Concerns over baptimism validity (RCIA concerns)

[BobbyNewmark]

This all seems terribly complicated

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

This all seems terribly complicated

Not really.

1. Work with your RCIA team to verify your baptism.

If #1 is impossible then:

1. Work with your RCIA team to do what’s necessary for a conditional baptism.

 

[Spirithound]

Bobby, which part confuses you?

 

[Monica4316]

Was your baptism in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit? then it was valid regardless of where you got baptized or who baptized you. It was still the Holy Spirit who took away you sins and gave you life in Christ

 

[IntegraCatholic]

Bobby, I feel your pain. Hence my very simple response: just request a conditional baptism. You have this right, as there is no baptismal certificate.

jmcrae,

“Traditional” meaning, what? (The Tridentine form doesn’t have the Easter Vigil, as far as I know.)

1962 Missal by a parish priest of the FSSP.

There has always been an Easter Vigil. Since the Middle Ages, however, it has been anticipated earlier and earlier, said on Saturday morning from the late Middle Ages until 1951 (ad experimentum) and 1955 by decree. Since 1955, and therefore in 1962, the Easter Vigil has been said in the middle of the night/early Easter morning.

This would be an excellent reason not to have Conditional Baptism at the Easter Vigil …] unless they interrupt the Mass right after the Baptism and have the candidates go to Confession in the middle of Mass.

The Sacraments are not given during Mass in the traditional rite but (logically) after the blessing of the baptismal font.

 

[Senecus]

I was also baptized at an Assembly of God church. It absolutely is a valid Christian baptism, and uses the correct form (in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit). As the AOG is the largest worldwide Pentecostal church (60 million plus), many former members who become Lutheran, Catholic, Orthodox, etc., frequently deal with this situation.

If your parents or you have lost or misplaced your “Record of Christian Baptism”, you may be able to contact the church secretary, and see if they have a copy, or if you can get a new copy. Some churches have old archives in various formats.

If the above doesn’t work out, simply schedule a conditional re-baptism . . . not a big deal, . . . . don’t let it be a barrier to your faith journey.

Gruess

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Bobby

Please do not become disheartened. DO NOT go for a conditional baptism because some people on here are recommending this. Choosing conditional baptism is not a casual thing like going into a shop and choosing a loaf of bread.

First, you need to work with the parish priest and your RCIA team. They will know, or be able to find out, if an Assembly of God baptism is valid. Second, work with them and members of your family who were around at your baptism, and the place where you were baptised to obtain proof of your baptism. Lack of a baptismal certificate does not mean you cannot prove you were baptised. The Church will, for example, accept the testimony of adults who witnessed your baptism.

The decision cannot be made on this Forum. The decision will be made by your parish priest.

Go back to your RCIA and start from there. Part of their role is to answer your questions.

Best wishes

Matthew

 

[jmcrae]

The Sacraments are not given during Mass in the traditional rite but (logically) after the blessing of the baptismal font.

Which takes place directly after the blessing of the Easter Candle, as part of the opening rite of the Easter Vigil Mass.

But even if the baptisms are taking place directly after this, instead of after the homily, then there is still the problem of, when do they go to Confession? Since Mass is already beginning, at this point.

 

[IntegraCatholic]

No, in the traditional rite all the blessings take place before Mass. Bugnini had a certain fetish for moving blessings and other sacraments into the rite of Mass for some reason, as though they lacked efficacy otherwise. The conferral of holy orders during Mass actually makes sense and has basis in tradition because the orders are directly relevant to the Mass itself and are given immediately before that order would be used – e.g., the subdeaconate is conferred before the epistle, the diaconate before the Gospel – the newly ordained fulfilling that liturgical role.

 

[jmcrae]

No, in the traditional rite all the blessings take place before Mass.

This doesn’t answer my question. When do they go to Confession? Since even if the water is blessed ahead of time, the Baptisms can’t take place until after the Liturgy of the Word.

 

[IntegraCatholic]

This doesn’t answer my question. When do they go to Confession? Since even if the water is blessed ahead of time, the Baptisms can’t take place until after the Liturgy of the Word.

No, as I mentioned above, the baptisms and everything else taking place concerning the reception of converts into the Church, takes place outside the Mass. The baptisms (logically) take place immediately after the blessing of the baptismal font. The conditional confessions could then be heard after the baptisms, as the ministers return to the sacristy, vest for Mass, etc., and the sanctuary is being prepared for Mass (decorations, flowers, etc.). Of course, the majority of the confession could have been given earlier that day or week or at some more opportune time; all that is necessary is that the conditional absolution of those sins take place after the baptism.

 

[jmcrae]

No, as I mentioned above, the baptisms and everything else taking place concerning the reception of converts into the Church, takes place outside the Mass. The baptisms (logically) take place immediately after the blessing of the baptismal font. The conditional confessions could then be heard after the baptisms, as the ministers return to the sacristy, vest for Mass, etc., and the sanctuary is being prepared for Mass (decorations, flowers, etc.). Of course, the majority of the confession could have been given earlier that day or week or at some more opportune time; all that is necessary is that the conditional absolution of those sins take place after the baptism.

