Spinoff from a thread about baptism--water going over the head

[annb]

This is the original thread:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=173488

My dd was baptized by “partial immersion” as shown in the article posted. I do not remember for sure if the back of her head got wet. I also do not remember if any water was poured over her forehead. If it was, I do not believe it was at the same time as the decon said “I baptize you in the name of the father…”, if he did put any water on her forehead, I beleive it would have been after he said that. My dh thinks that her head got wet, but honestly I don’t think he remembers any better than I do. We didn’t video tape, and I can’t find a picture that would tell one way or another.
It absolutely could have been done perfectly right. But I’m just not sure.
I hate to think that she might not be baptized. But I think surely it must have been done correctly.

What should I do???

The other issue is not just my own dd, but now due to this other thread, I am questioning wether other babies at our parish may also not really be baptized.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

This is the original thread:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=173488

My dd was baptized by “partial immersion” as shown in the article posted. I do not remember for sure if the back of her head got wet. I also do not remember if any water was poured over her forehead. If it was, I do not believe it was at the same time as the decon said “I baptize you in the name of the father…”, if he did put any water on her forehead, I beleive it would have been after he said that. My dh thinks that her head got wet, but honestly I don’t think he remembers any better than I do. We didn’t video tape, and I can’t find a picture that would tell one way or another.
It absolutely could have been done perfectly right. But I’m just not sure.
I hate to think that she might not be baptized. But I think surely it must have been done correctly.

What should I do???

The other issue is not just my own dd, but now due to this other thread, I am questioning wether other babies at our parish may also not really be baptized.

Minimally water must flow on the persons skin with reasonable proximity to the words being spoken, so as to constitute one act.
The head is preferred if the person is not immersed.

 

[sanctareparata]

Minimally water must flow on the persons skin with reasonable proximity to the words being spoken, so as to constitute one act.
The head is preferred if the person is not immersed.

There is nothing in Church documentation that says that the head is only “preferred”. On the contrary, all documents state that water is to be poured over the head if full immersion is not possible. (Repeating some of these, Ann, just for the sake of other readers).

CCC1239 "The essential rite of the sacrament follows: Baptism properly speaking…Baptism is performed in the most expressive way by triple immersion in the baptismal water. However, from ancient times it has also been able to be conferred by pouring the water three times over the candidate’s head.

CCC 1284 “In case of necessity, any person can baptize provided that he have the intention of doing that which the Church does and provided that he pours water on the candidate’s head while saying: ‘I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.’”

The Rite of Baptism
21. 1. At the moment of death or when there is urgency because of imminent danger of death, the minister, [4] omitting all other ceremonies, pours water (not necessarily blessed but real and natural water) on the head of the child and pronounces the customary formulary.

Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults 226 The celebrant baptizes each candidate either by immersion, option A, or by the pouring of water, option B. . . . If baptism is by immersion, of the whole body or of the head only, decency and decorum should be preserved. Either or both godparents touch the candidate. The celebrant, immersing the candidate’s whole body or head three times, baptizes the candidate in the name of the Trinity.

National Statutes for the Catechumenate Baptism by immersion is the fuller and more expressive sign of the sacrament and, therefore, is preferred. Although it is not yet a common practice in the United States, provision should be made for its frequent use in the baptism of adults. At the least, the provision of the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults for partial immersion, namely, immersion of the candidate’s head, should be taken into account.

catholic.net/RCC/Catechism/3/l14.html
“Q. 640. If it is impossible, in case of necessity, to reach the head, may the water be poured on any other part of the body?
A. If it is impossible, in case of necessity, to reach the head, the water should be poured on whatever part of the body can be reached; but then the baptism must be given conditionally; that is, before pronouncing the words of baptism, you must say: “If I can baptize thee in this way, I baptize thee in the name of the Father,” etc. If the head can afterward be reached, the water must be poured on the head and the baptism repeated conditionally by saying: “If you are not already baptized, I baptize thee in the name,” etc.”

Summa Theologica/Thomas Aquinas/Article 7
“The principal part of the body, especially in relation to the exterior members, is the head, wherein all the senses, both interior and exterior, flourish. And therefore, if the whole body cannot be covered with water, because of the scarcity of water, or because of some other reason, it is necessary to pour water over the head, in which the principle of animal life is made manifest.”

