Conditional Baptism

[kiri]

Hello, and I’m glad to be a (new) member of this forum. This is my question:

If a Catholic found out that they were baptized by a now-elderly Catholic relative rather than a priest (and that relative now is not completely certain that the baptism was performed correctly), would the need to receive Conditional Baptism invalidate the many confessions made over the years? Many thanks for any help you can give me on this question.

 

[1ke]

Hello, and I’m glad to be a (new) member of this forum. This is my question:

If a Catholic found out that they were baptized by a now-elderly Catholic relative rather than a priest (and that relative now is not completely certain that the baptism was performed correctly), would the need to receive Conditional Baptism invalidate the many confessions made over the years? Many thanks for any help you can give me on this question.

Please go talk to your pastor. The forum is not a place for a specific answer to a pastoral concern such as this.

Your pastor will need to make a determination regarding whether or not records exist and whether or not a conditional baptism needs to be done and what other provisions need to be made based on the findings of his investigation.

 

[FrDavid96]

Hello, and I’m glad to be a (new) member of this forum. This is my question:

If a Catholic found out that they were baptized by a now-elderly Catholic relative rather than a priest (and that relative now is not completely certain that the baptism was performed correctly), would the need to receive Conditional Baptism invalidate the many confessions made over the years? Many thanks for any help you can give me on this question.

Actually, it doesn’t matter.*

1. If the baptism years ago was valid, then so were all the Confessions afterwards. No issue, no problem.
2. If the first attempt was not a valid baptism, and the priest in the present-day baptizes the person, then Baptism itself remits all sins. There is never a need for Confession for any sins committed before Baptism. No issue, no problem.

So, either way, there is still no need to repeat any past Confessions.

** Edit*
The “confession” part of the question doesn’t matter. Surely, the broader issue is important.

 

[lmelahn]

Hello, and I’m glad to be a (new) member of this forum. This is my question:

If a Catholic found out that they were baptized by a now-elderly Catholic relative rather than a priest (and that relative now is not completely certain that the baptism was performed correctly), would the need to receive Conditional Baptism invalidate the many confessions made over the years? Many thanks for any help you can give me on this question.

I would see no reason to think that a baptism performed by a layperson would be invalid, as long as water was poured (or the baptized was immersed) and the Trinitarian formula was used. The person might need to get a baptismal certificate, e.g., in order to get married, but that is a strictly procedural matter.

Hence, the only reason to perform a conditional baptism is if there is some doubt regarding the actual baptism: either because people are not sure that it actually happened, or because people are not sure whether the essential rite (pouring of water and Trinitarian formula, both performed by the same person) was followed.

 

[paperwight66]

A Baptism performed by a lay person is for when there is danger of death. It isn’t just for any old time, or as an alternative to baptism by a priest.

OP, I’m sure your relative meant well. Were you a baby at the time and in danger of death? My nurse friends sometimes baptise babies in intensive care when it looks like they are not going to survive more than a few minutes, but if they recover, the parents are told to see their priest and arrange a ‘proper’ baptism. Apart from anything else, there should be a prep. course for the parents.

 

[1ke]

I would see no reason to think that a baptism performed by a layperson would be invalid, as long as water was poured (or the baptized was immersed) and the Trinitarian formula was used.

Well the person who performed it says they have doubt. So, the OP and that person need to talk to their pastor. Anonymous questions on the internet will not help at all. None of us here has the facts, and furthermore none of us here has pastoral care of the person. None of us here will be the one to interview the person who baptized the OP and make the determination on whether there is sufficient doubt to require a conditional baptism.

The person might need to get a baptismal certificate, e.g., in order to get married, but that is a strictly procedural matter.

Yes and no. If the baptism was never recorded, there is no certificate to be had. This is again why the OP needs to talk to their pastor. The pastor can initiate an affidavit of baptism for the records and make an appropriate entry into the sacramental records. The OP can also address any other sacramental needs with the pastor, such as confirmation, marriage in the church, etc.

