Chapter — Prümmer, Manuale Theologiae Moralis
Chapter V. On The Minister Of Baptism
118. The doctrine and present practice concerning the minister of baptism are stated thus by the new Roman Ritual,121 according to the norm of the Code of Canon Law: "The ordinary minister of solemn baptism is a priest; but its conferral is reserved to the pastor, or to another priest with the permission of the same pastor or of the local Ordinary, which in a case of necessity is legitimately presumed. Even a traveler is to be solemnly baptized by his own pastor in his own parish if this can be done easily and without delay; otherwise, any pastor can solemnly baptize a traveler in his territory. In another territory no one may confer solemn baptism without due permission, not even upon inhabitants of his own place."
A twofold minister of baptism is distinguished: one of solemn baptism, which is administered with all the prescribed ceremonies; the other of non-solemn baptism, which is given with these ceremonies omitted, especially in danger of death. Danger of death, since it is not the same as the moment of death, is judged to be present when it is feared that the one to be baptized may die before he receives solemn baptism. Hence, when a priest is absent in mission territories, catechists or other laymen are accustomed to baptize recently born infants who, although they are now well, can nevertheless easily die before the arrival of the priest. The minister of solemn baptism is again twofold: one ordinary and by office; the other delegated. With these things premised, the following three propositions are set down:
121 Tit. 2, c. 1, on the sacrament of baptism, n. 12 sq.
119. 1. The ordinary minister of solemn baptism is a priest; but its conferral is reserved to the pastor, or to another priest with the permission of the same pastor or of the local Ordinary, which in a case of necessity is legitimately presumed. Thus the Code of Canon Law, c. 738, § 1, establishes.
Hence the right of solemnly baptizing is an exclusive parochial right. Therefore, whoever solemnly baptizes without the permission, express or at least duly presumed, of the pastor or Ordinary gravely injures the right of another and commits a grave sin.122 Likewise, those who offer infants to be baptized by another pastor sin. The parochial right in this matter is territorial and not personal,123 since ordinarily solemn baptism cannot be administered except in the parish church. Hence a pastor cannot on his own authority baptize his subjects who may be living outside the territory of the parish; but he can baptize not only vagrants but also travelers staying in his territory, if they cannot easily and without delay be carried to their own pastor.124 According to the present discipline, whenever a woman has given birth outside the place of her domicile or quasi-domicile, the infant must, for the proper keeping of baptismal registers, be baptized in her own parish. But if this cannot be done conveniently and without delay, baptism can be conferred in the parish in which the birth occurred, as was said, or even in another parish. Since this case frequently occurs in our days in hospitals intended for women in childbirth, particular statutes or legitimate customs are to be observed.
What has been said concerning the right of conferring baptism applies also to the supplying of the ceremonies when baptism in a case of necessity has already been conferred by another.
If conditional baptism is in question, such as is customarily employed in the conversion of heretics, particular statutes are to be observed. Since conditional baptism today in some regions is customarily performed without ceremonies, the parochial right is not established; and therefore it can be performed in any church or sacristy, unless the bishop has established otherwise. Nevertheless, a record of the baptism conferred is to be preserved in the archive of that church. It is better still if the same baptism is noted also in the register of the parish church, since everyone who afterward contracts marriage must be entered in the baptismal book of the parish. This cannot be done if all the names of the baptized are not contained in the register of the parish church. According to modern discipline, conditional baptism also must be performed by a priest and in a sacred place, at least in the sacristy or in some chapel; hence outside a case of necessity it is not becoming to act otherwise.
The solemn baptism of adults, where this can conveniently be done, is to be referred to the local Ordinary, for example, the bishop or vicar general, so that, if he wishes, it may be conferred more solemnly by him or by his delegate.125
122 Cf. St. Alphonsus, Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 115, second point to be noted.
123 Code of Canon Law, c. 739. Whether and in what manner personal pastors, for example, military chaplains, can baptize their subjects is to be ascertained from particular statutes or from legitimate custom.
