Baptism

[prose]

Well, I found a lot on babies and baptism, but I haven't been able to find a lot about 2 other areas. I can't believe I was unable to defend these!! I know a lot about our faith, but I was never really asked these questions.

Please help me for our future discussions with the mormons...

1. Why is full immersion not needed when that is what Jesus taught, if he didn't teach that, what exactly was taught?

2. Explain what authority (if any) is needed for baptism, and why we accept all baptisms from other faiths (which would not have Church authority) and why a layperson can do a baptism if needed. If this is the case, why do we get priests to baptize? Why don't we just do it ourselves?

[Noel's angel]

Try this:

[url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Baptism_Immersion_Only.asp"]http://www.catholic.com/library/Baptism_Immersion_Only.asp[/url]

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='prose' date='Mar 19 2006, 01:58 PM']Well, I found a lot on babies and baptism, but I haven't been able to find a lot about 2 other areas.  I can't believe I was unable to defend these!!  I know a lot about our faith, but I was never really asked these questions.

Please help me for our future discussions with the mormons...

1.  Why is full immersion not needed when that is what Jesus taught, if he didn't teach that, what exactly was taught? 

2.  Explain what authority (if any) is needed for baptism, and why we accept all baptisms from other faiths (which would not have Church authority) and why a layperson can do a baptism if needed.  If this is the case, why do we get priests to baptize?  Why don't we just do it ourselves?
[right][snapback]915121[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

1. The early Church taught and we maintain that Baptism needn't be by immersion. We presume that Jesus used immersion, but that does not mean that it has to be.

[quote]The Didache.  Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism.  And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

[url="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0714.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0714.htm[/url][/quote]

2. Priests and deacons are the norm of Baptism because Baptism is, as a norm, supposed to be done in a liturgical setting. However, anyone is allowed to baptize, so long as they have the proper form (the Baptismal formula), the proper matter (water), and the proper intention (to do as the Church does).

[Amator Veritatis]

Though I am not prepared to make a full response at this time, I would simply add that proposition 2 is faulty in at least one regard. The Church does not accept all baptisms from heretical or non-Catholic sects. While a non-Catholic can, hypothetically, baptise validly, such a scenario would require that certain conditions be met. Primarily, the baptism, as all Sacraments, would require that proper form, matter and intention be had. The proper form consists in the words used to effect the Sacrament, namely, [i]Ego te baptizo in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti[/i] as well as the actions accompanying the words, namely, the pouring of water over the head of the baptised at the same time that the words are being said. N.B., the words and actions cannot be separated or the form is, at least, questionably valid and would require a conditional baptism. Further, a baptism in which the water is not poured over the head of the baptised but rather on some other part of the body is questionably valid. In case of emergency, such a baptism can be performed, but then only as a conditional form. If the baptised survives, he is to be baptised according to the usual manner of the conditional form. The proper matter consists in "true and natural water", Cf., Council of Trent, Canons on Baptism, Canon II. Finally, the individual must have "at least the intention of doing what the Church does", Cf., Council of Trent, Canons on the Sacraments in General, Canon XI.


Noteworthy, as well, is a portion of the [i]Catholic Encyclopedia[/i] concerning conditional baptism.

