I'm Not Sure Lawyers Have Standing To Complain About Words Misused

Some parts of Catholicism I miss, some parts I don’t https://t.co/wpDWw2Pbsy

— TireSlashingHat (@Popehat) February 15, 2022

I am familiar with the formula that baptism is done "in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit." Inclusive language in baptisms is not permitted. Period. (Inclusive language would be "Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier," as an example.)  If you don't baptize in the traditional description of the Holy Trinity, you haven't performed the sacrament of baptism.

Father Andres Arango stood down from his role as a pastor with the Diocese of Phoenix in the United States earlier this month after it was revealed he had used this formula during the sacrament: "We baptise you in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit".

Instead, he should have said the same words starting with "I baptise you … "

....

"The issue with using "we" is that it is not the community that baptises a person, rather, it is Christ, and Him alone, who presides at all of the sacraments, and so it is Christ Jesus who baptises," Bishop Olmstead said in a statement.

"I do not believe Fr Andres had any intentions to harm the faithful or deprive them of the grace of baptism and the sacraments. On behalf of our local church, I too am sincerely sorry that this error has resulted in disruption to the sacramental lives of a number of the faithful."

Is this too "legalistic"?  Well, all line-drawing/boundary setting is arbitrary and capricious, unless it's of importance to you.  The line between my property and yours, is a very important line.  The distinction between what the contract allows you, and what it allows me, is a very important line.  The line between lawful behavior by law enforcement, and unlawful behavior, is a very important line.

Just depends on which side of the line you're on. And the Church is on the side of the line, here, that baptism is sacramental (as it is to all mainline Christian denominations which recognize any sacraments at all (as "sacraments," I mean), and as such comes under the authority of the Church (else it is not a sacrament, by any definition), and so changing one word renders it non-sacramental.  I've mentioned before how I served hot chocolate and cinnamon rolls on Christmas Day at a church service.  My superiors were at great pains to be sure I did not call this service "communion," which is a sacrament.  You cannot change the elements of the sacrament any more than you can change the words of the baptismal formula.

It may seem silly to you; but sacraments are sacramental for a reason.  There are words of institution which are used in a communion service which you don't mess with, either. (And no, I didn't use them in my Christmas Day service; I was careful not to use cinnamon rolls and hot chocolate as sacramental elements.)

These things actually do matter.  If they don't matter to you, you have to respect that they matter to others.