Article — Merkelbach, Summa Theologiae Moralis
Article II: On the Matter of Baptism
St. Thomas, III, q. 66, a. 3, 4, 7, 8.
119. Errors. - Concerning the matter of Baptism several have erred. Certain Gnostics and Manichaeans, with Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Augustine as witnesses, excluded water from the conferral of Baptism, which they said had arisen from an evil principle; the followers of Marcus mixed oil with water; the disciples of Simon Magus and the Cathari, taking literally the words of Mt. III, 11, posited fire as the matter, and therefore they baptized in a dark place among lamps.
Luther and Beza contended that whatever can be in place of a bath, when water is lacking, is apt for Baptism. Calvin, although he acknowledged that water is required in Baptism, understood the word "water" in the text of John III, 5 metaphorically of living water, or the vivifying Spirit after the likeness of water. The Quakers repudiate Baptism of water as a Jewish rite, and acknowledge only spiritual Baptism, which is in the testimony of a good conscience and the reception of the Holy Spirit.
Baptists and Anabaptists, as also many Greek schismatics with Mark of Ephesus, admit only Baptism by immersion; they hold the mode more commonly used in the Latin Church from the fourteenth century to be invalid, or even heretical.
120. Principle I. The remote matter of Baptism is every natural water, and only natural water (can. 737). - It is defined as of faith in the Council of Trent, sess. 7, de Bapt., can. 2: "If anyone shall say that true and natural water is not of the necessity of Baptism (against Luther), and therefore shall twist those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: Unless someone shall have been born again of water and the Holy Spirit, to some metaphor (against Calvin), let him be anathema."
It is proved: 1. From the documents of revelation. Christ determined water (John III, 5 and 22-26); the Apostles baptize only in water (Acts VIII, 27-39; X, 44-48). Whence Paul calls Baptism the laver of water (Eph. V, 26), and Peter in I ep. III, 20: "The ark in which... souls were saved through water, which also of like form now saves you: Baptism." The primitive Church firmly holds this practice, as is established from the Didache VII; Ep. Barn. XI; Justin, Ap. I, 61; the Fathers refute the heretics who do not use water; all Liturgies from the beginning prescribe water; Innocent III declares water necessary for true Baptism. The Councils confess this: Lateran IV, c. 1; Vienne, const. de fide cath.; and Florence, for the Armenians.
- From the fittingness of reason: "From divine institution water is the proper matter of Baptism; and this fittingly... a) with regard to the effects of Baptism, to which there correspond the properties of water, which by its humidity washes, from which it is fitting for signifying and causing the washing away of sins; by its coldness it also tempers the excess of heat, and from this it is suited to mitigating the concupiscence of the fomes; by its transparency it is receptive of light, whence it is suited to Baptism insofar as it is the sacrament of faith...; - b) because by reason of its commonness and abundance it is the fitting matter for the necessity of this sacrament: for it can easily be had everywhere" (a. 3).
121. For the validity of Baptism there is required natural or elementary water in a liquid state, i.e., everything which among men comes under the use and name of water.
Such is water of rivers, rain, a well, a spring, ponds, cisterns, a bath, marshes, lakes, the sea, whether it be bitter or poisonous or sweet, whether warm and boiling or cold and icy, whether blessed or not blessed. Likewise water dissolved from snow, ice, hail, dew, mists, condensed vapors, or flowing from stones (which is called the sweat of pavement), leaves, or walls in rainy or winter time; likewise water obtained by chemical art or by distillation of another element, if it is pure from foreign elements; likewise water mixed with foreign matter in a small quantity, provided not only chemically but also according to common estimation water certainly predominates and it is still called water, for example, putrid water (Holy Office, April 17, 1839), turbid or somewhat muddy water, mineral, sulphurous, ferruginous water, etc.
Hence 1. invalid matter includes: wine, oil, juice of flesh or fat, humors of an animal or human body: milk, blood, urine, saliva, tears, sweat, phlegm, amniotic fluid, spittle, phlegmatic discharges, etc.; - juice expressed from trees, fruits (apples, pears, cherries), flowers, herbs, roots, grains; - snow, ice, hail, hoarfrost, vapor, and other things not dissolved, because they are not apt for washing; - water very much mixed, so that it has more of a foreign substance than of water, or is no longer apt for washing, for example, mud, ink, very good beer, good coffee, good tea, good broth, lye. For all these things are not water; or if they are, according to common estimation they do not have the use or name of water.
