Was My Baptism Invalid

[BVM_1221]

Was my baptism invalid because my parents served as my godparents one isnt even Catholic and the other is a lapsed one!! Is it valid or not??

I am coming in late on this. Now…if you still feel uncomfortable about your Baptism, talk to a Priest or Deacon about a “Conditional Baptism”. This is just a Baptism with the wording of “If you have not been previously baptised, I baptise you etc etc etc.”

This conditional baptism is usually done as a private affair. If you have not been previously baptised, you are now. If you were previously baptised, you just got wet. In either case, sleep well that night.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Godparents do not validate or invalidate a baptism. When it comes to validity, godparents aren’t even necessary.

 

[Aramis]

All please answer

To be valid, per the Ecumenical Councils:
Water must be used.
The trinitarian formula must be used.
The baptized must have either been a child of consenting parents, or a consenting adult or older child.
The minister must intend to baptize into a trinitarian Christian Church.

A valid baptism is good. It does what is intended: washes away sins, united one to the Family of Christ, and makes one part of the Church. Even if illicit, it’s still effective.

Licity is a whole different thing.
Licity is, essentially, whether or not it was a sin to have done it the way it was done.

No godparents is illicit, but not invalid. Someone sinned if you have no godparents, but you still became part of the church.

 

[ConstantineTG]

No godparents is illicit, but not invalid. Someone sinned if you have no godparents, but you still became part of the church.

Unless its emergency baptism of course

 

[5Loaves]

Im hoping so because than I get to have another baptism

What prompts you to hope your baptism is invalid so you could be baptized now? (Not “another”. Baptism, like holy orders, is permanent and therefore unrepeatable CCEO 679)

Now…if you still feel uncomfortable about your Baptism, talk to a Priest or Deacon about a “Conditional Baptism”.

OP says this baptism was done in an Eastern Catholic Church. It’s inconceivable a Catholic priest would not use the appropriate form and matter. A sponsor AKA God parent is not required for a valid baptism.

 

[The_Idiot]

Hi, Im beginning to fear my baptism was invalid because my parents served as godparents.One is not even Catholic , the other is a lapsed one.What should be done if it is??

I gather you are Eastern Catholic . The only person who can really answer this is your Priest.

Why not ask this on the Eastern Catholic Board ?

 

[puzzleannie]

Hi, Im beginning to fear my baptism was invalid because my parents served as godparents.One is not even Catholic , the other is a lapsed one.What should be done if it is??

parents never serve as godparents
if for some reason no sponsor is found or the priest does not appoint one there are no godparents, and in any case this has nothing whatever to do with the validity of the sacrament, which depends on the minister using proper matter and form.

 

[smichhertz]

Godparents would fall as a canonical requirement (I’m not sure about the Eastern Rites, but I assume it’s the same). If you were baptized with:

a. Water
b. Three times (pouring or immersion)
c. In the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirt

then you are validly baptized (that is all that’s required for a valid baptism). If there were anything, it might be illicit (don’t take my word on that, I’m not a canon lawyer), but none of that would reflect on you because you weren’t old enough to have committed a sin (I’m assuming you were baptized as a baby?).

Do you have a baptismal record? If it says you’re baptized, then you’re baptized.

Doesn’t it also have to be on the head?

 

[mardukm]

The minister must intend to baptize into a trinitarian Christian Church.

It does what is intended: washes away sins, united one to the Family of Christ, and makes one part of the Church. Even if illicit, it’s still effective.

Though even a non-Christian can validly baptize, it’s probably extremely rare that a non-Christian has the capacity to intend what the Church intends for lack of knowledge.

Question: When the opportunity arises for the normative form of baptism to be administered, is it normal/necessary to baptize someone with a conditional baptism for such extreme cases?

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

So if thats the case than I guess priests can say a divine litergy without using the proper texts and they can say what ever they want.Thats what your telling me.Priests can rule the church however they see fit as long as their intent was in the right place. Whats the use of even having canon law than if this is the way its used.

How do you arrive at this conclusion? The proper formula in Baptism must always be used, just like the proper texts for the Liturgy must always be used.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[curlycool89]

That said, I’m almost certain that the Church has never required a triple pouring (or dunking) for validity, though I’m willing to be corrected.

You know, I’m not actually sure. I’ve just always seen it poured 3 times, but I know that the other two are required (water poured, in the name of the Trinity).

Doesn’t it also have to be on the head?

Same as above. I’ve always seen it on the head, but I don’t think it’s needed for validity.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I think in most rites they will do the triple immersion or triple pouring. But thats not required for validity. In cases of urgency, as long as the person is poured water on or immersed, it doesn’t matter how many times.

 

[Aramis]

Most emergency baptisms will be conditionally baptized just in case, unless there were witnesses (or video).

 

[ConstantineTG]

Most emergency baptisms will be conditionally baptized just in case, unless there were witnesses (or video).

Our emergency baptism was done by a priest. He did just one pouring if I recall correctly.

 

[smichhertz]

You know, I’m not actually sure. I’ve just always seen it poured 3 times, but I know that the other two are required (water poured, in the name of the Trinity).

Same as above. I’ve always seen it on the head, but I don’t think it’s needed for validity.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=173832

This thread seems to suggest that validity is uncertain although not necessarily invalid if it is not on the head.

I’m curious if anyone has any more information on this. I’ve never heard of “uncertain validity” before.

 

[puzzleannie]

Most emergency baptisms will be conditionally baptized just in case, unless there were witnesses (or video).

no they will not, as long as someone can attest to the facts. the rest of the rites will be supplied.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Doesn’t it also have to be on the head?

I thought it was, but after doing some research, all it said was immersion or pouring without specifying where. Even immersion, some would immerse the body only, especially if the one being baptized is an infant.

 

[ConstantineTG]

no they will not, as long as someone can attest to the facts. the rest of the rites will be supplied.

Most emergency baptisms will be conditionally baptized just in case, unless there were witnesses (or video).

puzzleannie, you just repeated what Aramis said

 

[Vico]

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=173832

This thread seems to suggest that validity is uncertain although not necessarily invalid if it is not on the head.

I’m curious if anyone has any more information on this. I’ve never heard of “uncertain validity” before.

c) Wherever doubts arise about whether, or how water was used,[105] respect for the sacrament and deference towards these ecclesial Communities require that serious investigation of the practice of the Community concerned be made before any judgment is passed on the validity of its baptism.

[105] With regard to all Christians, consideration should be given to the danger of invalidity when baptism is administered by sprinkling, especially of several people at once.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/general-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_19930325_directory_en.html

 

[smichhertz]

c) Wherever doubts arise about whether, or how water was used,[105] respect for the sacrament and deference towards these ecclesial Communities require that serious investigation of the practice of the Community concerned be made before any judgment is passed on the validity of its baptism.

[105] With regard to all Christians, consideration should be given to the danger of invalidity when baptism is administered by sprinkling, especially of several people at once.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/general-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_19930325_directory_en.html

Ah so there are cases where validity remains uncertain. I guess because there is no biblical example of Christ instituting the sacrament in that way?