124 Code of Canon Law, c. 738, § 2.
125 Code of Canon Law, c. 744.
120. 2. The extraordinary minister of solemn baptism is a deacon.
Although a deacon receives in his ordination the faculty of solemnly baptizing, nevertheless, according to the present discipline of the Church, he is only an extraordinary minister, and therefore he cannot licitly baptize unless these two things are present together: 1. the commission of the pastor, or local Ordinary; and 2. a just cause.126 In a case of necessity a deacon can indeed solemnly baptize even with the presumed permission of the pastor,127 but in other cases the commission, express or at least tacit, of the pastor is necessary. Indeed, according to the opinion which St. Alphonsus128 called the more probable and most common, a deacon solemnly baptizing without such a commission would incur an irregularity. Nevertheless, the opinion denying the irregularity is safe today; for the text cited for the opposite opinion rather proves the contrary. These are the words: "If anyone not ordained should baptize or exercise any divine office, on account of his temerity let him be cast out of the Church and never be ordained."129 But a deacon in his ordination expressly receives the faculty of baptizing.130 Therefore, he cannot be called "not ordained." But if a subdeacon, another cleric, or a layman rashly confers solemn baptism, he is irregular. The reason why a deacon ordinarily cannot solemnly baptize without the commission of the pastor is that deacons, as their very name indicates, are only assisting ministers, and it does not pertain to them to furnish any sacrament principally and as if from their own office. Thus the Angelic Doctor131 gives this general rule: "He who cannot consecrate the Eucharist cannot solemnly open the approach to this sacrament. But baptism is the approach to the Eucharist and to all the other sacraments. Therefore, a deacon who cannot consecrate the Eucharist cannot solemnly baptize on his own authority."
Note. 1. A deacon solemnly baptizing probably cannot bless the salt or water, but must use these things blessed by a priest.132 2. Those who knowingly presume to offer their children to non-Catholic ministers to be solemnly baptized incur an excommunication reserved to the Ordinary.133
126 Ibid., c. 741. The local Ordinary or pastor can delegate a deacon to baptize solemnly for a just cause, for example, because he himself is sick, absent, or occupied in hearing confessions, and so forth.
127 Code of Canon Law, c. 741.
128 Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 116.
129 c. 1, X 5, 28.
130 Thus Noldin, De sacr., n. 63, and Gasparri, De s. ordinat., n. 339.
131 S. theol. 3, q. 67, a. 1.
132 Sacred Congregation of Rites, February 10, 1888 (Decr. auth., n. 3684). Whether this decree was abolished by the Code of Canon Law, c. 1153, is not certainly established.
133 Code of Canon Law, c. 2319, § 1, n. 3.
121. 3. The minister of non-solemn baptism in a case of necessity is any man possessing the use of reason and willing and able duly to apply the form to the matter.134
Therefore, for example, a completely mute man can never baptize validly, not even in extreme necessity. This doctrine concerning the minister of non-solemn baptism has now been defined in several Councils, for example, by the Fourth Lateran Council: "The sacrament of baptism ... duly conferred by anyone profits unto salvation."135 The Council of Florence, however, defines: "In a case of necessity, not only a priest or deacon, but also a layman or woman, indeed even a pagan and a heretic, can baptize, provided that he observes the form of the Church and intends to do what the Church does."136 St. Thomas137 assigns the reason of fittingness: "Lest man be able to suffer a lack concerning so necessary a remedy, it was instituted that both the matter of baptism should be common, namely, water, which can easily be had by anyone, and that the minister of baptism should also be anyone not ordained, lest on account of a lack of baptism man should suffer the loss of his salvation."
