Should I seek an EF baptism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter savedbychrist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

savedbychrist

Guest
I am a catechumen who has been attending RCIA for more than a year, preparing for baptism at the coming Easter Vigil. Two months ago, I started to discover the EF Mass and developed my love and admiration for the beauty of sacred tradition. Now I attend Sunday Mass in the EF whenever possible. I also desire my coming baptism to be performed in the EF too.

The thing is, all parishes in my diocese are OF parishes, my parish is of no exception. The EF Sunday Mass that I attend, which is the only EF Mass available in the diocese, is offered by the Tridentine Liturgy Community rather than a parish. The Mass is celebrated by different priests every week.

I am wondering what God desires for my baptism; Does he prefers me to:
  1. be baptized in my original parish in the OF;
  2. seek an EF baptism elsewhere; or
  3. choose it myself and is equally pleased
How should I know His preference on this? I know both the OF and EF are valid, licit, and pleasing to Him, but I still want to know what He desires for me. And if I am going for an EF baptism, what should I do?
 
Fortunately, Jesus gave us a Church so we don’t have to struggle alone with such questions. 🙂

Speak to the pastor of the parish where you are in RCIA. Tell him all of this and then follow whatever counsel he gives you.

Welcome home, and God bless!
 
Last edited:
Is this Tridentine Liturgy Committee in communion with the Catholic Church in the way that is understood by the Catholic Church where you live?
 
Yes, it’s in full communion with the Diocese and the Holy See.
 
Yeah, sorry not to have underscored that. “All of this” includes the desire for baptism in the EF, the reasons for this desire, and exploring the possibility of being baptized according to that form. It is possible that the pastor would be willing to accommodate the OP’s wishes and that it could be arranged. However, if after all this the pastor says no, in the OP’s place I would accept it. As you said, the sacrament is fine either way.

What I would not recommend is insisting upon my own desires no matter what.

The OP stated that (s)he has been in RCIA for over a year. Where I live, RCIA is handled by one of two entities: the Archdiocese or the ICRSS. Catechumens in both systems are expected to be received into the Church according to the respective practices of each. It would be strange to remain with one for more than a year and then request to be received in accordance with the practices of the other. This is why I advised as I did, hopefully without inserting my own opinions, in order to point the OP in the right direction to have his/her questions answered by the proper authority in his/her case and perhaps be able to find a way to have his/her desires fulfilled. In the end, the OP needs to speak to the pastor. I cannot answer these questions in the pastor’s place.
 
Last edited:
For more background information: Roman Catholicism isn’t the majority in my city. Only roughly 8% of the population are Catholics. Therefore not many people are baptized at infancy, quite a proportion of people enter the Church through at adulthood. RCIA is carried out separately by each parish. There will are about 40 to 60 catechumens baptized in my parish each year.

I shall speak my RCIA pastor about this quickly, thanks for your kind response.
 
Thank you for the additional information. I see now that the situation on the ground where you live is completely different from how it is where I live. I haven’t looked recently, but about ten years ago a survey conducted by the national Catholic newspaper indicated at the time that 89% of the French population is baptized Catholic. (This does not mean that they are all practicing, just that they have been baptized.) That’s why there is no parish-level RCIA in many dioceses. There are relatively few people to receive into the Church, certainly not enough to justify each parish organizing its own program.

I hope that your pastor can answer your questions. God bless you 🙂
 
Last edited:
savedbychrist said:
I am wondering what God desires for my baptism; Does he prefers me to:
  1. be baptized in my original parish in the OF;
  2. seek an EF baptism elsewhere; or
  3. choose it myself and is equally pleased
How should I know His preference on this? I know both the OF and EF are valid, licit, and pleasing to Him, but I still want to know what He desires for me.
Click to expand...
You’ve gotten some good advice on this thread.

I would just note that God desires that you be baptized into the Catholic Church, as soon as reasonably possible, in a valid and licit manner. He doesn’t care about whether it’s EF or OF. This is a matter of your own preference and what your pastor and any other authorities (diocese etc) would permit.

God probably wouldn’t want you to delay baptism (or any sacrament) for a very long amount of time jut so you could have the ritual you prefer. Like, if it was going to take you a whole extra year to get an EF baptism, then waiting a year to be baptized just on the basis of a preferred ritual might indicate that you’re prioritizing the ritual over the actual sacrament.

Just my 2 cents. Glad you will be joining us.
 
