113. On the Subject of Baptism

1. Landulphus, converted from infidelity to the Christian faith, confesses that he had indeed wished to receive baptism, but solely so that he might be aided by Christians, because he was very poor, not so that he might truly embrace the Christian faith. And indeed Landulphus, after receiving baptism, was still for many years given over to pagan rites. He is now converted to a better way, and the uncertain missionary asks whether he is to be rebaptized.

R. Negatively. Three dispositions are required in an adult for receiving baptism duly, namely faith, penitence, and the intention of receiving it. But faith and penitence are required in an adult so that he may receive the sacrament licitly and may obtain the fruit of the sacrament. Intention, however, is necessary for obtaining it validly. Therefore, for the validity of baptism, the will of receiving baptism itself suffices, or of receiving what Christians receive, even under a certain confused aspect, even if for a private reason he believes that this whole thing is of no value or moment. Wherefore the will of the effect of baptism is by no means required. But Landulphus truly willed to receive baptism, although afterward he did not will to live according to the faith of baptism. Therefore he validly received baptism, and consequently is not to be rebaptized. Nor indeed did that motive, that he might be aided by the missionaries in his temporal necessity, impelling him to baptism, impede the true will of receiving baptism, since, on the contrary, that motive impelled him to receive baptism. And if fear, impelling one to baptism, does not take away the will of baptism, and the baptism is valid, as is gathered from C. Maiores 3. de Baptismo, much more is baptism valid in the Case, since it is received altogether voluntarily by Landulphus. Cf. Suarez de Sacr. q. 68. d. 24. s. 2., Instr. S. O. 6. Jun. 1860. Collectan. S. C. de P. F. n. 589., I. M. 460.

2. In a certain city, altogether Catholic, Peter and Petronilla, Christians and Catholics, but living altogether badly, neglect to make efforts that their offspring be baptized. Their maidservant Rosina, a fervent Catholic, and one who has already lived in this house for many years, warns Antoninus the parish priest of this. After the matter has been maturely weighed, and with the approval of the Ordinary having been obtained, the parish priest secretly baptizes the offspring, with the parents not knowing; and meanwhile he commends her to the same maidservant.

Quaer. Whether the parish priest acted well?

R. Since the case occurs in a region altogether Catholic, and consequently there is hope that that offspring will afterward be instructed in the true faith, and no scandal follows, the parish priest acts licitly. For the Church has full right over such offspring, and no reason is present why she should not use it for the greatest good of such offspring. Certainly those who live among Catholics in a Catholic city can easily be instructed in the Catholic religion, since almost everywhere they have before their eyes those things which pertain to the Catholic religion, and they often hear others speak and discourse about it, as, for example, at Rome, Naples, and other similar cities. But if the parents are negligent, there are not lacking, in cities of this kind, other persons, whether blood relatives or even strangers, such as male servants and maidservants, as in the Case, who can supply for the parents' sloth, and employ diligent care so that, gradually and without being noticed, they may imbue infants with the true doctrine of the Catholic faith, and may also stir them up to the very practice of the Catholic religion. And often the good disposition of the boys themselves also helps toward this, and the assisting grace of God is always at hand. Wherefore, since such seems to have been the Case of Antoninus the parish priest, his zeal seems worthy of praise; and, since meanwhile he commended that offspring to the fervent maidservant, this surely proves that he will also watch in the future for the right and Catholic instruction of that offspring. And this resolution can be abundantly confirmed from the resolution of the following case. I. M. 464.

3. "Whether it is expedient, outside the case of death, to baptize the infants of the faithful, when, account being taken of the tepidity or of another evil manner of acting of the same parents, no probable hope shines forth that the said infants will afterward be instructed in the Christian religion?

R. Let the response of the Holy Office, 17. Sept. 1671., be given, and let it be written according to the Instruction: namely, since by this Sacred Congregation the opinion of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office had been requested: Whether infants of Turks can be baptized, when the father is a defector from the Christian religion, the mother is Christian, and although both ask baptism for the son, nevertheless there is doubt whether the father may wish to educate him in Mohammedan superstition? To this doubt, when the response had gone forth from the Holy Office: In the proposed case they ought to be baptized, from here the beginning must be taken of the prescribed Instruction to be drawn up, by which, from the given response, the way may be prepared for a certain fuller explanation of the proposed doubt.

Therefore it must be noted beforehand that one judgment is to be given concerning the case in which the danger of perversion of the infant to be baptized is so pressing that it is almost certain that afterward no help can be brought to him in any way, as when the infant is thereafter to remain in the power of infidel parents; another judgment is to be given concerning the case in which there is indeed some doubt, or even a just cause, for fearing perversion, yet in such a way that not every reason of suitable aid is lacking by which provision can opportunely be made for the danger which is foreseen. Certainly in the former case, in which there is discerned that kind of danger which is usually called proximate, that baptism cannot be conferred on the infant unless his life is in danger is clearly established from another response of the Holy Office, 3. March 1703., by which it was decreed: It is not lawful to confer baptism on infants who are children of infidels and are to remain in their power, excepting children who, being most gravely ill, are in danger of life. But as regards the latter case, it is immediately added: But it is lawful, if they are indeed children of barbarians, but already of the soldiers of Christ, provided that, when they have grown up, they are instructed concerning the precepts and mysteries of holy Religion, either by apostolic men dwelling there or by the parents themselves.

