Doubtfully valid baptism

  • Thread starter Thread starter jj2011
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jj2011

Guest
The video below shows a baptism done in an incredibly irreverent way in Los Angeles. The comments section has a link to another even worse case where the form seems to have been changed to “We baptize you…”

This is a very grave abuse. Doubtfully valid baptisms should be repeated sub conditione.

I’m hoping that somebody here can bring this situation to the attention of Rome.

closedcafeteria.blogspot.com/2007/11/not-your-grandparents-baptism.html
 
1.) He got the moving water part correctly done.
2.) He said, “I baptize you in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” There was no “we”.

This baptism is a done deal!

Is it the immersion part that bothers you? Or is it the part where the parents and the godparents are all in the baptismal pool with the priest and held the baby? There’s no definitive on who holds the baby. It used to be the godmother, mostly because women were considered baby “experts” and mothers did not make it to the baby’s baptism, being at home recouping from giving birth. Later, mothers held the baby. But it doesn’t matter who holds the baby. The priest immersed the kid, and said the right thing. Not my cup of tea, but it meets the basic requirements.

In any event- If you think this needs to go to Rome, don’t wait on one of us. You have every right, as a Catholic, to question what you consider abuse.
 
This is the second case I mentioned, where this priest appears to tamper with the form, changing it to “We baptize you…” To change the form, particularly in a way that changes the meaning, is a big deal-- a very big deal.

youtube.com/watch?v=vm8r5QxuSUk
 
jj2011 said:
The video below shows a baptism done in an incredibly irreverent way in Los Angeles. The comments section has a link to another even worse case where the form seems to have been changed to “We baptize you…”

This is a very grave abuse. Doubtfully valid baptisms should be repeated sub conditione.

I’m hoping that somebody here can bring this situation to the attention of Rome.

closedcafeteria.blogspot.com/2007/11/not-your-grandparents-baptism.html
Click to expand...
In the one I watched where several people were in the pool, I didn’t find any issue of validity. It did not seem to be within the context of Mass. One major problem I have seen is the Baptizing of dipers and legs. The Rite speaks of “water flowing on the forehead”. A Baptism might be considered questionable or doubtful unless water flows on the head or specifically the forehead.
 
While I have seen full immersion infant baptisms, this one takes the cake. I have never seen everyone in the font (Holy Hot Tub) together. 🤷
DD’s father held her during her Baptism.
 
jj2011 said:
This is the second case I mentioned, where this priest appears to tamper with the form, changing it to “We baptize you…” To change the form, particularly in a way that changes the meaning, is a big deal-- a very big deal.

youtube.com/watch?v=vm8r5QxuSUk
Click to expand...
Then if you are in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, you need to take it up with the Vatican, if Cardinal Mahoney will not give you an answer, or correct an abuse. You can’t expect people from other places to do it for you.
 
PatienceAndLove said:
While I have seen full immersion infant baptisms, this one takes the cake. I have never seen everyone in the font (Holy Hot Tub) together. 🤷
DD’s father held her during her Baptism.
Click to expand...
Holy hot tub, Batman!😉 As I said, not my cup of tea, but valid. Ranks up there with Shakey’s Pizza Hymnology (not Hymnody).

But the OP still needs to go up the chain to report what he sees as abuse himself, not depend on the CAF people to do that. They just are not going to listen to me, in the burbs of Chicago, state a complaint about LA.
 
I am a traditionalist. I heard the priest say I baptise you in the name of the Father , etc.

IT looked like a perfectly valid baptism to me.

And I actually liked it…I just hope it was outside of the liturgy.
 
What a joyful baptism! And, it met all the official criteria…OF course it is valid…

BTW…Total immersion has alwas been the norm for Catholic baptism…From the very beginning…

Sandy
 
I watched that three times. Each time, I heard the priest use ‘I baptize’

So, yes, it’s a valid baptism.
 
jj2011 said:
This is the second case I mentioned, where this priest appears to tamper with the form, changing it to “We baptize you…” To change the form, particularly in a way that changes the meaning, is a big deal-- a very big deal.

youtube.com/watch?v=vm8r5QxuSUk
Click to expand...
The first Baptism, although definitely not my cup of tea, was fine. I didn’t hear “We”, but I did hear "We baptize you… for “Erika’s Baptism” on this link you had. Is that the same priest?
 
It would be incumbant on all who have read this thread to pray for the child who was baptized using “we” so as that they might be brought to receive the Sacrament properly.

As well as the Monsignor, both on account of whatever guilt he has for the erroneous baptism, and for the sake that he not make such a mistake in the future.
 
Lazerlike42 said:
It would be incumbant on all who have read this thread to pray for the child who was baptized using “we” so as that they might be brought to receive the Sacrament properly.

As well as the Monsignor, both on account of whatever guilt he has for the erroneous baptism, and for the sake that he not make such a mistake in the future.
Click to expand...
I watched the first video…it is more than obvious that the priest said “I”…the second baptism I am not so sure about…But the first video the baptism was as valid as can be…I wish my sould was as clean as the child in the first video:o
 
<<The comments section has a link to another even worse case where the form seems to have been changed to “We baptize you…”>>

In the Byzantine books, the formula is, "The servant of God N is baptized in the Name of the Father [R. Amen.] and of the Son [R. Amen.] and of the Holy Spirit [R. Amen].

I can’t say about the Chaldeans, but the Assyrians say, “Name, be baptized in the Name…”

Would dare to say that these baptisms are doubtful?
 
bpbasilphx said:
<<The comments section has a link to another even worse case where the form seems to have been changed to “We baptize you…”>>

In the Byzantine books, the formula is, "The servant of God N is baptized in the Name of the Father [R. Amen.] and of the Son [R. Amen.] and of the Holy Spirit [R. Amen].

I can’t say about the Chaldeans, but the Assyrians say, “Name, be baptized in the Name…”

Would dare to say that these baptisms are doubtful?
Click to expand...
If during a baptism —the formulas you quote above are changed --to say different —would the Byzantines and/or Assyrians not be concerned about the validity of the baptism.
 
bpbasilphx said:
<<The comments section has a link to another even worse case where the form seems to have been changed to “We baptize you…”>>

In the Byzantine books, the formula is, "The servant of God N is baptized in the Name of the Father [R. Amen.] and of the Son [R. Amen.] and of the Holy Spirit [R. Amen].

I can’t say about the Chaldeans, but the Assyrians say, “Name, be baptized in the Name…”

Would dare to say that these baptisms are doubtful?
Click to expand...
I’m not familiar with the Assyrian form, but in general I would not question the validity of baptism done according to the traditional rites.

In each rite there is some mention of the sacrament being conferred, either in the active voice, “I baptize thee,” or the passive voice, “The servant of God is baptized…”

I am not attacking any of the traditional eastern rites. The problem is when a priest changes the sacramental formula to insinuate a false doctrine, such as baptism is done by the community. That is what the priest in the video appears to have done.
 
Br.Rich_SFO said:
In the one I watched where several people were in the pool, I didn’t find any issue of validity. It did not seem to be within the context of Mass. One major problem I have seen is the Baptizing of dipers and legs…
Click to expand...
I appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut, Bro. Rich. To your knowledge was anything ever done about these cases?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top