Last edited:
Traddy1962 said:
If you are able, I would definitely recommend an EF baptism. Compare the two forms of baptism and you will see some differences. Both are licit and acceptable. However, the EF has the exorcism which is omitted from the OF. I have witnessed both forms, and all of my children will be baptized in the EF. Definitely more efficacious. .
Click to expand...
‘Definitely more efficacious’? What do you mean? On the face of it, it looks like you are saying that an OF baptism is deficient.
 
Last edited:
If both rituals produce a baptized Catholic (which is the point of the Sacrament) how can one be deficient or less efficacious? Now if you had stated that you preferred the EF for aesthetic reasons, I could get behind that, but if both have the same effect…
 
whatistrue said:
If both rituals produce a baptized Catholic (which is the point of the Sacrament) how can one be deficient or less efficacious? Now if you had stated that you preferred the EF for aesthetic reasons, I could get behind that, but if both have the same effect…
Click to expand...
Well, quite. Or the poster could have said that it ‘felt’ more meaningful.

But to imply that one baptism is less efficacious than the other, when the church accepts both, is plain wrong.

What are they implying about the priests who are administering the OF baptism? That they are knowingly giving a lesser sacrament to their parishioners?
 
Last edited:
Traddy1962 said:
That is like comparing it to Catholics and Protestants.
Click to expand...
I am not convinced that I am reading this correctly. Sounds here, on the face of it, that you are comparing the OF to Protestantism.

But the real issue I have is that you stated that one is more efficacious than the other, even though both have the same effect of baptizing someone. That is directly contrary to the definition of efficacious.
 
Haha I knew that would come from that analogy.
I am not comparing the OF to Protestantism.
However, there is nothing wrong with believing that to do one thing a certain way is more efficacious. Go listen to exorcists who deal with the diabolical everyday. Fr. Ripperger is a good example, he is a very prominent exorcist and he isn’t a die hard trad. Go see what he has to say about it. He has the authority to do so.
 
Traddy1962 said:
Definitely more efficacious.
Click to expand...
Is the remission of sin, original and actual, not accomplished in either form? Does either form not bring you into the Church?

In what way is the EF more efficacious?

Edit: Having read through the rest of the thread, I see I’m not the only one do wonders what you mean.
 
Last edited:
Traddy1962 said:
a certain way is more efficacious
Click to expand...
Efficacious: successful in producing a desired or intended result; effective

Baptism is the intended result. Both EF ritual and OF ritual produce the same effect. Therefore neither is more efficacious than the other. That is my only point, and my last post on this subject.
 
In the EF there is “The delivering of the unclean spirit” from the person being baptized. At conception we inherited original sin. Therefore at baptism an actual exorcism occurs to rid the baptized of this unclean spirit present within. In the OF the exorcism is omitted. This does not prevent a person from being accepted into the church or being baptized, for we see many Catholics in church history who have been possessed but remained in a state of grace. I don’t know about you, but if the church taught that The un-baptized had need of exorcisms due to unclean spirits within from original sin, I sure would take it.
 
Traddy1962 said:
Well, as I stated, the EF ritual has things that the OF does not. Primarily the exorcism of the baptized.

That is like comparing it to Catholics and Protestants.
Click to expand...
Did you seriously just equate the use of the Ordinary Form to Protestantism?
That’s really incorrect thinking.

Edited to add, I see you already said you did not do that, but your use of the word “Efficacious” is highly suspect here.
Fr. Ripperger also simply has opinions, like you. He is not any kind of Church authority and his opinions are highly controversial.

All of this is a complete matter of opinion. It is not Church teaching and, since this is a thread started by a catechumen, it needs to be made very clear that opinions do not contain the fullness of truth.
 
Last edited:
Traddy1962 said:
You would think I posted a comment stating that the OF is not true Catholicism and that it does absolutely nothing for people who really wanna be catholic. Which I did not. I stated that the OF is licit and just as acceptable as the EF. Perhaps instead of efficacious I could have used the term beneficial. Considering the EF does include the exorcism, I would say it is more beneficial. The OF still works though. Don’t wanna confuse anybody again.
Click to expand...
Benificial is a much better word, though I would still disagree with you, unless you are referring to the person’s emotional state.

You do know that the Ordinary Form Rite of Baptism contains an exorcism, right?
 
There is not a solemn exorcism as performed in the old right. Look at both forms. There is an asking of God to free them from original sin and make them his temples, but no solemn exorcism.

There are also different degrees of exorcism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top