, if a child is baptized before an adoption is complete, her birthparents' names also go on her baptismal certificate. (Church rules.)
This is a)a privacy matter, and b) asking for red tape and confusion when she goes to receive the other sacraments.
At first, I was pretty upset, but I KNOW that God is in charge, and I owe my pastor (a loving, kind, brilliant man) my obedience and acceptance of his decisions.
God will take care of us - He certainly has thus far.
(At least, that's my official answer.)
:)
Baptism of an infant is indeed a serious matter, and the parents and godparents should be as aware as possible of the great responsibility that they're taking on. One of the most moving things I've seen was my non-Catholic sister-in-law weeping as she received the mother's blessing at her son's baptism - and having made promises on his behalf and received a blessing herself, she has always been adamant that she must do her best to ensure that her son is brought up in the Catholic faith and that she keeps the promises that she made at his baptism.
"No blessing of the father, the mother, and uncle Tom Cobbley and all while everyone is standing there wilting"? What a terrible shame - I think the parents have such an important role in bringing the child up in the faith that they need all the help and encouragement they can get, and I also think the importance of that role should be made as clear as possible both to them and to the rest of the congregation.
Fr.
Have you ever read Michael Davis' book Order of Melchisadeck detailing the "reform" of the ordination rites in 1968?
newhousenewjob - sorry if my remark about the blessing was a bit flippant. It comes from long and weary pastoral experience of trying to inspire people by saying prayers at them in as meaningful a voice as possible (if one can get them to stop talking, taking photos and chewing gum for a minute). My preference for the older rite is largely down to the fact that the godparent has to hold the child, answer on behalf of the child and generally act out their role.
But there's legitimate freedom in these matters and of course if you prefer the newer rite it remains the ordinary form.
I have a collection of Michael's books bequeathed to me by my father who was a good friend of his. I knew him too as a friend.
Andrew - yes, I read it with some trepidation before my ordination. I was glad to see that Michael did not conclude that the rite was invalid. I agree with many of his criticisms of the rite.
It's funny - at our parish, once every six months over at Mary's altar, all the pregnant women get the Mother's blessing.
I think this is such a beautiful and moving event, all the hormonal women kneeling at the altar rail after Mass, weeping and bloated.
I just think of all those beautiful new parishioners still inside their mommies.
This might be a better time to bless the moms - BEFORE labor and delivery, at a time when a blessing is such a comfort to them. (Not that there's ever a bad time.)
Anyhow...
Father, does the old rite baptism begin outside the church? Just curious. I think I heard that once.
Hi Ma,
Thanks for the explanation..kind of you to be so open. Let us pray everything works out quickly for you all & your lovely family.
Ah yes Fr Tim..chewing gum! Thankfully none has ever been present at the Baptisms of my children with a totally 100% practicing congregation & once that was (well at Andrew's baptism you might know) close on a couple of hundred.
But at other Masses yeah i've seen lotsa gum!
Ma Beck - blessing every six months: that's a great idea. Must get round to organising it.
The older rite of Baptism began at the Church door. After the exorcisms etc., you went to the baptistery reciting the Apostles' Creed and the Our Father. At the gates, the priest once again had some stern words for the demons before the party went in.
OK, one last comment on this post and I'm done!
Dominie,
how appalling that you were denied a traditional baptism for your little one. But I don't think it's necessary to supply the exorcisms after the event, and for the following reason. The traditional rite of infant baptism compresses the catechumenate (the period of preparation for adult baptism) into a few minutes, but we should remember that these exorcisms were originally intended for converts from paganism, who may have done all sorts of unspeakable things. And they were administered in the early weeks of Lent, the idea being that the devil would be driven off for long enough that they could make a good preparation for their baptism at Easter.* In infant baptism, these rites are wisely retained, but they are somewhat redundant. After all, the candidate is an innocent babe (not a hardened sinner) and the exorcism only needs to be effective for ten minutes. Baptism itself is ALL THE EXORCISM YOUR BABY NEEDS, and a baptized Christian certainly needs no exorcism except in the very exceptional case of demonic possession. Doing the exorcisms AFTER baptism is therefore not necessary.
Still, get your boy along to Fr Thwaites as soon as you can. The prayers of that holy priest will be of great benefit to him! And the consecration of a child to the immaculate heart of Mary can be done any time.
God bless,
Ben
* It has only just occurred to me while writing this that the three exorcisms, originally administered at different points during the forty days of Lent, represent our Lord's three rejections of satan during his holy fast. Traditional liturgy is so DEEP!
Can anyone provide a reference or a link for specific information regarding in which parts of the older rite of baptism the vernacular may be utilized and in which parts Latin is mandated? In addition, a reference or a link for an approved translation would be most helpful. We are arranging with a (willing) priest to have our twin sons (currently in utero) baptized according to the older rite. This priest has never used it before and needs whatever help we can give him. Thanks.
Post a Comment