Thus, moreover, these two responses of the Holy Office which have been brought forward agree and consent with one another, so that one receives mutual light from the other. For in the first response given, although the father's defection from the Christian religion would bring no empty suspicion that he would wish to educate his son in the Mohammedan impiety which he had embraced, nevertheless, since the mother professed the Christian religion, and the father himself did not resist, in such a factual situation, which indeed carried before itself some doubt, but not likewise a sufficiently explored proximate danger of future perversion, the Sacred Congregation rightly judged that there was not sufficient cause why, on account of an uncertain event, it should repel the born infant from the benefit of obtaining the grace of baptism.

These things being duly weighed and known, the explanation of the doubt proposed by the Reverend Vicar Apostolic comes forth, as it were of its own accord. For whatever that may be which is called the tepidity of the parents, or sluggishness and sloth in every practice of religion, or the stubbornness of another of the same parents in an evil manner of acting, there is surely no greater destruction threatening the education of the offspring from this than from an open defection of the father from Christian rites to Mohammedan impiety. On the other hand, from the practice of religion flourishing in those Apostolic Missions, there are supplied far more aids than from the Christian profession of one mother dwelling among Turks, by which, especially through the pious and diligent industry of the Pastors, the indolence of the parents can be supplied. And first of all, because of the supreme zeal with which the Apostolic Vicars and their ministers stand unanimous in those regions, laboring together in the same spirit for the Gospel of the Son of God, it can scarcely happen that, when they approach to celebrate holy baptism, there would be lacking the means of procuring such sponsors, by whom, when the reborn infants have begun to grow up, they may be taught concerning the precepts and mysteries of the Christian religion. But if it happens that afterward the miserable defection of many from the religion they received is to be lamented, partly, as is explained, from fear of persecutions, partly because of confession denied on account of scandals, who nevertheless now are said to be converted rather easily; partly because several are transferred into more remote regions, where priests rarely go by whom they may be visited; partly because of the voluntary cohabitation of very many with gentiles, by whom they are gradually depraved; partly finally because several, compelled to restitution of things badly acquired, prefer to desert faith rather than money: surely this entirely voluntary subsequent depravity is not of such force that one must distrust concerning the little ones who are offered individually for baptism, and not rather piously hope that those faithful, with God having mercy, will remain in that vocation to which they have been called by baptism through the kindness of the very God who has mercy. Indeed, the fact that it has also been noted that those who depart because the sacraments have been denied are converted rather easily plainly shows how much it has profited them to be baptized; for if they had not previously been baptized, perhaps they would have lain miserably forever in the darkness of idolatry. By this the pious confidence of the Pastors in the Lord ought to be increased all the more, that labor undertaken by them will not be empty, the more zealously they apply themselves to the conversion of others of every kind, preaching the word, being urgent in season and out of season, reproving, entreating, rebuking in all patience and doctrine.

Now, that we may return more nearly to the proposed doubt, from the decree given by order of the Sacred Congregation, it must be concluded with stronger reason that the consideration of the tepidity of faithful parents, or of another evil manner of acting of the same, does not stand in the way of their infants being able and obliged to be duly baptized, especially when the parents themselves request it, as in the proposed Case." S. C. de P. F. 31. Jan. 1796.

4. What must be done by a missionary who imprudently and inconsiderately baptized all the infants of his Mission whose fathers and mothers were still infidels.

R. He is bound, by himself or through others, as far as can be done, to instruct the children of infidels imprudently and inconsiderately baptized, when they have arrived at the use of reason, with the other missionaries also being warned, indeed even the bishop, insofar as there is need. S. O. 25. Jan. 1703. Collect. S. C. de P. F. n. 548.

5. Caia, a heretic, fearing lest her newly born son be baptized invalidly by a heretical minister, calls a Catholic priest so that he may be baptized duly by him. He flies there gladly and baptizes the infant by the Catholic rite. But immediately he begins to doubt whether he acted rightly. For Caia in no way intended to oblige herself to educate her son in the Catholic Religion. And much less could this be expected from her obstinate Protestant husband.

Quaer. Whether the priest could baptize the infant, as in the Case?

R. Negatively, except in the article of death. Thus, in a similar Case, the Holy Office answered, 26. Aug. 1885. Collect. S. C. de P. F. n. 595. For, in order that a Catholic minister may licitly offer baptism to the son of heretics, it is necessary that he conceive a probable hope that a boy of this kind, once baptized, can in his own time be instructed in the true faith. But if he can in no way have a moral hope of this kind, he ought certainly rather to abstain from baptism, supposing that the little child is not in extreme necessity, in which any other person can be baptized. S. C. de P. F. 3. Jan. 1777. n. IX. Enchir. Moral. 464., I. M. 464.

