L
Learner1969
Guest
It was a CofE church where I was Christened I must have been a couple of months old at the time.
- Status
E
eagerbeaver
Guest
Stunned !! - this is really problematical
L
Learner1969
Guest
Why is this problematical, he asked my why I wanted to join the Catholic Church and was happy with my response, I do not know the canon law on this so could anyone enlighten me?
E
eagerbeaver
Guest
L
Learner1969
Guest
“Prior to formal incorporation, they would still require a dispensation from the bishop before entering into marriage and a man could not enter into seminary formation. Nor could they receive any formal ministry.”
Pardon my ignorance but could you explain this more clearly.
Pardon my ignorance but could you explain this more clearly.
Last edited:
F
FrDavid96
Guest
I wish people would understand that when someone poses a question or comment about a topic like this, we have to be careful about certain things.
Saying “in my experience, we use different words” does not help the discussion. The OP’s question mostly comes down to issues addressed in Canon Law. While we can all have our own informal vocabulary from time to time, when discussing issues of the law, we do (yes, do) need to be careful about the vocabulary. The Catholic Church does not “Christen” persons. That word can-and-does mean different things to different people and different Christian religions.
The question here is the status of the OPs baptism, not a Christening, but a baptism.
The CofE has valid baptisms. However, a Christening is not always a baptism.
Saying “in my experience, we use different words” does not help the discussion. The OP’s question mostly comes down to issues addressed in Canon Law. While we can all have our own informal vocabulary from time to time, when discussing issues of the law, we do (yes, do) need to be careful about the vocabulary. The Catholic Church does not “Christen” persons. That word can-and-does mean different things to different people and different Christian religions.
The question here is the status of the OPs baptism, not a Christening, but a baptism.
The CofE has valid baptisms. However, a Christening is not always a baptism.
F
FrDavid96
Guest
In the preparation before you became Catholic (2017, right?) did you work with a priest, or directly with the bishop himself? Most of the time, the preparation is done by the parish priest, who presents (directly or indirectly) the candidate to the bishop.
Whether it was the bishop or the priest who prepared you does not matter, except for the simple fact of knowing which word to use.
The important question is this:
The person who prepared you (bishop or priest): did he ever ask you to produce any certificates of your prior baptism(s) and or Confirmation (or attempt-at-Confirmation)??? Basically, did he ask you for any sacramental certificates?
If you answer “yes”, can you recall what you showed him? (not every little detail, but at least, generally, what did those papers say).
F
FrDavid96
Guest
It’s irrelevant.
It simply means that an Orthodox person who intends to become Catholic, but who has not yet been formally received into the Catholic Church is still considered to be an Orthodox person under canon law UNTIL the point when he formally becomes a Catholic.
So if such a person wants to marry a Catholic, the marriage would be one Catholic spouse and one Orthodox spouse.
In contrast, AFTER that person formally becomes a Catholic, the marriage would be two Catholics.
It also means that an Orthodox man who intends to become a Catholic in the future but who seeks to be ordained a deacon cannot be ordained a Catholic deacon until AFTER he formally becomes Catholic.
Again, it’s irrelevant. It simply means that an Orthodox person is considered to be canonically Orthodox until he is formally received into the Catholic Church. Only after formal reception will he be canonically Catholic.
Aside: before people who don’t understand how this works start posting things like “catechumens and candidates are considered Catholic for some purposes”–I’ll try to stop that before it happens. There is no such thing as Orthodox persons who are either catechumens or candidates.
L
Learner1969
Guest
Thats right Fr, it was back in the 1970s when I was Christened and it was just a name giving ceremony, my parents were a part of the Salvation Army but they do not do baptisms or Christenings so thats why they asked a CofE vicar to Christen me.
F
FrDavid96
Guest
Are you doing that intentionally: using the word 'Christening" specifically because I keep asking you not to use that word??? At this point, that the impression I’m getting.FrDavid96:
Thats right Fr, it was back in the 1970s when I was Christened and it was just a name giving ceremony, my parents were a part of the Salvation Army but they do not do baptisms or Christenings so thats why they asked a CofE vicar to Christen me.
I keep asking you not to use the word “Christening” because that word only causes confusion. It is ambiguous exactly because it means different things to different people.
You are asking about your status as a Catholic. In order to help you, we need to use vocabulary that is clear for a Catholic.
Every time I ask you to specifically tell us whether or not you were baptised as an infant, you keep answering “I was Christened.” That leads me to think that you were not baptised as an infant and you’re avoiding answering that question by saying “I was Christened.”
If you just want to be difficult, I have other things to do with my time.
As I said in the beginning, what you really need to do is to talk to a Catholic priest.
In the meantime, I can try to help you to have some understanding of what to expect. I cannot do that without your cooperation. I especially cannot do that if you won’t answer my questions. I am only asking these questions because I am trying to help you.
If you actually do want help with this, go back a few posts and please answer my 3 questions. If you do that, I’ll try to help you.
K
Kmon23
Guest
Hi Father. Had a question.