- Doubtful matter includes thin broth, lye not too thick, small beer, ordinary tea-water or coffee-water, weak ink, water dissolved from salt, artificial water extracted by distillation from flowers or herbs, for example, rose-water, violet-water, etc., or water flowing from a vine or trees.
He sins gravely, against reverence for the sacrament, who without necessity uses impure, dirty, turbid water, - or who in solemn Baptism does not use consecrated water (can. 757, § 1): but if in a case of necessity consecrated water is lacking, blessed water is to be used; otherwise natural water (Holy Office, June 20, 1883); outside the case of necessity new water is to be blessed (April 17, 1839).
In merely private, or non-solemn, Baptism, it is better to use blessed water, - or, if the one baptizing is a priest or deacon, even consecrated water; others cannot use consecrated water.
123. Principle II. The proximate matter of Baptism is the exterior washing of the body, - which can be valid not only by immersion, but also by infusion or sprinkling. - The first pertains to the faith, as is established from the universal preaching and use of the Church, and from the very signification of the name: Baptism is indicated in many places of Scripture (Acts II, 38; XXII, 16; I Cor. VI, 11; Eph. V, 26; Tit. III, 5; Heb. X, 22), and is clear from the unanimous testimony of the Fathers and Liturgies (can. 737).
It is proved: 1. The name Baptism, although etymologically it signifies immersion, nevertheless by common use, also reported in the Scriptures, signifies every washing (n. 111).
- To the essence of Baptism there pertains the washing of water by which the interior washing away of sins is signified; when this is preserved, the essence of the sacrament is preserved. But it is preserved not only by immersion, but also by infusion or sprinkling, which, provided the water flows, truly washes. Therefore not only by immersion, but also by infusion or sprinkling, the essence and consequently the validity of Baptism is preserved.
- From the beginning, the mode of baptizing by infusion or sprinkling was sometimes used, as the Didache VII, 3, explicitly testifies. Besides, the Apostles themselves seem thus to have baptized at Pentecost three thousand men on one day, and on another five thousand men (Acts II, 41), since in these circumstances the rite of immersion would scarcely have been possible; likewise when St. Paul baptized the jailer in prison (XVI, 33). And in Baptism by immersion, which was the ordinary rite, immersion among adults was not customarily total, but the water rose up to the knees or the middle of the body and at the same time was poured over the head. Moreover the Baptism of the sick, who were baptized while lying in bed, was held as valid; and martyrs in prison or in the very place of execution were baptized by pouring.
- "Sometimes a necessity can threaten (of baptizing otherwise than by immersion) on account of scarcity of water, or on account of weakness in the one to be baptized, to whom danger of death can threaten from immersion. And therefore it must be said that immersion is not of the necessity of Baptism" (a. 7).
Nor does it stand in the way that by immersion alone our being placed with Christ in the tomb is figured (Rom. VI, 3). - For "in immersion the figure of Christ's burial is represented more expressly..., but in the other modes of baptizing it is represented in some way, although not so expressly: for in whatever way the washing is done, the body of man, or some part of it, is placed under the water, just as the body of Christ was placed under the earth" (ad 2). Besides, this figurative signification in Baptism is merely secondary.
124. For the validity of Baptism there is required a washing of the one to be baptized by the one baptizing; otherwise the sense of the form would not be verified, and besides universal tradition so holds. It is said:
- Washing, for which it is required that water immediately and physically touch the body and successively flow and run over some part of it, so that it is judged washed or cleansed. Yet for this a small quantity suffices; nor is it necessary that bodily filth be wiped away: for the washing of Baptism is ordered only to spiritual amendment. It can be done either a) by motion of the one to be baptized in the water, or b) by motion of the water upon the one to be baptized; namely:
a) By immersion, for which it is required 1. that someone be moved in or under the water; whence Baptism would be invalid if someone were held unmoved in unmoved water; 2. and probably, according to some, also that he be drawn out of the water.
