Valid Baptism?

[christcnection1]

In my opinion, without attrition which presupposed an act of faith, the person (of the age of reason) has received the sacrament validly, but their lack of attrition/faith creates a barrier to “worthy reception.” Consequently, it is much like receiving marriage without being in a state of grace. The marriage is valid, but not worthily received (lacks the graces of worthy reception). Nonetheless, once a state of grace is attained after the valid sacrament, the graces that one would have received are then recieved, because the barrier that one placed for worthy reception are then removed.

This is a unique perspective, not one I have heard before. I assume you believe this with the other Sacraments as well. You mentioned Matrimony.

Is there anything you are aware of in Catholic teaching this supports this opinion? (Again, I’m not disagreeing with you; I have just never heard it before.)

Just to clarify, are you saying that if she decides to come into a state of grace, the benefits of that Baptism will be infused/transferred to her at that point?

Blessings,

JB

 

[itsjustdave1988]

It is illicit (unlawful) to do so if the recipient is unwilling, however, their willingness or lack of it does not invalidate the sacrament.

I need to correct the above. That’s what I get for answering from my (failing) memory.

One who is “unwilling” is different than one who truly manifests his/her willingness (in response to the question, “What do you ask of the Church?” Answer: “Faith”), but may lack proper disposition (ie. lacking attrition, faith) for baptism.

For recipients above the age of reason…

According to the common teaching of Catholic theologians, the recipient who willingly receives baptism but does so without attrition/faith, validly receives Baptism, but does so “unworthily.”

St. Augustine affirmed: “The purity of baptism is wholly and entirely independent of the purity or impurity of the conscience both of the minister and of the recipient” (*Contra litt. Petiliani, *II 35, 82).

The reason is that Sacraments confer grace *ex opere operato, *(Lat, “from the work having been worked”). The power of the Sacraments come neither from the recipient nor from the minister, but from God.

Once valid baptism is received, even if received unworthily, it leaves an indelible mark on the soul and can never be repeated. If unworthily received, justifying grace is not received because of the barrier the recipient places by his/her lack of proper disposition. Once the barrier is removed, the Sacrament of Baptism is said to “revive.”

This is a unique perspective, not one I have heard before. I assume you believe this with the other Sacraments as well. You mentioned Matrimony.

Revival of the sacraments doesn’t apply to all the sacraments. For instance, Penance requires the moral acts of the recipient as the “matter” of the Sacrament: attrition, confession, satisfaction, which are necessary elements of validity.

According to Dr. Ludwig Ott’s *Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma:
*

“The revival of a validly but unworthily received Sacrament occurs in the case of Baptism, Confirmation and Holy Orders. In these cases the sacramental character is regarded as the physical bearer of the grace-effecting power bestowed by God. In the Sacraments of Extreme Unction and Matrimony the character of Baptism takes over this task.” (p. 332)

Pope Innocent III declared forced baptisms to be invalid. “The sacrament operation impresses the sign, when it does not meet the resisting obstacle of a contrary will.” (Innocent III, *Ex parte tua, *Jan. 12, 1206, Denzinger 411).

So the example of the OP, if she was coerced and neve**r internally consented, then the baptism is invalid, even though she may have “faked” consent externally just to appease her mother.

To be clear, the lack of attrition/faith does not invalidate baptism. However, in those above the age of reason, the lack of internal willful consent to receive baptism does invalidate the sacrament.

Is there anything you are aware of in Catholic teaching this supports this opinion? (Again, I’m not disagreeing with you; I have just never heard it before.)

Just to clarify, are you saying that if she decides to come into a state of grace, the benefits of that Baptism will be infused/transferred to her at that point?

Yes. If she consented internally, although she did not have attrition or faith, then her baptism is valid, but unworthily received. Unworthily received baptism can “revive” according to Catholic theology. Meaning, the sacramental grace is conferred subsequently, after the removal of the prior barriers.

