Paul Turner’s Catholic Liturgy Blog

Deacons and baptism

Q:  Our parish has once again decided to celebrate baptisms during Sunday mass.  We have 10 deacons here and at times, families will request that the deacons baptize.   I’ve always wondered…
1.        Is this kosher?
2.       Are there parts reserved for the priest:  i.e. Anointing following baptism, final blessing, etc.
A:    This question comes up about weddings too. I’ve consulted Frank Agnoli on this point in the past, and he says that there is no clear legislation on the matter. The closest we get is in the Book of Blessings, which states that a deacon may give blessings, “But whenever a priest is present, it is more fitting that the office of presiding be assigned to him and that the deacon assist by carrying out those functions proper to the diaconate” (18). The words “more fitting” do not exclude the possibility that a deacon could bless when not presiding. You’re asking about a sacrament, which is more than a blessing.

In general, the liturgical books presume that when a priest is presiding at a mass when another sacrament takes place, he will also preside over the sacrament because, well, he is the presider.
But the practice of deacons baptizing at mass is common, and there is no clear legislation against it. In practice, I think you’d have to come up with a good reason why it is “more fitting” for the deacon to baptize instead of the priest. Such reasons probably do exist.
In regard to the second question, some parts of the mass are shared with the rite of baptism; for example, the introduction to the Lord’s Prayer and the final blessing. These would naturally fall to the priest. They illustrate the liturgical difficulty of having two separate presiders.

Last week on the site

Last week the following was added to www.paulturner.org

  • Two new blog posts including a recent update on the Deacon Postures post.
  • The homilies for Most Holy Trinity in both English and Español:  https://paulturner.org/homilies-year-b-2015/
  • Scores for the Royals’ pre-game activities:  https://paulturner.org/pre-game-grades/

Deacon postures

Q:  When there are more than two deacons at a Mass at the cathedral, what postures do they take during the eucharistic prayer?  The two deacons at the altar kneel from the epiclesis to the memorial acclamation, but what about the others?  Do they kneel from the Sanctus to the Amen as the people do?
A:  There is no legislation on this. Some dioceses have expressed a preference. Others have not.
Personally, I think it’s better for deacons in pews away from the sanctuary to assume the postures of the rest of the assembly. GIRM 43 refers to what postures “the faithful” should take. Extra deacons are more like members of the faithful than ministers of the mass.
Q.  Would we say the same thing about additional vested priests at the Liturgy of the Eucharist if they were seated with the assembly?

A.  No. The difference is that the extra priests are actually concelebrating. The extra deacons are vested, but they are not performing liturgical actions in the same way as the deacons ministering in the sanctuary.

RCIA recording requirements

Q:  For the Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults (RCIA) there are three books/registers that our diocese requires parishes to maintain: the Register of Catechumens, the Book of the Elect, and a book for recording the names of baptized Christians who have been received into full communion in the Catholic Church.  Our question is, is it  just the name and date in each separate book?
A:  This is a canonical question, not a liturgical one, so my expertise is limited.

I don’t see much legislation pertaining to the specifics of what should be recorded. You could consult Canon 877 §1 for the requirements for registering a baptism and back the information out from there. There’s a brief statement about recording baptisms also in “Christian Initiation: General Introduction” (#29), which you find in the beginning of the RCIA and the RBC. But canon 877 will be more helpful.
In my humble opinion, in the register of catechumens, I think it would be useful to record the names of the catechumens, their place and date of birth, sponsors, minister, and date of the Rite of Acceptance. The same data would be helpful to see in the Book of Reception into the full communion of the Catholic Church.
What to record in the Book of the Elect makes an interesting question because canon 878 says that in the case of baptism, the record is made at the parish within whose boundaries the baptism took place. Although very few priests do this, any emergency baptism he performs at a hospital should be reported to the parish within whose boundaries the hospital stands, and the official baptismal record is supposed to be kept there, not in his own parish (though it’d be a good idea to put a notation there indicating where the record can be found). The Rite of Election is taking place at the cathedral. By analogy, the cathedral should keep the records of the elect, not the parishes, even if the elect sign the book of the elect in the parish. Their signature doesn’t make them elect; the Rite of Election makes them elect. I don’t see any requirement about what to record, but the names of the elect, place and date of birth, the names of their godparents, and the name of the bishop or his representative would be good to see.
My two cents. But I concede that this is outside my field.

Last week on the site

Last week the following was added to www.paulturner.org

  • Two new blog posts.
  • A new book was added to the books page – “Whose Mass Is It?“ – https://paulturner.org/books/
  • The homilies for Pentecost in both English and Español:  https://paulturner.org/homilies-year-b-2015/
  • The scores for the Royals’ pre-game activities:  https://paulturner.org/pre-game-grades/

Articles are free

Q:  I am interested in printing copies of your article from Catholic Practice 1997 entitled- The Death of the Last Rites. Would this be possible?
A:  Yes. The articles on my web site are there for the taking. There is no cost. Thanks for asking.

Who replaced Judas?

Q:  In places where the Ascension is celebrated on a Thursday, the first reading on the Seventh Sunday of Easter is about the election of Matthias to replace Judas. In the New American Bible, Acts 1:23 gives the name of the other candidate as Joseph, but the Lectionary for Mass, which uses the same translation in the United States, says his name is Judas. Why is there a discrepancy?
A:  There are times when the vocabulary in the lectionary’s version of the NAB has been changed from the published bible, usually for some liturgical reason. For example, the Lord’s Prayer that appears in the lectionary matches the words we use at mass (“thy” instead of “your”), even though these are not the same words in the bible. Also, the word “cup” sometimes appears as “chalice” in the lectionary, supposedly because of its liturgical connotations. Eventually, we’ll probably see a translation of the NAB that matches what has been chosen for the lectionary.
In this case, the bible has “Joseph” – and so does the Greek original of Acts. The lectionary has changed it to Judas probably because of a tradition that he is the same person mentioned in Acts 15:22 (Judas Barsabbas). That reading appears in the lectionary cycle on Friday of the Fifth Week of Easter each year. It looks as though the compilers of the lectionary thought that this achieved better consistency.
On another note, I remember one wag suggesting that the reason Judas/Joseph/Barsabbas/Justus lost out to Matthias was not just the drawing of lots but because nobody could remember his name.

Last week on the site

The following was added this week to www.paulturner.org:

  • “My Sacrifice and Yours” – a workshop for National Association of Pastoral Musicians, Scranton Chapter, on May 11.
  • A blog post about reverencing the altar.
  • The homily for the Memorial Mass for Lucas Turner.
  • The homilies for Ascension Sunday in both English and Español:  https://paulturner.org/homilies-year-b-2015/
  • The scores for the Royals’ pre-game activities for the game on May 15:  https://paulturner.org/pre-game-grades/

Reverencing the altar

Q:  At our parish, cantors and lectors bow to the altar on their way to the ambo, but not on their way back to their original places. It is felt that reverencing the altar twice is redundant. What would you say is correct?
A:  The Ceremonial of Bishops #72 says, “A deep bow is made to the altar by all who enter the sanctuary (chancel), leave it, or pass before the altar.”  The way I read that, it would be preferable for the ministers to bow to the altar on entering and again on leaving the sanctuary.