www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology No Baptism during the Great Fast?

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ's Light,

My sister-in-law just gave birth to her and her husband's very first child. Thanks God, "Dominic John" and his mother are both in good health. I have a question pertaining to Dominic's upcoming reception of the Holy Mystery of Baptism for you all.

Dominic's parents were told by their Roman Catholic parish that he would have to be Baptized before Lent or else they would have to wait until after Lent.

What's the precedent for this rule? The parish is more of the modern persuasion. I know that traditional Latin Roman Catholics are very opposed to any notion of delaying Baptism for any reason. Could some of you tell me what would be the traditional Eastern take on all of this? Which side is more consistent with the Eastern approach: No Baptism in a penitential period or Baptism as soon as possible no matter what the season?

I thank you in anticipation of your response,

Trusting in Christ's Light,

Wm. Der-Ghazarian

Dear Ghazar,

In the Byzantine East, Catholic and Orthodox, Lent has been a time of preparation for adult Baptism. There are special petitions to be inserted at Liturgy and the Baptisms historically took place on Lazarus Saturday, there are still references to the in the Liturgy (such as the replacement of the Trisagion). In this way the newly-enlighted could participate fully in the life of the Church during Great Week. This is substantiated in the latest modern American Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic liturgical texts and others.

A quick search turned up this web page [nccbuscc.org] about the RCIA. A quick glance seems to indicate that indeed Baptisms (of adults) take place at the Easter Vigil.

As for children perhaps a look over an officical diocesan site would help.

Tony

I jumped to the conclusion that after Lent means after Easter. For us, Great Week is not technically part of Lent (although certainly the faithful perceive it as such since the fasting continues, etc). I don't know how the RCs count it.

The general idea is: we don't 'celebrate' during times of penance. Great Lent, and Great Week, are times of penance in preparation for Pascha.

We don't want to 'celebrate' the baptism of a child during this period. So, we wait.

Of course, if there is a danger from illness or whatever, the rule is ignored and the person is baptised. It's not a 'celebration', but rather a 'necessity'.

Maybe it's the bizarre Byantine mindset, but the fact remains that we are either celebrating a feast day or feast period, or we are in preparation for the feast day (i.e., some type of Lent). [It's strange that we have so few "ordinary" non-feast, non-fast days. Hmmm.]

Blessings!

The general idea is: we don't 'celebrate' during times of penance. Great Lent, and Great Week, are times of penance in preparation for Pascha.

We don't want to 'celebrate' the baptism of a child during this period. So, we wait.

Of course, if there is a danger from illness or whatever, the rule is ignored and the person is baptised. It's not a 'celebration', but rather a 'necessity'.

Maybe it's the bizarre Byantine mindset, but the fact remains that we are either celebrating a feast day or feast period, or we are in preparation for the feast day (i.e., some type of Lent). [It's strange that we have so few "ordinary" non-feast, non-fast days. Hmmm.]

Blessings!

In the work "The Lenten Triodion" by Mother Mary and (Bishop) Kallistos Ware, beginning on page 30 in the chapter on The Meaning of the Great Fast, the section section entitled Historical Development of the Great Fast we find:

"It is, however, clear that whereas the pre-Nicene fast was specifically a Paschal observance in preparation for Easter, the forty-day fast was connected more particularly with the final preparation of the catecumens for the sacrament of Baptism or 'illumination'."

And on page 32

"Today in most parts of the Church there is no organized catechumenate, and it is customary to administer Baptism on many other occasions besides the night of Holy Saturday; yet the baptismal significance of Lent has still importance."

The above in addition to much other information contained in that valuable work.

"At the Divine Liturgy of Lazarus Saturday the baptismal verse from Galatians: As many as have been baptizedl into Christ have put on Christ (Gal 3:27) replaces the Thrice-holy Hymn thus indicating the resurrectional character of the celebration, and the fact that Lazarus Saturday was once among the few great baptismal days in the Orthodox Church Year." is part of a larger article on this web page [oca.org] .

There are plenty of other resources available. I think to say that "we don't 'celebrate' during times of penance is somewhat counter-intuitive. Our Sundays remain celebrations of the Resurrection, don't we continue to sing (and otherwise use "...risen from the dead" on Sundays of Lent? That is something we don't do outside of Sundays and Bright Week. Even outside of non-fasting seasons we dont use that "insert" it is "who is wondrous in His saints" and at the dimsissal there is no "..risen from the dead."

