Chapter — Prümmer, Manuale Theologiae Moralis
Chapter VII. On The Ceremonies Of Baptism
139. Notion. Since baptism is so necessary and excellent a sacrament, the Church has been accustomed from the earliest times to administer it with great solemnity of ceremonies. Under the name of ceremonies, however, we understand here not only the actions to be performed by the minister, but also all the other things that the Church prescribes for the worthy administration of baptism. Therefore, we also include sponsors. "For indeed, from most ancient tradition, the presence of sponsors at baptism has always been regarded as a principal ceremony in the Church of Christ."196
196 Holy Office, September 15, 1869.
140. Obligation. Outside a case of necessity, baptism must be conferred solemnly with all the ceremonies prescribed in the Ritual.197 Hence a priest sins gravely not only if, without cause, he omits all the prescribed ceremonies, but also if he knowingly neglects some notable part of them, for example, the anointing with chrism,198 the insufflation, and the imposition of saliva and salt.199 It was already said above, n. 100, that it is gravely forbidden for a priest to use the old oils of the past year, unless necessity compels it. For if fresh oils cannot be had, baptism is not therefore to be deferred, but is to be administered with the oils of the preceding year.
The entire baptismal rite must be performed in the Latin language.200 In some dioceses, however, there exists a legitimate custom approved by the Supreme Pontiff of putting the questions either in the vernacular language alone or in both languages.201 The sponsors may recite the Our Father and the Creed in the vernacular language while the priest recites them in Latin.202
The ceremonies may licitly be omitted: a) in a case of necessity, that is, when danger of death is imminent. The Roman Ritual describes how one is then to proceed;203 b) if a heretic certainly baptized validly returns to the bosom of the Church. In that case the new convert is neither rebaptized nor are the ceremonies of baptism repeated; c) if a heretic doubtfully baptized is rebaptized under condition. This is so, at least by the particular law of certain regions, for example, England and the ecclesiastical Province of Philadelphia.204 For the bishop can permit private baptism to be conferred, and consequently the ceremonies to be omitted, if heretics are baptized under condition in adult age.205 When baptism has been conferred without ceremonies in danger of death, they must afterward be supplied. But if, while the ceremonies of solemn baptism are being performed, danger of death should become imminent for the person to be baptized, baptism itself must be performed immediately; then, while the baptized person is still living, the ceremonies marked for after baptism, and finally the ceremonies marked for before baptism, must be supplied. Thus the Roman Ritual.206
When the parents of an infant belong to different rites, for example, to the Latin and Greek rites, the infant is ordinarily to be baptized according to the rite of the father.207
197 Code of Canon Law, c. 755.
198 St. Alphonsus, Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 141.
199 Cf. the Constitutions of Benedict XIV, Inter omnigenas, February 2, 1744, and Omnium sollicitudinum, September 13, 1744.
200 Holy Office, August 25, 1880.
201 Cf. Schüch, Handb. der Pastoral, § 273.
202 Sacred Congregation of Rites, December 30, 1881, ad X (Decr. auth., n. 3535).
203 Tit. 2, c. 2, n. 28 sqq.
204 Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments, January 4, 1914, in The Ecclesiastical Review (1914), 723.
205 Code of Canon Law, c. 759, § 2.
206 Cf. Göpfert, Moraltheol. III, 38.
207 Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, April 11, 1894; Code of Canon Law, c. 756, § 2.
141. Place. Solemn baptism must be conferred in a church or in a public oratory,208 for "the proper place for administering solemn baptism is the baptistery in a church or public oratory." A parish church has a baptistery by the law itself; another church or public oratory has one by ordinance of the local Ordinary.209 The reason of fittingness is that baptism is the gate through which entry is made into the Catholic Church. Therefore, it is fitting that a man be baptized in some place deputed to the public worship of the Catholic Church. Such a place is a church or public oratory. There are, however, cases in which it is lawful to baptize outside a church:
a) The children or grandchildren of those who actually hold supreme sovereignty can be baptized in the chapel of the house or in another decent place.210
b) It is lawful to baptize in the sacristy for a reasonable cause to be approved by the bishop, for example, because of severe cold harmful to the infant.211
c) In mission territories or elsewhere, where Catholics live far from a church, so that infants newly born cannot be carried to church without great inconvenience, it is lawful to baptize in private houses.212 The custom of baptizing at home the infants of the wealthy or of others, however, seems to be illegitimate, unless somewhere the bishop, for a just and reasonable cause, has permitted it in some extraordinary case.213
When a priest administers baptism in a private house because of imminent danger of death, he need not necessarily employ the other ceremonies prescribed in the Ritual. But if he baptizes in a private house outside imminent danger of death, for example, because an infant recently born cannot be carried without grave danger to health to a distant church, then he must employ all the ceremonies of the Roman Ritual214 or of another legitimately approved Ritual.
