No baptism during Lent - a question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jen7
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So, just out of curiosity, is this a post-Vatican II thing? Because I feel like it’s been a practice “forever” to baptize within a few days of a child’s birth?
In other words, is it like sand in the Holy water fonts during Lent?
 
Last edited:
@Jen7

If I were you, I’d mention to your parish priest all the concerns you just mentioned here. If he insists on you waiting until after Easter to have your baby baptized, then… it looks like you have about 15 weeks to find you and your baby a new parish.

Your intuition is correct here. There is zero traditional practice of withholding baptism during Lent. None. The modern presumption of God’s mercy so rampant today in the Church is what leads many parishes today to make such stupid policies. Yes, stupid. And dangerous.

Don’t listen to the blind sheep here telling you to obey dangerous orders of your priest. Your first obligation as a mother is to your child, and the Holy Ghost has clearly given you the right discernment to know that this just isn’t right.

Good luck in your pregnancy!
 
Loud-living-dogma said:
So, just out of curiosity, is this a post-Vatican II thing? Because I feel like it’s been a practice “forever” to baptize within a few days of a child’s birth?
In other words, is it like sand in the Holy water fonts during Lent?
Click to expand...
The Church does not require us to avoid Lenten Baptism. And yes, it is like the sand in the holy water stoups.

Our present priest baptizes whenever the families request it. We “schedule” Baptism for the last Sunday of the month but it doesn’t take much of a reason to have your child baptized at any other Saturday or Sunday Mass.

When we were between pastors and had a lay administrator appointed she stopped Baptisms in Lent and Advent. The incoming Pastor’s comment: “You might make an argument for not celebrating Baptism during Lent but you have no reason to not baptize during Advent.” The line with the “Alleluia” after the Baptism would have to be omitted.
 
Just thinking aloud here but if we’re not allowing Baptism during lent then Confession should go to as it returns us to our Baptismal state after commuting sin.

Furthermore there are a lot of people talking about trusting in God’s mercy if the child dies before Baptism. While God isn’t bound to the Sacraments the way we are He did establish them as the norm for entering into His Church. We should respect and obey that as much as possible. It is imprudent to “trust in mercy” where there is a clear formula in Baptism to obtain that mercy with perfect hope. We shouldn’t let the exception run over the rule as we have in so many other ways in the church.
 
Weave said:
Furthermore there are a lot of people talking about trusting in God’s mercy if the child dies before Baptism. While God isn’t bound to the Sacraments the way we are He did establish them as the norm for entering into His Church. We should respect and obey that as much as possible. It is imprudent to “trust in mercy” where there is a clear formula in Baptism to obtain that mercy with perfect hope. We shouldn’t let the exception run over the rule as we have in so many other ways in the church.
Click to expand...
Yes, this is just what I’ve been feeling. I lost a baby through miscarriage. THAT is where I trust God’s mercy. I COULD NOT have baptized that baby. But here… I really can if they’d just allow it!

I really want to know if I can just do it myself?? If any of my other kids had the immune system and strength-level of a newborn babe, we’d consider them medically fragile. Why isn’t the pastor making we wait 40 days a reason to baptize my fragile newborn myself?
 
Loud-living-dogma said:
So, just out of curiosity, is this a post-Vatican II thing? Because I feel like it’s been a practice “forever” to baptize within a few days of a child’s birth?
In other words, is it like sand in the Holy water fonts during Lent?
Click to expand...
This is the first thing I thought of. There is no reason to withhold baptism during Lent. It’s just one of those “practices” like the sand in the fonts during Lent that caught on decades ago that has no historical or theological premise. Yes, most babies will be fine, but for the one time it happens, the priest who refused to baptize because “we don’t do baptisms during Lent” bears the responsibility on his soul for his failure to baptize that child for an illegitimate reason.
 
Jen7 said:
I really want to know if I can just do it myself?? If any of my other kids had the immune system and strength-level of a newborn babe, we’d consider them medically fragile. Why isn’t the pastor making we wait 40 days a reason to baptize my fragile newborn myself?
Click to expand...
Unless your child is, God forbid, in danger of death, you may not baptize the child yourself. The baptism would be valid, but would be gravely illicit.

From the way you phrase this — “if any of my other kids had the immune system and strength-level of a newborn babe, we’d consider them medically fragile” — if what you say is true, then that would give any parents carte blanche to baptize their children immediately, and not wait days or weeks until the priest can baptize him. That can’t be.