Okay, this sounds like what was done prior to Vatican II - all well and good for then - and all of them were done in private, which is how Conditional Baptisms are supposed to be done.

In the new Rite, the Baptisms take place instead of the Apostles’ Creed, after the Liturgy of the Word.

If you are doing Conditional Baptisms at this time, are you expecting the people to now go for their Conditional Reconciliations, before the Mass can continue?

NO, but as I said before, Conditional Baptisms must take place privately, at some point prior to the Initiation ceremony itself, and followed by Conditional Reconciliations, and then they are treated like Baptized Candidates during the ceremony itself.

Does that make sense to you, now?

 

[IntegraCatholic]

Nothing I have said in this thread has implied that I was speaking about the new rite. I have said at least once or twice that I am speaking of the traditional rite.

My question has been very simple and is as follows.

1. I have personally witnessed the conditional baptism of a Protestant convert (followed by his conditional confession in the confessional nearest the altar) at a Mass said by an FSSP priest for Easter Vigil according to the 1962 Missal.
2. As the documents quoted thus far have only been in reference to the new rite, does anyone have any documentation (either before or after 1962) stating that conditional baptisms in the traditional rite must be given in private? While it may have been customary to do so in the past most of the time (as it had not been customary at all to receive converts at Easter Vigil from the time when mass conversions of adults stopped until 1951), is there any documentation that it was forbidden to be done at the Easter Vigil? Is there any evidence that it was discouraged to be done then? Is there any evidence that it was not done then, particularly between 1951 and 1962?

I think that sums up what I’ve been saying throughout the course of this thread.

 

[jmcrae]

Nothing I have said in this thread has implied that I was speaking about the new rite. I have said at least once or twice that I am speaking of the traditional rite.

My question has been very simple and is as follows.

1. I have personally witnessed the conditional baptism of a Protestant convert (followed by his conditional confession in the confessional nearest the altar) at a Mass said by an FSSP priest for Easter Vigil according to the 1962 Missal.
2. As the documents quoted thus far have only been in reference to the new rite, does anyone have any documentation (either before or after 1962) stating that conditional baptisms in the traditional rite must be given in private? While it may have been customary to do so in the past most of the time (as it had not been customary at all to receive converts at Easter Vigil from the time when mass conversions of adults stopped until 1951), is there any documentation that it was forbidden to be done at the Easter Vigil? Is there any evidence that it was discouraged to be done then? Is there any evidence that it was not done then, particularly between 1951 and 1962?

I think that sums up what I’ve been saying throughout the course of this thread.

I think I have pointed out before that in “A Priest’s Guide to Inquiry Classes” which was written in 1957, the priest is told to give everyone Conditional Baptisms and Conditional Reconciliations as the substance of the 25th meeting, with First Holy Communion to be given on the Sunday following, and Confirmation to be given at the convenience of the Bishop, at his next visit to the parish. There is no mention of the Easter Vigil.

There is no process given for the investigation, to know whether someone had been baptized before, or not. It is simply assumed to be “unknown” in every case, meaning that there would be no public Baptisms.

As far as I know, this was the norm for at least all of North America at that time.

 

[IntegraCatholic]

One book’s abbreviated course of action does not constitute what is customary for an entire continent. I am not accusing you for not knowing. I am simply wondering if anyone has evidence for the questions I’ve posed – evidence that says one may not administer conditional baptism in public, either before the Easter Vigil or otherwise, etc., as in my previous post.

 

[jmcrae]

One book’s abbreviated course of action does not constitute what is customary for an entire continent. I am not accusing you for not knowing. I am simply wondering if anyone has evidence for the questions I’ve posed – evidence that says one may not administer conditional baptism in public, either before the Easter Vigil or otherwise, etc., as in my previous post.

And again, read the Rite. All the way through. It explains all of these things in great detail.

 

[Brywan]

My advice would be to try and get confirmation that you were baptized.

I did not have documentation of my baptism when I came into the Catholic Church. The RCIA director requested that I have someone who had witnessed my baptism to write a confirmation letter.

My father ended up writing a letter stating that he was present at my baptism. That was all I needed…

 

[Matthew_Holford]

One book’s abbreviated course of action does not constitute what is customary for an entire continent. I am not accusing you for not knowing. I am simply wondering if anyone has evidence for the questions I’ve posed – evidence that says one may not administer conditional baptism in public, either before the Easter Vigil or otherwise, etc., as in my previous post.

The Roman Ritual, the liturgical book that contains the Rite of Baptism, states that conditional baptism must be administered privately.

It would be impractical to administer conditional baptism at the Easter Vigil because conditional baptism must be followed by confession (and conditional absolution) before being confirmed and receiving Eucharist for the first time.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Unfortunately, you appear to be misinformed about conditional baptism. The Church requires conditional baptisms to be conducted in private; therefore, they cannot take place within the celebration of the Paschal Vigil.

I have never heard this before, can you provide a source document from the Church?

 

[IntegraCatholic]

Does everyone realize that the traditional Roman Rituale (1962) is still in use for any priests wishing to use it? Does everyone realize that the rubrics for the latest rituale have nothing to do with the rituale of 1962?