Time of baptism. In ancient times, the vigils of Easter and Pentecost were observed for baptism, and this discipline is still commended in the baptism of adults.215 Today no time is appointed, except that the Church commands that baptism be received as soon as possible.216
208 Code of Canon Law, c. 773.
209 Roman Ritual, tit. 2, c. 1, n. 42 sq.
210 Code of Canon Law, c. 776, § 1.
211 Sacred Congregation of Rites, March 14, 1861 (Decr. auth., n. 3104, dub. 9).
212 Sacred Congregation of Rites, February 4, 1871 (ibid., n. 3234, dub. 3).
213 Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments, December 23, 1912 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis IV, 735); Code of Canon Law, c. 776.
214 Thus the Sacred Congregation of Rites, June 17, 1914 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis VI, 32).
215 Code of Canon Law, c. 772.
216 Cf. above, n. 126.
142. Name. A name must be imposed upon the one to be baptized, and indeed a Christian name, although this seems to be a counsel rather than a strict precept.217 The pastor, however, should take care that "obscene, fabulous, or ridiculous names, or the names of vain gods or of impious pagan men, are not imposed."218 But if the parents altogether demand that such a name be imposed, for example, Venus, Epicurus, and so forth, baptism is not therefore to be deferred; rather, the infant is to be baptized, with a Christian name added in a lowered voice, and both names are to be entered in full in the book of the baptized.219
217 St. Alphonsus, Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 145.
218 Roman Ritual, tit. 2, c. 1, n. 70.
219 Holy Office, January 13, 1883; Code of Canon Law, c. 761.
143. Sponsor. From ancient times,220 sponsors were employed in the conferral of baptism, who were called receivers, sponsors, sureties, and so forth. The laws concerning sponsors now in force in the Church were enacted by the Code of Canon Law,221 which establishes "that only one be employed, although of a sex different from the one to be baptized, or at most one man and one woman." This statute indeed binds under grave sin; hence a pastor would sin gravely if, for example, he admitted three sponsors. St. Alphonsus222 thinks that it is also a grave sin if two female sponsors were taken for a boy, or two male sponsors for a girl; but that it is a light sin if two male sponsors were admitted for a boy and two female sponsors for a girl. The reason is that, in the first case, spiritual kinships with the baptized person would be uselessly multiplied, but not so in the second case.
The law of sponsors can be explained briefly in this manner: In every solemn baptism one sponsor suffices, whether a man or a woman; two sponsors are permitted, provided that they are of different sexes; three or more sponsors are prohibited.
Today, in many regions, especially where numerous Protestants live, there exists a custom of presenting several sponsors. This custom cannot be tolerated, but the pastor is bound to obey Catholic law. Nothing prevents more than two from being admitted as witnesses of baptism, or as so-called "honorary sponsors."
220 Cf. Tertullian, De bapt., c. 18 (Migne, Patr. lat. 1, 1330).
221 c. 764.
222 St. Alphonsus, Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 156.
144. Necessity of sponsors. a) In solemn baptism there is required under grave sin, insofar as it can be done, at least one sponsor, whether a man or a woman. b) In a baptism of necessity or in private baptism, there is no grave obligation of summoning a sponsor.
Everyone indeed concedes that a sponsor is not strictly required: 1. if a layman baptizes in necessity; 2. when a heretic is rebaptized under condition. Whether, however, a priest administering private baptism is strictly bound to employ a sponsor is not established. The negative opinion seems truer, because private baptism is administered without ceremonies. Moreover, among the ceremonies of baptism, the designation of a sponsor holds the first place.223 Therefore, if private baptism is administered, a sponsor is not strictly required, but one should be employed if he can easily be had,224 since this tends to the benefit of the one to be baptized. But when the baptismal ceremonies are supplied after a baptism of necessity, a sponsor also must be employed, who nevertheless in this case contracts no spiritual kinship.225
c) In baptism repeated conditionally, the same sponsor who perhaps was present at the prior baptism and who then contracts spiritual kinship should be employed, insofar as this can be done. Outside this case a sponsor is not necessary in conditional baptism; if one is nevertheless employed, he does not contract spiritual kinship.226
Qualities of sponsors227 are partly for validity and partly for liceity.