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

There is nothing in Church documentation that says that the head is only “preferred”. On the contrary, all documents state that water is to be poured over the head if full immersion is not possible. (Repeating some of these, Ann, just for the sake of other readers).

CCC1239 "The essential rite of the sacrament follows: Baptism properly speaking…Baptism is performed in the most expressive way by triple immersion in the baptismal water. However, from ancient times it has also been able to be conferred by pouring the water three times over the candidate’s head.

CCC 1284 “In case of necessity, any person can baptize provided that he have the intention of doing that which the Church does and provided that he pours water on the candidate’s head while saying: ‘I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.’”

The Rite of Baptism
21. 1. At the moment of death or when there is urgency because of imminent danger of death, the minister, [4] omitting all other ceremonies, pours water (not necessarily blessed but real and natural water) on the head of the child and pronounces the customary formulary.

Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults 226 The celebrant baptizes each candidate either by immersion, option A, or by the pouring of water, option B. . . . If baptism is by immersion, of the whole body or of the head only, decency and decorum should be preserved. Either or both godparents touch the candidate. The celebrant, immersing the candidate’s whole body or head three times, baptizes the candidate in the name of the Trinity.

National Statutes for the Catechumenate Baptism by immersion is the fuller and more expressive sign of the sacrament and, therefore, is preferred. Although it is not yet a common practice in the United States, provision should be made for its frequent use in the baptism of adults. At the least, the provision of the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults for partial immersion, namely, immersion of the candidate’s head, should be taken into account.

catholic.net/RCC/Catechism/3/l14.html
“Q. 640. If it is impossible, in case of necessity, to reach the head, may the water be poured on any other part of the body?
A. If it is impossible, in case of necessity, to reach the head, the water should be poured on whatever part of the body can be reached; but then the baptism must be given conditionally; that is, before pronouncing the words of baptism, you must say: “If I can baptize thee in this way, I baptize thee in the name of the Father,” etc. If the head can afterward be reached, the water must be poured on the head and the baptism repeated conditionally by saying: “If you are not already baptized, I baptize thee in the name,” etc.”

Summa Theologica/Thomas Aquinas/Article 7
“The principal part of the body, especially in relation to the exterior members, is the head, wherein all the senses, both interior and exterior, flourish. And therefore, if the whole body cannot be covered with water, because of the scarcity of water, or because of some other reason, it is necessary to pour water over the head, in which the principle of animal life is made manifest.”

Ok, what word would you have used “strongly suggested”, “reasonably required” rather than, preferred? The head is not absolutely required for validity, but should be if possible.

 

[sanctareparata]

Ok, what word would you have used “strongly suggested”, “reasonably required” rather than, preferred? The head is not absolutely required for validity, but should be if possible.

You need to provide documentation on this.

The head is required for a certainly valid baptism - anywhere else the sacrament’s validity is called into question. Pouring water over one toe, for instance, would be probably invalid. And if a baby is being born in an emergency breech, he or she can be baptized conditionally on whichever body part presents first SO LONG AS once the child is born alive the child is again conditionally baptized on his/her head - to make sure the baptism is valid. Otherwise, there is doubt and uncertainty.

Same goes if a priest says “we baptize you” or “the church baptizes you” rather than “I baptize you” - no baptism is conferred; it’s invalid.

 

[dylanschrader]

You need to provide documentation on this.

The head is required for a certainly valid baptism - anywhere else the sacrament’s validity is called into question. Pouring water over one toe, for instance, would be probably invalid. And if a baby is being born in an emergency breech, he or she can be baptized conditionally on whichever body part presents first SO LONG AS once the child is born alive the child is again conditionally baptized on his/her head - to make sure the baptism is valid. Otherwise, there is doubt and uncertainty.

Same goes if a priest says “we baptize you” or “the church baptizes you” rather than “I baptize you” - no baptism is conferred; it’s invalid.

I don’t have access to Tractatus Canonico-Moralis de Sacramentis by Felix Cappello right now, but I remember reading what you describe. Unless I forget, I can look up the passage on this matter later today.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

You need to provide documentation on this.

The head is required for a certainly valid baptism - anywhere else the sacrament’s validity is called into question. Pouring water over one toe, for instance, would be probably invalid. And if a baby is being born in an emergency breech, he or she can be baptized conditionally on whichever body part presents first SO LONG AS once the child is born alive the child is again conditionally baptized on his/her head - to make sure the baptism is valid. Otherwise, there is doubt and uncertainty.

