Skip to main content

A Question About Baptism

     I have debated about dealing with the recent issue swirling about the issue about baptism within the Roman Catholic Church.  It concerns a story coming out of the Catholic Diocese of Phoenix about baptism.  That story has caused a firestorm of controversy for the Catholics of that area and around the country.  Of course, I am not Catholic; I am a lifelong Quaker.  I like to hang out with Catholics.  I have done some fairly serious reading and some writing about sacraments, but I also realize I have no right to offer Catholicism any advice on how they should understand or practice baptism. 

            I had decided not to comment until I read a recent article by Kimberly Roland, whom I do not know.  Reading her bio reveals that she is a “cradle Catholic” and a native of the Phoenix Diocese.  She is also vice president of Innovation and Entrepreneur Programs for Better Business Bureau.  So she is not a professional theologian, but she has been baptized and raised in a Catholic environment.  She went to Catholic schools and graduated from Notre Dame.  I saw no reason that she has an ax to grind with her faith. 

            The background of the story concerns Father Andres Arango, a priest in that Diocese.  On Jan. 14, 2022 Bishop Thomas Olmsted officially announced that the baptisms performed by Fr Andres for some twenty years were declared invalid.  For a Quaker and for countless non-religious persons, our response might be to wonder who cares?  We would not have a clue what a “valid” baptism is anyway!  But I know enough to know who might care.  Anyone of the countless people baptized by this priest would care.  For example, if your baptism is invalid, that means all the other sacraments you might have participated in also were invalid. 

            Rather than piping up with my opinions, I would prefer to let Roland speak.  She makes a great deal of sense to me.  And I would also like to know what the Diocesan Bishop would say and, even, know what the Pope might think.  I knew what the nub of the problem is.  It seems that in baptizing infants and adults who were joining the Catholic Church, Fr Andres said “we baptize” instead of “I baptize.”  This is an incorrect formula.  I quote the Bishop: “As the chief shepherd of the Diocese of Phoenix and as your spiritual father, I am charged with the responsibility of being vigilant over the celebration of the sacraments.  It is my duty to ensure that the sacraments are conferred in a manner that is in keeping with the commands of Jesus Christ in the Gospel and the requirements of sacred tradition.”

            I add one more line from the Bishop to show how he (and Rome) understands things.  “The issue with using ‘We’ is that it is not the community that baptizes a person, rather, it is Christ, and Christ alone, who presides at all of the sacraments, and so it is Christ Jesus who baptizes.”  Again, I say that I can have opinions on Christian baptism, but I have no say in how Catholic interpret Jesus understanding of baptism and how Catholics should perform their baptisms.  But I think Roland has a right to be heard and I quote her.

            Roland is very clear where she stands when she states, “The elaborate website built to condemn Father Andrés wreaks of pharisaical bureaucracy in a diocese riddled with decades of scandals, lawsuits, and missteps, particularly with the handling, or mishandling, of a multitude of child molestation and sexual abuses at the hands of criminal priests.”  Obviously, that is a blunt statement.  While I may empathize with Kim Roland, I also wince for the Church leaders, like Bishop Olmsted, who has to enforces the rules as he understands them. 

            A key point in Roland’s critique is focusing on “we” instead of “I” is dealing with a molehill when there is a mountain of other problems which are bigger and more concerning.  Again, that makes sense to me.  I quote her at length because she raises a good point.  “More importantly: Does Jesus care?  While erudite theologians far more educated in canon law than I may debate the sacramental formula, my opinion is one based in pragmatic reality, Catholic social teaching, and the biblical knowledge that Jesus was baptized by his cousin in the Jordan River and not too fond of bureaucratic Pharisees.”

            Just as importantly, we can ask is this the kind of thing that turns off young folks and seekers of the Spirit.  Of course, I don’t know the answer to that.  Does it seem to elevate the institution of the church above the individuals within the church and those wanting to come into the church?  I don’t know, but I do know I don’t want to have to defend it.  Having said that, I also empathize with Bishop Olmsted, who is the one who has to act and to make public something I can only imagine he wishes he did not have to do.  After all, he did not make up the rule. 

            At the end, I step back from this story and talk about it in my own terms.  My understanding of the church is a community of believers who join in a common question to live lives in the Spirit and to be the presence of God in the world.  The sacraments---in this case, baptism---is meant to incorporate an individual into the community and recognize the relationship with Christ.

            The bottom line for me is about grace.  Being brought into relationship with God is an opportunity for grace.  And being part of the community is an ongoing experience of grace.  Grace is a gift---a gift from God and from God’s people.  I have no questions about that.  How baptism fits into that is a different, but related, issue.  I recognize there are questions about that.  Roland asked the trickiest question, however; does Jesus care?

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

I-Thou Relationships

Those of us who have read theology or, perhaps, those who are people of faith and are old enough might well recognize this title as a reminder of the late Jewish philosopher and theologian, Martin Buber.   I remember reading Buber’s book, I and Thou , when I was in college in the 1960s.   It was already a famous book by then.   I am not sure I fully understood it, but that would not be the last time I read it.   It has been a while since I looked at the book.             Buber came up in a conversation with a friend who asked if I had seen the recent article by David Brooks?   I had not seen it, but when I was told about it, I knew I would quickly locate and read that piece.   I very much like what Brooks decides to write about and what he contributes to societal conversation.   I wish more people read him and took him seriously.           ...
13 comments
Read more

Walk the White Line

I was not very far into my run/walk yesterday, when I noticed them.   It was a gorgeous fall day.   It was warm, the sun shone brilliantly in the sky and the leaves are turning multiple colors.   It was a good day to be alive and to be outside.   Besides it was more fun than reading and grading papers!   I noticed ahead of me on the other side of the road a bunch of kids and two adults.   They were just emerging from a yard and were coming toward me on the side of the road that has no sidewalk.   It is not a hugely traveled road, but there are quite a few cars and the road is relatively narrow.   From what I was guessing, there were two mothers and five kids as I differentiated the pack unfolding one person at a time.   Naturally, the kids bolted to the front, forming a single line to include the mothers at the tail of the line.   I was not paying close attention as I loped along in my own little world.   But then I heard thes...
2 comments
Read more

Spiritual Commitment

I was reading along in a very nice little book and hit these lines about commitment.   The author, Mitch Albom, uses the voice of one of the main characters of his nonfiction book about faith to reflect on commitment.   The voice belongs to Albom’s old rabbi of the Jewish synagogue where he went until his college days.   The old rabbi, Albert Lewis, says “the word ‘commitment’ has lost its meaning.”    The rabbi continues in a way that surely would have many people saying, “Amen!”   About commitment he says, “I’m old enough when it used to be a positive.   A committed person was someone to be admired.   He was loyal and steady.   Now a commitment is something you avoid.   You don’t want to tie yourself down.”   I also think I am old enough to know that commitment was usually a positive word.   I can think of a range of situations in which commitment would have been seen to be positive.   For example, growing up was f...
20 comments
Read more