According to Dr. Ludwig Ott:

**Revival of the Sacraments

**A validly conferred but unworthily received Sacrament communicates the *Sacramentum tantum–*Baptism and Consecration confer also the character (res et sacramentum)–but not the *res (or virtus) sacramenti, *that is, the grace (a Sacrament thus unworthily received is called: sacramentum informe).The Sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation and Consecration, when they are received validly but unworthily, revive after the removal of the moral indisposition, that is, the sacramental grace is conferred subsequently. (Sent. communis.)
The ground for the revival lies, on the one had, in God’s mercy, on the other hand, in the absolute impossibility of repeating these Sacraments.

Many Theologians, in view of God’s mercy, assume a revival of Extreme Unction and of the Sacrament of Matrimony also, as both these Sacraments are relatively unrepeatable. The Sacrament of Penance cannot revive, because an unworthy reception of it involves invalidity of the Sacrament. In the case of the Eucharist, revival is improbable, because this Sacrament can very easily be received again.

The revival of Baptism was taught even by St. Augustine. cf. *De baptismo, *I, 12, 18: “That is already given (Baptism) begins then to be efficacious to salvation when the former unreadiness for penance is replaced by true penance.” Cf. [St. Thomas Aquinas, *Summa Theologica,

III, 69, 10].

[Ott, L. *Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, p. 346]

 

[christcnection1]

I need to correct the above. That’s what I get for answering from my (failing) memory.

One who is “unwilling” is different than one who truly manifests his/her willingness (in response to the question, “What do you ask of the Church?” Answer: “Faith”), but may lack proper disposition (ie. lacking attrition, faith) for baptism.

For recipients above the age of reason…

According to the common teaching of Catholic theologians, the recipient who willingly receives baptism but does so without attrition/faith, validly receives Baptism, but does so “unworthily.”

St. Augustine affirmed: “The purity of baptism is wholly and entirely independent of the purity or impurity of the conscience both of the minister and of the recipient” (*Contra litt. Petiliani, *II 35, 82).

The reason is that Sacraments confer grace *ex opere operato, *(Lat, “from the work having been worked”). The power of the Sacraments come neither from the recipient nor from the minister, but from God.

Once valid baptism is received, even if received unworthily, it leaves an indelible mark on the soul and can never be repeated. If unworthily received, justifying grace is not received because of the barrier the recipient places by his/her lack of proper disposition. Once the barrier is removed, the Sacrament of Baptism is said to “revive.”

Revival of the sacraments doesn’t apply to all the sacraments. For instance, Penance requires the moral acts of the recipient as the “matter” of the Sacrament: attrition, confession, satisfaction, which are necessary elements of validity.

According to Dr. Ludwig Ott’s *Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma:
*Pope Innocent III declared forced baptisms to be invalid. “The sacrament operation impresses the sign, when it does not meet the resisting obstacle of a contrary will.” (Innocent III, *Ex parte tua, *Jan. 12, 1206, Denzinger 411).

So the example of the OP, if she was coerced and neve**r internally consented, then the baptism is invalid, even though she may have “faked” consent externally just to appease her mother.

To be clear, the lack of attrition/faith does not invalidate baptism. However, in those above the age of reason, the lack of internal willful consent to receive baptism does invalidate the sacrament.
Yes. If she consented internally, although she did not have attrition or faith, then her baptism is valid, but unworthily received. Unworthily received baptism can “revive” according to Catholic theology. Meaning, the sacramental grace is conferred subsequently, after the removal of the prior barriers.

According to Dr. Ludwig Ott:

Great post Dave! I am not sure if others here would disagree with this concerning what the Church teaches, but this was one of the best responses I have ever received on CAF.

The distinction is very specific; however, it does make sense. I will ask my friend about this next time I chat with her.

Thank you for taking the time brother; I’m sure this was helpful for others as well.

JB

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Great post Dave! …

Thanks. I may have a failing memory, but thank God I have great collection of books!

 

[puzzleannie]

Thank you Puzzieannie. I found your response helpful.

Now if a Sacrament is illicit, does that change anything for the recipient?

no as stated by several posters that is a problem for the celebrant, not the recipient.