Same goes if a priest says “we baptize you” or “the church baptizes you” rather than “I baptize you” - no baptism is conferred; it’s invalid.

I would like to see where you found: “Pouring water over one toe, for instance, would be probably invalid.” I can find Nothing that hints at invalidity when using any part of the body when necessary other then the head. Remember we are speaking of the application of the matter, not the matter itself, or the formula.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

I would like to see where you found: “Pouring water over one toe, for instance, would be probably invalid.” I can find Nothing that hints at invalidity when using any part of the body when necessary other then the head. Remember we are speaking of the application of the matter, not the matter itself, or the formula.

Catechism of the Catholic Church

[1239](http://javascript:OpenPopupWindow() The essential rite of the sacrament follows: Baptism properly speaking. It signifies and actually brings about death to sin and entry into the life of the Most Holy Trinity through configuration to the Paschal mystery of Christ. Baptism is performed in the most expressive way by triple immersion in the baptismal water. However, from ancient times it has also been able to be conferred by pouring the water three times over the candidate’s head.

Either way the head gets wet.

 

[sanctareparata]

I would like to see where you found: “Pouring water over one toe, for instance, would be probably invalid.” I can find Nothing that hints at invalidity when using any part of the body when necessary other then the head. Remember we are speaking of the application of the matter, not the matter itself, or the formula.

But hair is also a part of the body, and if the water only rolls across the hair without wetting the skin, the person is not baptized.

I’m not sure what you’re looking for that hints or doesn’t hint at invalidity when using other parts of the body - the Church is clear where Baptism should take place for it to be certainly valid, She doesn’t need to point out each body part when She’s already specified which one needs to be on the “receiving end” of the water.

 

[thechrismyster]

God is not an accountant…

“welcome to the pearly gates, Jane Doe… you rescued 900 people from a fiery plane wreck, raised a beautiful family, followed my commandments and you lived a life in constant prayer to me…
yeah, but um… we got this little thing that came up… see when you were baptized… yeah, well… the water hit your ear and back of your head and didn’t quite touch the temple or frontal lobe area… so… um… sorry… downwards for you sweetie - buh bye”

not a likely scenario to a all praiseworthy Creator.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Catechism of the Catholic Church

Either way the head gets wet.

Unfortunately I have seen hundreds of babies be Baptized without the head necessarly getting wet. I have spoken with someone that I trust and they have pointed me to a resource which I will look at tomorrow. They feel that water is required to flow on the head, but that it affects licitness, not validity.

 

[NMJenny]

But hair is also a part of the body, and if the water only rolls across the hair without wetting the skin, the person is not baptized…

I was baptized in a Protestant church at the age of ten, so I remember clearly that the pastor just dipped his hand into a bowl of water and laid it on my head. When I was received into the Church I discussed this with my priest, and he recommended that I be baptized conditionally because of a serious doubt that any water had touched my skin…

 

[sanctareparata]

ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=377290&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2003&Author=&Keyword=head&pgnu=4&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=152&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ID+DESC&start_at=

Question: “Is it proper to baptize an infant by immersion? Should the baby be submerged three times? The back dipped three times? The head dipped three times? I have never seen an immersion baptism, except for adults. A friend suggested we consider immersion for our baby.”

Answer by Colin B. Donovan, STL (EWTN):
"Water must flow over the head, according to the common theology of the Church. This can be accomplished by sprinkling, pouring or immersion, as long as it runs somewhere on the head - even if only a trickle. Touching the hair would be insufficient, again by the common teaching, as it must touch flesh and flow. Just touching other body parts, neck, shoulders, back, butt, changes the baptism from “certainly valid” (head) to probably valid (shoulders) to probably invalid (rump) - a chance that should never be taken with a sacrament or a soul.

So, if you decide on immersion, just make sure that water flows across the flesh of the head somewhere."

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I would like to see where you found: “Pouring water over one toe, for instance, would be probably invalid.” I can find Nothing that hints at invalidity when using any part of the body when necessary other then the head. Remember we are speaking of the application of the matter, not the matter itself, or the formula.

Here is what I found this morning.

Using very specific terms. Certain, Doubtful, and Invalid.