I was not thrilled about having to wait a month before our son was baptized. I kept a bottle of holy water by his crib at all times, if he had become suddenly in danger of death, and it had become necessary for me to fulfill this grim duty. But that is all you can do — make adequate preparation for an event we hope won’t happen.
 
HomeschoolDad said:
if what you say is true, then that would give any parents carte blanche to baptize their children immediately, and not wait days or weeks until the priest can baptize him. That can’t be.
Click to expand...
Well, that does make sense. :cry:
 
Our archdiocese has an Office of Divine Worship headed by a priest who is well-qualified to speak for the archbishop on these matters. If the archbishop says that Lent is not a reason to unduly delay baptisms, then I think a way will be found to have your child baptized within the first few weeks, as is your duty (and your child’s right) according to canon law. You do deserve to have an answer from your bishop if there is a pastoral policy to deny baptism for such a long time to all children born near the begining of Lent, since such a policy would negatively impact your ability to carry out your duty.

In our archdiocese, however, it can be difficult or impossible to have a child baptized within a few weeks of baptism if the parents and sponsors haven’t contacted the pastor and arranged to do what is necessary to satisfy him that they are well-disposed to take on the obligation involved.
 
Last edited:
These are the policies for the Archdiocese of Portland:
Sacraments of Initiation during Lent
Because Lent—in its liturgies, its Scriptures, its place in parish life, and its history—is oriented toward the celebration of the sacraments of initiation at the Easter Vigil, the celebration of the Sacrament of Baptism is somewhat incongruous during Lent itself. Adult baptism is not normally celebrated during Lent, except in danger of death or other serious circumstances. The baptism of infants is also far more fitting on Easter and during the Easter season, but it should not be unduly delayed if the parents desire it sooner or the health of the baby is a factor. The Sacrament of Confirmation – also an initiation sacrament – should be celebrated if possible during the Easter season or at another time of year rather than during Lent.
https://d2y1pz2y630308.cloudfront.net/12494/documents/2017/2/LENT Triduum Regs 2017 wMemo.pdf

In other words, if the child is born early in Lent and the parents desire it, the pastor in that archdiocese would probably consent to do a baptism within a few weeks of the birth, if that is too far from the Easter Vigil, but he would also probably encourage the parents to wait in order to do the baptism done at the Easter Vigil or during the Easter season.
 
Last edited:
God bless the OP; hope everything works out well!
 
Last edited:
Well that’s why, historically, baptisms have happened within a few days of birth, right? It’s a relatively new thing, say in the last fifty years, that people have waited weeks or months, or until Lent is over…🤣
See Canon 867.1
 
Last edited:
Jen7 said:
My baby is due on Ash Wednesday. My church says they don’t do baptisms during Lent. Would it be wrong for me to baptize my baby? I know that’s for “danger of death”… but I know people who have lost babies to SIDS. I don’t like the idea of waiting 40 whole days. Isn’t the SIDS risk every baby faces dangerous enough??
Click to expand...
www.catholic.com

May a Baby Be Baptized During Lent?

Yes, infants may be baptized during Lent. There is no Church law or liturgical guideline that prevents or discourages the baptism of infants during the Lenten season.
www.catholic.com www.catholic.com
 
I note that Jews do not delay the circumcision of infants even for Yom Kippur.
 
mythbuster1 said:
I note that Jews do not delay the circumcision of infants even for Yom Kippur.
Click to expand...
It’s worth noting that the 8th day after birth, which is when Jewish baby boys are circumcised, just happens to be the day after birth that the blood (as from an incision) clots most easily.

Thankfully we are under the new covenant, and no man need be circumcised to be united to God’s people, those people being the Church, the Body of Christ.

https://www.hidabroot.com/article/173844/Circumcision---The-Day-When-Blood-Coagulation-Begins

That is really TMI about Prince Charles, but still interesting to know. Your trivia for the day.
 
Last edited:
AlbertDerGrosse said:
If I were you, I’d mention to your parish priest all the concerns you just mentioned here. If he insists on you waiting until after Easter to have your baby baptized, then… it looks like you have about 15 weeks to find you and your baby a new parish.
Click to expand...
Well, it’s a little more complex than that for us, unfortunately.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top