Was my baptism invalid? CDF says "We Baptize" Invalid

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Congratulations on your baptism! One way or the other now, you know for certain! Praise God!
 
I think people from protestant denominations that were baptized as children or adolescents are going to be left wondering if they actually received a valid baptism.

Regardless of whatever a priest’s personal views are on conditional baptisms, I have zero doubt that they are now going to become much more common throughout the world.
 
Last edited:
Bithynian said:
As a matter of perspective, it’s helpful to note that in Christian antiquity, the standard of validity for baptisms was, in fact, very low. The 7th canon of the Council of Constantinople recognised as valid the baptisms of eight or so different heretical/schismatic groups, including Arians.
Click to expand...
But that was an Ecumenical Council, and Arians were non-Trinitarian and didn’t believe in the divinity of Christ. How is it possible that they were able to recognize Arian baptisms as valid? Did Arians still follow the Trinitarian formula?
 
Last edited:
TK421 said:
40.png
Bithynian:
As a matter of perspective, it’s helpful to note that in Christian antiquity, the standard of validity for baptisms was, in fact, very low. The 7th canon of the Council of Constantinople recognised as valid the baptisms of eight or so different heretical/schismatic groups, including Arians.
Click to expand...
But that was an Ecumenical Council, and Arians were non-Trinitarian and didn’t believe in the divinity of Christ. How is it possible that they were able to recognize Arian baptisms as valid? Did Arians still follow the Trinitarian formula?
Click to expand...
Yes, they did, and Arian baptisms were valid.

Errors in belief do not (necessarily) invalidate a sacrament.
 
porthos11 said:
Yes, they did, and Arian baptisms were valid.

Errors in belief do not (necessarily) invalidate a sacrament.
Click to expand...
Because God works through the Sacrament regardless if the person giving the baptism believes in the Trinity.
 
Last edited:
I’m so happy for you!!! :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes: That’s wonderful news.
 
Le_Cracquere said:
This has truly scary implications for converts like me, no matter how long ago their confirmations. Hope the CDF has more to say about this subject.
Click to expand...
Very scary; it’s overwhelming. Sometimes I do not have the mental stamina for all the ins-and-outs of Catholicism. I need a hot bath. Or a drink. Or both.
 
I hope for all those troubled by this that an easy way can be found to set minds at rest. It seems to me, from outside the Church, to be extraordinary that such a ruling could be made without a full programme put in place to inform people and resolve issues. It must affect thousands at least.

I checked some linguistic resources and found that there are ten languages recorded in which there is no ‘I/we’ distinction. I wonder how the ruling applies there?

And of course there is the very ancient practice in English of ‘we’ being used by people in high authority especially kings. The Pope himself, in English translation, has used this in documents I’ve seen. As the person baptising is acting in the place of the ‘King of Kings’ surely ‘we’ is the correct formal English in any case?
 
Last edited:
If The person Baptizing is ministering in persona Christi the word ‘we’ presents a failure of the words to accurately describe the reality of what is happening.
 
Weserthy said:
Here’s a whopper. A priest who had his baptism on video using the invalid formula has been determined to not be a priest. Thus all the sacraments he performed to this point have been invalid.
Click to expand...
Not to sound overly dramatic but this story of this priest has made me feel so sad. It’s depressing. He not only found out that he wasn’t baptized or even a priest. But every time he celebrated mass, every confession he heard, every anointing of the sick he administered, every wedding he witnessed, every dying person he visited to administer the last rites. All of that is invalid. That is just so depressing for every single person involved. What a terrible mess to attempt to unravel, I can’t imagine how it would be possible for the diocese to completely rectify this
 
Last edited:
Allie1 said:
What a terrible mess to attempt to unravel, I can’t imagine how it would be possible for the diocese to completely rectify this
Click to expand...
At least they’re doing everything they can do.


Archbishop Vigneron of Detroit implemented an immediate and in my opinion, very good pastoral response to all of this. Emphasizing both the importance of valid sacraments, and establishing a route to receiving them for all those who suspect they yet haven’t — all while comforting those concerned about sincere past attempts to receive sacraments that were, through no fault of their own, invalid.

I found this pastoral response a good read. Encouraging. Comforting. Affirming the truth while also accompanying those walking towards full participation in it.

May other pastors take note.

(Personally, I’d have found it depressing if the Archbishop just tried to pretend nothing was happening, brush it under the rug, tell everyone the sacraments don’t really matter, etc. But instead he’s treating the sacraments seriously, and treating those under his pastoral care well. It seems God has blessed the people of Detroit with this good Archbishop.)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top