**Certain **when the water flows on the HEAD (forehead).

**Doubtful **less certainly valid, but not necessarly invalid. When water flows on another part of the persons body. Including if water only touches the persons hair. If Baptized in this manner they should be Conditionally Baptized.

Invalid no water comes into contact with the persons skin**.** Such as only the persons clothing. Or on the body of the mother before birth.

I now realize that I have witnessed at least dozens of **Doubtful **Baptisms over the last several years. That makes me so angry, that priests and deacons would not take more care in administering the Sacrament of Baptism.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

God is not an accountant…

“welcome to the pearly gates, Jane Doe… you rescued 900 people from a fiery plane wreck, raised a beautiful family, followed my commandments and you lived a life in constant prayer to me…
yeah, but um… we got this little thing that came up… see when you were baptized… yeah, well… the water hit your ear and back of your head and didn’t quite touch the temple or frontal lobe area… so… um… sorry… downwards for you sweetie - buh bye”

not a likely scenario to a all praiseworthy Creator.

I would suggest that Baptism of Desire covers such a case.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Here is what I found this morning.

Using very specific terms. Certain, Doubtful, and Invalid.

**Certain **when the water flows on the HEAD (forehead).

**Doubtful **less certainly valid, but not necessarly invalid. When water flows on another part of the persons body. Including if water only touches the persons hair. If Baptized in this manner they should be Conditionally Baptized.

Invalid no water comes into contact with the persons skin**.** Such as only the persons clothing. Or on the body of the mother before birth.

I now realize that I have witnessed at least dozens of **Doubtful **Baptisms over the last several years. That makes me so angry, that priests and deacons would not take more care in administering the Sacrament of Baptism.

The Church really needs an Inspector General department to review practices in parishes, and dioceses, from time to time.

 

[dylanschrader]

Tractatus Canonico-Moralis de Sacramentis by Felix Cappello (Vol. 1, Fourth edition, p. 105) says this:

1 Aqua immediate tangere debet corpus baptizandi. Id ex ipso conceptu et fine ablutionis liquet. Nomine capitis intelligitur frons, vertex, visus.

Invalidus est Baptismus, si, prole nondum in lucem edita, matris corpus abluatur; item, si aqua tangat solum vestes baptizandi; validus, contra, est Baptismus, si aqua effundatur super caput crusta ulcerosa opertum aut sordibus ante lotionem adhuc obductum, quia corpus vere tangitur.

Dubius est Baptismus collatus super secundinam, i.e., super membranam qua usque ad partum infantis corpus involvitur.

Baptismus collatus super crines validus est, quia crines revera ad corpus pertinent ideoque, dum ipsi abluuntur, caput vere proprieque abluitur. Contraria opinio quavis caret solida probabilitate; quare attendenda non est.

2 Aqua super caput effundi debet. Id affirmatur, ut certa omnino sit validitas Baptismi. Probabilissime est validus Baptismus, speculative loquendo, si in alia notabili corporis parte, ex. gr., in pectore, vel scapulis, puer ablatus fuerit. Tamen certum omnino est, Baptismum in casu habendum esse practice ut dubium, et consequenter sub conditione postea repetendum.

My translation:

1 The water should directly touch the body of the person to be baptized. This is proved from the concept and purpose of washing. By the name head is understood the forehead, the crown, it seems.

Baptism is invalid, if, while the child has not yet been drawn into the light, the body of the mother is washed; likewise, if the water only touches the clothes of the person to be baptized; Baptism is valid, on the other hand, if the water is poured over the head covered over by scabs or drawn out still covered in filth before being washed, because the body is truly touched.

Baptism is doubtful if conferred over the amniotic sac, i.e., over the membrane in which the body of an infant is wrapped up even till birth.

Baptism conferred over the hair is valid, because the hair in fact pertains to the body therefore, when it is washed, the head is truly and properly washed. Whatever opinion there is to the contrary lacks solid probability; therefore it should not be regarded.

2 The water should be poured over the head. This is affirmed, so that there might be the altogether certain validity of Baptism. Baptism is very probably valid, speculatively speaking, if the child is washed on other notable body parts, e.g., on the chest or shoulders. Nevertheless it is altogether certain, that Baptism in that case should be regarded practically as doubtful, and consequently should afterwards be repeated under condition.