Are Non-Catholic Baptisms Valid?

[nsper7]

I was Baptized in a Protestant ecclesial community, although it was in the Trinitarian formula and with water. Is this Baptism valid? After all, how can Protestant intend to do what the Church does since they are not Catholic?

I was Baptized at a Vineyard Movement ecclesial community and, as best as I can remember, they use the Trinitarian formula, but then my Scrupulous mind starts worrying (I worried about my Baptism even before I was Catholic, wondering if I was fully immersed properly since I was one of those full-immersion type Protestants before I became Anglican/Episcopalian and, later, came home to Rome).

I worry that if I ask for a conditional Baptism, the Priest will refuse on the grounds of my history of Scrupulosity and his progressive outlook and, also, even if he did consent to a conditional Baptism, how do I deal with the fact that I was Confirmed (Easter Vigil 2009)? Would I then need a conditional Confirmation?

 

[JaMc]

Most protestant baptisms are valid. I know Mormon baptisms aren’t.

Trinitarian formula + water sounds like its valid, but I know nothing about the rest of the “Vineyard Movement’s” beliefs, either.

I would expect, though, that this sort of thing was looked into when you converted, and it was decided then that it was, in fact, valid.

 

[Holly3278]

As long as they are done using the Trinitarian formula and are done by a group with a proper understanding of the Trinity, a person is baptized properly. Unitarian denominations’ baptisms are not valid as are Jehovah’s Witness baptisms and Latter-day Saint baptisms.

 

[thistle]

I was Baptized in a Protestant ecclesial community, although it was in the Trinitarian formula and with water. Is this Baptism valid? After all, how can Protestant intend to do what the Church does since they are not Catholic?

I was Baptized at a Vineyard Movement ecclesial community and, as best as I can remember, they use the Trinitarian formula, but then my Scrupulous mind starts worrying (I worried about my Baptism even before I was Catholic, wondering if I was fully immersed properly since I was one of those full-immersion type Protestants before I became Anglican/Episcopalian and, later, came home to Rome).

I worry that if I ask for a conditional Baptism, the Priest will refuse on the grounds of my history of Scrupulosity and his progressive outlook and, also, even if he did consent to a conditional Baptism, how do I deal with the fact that I was Confirmed (Easter Vigil 2009)? Would I then need a conditional Confirmation?

I was a Methodist before converting. My baptism was valid. Any baptism done by immersion or pouring water and in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is valid.

 

[msugeotech]

It is my understanding that a valid baptism is composed of:

1. Water
2. Trinitarian formula
3. Intent of the recipient to be baptized (if an adult - the age of reason attained)
4. Understanding of baptism by the minister performing the baptism

So, with that it sounds to me you have a valid baptism.

 

[msugeotech]

Can. 869 §1. If there is a doubt whether a person has been baptized or whether baptism was conferred validly and the doubt remains after a serious investigation, baptism is to be conferred conditionally.

§2. Those baptized in a non-Catholic ecclesial community must not be baptized conditionally unless, after an examination of the matter and the form of the words used in the conferral of baptism and a consideration of the intention of the baptized adult and the minister of the baptism, a serious reason exists to doubt the validity of the baptism.

§3. If in the cases mentioned in §§1 and 2 the conferral or validity of the baptism remains doubtful, baptism is not to be conferred until after the doctrine of the sacrament of baptism is explained to the person to be baptized, if an adult, and the reasons of the doubtful validity of the baptism are explained to the person or, in the case of an infant, to the parents.

 

[michaeldaniels]

The OP brings a good question to my mind…what if someone was baptized in a in a non-Catholic Church, such as Baptist…and they were young, so they can not remember the formula used…and there are no surviving witnesses that can be contacted…however, the Church has it on record and does submit a paper to The Catholic Church the person is planning on being confirmed in…so the Confirmation takes place. So now you have a confirmed Catholic…what happens if that Baptism wasn’t valid to begin with? Yet there is no way for the person who was confirmed to know??? Does that invalidate everything and result in him sacrilegiously receiving the Sacraments???