Thanks Dr. John for your explanation. I guess I can see why traditional Latin Roman Catholics are opposed to any long delay of Baptism. Their own Catechism explicitly states:

#1250. ...The Church and the parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth.[Cf. CIC, can. 867; CCEO, cann. 681; 686, 1.] "

Canon 867 of the Latin Code of Canon Law states:

Parents are obliged to see to it that infants are baptized within the first weeks after birth; as soon as possible after the birth or even befor it parents are to go to the pastor to request the sacrament for the child and to be properly for it.

Canon 686 of the Eastern Code, says likewise.

So the question is, is waiting a month an a half an unnecessary delay. I can understand those who would think so.

For myself, I'm partial to the tradition of Baptism on the eigth day.

Maybe I'm being over charitable here - but possibly their own Priest is wishing to Baptise the little one at the Easter Vigil with any other new [possibly adult] members.

It is also possible that there are no adults to be Baptised this year and he wishes to be able to celebrate a Baptism then [ mind you he could have explained that rather than just indicate that it should be delayed till after Lent ]

On the other hand - maybe not

Surely the sooner a child is presented to the Father, welcomed into the Church Community, and made a part of that Church by the Reception of the Sacraments of Initiation, the better ?

Or am I just a non-understanding Latin here ?

Anhelyna

Dear Tony,

Thanks for your posts. They were helpful. A couple of things you said were really consistent with the practice of the Armenian Church as well. The point you made about Holy Week not being part of the Great Fast (a.k.a Lent) is also true in our Church. Thank you for the Link and explanation about St. Lazarus Sunday.

The point you made about Sundays still being days of celebration is also true in our Church. We still sing the Trisagion (Armenian Style) with the words "Who was raised from the dead" rather than the penitential "Who was crucified for us." Yet during the Great Fast we traditionally keep the large curtain closed during the entire Divine Liturgy.

But I'm still curious is there a "ban" (for lack of a better word) on Baptism during the period of the Great Fast in the Tradition of the Eastern Churches?

Thanks again for everyone's help.

In Christ's Light,

Wm. Der-Ghazarian

O.L.S.O.L.,

You are being charitble. Actually, this is not the case. I had my first two children baptized at this parish, nine years ago and encountered the same thing.

Wm.

This is something they are presenting as a policy of the Latin Church.

Wm.

In the Byzantine Church, both Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic, owing to the large number of catechumens that the Church was receiving in its early days after the major persecutions, the number of days specified for Baptism was enlarged. Anyone familiar with the days during which at the Divine Liturgy the hymn, "As many as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ!" replaces the Trisagion hymn realizes this. The Great Feast of the Theophany is a notable example, as are Great and Holy Saturday, Holy Pascha itself, Pentecost Sunday, and the Great Feast of our Lord's Nativity.

OrthodoxEast

There are no restrictions that I'm aware of as to when baptisms can be performed in the Orthodox Church. There are, however, restrictions on when weddings can be performed - a different matter entirely.

Priest Thomas

Ghazar:

I suspect that this particular requirement is not something that is specified in Latin practice or theology. I've never heard of such a thing and I have studied Latin theology and practice for the better part of the past thirty-five years as an avocation. I would do some further research and not take this particular priest's word for this as final.

We have many clergy who have their own twists on practices in the Church. One of these is the emptying of the baptismal fonts and holy water fonts during Lent. There is no mandate for this. My last pastor insisted on this; the new one thinks that this was a crazy idea. I have heard of parishes where holy water fonts are filled with sand to remind us of the desert journey of Lent. Go figure.

I would call the Chancery of the diocese and find out what their take on this practice is. If they could not give me a satisfactory answer, I would go to the EWTN website and ask one of their experts in the different areas where they take questions. I might even pick up the phone and call the Birmingham, AL, area and talk to someone at the monastery first hand.

I have been the challenger of so many of these things over the past thirty-five years that it has become second nature. I'd never accept something like this at face value.

BOB

"I'd never accept something like this at face value."

Dear Friends,

Good point! I'm not going to accept this at face value, at all. In fact, this is the reason why I have raised the question. I know there are many on this forum much more familiar with the historic Eastern Tradition and also with the historic Latin Tradition. With Fr. Thomas' and Bob's replies, I believe I am receiving the help I was looking for. Thanks to you both for the information you have provided.

As far as Bob's suggestion of calling the chancery and all, allow me to explain. It looks as though my sister-n-law is going to be able to squeeze the Baptism in at her parish before Lent begins. If it were me, and I was facing this delima, I'd probably just find another parish where my child could be Baptized as soon as possible (like the Catechism recommends).

So, the reason I asked was not so much to resolve a problem I am experiencing but rather to gain a better understanding of what this talk of "no Baptism in Lent" is all about. Thanks again for your assistance.

In Christ's Light,

Wm. Der-Ghazarian