Among the ancient Fathers St. Cyprian did not recognize as valid baptism conferred by a layman.138 St. Augustine, however, certainly admitted the validity of baptism conferred by a layman, saying: "Even if [baptism] is usurped without any necessity and is given by anyone to anyone, that which has been given cannot be said not to have been given, although it can rightly be said to have been given illicitly";139 nevertheless, he seems to doubt somewhat whether not only a layman, but also a pagan, can baptize.140 Tertullian, after his manner, inveighs most vehemently against women conferring baptism, but it does not so clearly appear whether he considers such baptisms entirely invalid.141 The Angelic Doctor142 treats the validity of baptism conferred by a layman, a woman, or a pagan, and resolves the principal difficulties arising from history.
134 The Code of Canon Law, c. 742, § 1, moreover admonishes that in such a baptism, insofar as it can be done, two witnesses, or at least one, are to be employed, by whom the conferral of baptism can be proved.
135 In Denz., n. 430.
136 Denz., n. 696.
137 S. theol. 3, q. 67, a. 3.
138 Ep. 73, 7, 8 (Migne, Patr. lat. 3, 1159).
139 Contra ep. Parm., l. 2, c. 13, n. 29 (Migne, l.c. 43, 71).
140 De bapt., l. 7, c. 53, n. 102 (Migne, l.c. 43, 234).
141 De bapt., c. 17 (Migne, l.c. 1, 1219).
142 S. theol. 3, q. 67, aa. 3-5.
122. 4. The order to be observed among ministers in a case of necessity is established in this manner by the Roman Ritual and by the Code of Canon Law, c. 742, § 2: "If a priest is present, he is to be preferred to a deacon, a deacon to a subdeacon, a cleric to a layman, and a man to a woman, unless for the sake of modesty it is becoming that a woman rather than a man baptize an infant not entirely delivered, or unless the woman knows better the form and manner of baptizing." Hence it is a mortal sin: 1. if a non-priest is preferred to a worthy priest; 2. if an infidel, heretic, schismatic, or excommunicated person to be avoided is preferred without necessity to a Catholic; 3. if someone who is not the pastor is preferred to the proper pastor who is present and willing to baptize. Lehmkuhl143 rightly notes: "That inversion of order is a grave sin both on the part of the minister and on the part of him who requests it to be done thus or permits it by approving." In other cases the inversion of the established order does not seem to be a mortal sin. Hence, for example, a layman baptizing in the presence of a deacon or cleric does not sin mortally.144
A father and mother cannot licitly baptize their own offspring even in danger of death when another capable and willing person is present, because it is not becoming that a twofold paternity be joined in the same person: natural paternity from generation, and spiritual paternity from the administration of baptism. Thus it is from the precept of the Ritual and the Code, which nevertheless does not seem to oblige when a serious doubt exists whether another person present truly has the intention of doing what the Church does, or baptizes validly. Such a doubt is not rash if, for example, the physician present is a man of no religion. Then it is better and safer if the parent baptizes his own offspring in danger of death.
143 Theol. mor. II, n. 93.
144 Cf. St. Alphonsus, Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 117.
123. Scholion. On baptism of necessity conferred by laymen. Concerning the baptism of infants who have been baptized in danger of death by midwives and other laymen, the following things are to be observed: The pastor is bound diligently to instruct laymen, and especially midwives and physicians, in the correct manner of baptizing.145 He should teach them that, insofar as it can be done, they must employ two witnesses, or at least one, by whom the conferral of baptism can be proved.146 Moreover, it is advantageous prudently to examine midwives from time to time as to whether they truly know correctly the manner of baptizing. Whenever a midwife or another layman has baptized in a case of necessity, the pastor must investigate whether all the essentials for validity were present. A good manner of conducting this investigation is for the pastor not to put determinate questions, but to say to the midwife and to the witness, if one was present: "Tell me how it was done." Then he will easily perceive whether anything essential was omitted. If the pastor remains doubtful whether the baptism conferred was valid, he must baptize again under condition; otherwise, he is to supply only the baptismal ceremonies.
145 Code of Canon Law, c. 743.
146 Cf. ibid., c. 742, § 1.