 

[brotherhrolf]

The OP brings a good question to my mind…what if someone was baptized in a in a non-Catholic Church, such as Baptist…and they were young, so they can not remember the formula used…and there are no surviving witnesses that can be contacted…however, the Church has it on record and does submit a paper to The Catholic Church the person is planning on being confirmed in…so the Confirmation takes place. So now you have a confirmed Catholic…what happens if that Baptism wasn’t valid to begin with? Yet there is no way for the person who was confirmed to know??? Does that invalidate everything and result in him sacrilegiously receiving the Sacraments???

Southern Baptists have valid baptisms as do most of the main-line Protestants. I’ve seen way too many main-line Protestants received into HMC on Holy Saturday. Mormons, Unitarians, Jehovah’s Witnesses, no. Main-line Protestants, yes.

 

[Alindawyl]

The OP brings a good question to my mind…what if someone was baptized in a in a non-Catholic Church, such as Baptist…and they were young, so they can not remember the formula used…and there are no surviving witnesses that can be contacted…however, the Church has it on record and does submit a paper to The Catholic Church the person is planning on being confirmed in…so the Confirmation takes place. So now you have a confirmed Catholic…what happens if that Baptism wasn’t valid to begin with? Yet there is no way for the person who was confirmed to know??? Does that invalidate everything and result in him sacrilegiously receiving the Sacraments???

God isn’t limited by our fallible human knowledge. He would be perfectly aware of the situation and not allow someone to end up in hell if they belong in heaven. Nor will he allow someone to enter heaven who belongs in hell, stay in purgatory a second longer than mercy calls for, or leave purgatory a second earlier than justice requires. He’s God, and he’s perfect. That’s why he’s the judge and we’re not

 

[truevaticanii]

I was Baptized in a Protestant ecclesial community, although it was in the Trinitarian formula and with water. Is this Baptism valid? After all, how can Protestant intend to do what the Church does since they are not Catholic?

I was Baptized at a Vineyard Movement ecclesial community and, as best as I can remember, they use the Trinitarian formula, but then my Scrupulous mind starts worrying (I worried about my Baptism even before I was Catholic, wondering if I was fully immersed properly since I was one of those full-immersion type Protestants before I became Anglican/Episcopalian and, later, came home to Rome).

I worry that if I ask for a conditional Baptism, the Priest will refuse on the grounds of my history of Scrupulosity and his progressive outlook and, also, even if he did consent to a conditional Baptism, how do I deal with the fact that I was Confirmed (Easter Vigil 2009)? Would I then need a conditional Confirmation?

If there is any doubt that Baptism validly took place, that is, according to the method above, a “conditional Baptism” is later administered. A conditional Baptism is also the style of private Baptism used when baptizing someone who is not sure he is baptized. The words of a conditional Baptism are:

If thou art not baptized, I baptize thee in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

Latin:
Si non es baptizatus (-a), ego te baptizo in nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti.

Again, private Baptism should always be followed, if possible, by the formal Solemn Rite of Baptism.

-http://www.fisheaters.com/baptism2.html

 

[nsper7]

If there is any doubt that Baptism validly took place, that is, according to the method above, a “conditional Baptism” is later administered. A conditional Baptism is also the style of private Baptism used when baptizing someone who is not sure he is baptized. The words of a conditional Baptism are:

If thou art not baptized, I baptize thee in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

Latin:
Si non es baptizatus (-a), ego te baptizo in nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti.

Again, private Baptism should always be followed, if possible, by the formal Solemn Rite of Baptism.

-http://www.fisheaters.com/baptism2.html

But, although I was Baptized in a Protestant ecclesial community, I was Confirmed into the Catholic Church (Easter Vigil 2009 it happened). If I needed a conditional Baptism, what happens with my Confirmation?

 

[thistle]

But, although I was Baptized in a Protestant ecclesial community, I was Confirmed into the Catholic Church (Easter Vigil 2009 it happened). If I needed a conditional Baptism, what happens with my Confirmation?