6. "1. Whether, on account of the danger that a daughter be handed over in marriage to a Muslim or heathen man, or to a simple polygamous Christian, baptism can be administered to girls, whether infants or adults, when otherwise they have the necessary dispositions for receiving it?

2. Whether, on account of the danger that slaves be sold to Muslim or heathen masters, with danger to the faith, baptism can be conferred on them in infancy and also in adult age, as long as their master does not swear the contrary?

R. As regards the first, a distinction must be made between infant girls and adult girls. The former, where nothing else stands in the way besides the danger of future marriages, can and ought most safely to be admitted to baptism; for it is not equitable that, on account of an uncertain event still very remote, they be repelled from the certain benefit of obtaining baptismal grace. But adult girls are either not yet nubile, or indeed already nubile but not yet promised in marriage, or already betrothed to infidel or polygamous men. In the first and in the second Case there is no reason why baptism should be denied or deferred, provided the aforesaid girls have the necessary dispositions, since the danger of entering invalid marriages with infidels, and of afterward remaining in them violently, is not certainly and proximately imminent, and can otherwise be removed in several ways. But in the third Case it is in no way expedient to baptize them before marriage, both because of the not slight difficulty of obtaining a legitimate dispensation, and because of the most grave danger that they may proceed to the marriage even if no place is given for dispensation, which certainly cannot be granted over impediments of natural law; therefore it will be better to defer baptism than to expose it to proximate profanation.

As regards the second doubt, it contains a greater difficulty concerning infants than concerning adults. For the foreseen danger of perversion prevents baptism from being conferred insofar as it can in no way be removed by opportune instructions. With this principle established, it follows that adult slaves of either sex who are duly disposed, and can be fortified beforehand with Christian instruction, are to be baptized, even if their master refuses to promise that he will never commit this act, namely, to sell them to infidels. Concerning slaves who are still infants, it is necessary to consider whether they are liable to the danger of passing into the power of infidels after they have obtained adolescence, or before they have passed beyond the age of infancy. In the former hypothesis, whenever nothing else stands in the way of their baptism besides the above-mentioned danger and some hope shines forth of their Christian education, they are licitly washed in the sacred laver; and this is likewise licitly administered to them in the latter hypothesis, if they are either offered by Christian parents, or are found near death." S. O. 25. June 1866. Collect. S. C. de P. F. n. 591.

7. "An infidel woman married to a heretical man asks to be admitted to baptism. The husband does not stand in the way of her receiving it and professing the Catholic religion, though he himself is unwilling to become Catholic. It is asked how the Catholic missionary ought to conduct himself: Whether, by baptizing the woman, he should permit her to contract marriage with that heretical man before a non-Catholic minister? Whether, by denying her baptism, he should give her occasion to receive it from a heretical minister? Whether he should baptize her and join her in marriage with the heretical man, which evidently involves communication in divine things?

R.... In the proposed Case the missionary ought to teach the woman concerning the nullity of the prior marriage entered into in infidelity with the heretical man, who, as being subject through baptism to the laws of the Church, was detained by the impediment of disparity of cult; and if he finds her rightly disposed, he can admit her to baptism. With her, also, a dispensation can be given by one having the faculty for this, so that, after baptism, she may be able licitly to marry the same heretical man, if nothing else stands in the way. For, as regards the validity of the marriage, she would now contract it validly in the provinces of Quebec and Canada because of the extension of the Benedictine declaration made by Clement XIII on 4 November 1741. But nothing is discerned to prevent baptism being licitly conferred on the aforesaid woman, since, as is explained, she herself wishes to profess the Catholic religion, with her own husband consenting to this. Nor would an urgent cause be lacking for dispensing with her, so that she may marry the heretical man, whenever it would be prudently feared from the denial of the dispensation that she would either be turned away from receiving baptism, or would receive it from a non-Catholic minister, before whom she would likewise enter marriage; which must in no way be permitted. But it would not be forbidden for the Catholic parish priest to assist at a marriage of this kind. For by force of the grant of Apostolic dispensation it would become licit, and therefore also the presence of the parish priest would be licit. But, as Benedict XIV admonishes in de Syn. dioec. lib. 6. cap. 5. § 4., in those places and regions where marriages of this kind, namely of Catholics with heretics, are sometimes permitted to be contracted, it is altogether expedient that the bishop, for protecting the decorum of the Church, opportunely and prudently prescribe the rites to be observed in the celebration of those marriages. And first of all, the bishop should have before his eyes and, insofar as can be done, should take care that the practice of the Holy See be observed, and the rules which are usually prescribed by it when, for grave causes, it dispenses in marriages of this kind: namely, that the marriage be celebrated before the parish priest and witnesses outside the church, with the nuptial blessing omitted, and every sacred rite; that the Catholic party be most gravely admonished concerning the obligation which he or she has, and which never ceases for him or her, of taking care for the conversion of the spouse and the education of offspring of both sexes in the Catholic religion; and finally that the Catholic education of the offspring also be brought into an agreement confirmed by oath." Instr. S. O. 16. Sept. 1824. to the bishop of Quebec.