Could i be baptized again in the traditional form?

  • Thread starter Thread starter notredame_999
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

notredame_999

Guest
Could I be baptized again in the traditional form before Vatican II? I am specifically thinking of the scene in the Godfather where the priest speaks latin, sprinkles salt on the child, and breathes on the infant (I think its a form of exorcism). Its not because I feel my original baptism was invalid, I just prefer that form of baptism.
 
If your baptism was valid, then you cannot be baptised again. Remember the words of the Creed - we believe in ONE baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

Just because you saw something in a film doesn’t make it authentic.
 
notredame_999 said:
Could I be baptized again in the traditional form before Vatican II? I am specifically thinking of the scene in the Godfather where the priest speaks latin, sprinkles salt on the child, and breathes on the infant (I think its a form of exorcism). Its not because I feel my original baptism was invalid, I just prefer that form of baptism.
Click to expand...
You only preffer the form of the way it’s done, your baptism is valid and no need to go back and ask for a different form.
 
archangel04 said:
You only preffer the form of the way it’s done, your baptism is valid and no need to go back and ask for a different form.
Click to expand...
Besides that no priest would do it. If he can’t re-baptise validly baptized non-Catholics he certainly cannot re-baptise a baptized Catholic.
 
As everyone has said, no.

The Church recognizes even Protestant Baptisms, as long as they are Trinitarian in form. Form and matter is important.

Form: “I baptize you in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.”
Matter: water, preferably touching the forehead.

You are a baptized, and I will assume confirmed Catholic. No matter how much you want another Baptism, it is unnecessary and not allowed.
 
jantoniello said:
Matter: water, preferably touching the forehead.
Click to expand...
Surprisingly what I found is that there is nothing in Church documents that says that when the method of pouring is used, it must be on the head. Because I’ve heard of the water being poured on the body for babies and thought it is at the very least an abuse. Its isn’t and perfectly valid.

Also, some parishes who would have the facilities for it would practice some form or immersion for adult baptisms. One of my former parishes had a rather large baptismal font which resembles a good sized private fish pond. The candidates knelt in the water while Father pours generous amounts of water onto their heads.
 
Have you forgotten so soon the words of the creed you hear every Sunday: “Confiteor unum baptisma”? Not only is the answer to your question no, as everyone has said, but even to attempt the act deliberately would constitute the grave sin of sacrilege. Bad idea all around.

EDIT:
Its not because I feel my original baptism was invalid, I just prefer that form of baptism.
Click to expand...
Right, because it’s vital to tailor the Sacraments to each and every person’s individual preferences and whims. “But I want to be baptised in a river!” “But I want to be baptized in Latin!” “But I want to be baptized by a clown!” :rolleyes:
 
notredame_999 said:
Could I be baptized again in the traditional form before Vatican II? I am specifically thinking of the scene in the Godfather where the priest speaks latin, sprinkles salt on the child, and breathes on the infant (I think its a form of exorcism). Its not because I feel my original baptism was invalid, I just prefer that form of baptism.
Click to expand...
How old are you?
 
As everyone has said, no, you can’t.

If you prefer the pre-Vatican II form, when you have kids, join an FSSP parish and have them baptized there.
 
notredame_999 said:
Could I be baptized again in the traditional form before Vatican II? I am specifically thinking of the scene in the Godfather where the priest speaks latin, sprinkles salt on the child, and breathes on the infant (I think its a form of exorcism). Its not because I feel my original baptism was invalid, I just prefer that form of baptism.
Click to expand...
The actual process of washing away original sin by the prescribed words and action cannot be repeated without sacrilege, but the new rite has deleted many “extras” that were efficacious sacramentals, notably the exorcisms (I think there were 5 of them). You can ask to have these “topped up” without impugning the validity of the actual “I baptize thee in the Name …” When my wife and I “returned to tradition” we brought all our children along and the SSPX priest “filled in” these omitted parts, but without repeating the baptism itself. Our subsequent children were all baptised in the Tridentine rite, either in our local parish by a diocesan priest under Ecclesia Dei, or by the SSPX.

You will notice that the devil was quietly dropped from consideration in the 70s, so that now many priests are being given crash courses in exorcism. I very strongly advise anyone who had the 1970 Rite of Baptism, to find a sympathetic priest and have the ceremony topped up with the other Sacramentals.
 
notredame_999 said:
Could I be baptized again in the traditional form before Vatican II? I am specifically thinking of the scene in the Godfather where the priest speaks latin, sprinkles salt on the child, and breathes on the infant (I think its a form of exorcism). Its not because I feel my original baptism was invalid, I just prefer that form of baptism.
Click to expand...
NO
 
As everyone else has said, no. There is one baptism, as we profess each Sunday in the Creed.

I was baptized Protestant, by triune immersion in a pond. It still counted, and when I was received into the Catholic Church, I was not re-baptized.

Of my class of 40-odd catechumens and candidates, the only ones who had been baptized and needed to be rebaptized were those who hadn’t been baptized in the Trinitarian formula (e.g. two candidates converting from Mormonism), or those for whom there was no documentation of a prior baptism (e.g. one older lady whose childhood church had burned down along with all its records, and any witnesses to her baptism were deceased)
 
I know how ya feel. I wish I could remember my baptism but I understand why it had to be done when I was a baby. Full immersion Baptism seems so lovely.
 
No, Catholics only get validly baptized once. It is sufficient and has nothing to do with personal preference.
 
ora_pro_nobis said:
If your baptism was valid, then you cannot be baptised again. Remember the words of the Creed - we believe in ONE baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

Just because you saw something in a film doesn’t make it authentic.
Click to expand...
“No” is the right answer but just to clarify, the film does authentically depict Baptism as it is conferred according to the Rituale of 1962 and earlier, where the priest breathes on the infant three times, exorcises the salt and places it on the tongue.
 
numealinesimpet said:
The actual process of washing away original sin by the prescribed words and action cannot be repeated without sacrilege, but the new rite has deleted many “extras” that were efficacious sacramentals, notably the exorcisms (I think there were 5 of them). You can ask to have these “topped up” without impugning the validity of the actual “I baptize thee in the Name …” When my wife and I “returned to tradition” we brought all our children along and the SSPX priest “filled in” these omitted parts, but without repeating the baptism itself. Our subsequent children were all baptised in the Tridentine rite, either in our local parish by a diocesan priest under Ecclesia Dei, or by the SSPX.

You will notice that the devil was quietly dropped from consideration in the 70s, so that now many priests are being given crash courses in exorcism. I very strongly advise anyone who had the 1970 Rite of Baptism, to find a sympathetic priest and have the ceremony topped up with the other Sacramentals.
Click to expand...
Thank you for this, this has been on my mind. 🙂

I’ll add there is such a thing as a conditional baptism by the way, when there are doubts about the original, but they have to be of real substance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top