Why would you need a conditional baptism?
In your OP you said you had a Trinitarian baptism with water. Such a baptism is a valid baptism.
I assume you went through an RCIA program before being accepted into the Church at Easter. Are you saying no priest or anyone asked if you had been baptised before? I don’t think so. They must so they know what kind of ceremony you go through at Easter.

 

[puzzleannie]

I
I worry that if I ask for a conditional Baptism, the Priest will refuse on the grounds of my history of Scrupulosity and his progressive outlook and, also, even if he did consent to a conditional Baptism, how do I deal with the fact that I was Confirmed (Easter Vigil 2009)? Would I then need a conditional Confirmation?

you would not have been confirmed by a Catholic priest unless and until the matter of your baptism had been looked at and resolved. He did resolve it, you are validly baptized and confirmed. It is the decision of the Church, not the candidate, to rule on validity of the sacraments. If you feel you have a separate issue with scrupulosity, find one good priest as confessor and spiritual director, and direct these types of questions only to him, and do not discuss them with third parties. The same with other matters of concern that arise for you. Welcome Home! you give us great joy.

 

[Ohiomom]

This was recently raised in another group I belong to and one issue that was raised was that some congregations of some mainline denominations and some mega church type congregations were baptizing using “alternate Trinitarinan” forumulas- ie The Creator … There were some comments that pre-Vatican two almost all converts were conditionally baptised, but that has changed so it is assumed that baptisms are valid except for some denominations (already stated) who are known to not have valid baptisms for various reasons.

 

[thistle]

This was recently raised in another group I belong to and one issue that was raised was that some congregations of some mainline denominations and some mega church type congregations were baptizing using “alternate Trinitarinan” forumulas- ie The Creator … There were some comments that pre-Vatican two almost all converts were conditionally baptised, but that has changed so it is assumed that baptisms are valid except for some denominations (already stated) who are known to not have valid baptisms for various reasons.

It is not valid using the formula starting “in the name of the Creator…”.
It must be in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Ohiomom]

It is not valid using the formula starting “in the name of the Creator…”.
It must be in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

I know. Maybe I did not complete the thought. My point was that there may be some catechetical leaders and priests thinking that a church is baptizing validly because historically the denomination used the correct words that we received from Christ, when an individual congregation has started using various made up formulas.

That is aside from the fact that I know baptists have a different understanding of what baptism is and what it does because I recall as a child people being re-baptized who were coming to our church from other Christian denominations. I have also spoken with a couple of former Catholics who were re-baptized when they became baptist. Not certain if some of that was not really oppositional defiance (ie, if we baptists admit a Catholic baptism is valid then what else do they do that is valid…)

 

[SANxJONERO]

Why does it have to be in the name of the Father, the son & the holy spirit? Isn’t it with just Jesus’ name ok?

 

[nsper7]

Isn’t it with just Jesus’ name ok?

In short, no. Any Baptism using any formula besides the Trinitarian formula (in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit) is invalid.

 

[newyorkcatholic]

Why does it have to be in the name of the Father, the son & the holy spirit? Isn’t it with just Jesus’ name ok?

“Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” (Matthew 28:19)

 

[Raphael777]

Hi nsper7,

I felt obligated to log in a respond to this, since I went through a long period of doubt about the exact same situation that is plaguing you (heck, my Baptism took placing at a backyard youth rally!).

Short answer - be at peace! You are as Catholic in the eyes of God as the Holy Father himself.

This really is an issue of scrupulosity. I took this issue to 3 separate priests (who I knew to be highly orthodox). All gave me the same answer. But even with that, with my ridiculous scrupulosity, I wasn’t satisfied, so I even took this issue to my Bishop. The Bishop was very gentle with me, even telling me that it was very admirable that I took the Sacraments so seriously. But he told me not to worry at all - the Church had spoken. This is pretty powerful coming from a succesor of the Holy Apostles!

Be assured, this is definitely an issue with scrupulosity. Try your best to get past this, and offer up everything to God in the meantime.

When that Priest (or Bishop) said to you “The Lord receives you into the Catholic Church”, you entered into full Communion with HMC. These were not just empty words - this was Christ himself, speaking through the person of his Minister.

Be at ease my friend.

Hope this helped in some way.