Hence the killing ablution by which someone would throw an infant into a river is doubtfully valid; moreover it is gravely illicit, because evils are not to be done that goods may come: for the very throwing into a place from which the child cannot be rescued is already of itself evil, as tending directly to killing alone, nor does it immediately have a good effect, as washing does, but only mediately and per accidens, because in fact it terminates rather at water and washing than at something else. Namely, in the case, washing is the effect of the throwing, which, even if it were not done into water, would nevertheless cause death.1 - Yet it is licit to wash with icy water, when another is lacking, even if death were feared to be somewhat accelerated, because this action per se and immediately tends to washing and sanctification, not to killing; whence death would come about per accidens and would be compensated by the more excellent good of eternal life.
1 Billuart, de Baptismo, art. 3, § III.
b) Also by infusion and by sprinkling, although this last mode is dangerous in practice. For both, some motion of the water is required.
Whence invalid matter is the mere touch of water without flow, such as a drop or a wet cloth remaining on the forehead; washing performed by one or another drop, or after the manner of an anointing, is easily doubtful (Holy Office, December 14, 1898); it is valid if someone by the motion of a finger or wetted cloth washed a part of the body.
- Washing of the one to be baptized, i.e., a) of the whole body or of a principal part, namely, of the head, in which all the interior and exterior senses flourish (a. 7, ad 3).
Baptism is valid if it is done upon a head covered with an ulcerous crust, because the crust is nothing but the skin of the infant foully disfigured by disease, and otherwise a man whose whole head was covered with smallpox could neither be washed nor baptized; - Baptism is doubtful if the washing is done on other members than the head, because in none is there the integrity of life as in the head; and it is the more doubtful in proportion as it is done on a less notable member and one more remote from the head; whence it is more probably valid if it is done over the heart, chest, neck, shoulder blades, shoulders; more doubtful on the arm or leg; very doubtful on the foot, hand, finger (can. 746, § 2 and 3).
b) of the body itself, which must be touched physically and immediately.
Hence there is doubt concerning the value of Baptism conferred on the hair, even of the head, because it is not certain that hair is part of the body;2 it is more doubtful if on the beard or nails; very doubtful if on the umbilical cord or on one of the two membranes which immediately envelop the infant in the mother's womb and which arise from the ovum: for although they are of fetal origin, nevertheless they are not a permanent part of the infant but rather a covering or transitory instrument; almost certainly invalid if it is done on the third exterior membrane enveloping the fetus, because this arises from the substance of the mother; invalid if on the clothes or body of the mother (Holy Office, May 21, 1671).
2 But if the head is covered with hair, the priest, while with the right hand he pours water over the crown of the head, ought with the left to part the hair, or take care that the water runs over the temples of the head, or, what in practice is easier, confer Baptism on the forehead, because nowhere is it prescribed that washing must be done on the crown. (Cf. Noldin, Th. M., III, n. 60). - Some, such as Lugo and Génicot, think that Baptism conferred on the hair is as certain as on the skin, for if the hairs of an animal are washed, the animal is said to be washed. Yet it can be answered that this is true of an animal which cannot be washed otherwise, not of man, who by his nature does not have hair everywhere, and therefore is capable of being washed immediately.
- Washing by the one baptizing: for if it were done by the one baptized, or by a third party, or by a natural cause alone, for example, while a child slips into water, the words would be false: I baptize you. Whence Baptism is invalid in which the form is pronounced, but not by the one who does the washing (S.C.S., November 17, 1916).
Baptism is valid if someone holds an infant under water falling without the help of another or already poured out by another, because the one holding is the sole cause of the washing; but if another intends or knows that he is pouring water upon the infant, Baptism is doubtful, because there is doubt whether the one who holds, or the one by whose aid the water descends, is the cause of the washing.
125. For liceity, that mode of washing is to be observed which is in use among the individual Churches (can. 758). - The Greeks baptize by threefold immersion, which they can also use while they are staying among Latins; but in the Latin Church generally the washing is to be done by threefold infusion performed in the manner of a cross.
He sins gravely who, in solemn Baptism, changes the usual mode of washing, or does not do the threefold infusion. Threefold washing in honor of the Most Holy Trinity was used from the beginning of the Church, as the Didache, VII, 4, testifies.