From the foregoing it is evident that not all baptism administered by heretics or schismatics is invalid. On the contrary, if the proper matter and form be used and the one conferring the sacrament really "intends to perform what the Church performs" the baptism is undoubtedly valid. This is also authoritatively stated in the decree for the Armenians and the canons of the Council of Trent already given. The question becomes a practical one when converts to the Faith have to be dealt with. If there were one authorized mode of baptizing among the sects, and if the necessity and true significance of the sacrament were uniformly taught and put in practice among them, there would be little difficulty as to the status of converts from the sects. But there is no such unity of teaching and practice among them, and consequently the particular case of each convert must be examined into when there is question of his reception into the Church. For not only are there religious denominations in which baptism is in all probability not validly administered, but there are those also which have a ritual sufficient indeed for validity, but in practice the likelihood of their members having received baptism validly is more than doubtful. As a consequence converts must be dealt with differently. If it be certain that a convert was validly baptized in heresy, the sacrament is not repeated, but the ceremonies which had been omitted in such baptism are to be supplied, unless the bishop, for sufficient reasons, judges that they can be dispensed with. (For the United States, see Conc. Prov. Balt., I.) If it be uncertain whether the convert's baptism was valid or not, then he is to be baptized conditionally. In such cases the ritual is: "If thou art not yet baptized, then I baptize thee in the name", etc. The First Synod of Westminster, England, directs that adult converts are to be baptized not publicly but privately with holy water (i.e. not the consecrated baptismal water) and without the usual ceremonies (Decr. xvi). Practically, converts in the United States are almost invariably baptized either absolutely or conditionally, not because the baptism administered by heretics is held to be invalid, but because it is generally impossible to discover whether they had ever been properly baptized. Even in cases where a ceremony had certainly been performed, reasonable doubt of validity will generally remain, on account of either the intention of the administrator or the mode of administration. Still each case must be examined into (S. C. Inquis., 20 Nov., 1878) lest the sacrament be sacrilegiously repeated.

As to the baptism of the various sects, Sabetti (no. 662) states that the Oriental Churches and the "Old Catholics" generally administer baptism accurately; the Socinians and Quakers do not baptize at all; the Baptists use the rite only for adults, and the efficacy of their baptism has been called in question owing to the separation of the matter and the form, for the latter is pronounced before the immersion takes place; the Congregationalists, Unitarians and Universalists deny the necessity of baptism, and hence the presumption is that they do not administer it accurately; the Methodists and Presbyterians baptize by aspersion or sprinkling, and it may be reasonably doubted whether the water has touched the body and flowed upon it; among the Episcopalians many consider baptism to have no true efficacy and to be merely an empty ceremony, and consequently there is a well-grounded fear that they are not sufficiently careful in its administration. To this may be added, that Episcopalians often baptize by aspersion, and though such a method is undoubtedly valid if properly employed, yet in practice it is quite possible that the sprinkled water may not touch the skin. Sabetti also notes that ministers of the same sect do not everywhere follow a uniform method of baptizing. The practical method of reconciling heretics with the Church is as follows:-- If baptism be conferred absolutely, the convert is to make no abjuration or profession of faith, nor is he to make a confession of his sins and receive absolution, because the sacrament of regeneration washes away his past offences. If his baptism is to be conditional, he must first make an abjuration of his errors, or a profession of faith, then receive the conditional baptism, and lastly make a sacramental confession followed by conditional absolution. If the convert's former baptism was judged to be certainly valid, he is only to make the abjuration or the profession of faith and receive absolution from the censures he may have incurred (Excerpta Rit. Rom., 1878). The abjuration or profession of faith here prescribed is the Creed of Pius IV, translated into the vernacular. In the case of conditional baptism, the confession may precede the administration of the rite and the conditional absolution be imparted after the baptism. This is often done as a matter of fact, as the confession is an excellent preparation for the reception of the sacrament (De Herdt, VI, viii; Sabetti, no. 725).

Cf., [url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm[/url]
N.B., Conditional Baptism is heading VII.


As for the first question, an important reference is found in the [i]Summa Theologiae[/i] of S. Thomas of Aquin. Perhaps a thorough reading of question 66, article vii., [i]tertia pars[/i] would aid in your pursuit to these answers. Again, I apologise that I cannot treat the matter more thoroughly myself, but I have certain obligations requiring my attention for the remainder of the evening. I shall be out of town until Thursday night, so perhaps I can reply sometime after then. Below is a link to the question to which I alluded previously.

[url="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/406607.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/summa/406607.htm[/url]

[prose]

Thanks those were a lot of help. Especially the Didache.