Hence, the only reason to perform a conditional baptism is if there is some doubt regarding the actual baptism: either because people are not sure that it actually happened, or because people are not sure whether the essential rite (pouring of water and Trinitarian formula, both performed by the same person) was followed.

Yes, I am quite aware of that.

That is the OP’s question after all-- that the person who baptized him has now told him that he/she did the baptism and has doubts as to its validity. These facts and the person who did the baptizing need to be brought to the OP’s pastor for a resolution.

His/her question about confession is really tangential, because either way it doesn’t matter. A conditional baptism when one is not baptized wipes away original sin. If already baptized, the previous confessions suffice. The OP needs to see his pastor not because of his question on confession but because of other sacraments in the Church that he will need baptismal records for: confirmation and marriage (or ordination). it is best to get this straightened out while the person who baptized him is still alive and can complete an affidavit of baptism. It is also weighing on his mind and having his pastor make the determination on conditional baptism will put him at ease.

 

[1ke]

A Baptism performed by a lay person is for when there is danger of death. It isn’t just for any old time, or as an alternative to baptism by a priest.

Yes, to be licit. But, even if a person did so without danger of death it is still valid.

but if they recover, the parents are told to see their priest and arrange a ‘proper’ baptism. Apart from anything else, there should be a prep. course for the parents.

There is only one baptism. The baptism the nurse performs IS the baptism. A child is not baptized again. The priest can supply the rites of baptism including anointing, the candle, white garment, blessings, etc. The priest records the emergency baptism in the sacramental records.

 

[Roseeurekacross]

Hi Kiri,

You are fortunate to have 2 Priests on this thread.

I am not one of them. Is your elderly relative suffering dementia / forgetful now? Or can that person remember accurately how they baptised you?

 

[FrDavid96]

… would the need to receive Conditional Baptism invalidate the many confessions made over the years? …

Baptism remits all sins. That is all that would matter in such a situation.

 

[kiri]

Thanks so much, Fr. David, and all of you who responded to my question. You’ve reassured me and given me the courage to move ahead on resolving this. I’ll definitely go talk with my pastor!.

 

[Gorgias]

You are fortunate to have 2 Priests on this thread.

Two priests?

 

[UpUpAndAway]

Two priests?

Fr. David and Imelahn.

 

[lmelahn]

Well the person who performed it says they have doubt. So, the OP and that person need to talk to their pastor. Anonymous questions on the internet will not help at all. None of us here has the facts, and furthermore none of us here has pastoral care of the person. None of us here will be the one to interview the person who baptized the OP and make the determination on whether there is sufficient doubt to require a conditional baptism.

1ke, you are quite right—I did not read the original message correctly (the part about being doubtful that the baptism was done correctly).

However, I maintain the rest of my answer: the question will depend on whether the same person both poured water and recited the Trinitarian formula (which is the minimum matter and form required for validity). I totally agree that the O.P. will need to talk to his or her pastor.

As for the theological consequences of not being baptized: it is true that Baptism is the “door” to all of the other sacraments. However, there will never be any need to repeat confessions, as you and others have said, since Baptism remits sins (without a need for previous confession).

As a consequence, conditional Baptism would almost certainly be immediately followed by a conditional Confirmation (unless the person is very young). In the very same act, if the person is married, the marriage would be “sanated,” if necessary. In any event, the person’s pastor will tell him or her what to do.

 

[FrDavid96]

Friends:

The OP was not asking about the validity of the first (attempted) baptism. That was not the question.

What to do about that first baptism was not the question. The OP is in the process of discussing this with the pastor—which is exactly the right thing to do.

Please go back and read the OPs question. It was not about baptism. The question was about what effect a conditional baptism would have on past confessions.

Read the question. Answer the question.

… This is my question:
…would the need to receive Conditional Baptism invalidate the many confessions made over the years?..

The OP did not ask about certificates or testimony or marriage, or any of the other issues people are trying to address here.

The OP did not ask about whether or not a conditional baptism is needed—yet people are responding as if that were the question.

Read the question. Answer the question.