Did I Make The Right Choice? (regarding Baptism)

[Not The Philosopher]

Hello everyone.

I was received into the Church this past Easter, coming from a secular background. When I was an infant, my grandmother wanted me baptized, which my mother refused to do. Now, my mother suspected that my grandmother might have baptized me herself while giving me a bath (which, from my understanding, would if done properly, still be a valid baptism, even though illicit). My mother, as far as I can tell, didn't actually witness anything, and my grandmother is no longer around to confirm this either way.

Since I was worried about the possibility sacrilegiously repeating baptism, I let my pastor know about this. But he didn’t think there was enough evidence of a baptism taking place to make it anything to worry about, and baptized me at the Easter Vigil. My sponsor was similarly unfazed.

At the time I trusted my pastor’s decision, but a few months on now I’m starting to wonder whether I should have tried to cover my bases and push for a conditional baptism.

So: are my worries genuine, or am I just being a little bit of a scrupulous control freak?

[PhuturePriest]

[quote name='Not The Philosopher' timestamp='1342053632' post='2454777']
Hello everyone.

I was received into the Church this past Easter, coming from a secular background. When I was an infant, my grandmother wanted me baptized, which my mother refused to do. Now, my mother suspected that my grandmother might have baptized me herself while giving me a bath (which, from my understanding, would if done properly, still be a valid baptism, even though illicit). My mother, as far as I can tell, didn't actually witness anything, and my grandmother is no longer around to confirm this either way.

Since I was worried about the possibility sacrilegiously repeating baptism, I let my pastor know about this. But he didn’t think there was enough evidence of a baptism taking place to make it anything to worry about, and baptized me at the Easter Vigil. My sponsor was similarly unfazed.

At the time I trusted my pastor’s decision, but a few months on now I’m starting to wonder whether I should have tried to cover my bases and push for a conditional baptism.

So: are my worries genuine, or am I just being a little bit of a scrupulous control freak?
[/quote]

You made the right choice. What your grandmother did was invalid since it was not an emergency. Lay people can only baptize in emergencies, such as when someone is near death. These are indeed scruples. Relax and put your mind to rest knowing that your Priest did the right thing.

[cmotherofpirl]

Not to worry, you can only be baptized once, so it doesn't matter if your grandma or the priest did it.

[Marie-Therese]

[quote name='FuturePriest387' timestamp='1342056280' post='2454795']
You made the right choice. [b]What your grandmother did was invalid since it was not an emergency. Lay people can only baptize in emergencies, such as when someone is near death. [/b]These are indeed scruples. Relax and put your mind to rest knowing that your Priest did the right thing.
[/quote]

Not true. A layman can baptize anyone, under any circumstances, so long as their intent is to baptize in the Trinitarian formula of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and they intend to baptize as the Church baptizes. Such a baptism is valid, but it is not licit. There's a big distinction there. A person baptized under those conditions is fully and undeniably baptized and the Church would recognize it as such. In OP's case, there was insufficient evidence beyond presumption that the act ever occurred to begin with, so, even if they were, in fact, baptized by their grandmother, the repetition of the baptism was done in good faith, with no knowledge of a valid baptism, and wouldn't make any difference.

While it is best for laymen to avoid baptisms in general, and leave such to the clergy, it does not have to be a life or death circumstance for a baptism to be valid. Just FYI.

[PhuturePriest]

[quote name='Marie-Therese' timestamp='1342065760' post='2454846']
Not true. A layman can baptize anyone, under any circumstances, so long as their intent is to baptize in the Trinitarian formula of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and they intend to baptize as the Church baptizes. Such a baptism is valid, but it is not licit. There's a big distinction there. A person baptized under those conditions is fully and undeniably baptized and the Church would recognize it as such. In OP's case, there was insufficient evidence beyond presumption that the act ever occurred to begin with, so, even if they were, in fact, baptized by their grandmother, the repetition of the baptism was done in good faith, with no knowledge of a valid baptism, and wouldn't make any difference.

While it is best for laymen to avoid baptisms in general, and leave such to the clergy, it does not have to be a life or death circumstance for a baptism to be valid. Just FYI.
[/quote]

Oh, I see. I was just always taught it was for life and death situations only. Thanks for the clarification.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

I believe you will be ok because no one knows for sure whether your grandma did or didn't baptise you. My Godson fears he was baptised twice, when i found him he didn't believe he was baptised and than a few months after being baptised by a priest he some how thought he remembered (and he has a brain injury) being baptised in the ocean by some preacher, and he thought he was going to hell for getting baptised twice, which is not true.

[Groo the Wanderer]

[quote name='FuturePriest387' timestamp='1342066037' post='2454848']
Oh, I see. I was just always taught it was for life and death situations only. Thanks for the clarification.
[/quote]

Please read the CCC on matters such as this. Unfortunately our catechesis for the last 60 yrs has been weak at times.

[fides' Jack]

[quote name='FuturePriest387' timestamp='1342066037' post='2454848']
Oh, I see. I was just always taught it was for life and death situations only. Thanks for the clarification.
[/quote]

"For life and death situations only" doesn't mean it's invalid at other times. Perhaps illicit, but not invalid. To get the full truth from the Church, I've found that you must pay attention to every word, because every word counts.

[Not The Philosopher]

Thanks for the replies.

[Amory]

[quote name='Not The Philosopher' timestamp='1342053632' post='2454777']
Hello everyone.

I was received into the Church this past Easter, coming from a secular background. When I was an infant, my grandmother wanted me baptized, which my mother refused to do. Now, my mother suspected that my grandmother might have baptized me herself while giving me a bath (which, from my understanding, would if done properly, still be a valid baptism, even though illicit). My mother, as far as I can tell, didn't actually witness anything, and my grandmother is no longer around to confirm this either way.

Since I was worried about the possibility sacrilegiously repeating baptism, I let my pastor know about this. But he didn’t think there was enough evidence of a baptism taking place to make it anything to worry about, and baptized me at the Easter Vigil. My sponsor was similarly unfazed.

At the time I trusted my pastor’s decision, but a few months on now I’m starting to wonder whether I should have tried to cover my bases and push for a conditional baptism.

So: are my worries genuine, or am I just being a little bit of a scrupulous control freak?
[/quote]

Maybe the conditional formula ("If you have not been baptized, I baptize you . . .") would have been appropriate, but I also don't think an absolute baptism was wrong. A mere suspicion that your grandmother [i]might[/i] have baptized isn't really enough evidence to assume that she [i]did[/i] baptize you.

Either way, you're baptized now, and that's what matters.

The biggest difference on your end would have been whether to make a general confession. If you'd perhaps been baptized as a baby, you'd have needed to confess all your mortal sins since childhood and receive conditional absolution before receiving Communion. You can't really go back and change that, though, and general confessions--especially ones where the necessity to confess is so greatly in doubt--are strongly discouraged for anyone with tendencies toward scrupulosity, which you seem to indicate.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Amory

[Mark of the Cross]

The important thing is to receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit and that will only happens once. So if you get baptised twice then one is automatically redundant. God is not lame or silly enough to reject someone over an error.

[Mark of the Cross]

Father Barron does an excellent explanation here of baptism.
[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ1pLyLdnhM&feature=g-vrec"]Being Born Again![/url]