Article — Gury-Ballerini, Compendium of Moral Theology (8th ed., 1884)
Article II. On the Form of Baptism
- The form of Baptism is: I baptize thee in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Thus the Council of Trent defined, according to that saying, Matt. 28.19: Going therefore, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Among the Greeks, however, it is said: Let the servant of Christ be baptized in the name of the Father, etc. Or: The servant of Christ is baptized, etc. This form is valid from the instruction of Eugene IV to the Armenians; but it is licit only in the Greek Church.
Several Theologians, among whom is St. Alphonsus, judge that the omission of the word Amen at the end of the form of Baptism is venial, which word, however, is not found in the Roman Ritual. Therefore it is asked whether it is to be used or omitted? Resp. The Sacred Congregation of Rites: In the case the Roman Ritual is to be strictly observed (June 9, 1853, Cochinchina).
This form can be vitiated in many ways, either accidentally or substantially, as was said above in the Treatise on the Sacraments in general, n. 198.
The omission of the word I does not pertain to the essence of the form, nor would it exceed a venial sin. - St. Ligorius, n. 111. The same seems to have to be said, at least more probably, concerning the omission of the conjunction and, especially if it is omitted only once and is placed before the third person. The same also more probably concerning the word in, although several grave Theologians contradict. But the other words are altogether required for validity.
- Questions. - QUESTION 1. Whether the form of Baptism is valid if it is said: I baptize thee in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, or in the name of Christ?
Resp. to the first: No, at least more probably, because in such a form the several persons of the Holy Trinity are not sufficiently distinctly expressed; since the word Trinity signifies the persons only confusedly and implicitly; but Christ willed that they be distinctly expressed, as is clear from Matt., last chapter. - Thus commonly. - St. Ligorius, n. 111.
Resp. to the second: No, at least a fortiori, because the Trinity is in no way expressed through the phrase in the name of Christ. - Thus all, at least now after St. Thomas, 3 part, q. 66, art. 6; and it is clear from Canon Law in c. Si revera, 30, De Consecrat., dist. 4. - St. Ligorius, n. 112.
QUESTION 2. Whether Baptism is valid if there is added to the accustomed form: and in the name of the blessed Virgin Mary?
Resp. A distinction must be made: It is not valid if someone, doing this, intends to confer Baptism in the name of the blessed Virgin, namely by attributing to such names true efficacy in the value of Baptism. - But otherwise, if he does this from importunate devotion. - St. Ligorius, n. 111.