So in a hypothetical scenario of a Protestant who received a valid baptism recognized by the CC, and later converted to Orthodoxy with chrismation, and then later became Catholic by profession of faith, which sui iuris church would the person fall under? Latin or an Eastern Church? I assume Latin since baptism occurs first and a protestant baptism is automatic enrollment into the Latin Church upon conversion?
So in a hypothetical scenario of a Protestant who received a valid baptism recognized by the CC, and later converted to Orthodoxy with chrismation, and then later became Catholic by profession of faith, which sui iuris church would the person fall under? Latin or an Eastern Church? I assume Latin since baptism occurs first and a protestant baptism is automatic enrollment into the Latin Church upon conversion?
F
FrDavid96
Guest
This gets extremely complicated.
Each situation has to be evaluated on an individual basis.
For example: let’s say I add something to your question. Now, I’m just going to add something. I’m not going to change anything. I’m just going to supply a previously-unknown.
Let’s say the person is Ukrainian ancestry. His parents immigrated to England in the late 1940s as orphan children and he was born in 1980. His parents are both Ukrainian Catholic (by baptism back home), although under the circumstances they started attending an Anglican church. When he was born (1980) they just automatically had him baptised by an Anglican vicar.
That would make the answer to your question: He is Ukrainian Catholic.
If he made a conscious and expressed choice to enroll in the Catholic Church sui iuris of his choice (in this case, I suppose you mean the Latin Church) then he is Latin.
The point is that I’ve already given two possible answers to your one question.
One little detail can change everything.
That’s why I get upset oftentimes when I read what gets posted here on CAF when people ask questions and others provide (what they thing to be) answers. It’s not always as straightforward as people often think.
In real-life, not on the internet, when we deal with this sort of thing (and yes, I did study the Eastern Code, so I do mean “we”) we have to ask all kinds of questions FIRST. We can’t just give the first answer that comes to mind.
L
Learner1969
Guest
Ok ok forget I will ask my ex Orthodox priest I will get more respect from him
G
Gorgias
Guest
Fr David is asking a reasonable (and critical) question, though! You mentioned that you only had a “name-giving ceremony”. So, then… were you ever baptized (that is, immersed in water or water poured over your head and baptized “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”)?
That’s the salient question in this context.
Since there are generally no baptisms in the Salvation Army (although they don’t prohibit Soldiers to receive baptism elsewhere), I’d guess that the answer is “no”, but still, it’s important to ask.
L
Learner1969
Guest
The answer I have recieved from an Orthodox monk regarding baptism:
Regarding baptism/Christening, from an Orthodox perspective:
There are occasions when the Church says it is necessary to re-baptise someone, but it would say that this is because the first baptism wasn’t valid. For example, I was baptised again when I was received into the Orthodox Church. In the Orthodox Church, baptism must be Trinitarian and with full immersion (not necessarily ‘submersion’…). In other words, the person being baptised is immersed in water 3 times, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. If a person’s first baptism isn’t done in this way, it isn’t valid. Most protestant churches, and even some Catholic Churches, do not baptise properly. It is common now for Anglicans to make a small sign of the cross once on the head in holy water and call this baptism. This is not valid.
“Anglicans to make a small sign of the cross once on the head in holy water and call this baptism.”
That is what I meant by Christening (whoops…sorry to mention the “C” word again)
Regarding baptism/Christening, from an Orthodox perspective:
There are occasions when the Church says it is necessary to re-baptise someone, but it would say that this is because the first baptism wasn’t valid. For example, I was baptised again when I was received into the Orthodox Church. In the Orthodox Church, baptism must be Trinitarian and with full immersion (not necessarily ‘submersion’…). In other words, the person being baptised is immersed in water 3 times, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. If a person’s first baptism isn’t done in this way, it isn’t valid. Most protestant churches, and even some Catholic Churches, do not baptise properly. It is common now for Anglicans to make a small sign of the cross once on the head in holy water and call this baptism. This is not valid.
“Anglicans to make a small sign of the cross once on the head in holy water and call this baptism.”
That is what I meant by Christening (whoops…sorry to mention the “C” word again)
G
Gorgias
Guest
Regarding baptism/Christening, from an Orthodox perspective:
In other words, it’s not a re-baptism, but a first valid baptism. Right.
“Not valid” according to Orthodox standards. Catholics view validity differently; we don’t require immersion.
If the Anglican minister uses water and a Trinitarian formula, then the Catholic Church would likely call that a valid baptism.
I don’t care what word you use.
The question still remains: did your ceremony include water and a Trinitarian formula (“in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”)? If so, then it’s likely a valid baptism according to the Catholic Church.
Last edited:
L
Learner1969
Guest
I was too young to remember but the norm for Christenings(over here in theUK) is the sprinkling of water on the forehead
G
Gorgias
Guest
I hate to keep beating the drum on this one, but… it’s not just “water”, but “water and trinitarian formula” that makes for validity. So, you could ask someone who was present for the christening what the ceremony included, right?
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
Or he could just request a copy of the record which would indicate whether or not he was baptized.Learner1969:
I hate to keep beating the drum on this one, but… it’s not just “water”, but “water and trinitarian formula” that makes for validity. So, you could ask someone who was present for the christening what the ceremony included, right?
- Status