223 Holy Office, September 15, 1869.
224 Code of Canon Law, c. 762, § 2.
225 Cf. St. Alphonsus, Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 147; Code of Canon Law, c. 762, § 2.
226 Code of Canon Law, c. 763.
145. For validity it is required:
That they have the perfect use of reason and the intention of undertaking this office. Hence a ratification given afterward does not suffice.228
That they be Catholics, and neither a) infidels or persons belonging to a heretical or schismatic sect; nor b) persons who, by a condemnatory or declaratory sentence, are excommunicated, infamous with infamy of law, or excluded from legitimate acts; nor c) deposed or degraded clerics.229
Benedict XIV already laid down, through an Instruction of the Holy Office dated December 9, 1745, "that infidels, heretics, or schismatics cannot be sponsors in a baptism conferred upon the children of Catholics; which same statute we read in the Roman Ritual under the title concerning sponsors, where these words are found: 'Pastors should know, moreover, that infidels or heretics are not to be admitted to this office.'" The reason for this prohibition is evident; for the office of sponsors is, when parents are lacking, to instruct the baptized person in the truths of faith and morals. But who can persuade himself that a heretic would wish to instruct the baptized person in the Catholic faith, which he himself opposes? This prohibition is indeed so strict that baptism is to be administered without sponsors rather than with a non-Catholic sponsor. Thus Benedict XIV (loc. cit.) and the Holy Office several times.230 But if a heretic has already been designated as sponsor by the parents and cannot be removed without great inconvenience, he can then be admitted as a witness; he cannot, however, be inscribed in the book of baptisms as sponsor, since he has exercised the office of sponsor invalidly. According to the custom of several dioceses, in this case the pastor designates as sponsor the midwife carrying the infant, if she is a Catholic, or the assisting sacristan.
Just as a heretic cannot be admitted as sponsor in a Catholic baptism, so also a Catholic cannot be a sponsor in a baptism administered by a heretical minister. Benedict XIV said in the cited Instruction that it is safer for a Catholic to abstain; but the Holy Office, on June 30 and July 7, 1864, decreed: "It is absolutely unlawful for Catholics, either personally or through others, to discharge the office of sponsor in baptisms administered by heretics to the children of heretics."231 There are indeed authors who permit this for a reasonable cause,232 but in practice there must be no departure from the Decrees of the Holy Office, because otherwise the Catholic would commit forbidden communication in sacred things with heretics.
- That they be neither the father nor the mother nor the spouse of the one to be baptized.
The reason is twofold: a) to avoid spiritual kinship among such persons; b) because parents are already bound by natural law to the education of their children, whereas sponsors by ecclesiastical law must sometimes supply their place. But no one can supply for himself. Hence, according to the discipline now in force, a father or mother can in no case validly exercise the office of sponsor in the baptism of his or her own child. But if no one else is present who can hold the child to be baptized, the father or mother can indeed perform this task, but does not become a sponsor.
That they be designated by the one to be baptized himself, or by his parents or guardians, or, if these are lacking, by the minister of baptism.233
That, in the act of baptism, they physically hold or touch the one to be baptized, either personally or through a proxy, or immediately lift or receive him from the sacred font or from the hands of the baptizer.234
As regards this contact, it suffices "if the sponsor, by physical contact with the infant, joins himself to the person by whose hands the infant is held, and accompanies the one carrying him to the infusion of the water, without its being necessary that the sponsor, male or female, alone, after the carrier has been removed, receive the infant into his or her hands and present him to the priest to be baptized."235 In most regions it is now customary for the midwife or another woman to carry the infant, while the male and female sponsors accompany her, answer the questions, and, while the priest pours the water, place a hand upon the infant, touching him. In the baptism of adults, however, the sponsors place a hand upon the shoulder of the one to be baptized. When a sponsor discharges his office through a proxy, the proxy indeed must touch the infant, but it is the designated sponsor, and not the proxy, who contracts spiritual kinship and the other obligations.
228 Cf. Holy Office, September 15, 1869.
229 Code of Canon Law, c. 765, n. 2.
230 For example, May 3, 1893; June 27, 1900.
231 Collect. de Prop. Fide, n. 1257.
232 For example, Azor, Diana, and Laymann; St. Alphonsus (Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 156) also seems to favor this opinion.
233 Sess. 24, c. 2, De reform. matr. Cf. Code of Canon Law, c. 765, n. 4.
234 Code of Canon Law, c. 765, n. 5.
235 Thus the old Roman Ritual, tit. 2, c. 1, n. 25.
146. For liceity it is required:236
That they have attained the fourteenth year of age, unless for a just cause it should seem otherwise to the minister.
That they not be excommunicated or excluded from legitimate acts because of a notorious delict,237 or infamous, whether by infamy of law or of fact, nor interdicted, nor publicly criminal.
Those who are punished with these penalties by sentence of a judge exercise the office of sponsor not only illicitly but also invalidly, as was said above, n. 2.
Illicit sponsors are, for example, concubinarians living in an invalid civil marriage, and notorious Freemasons, concerning whom the Holy Office wrote to the Ordinaries of Brazil on July 5, 1878: "It is altogether to be forbidden that notorious Masons undertake the office of sponsor in the sacrament of baptism or confirmation. For they, insofar as they adhere to a sect condemned by the Church, are in no way fit to procure, if there should be need, the Christian education of their spiritual children." A pastor cannot, however, exclude from the office of sponsor one who neglects annual confession and Communion, or who indulges excessively in intoxicating drink, unless public scandal would arise from his admission. The reason is that in present times sponsors rarely exercise a real influence upon the spiritual education of their children.
- That they know the rudiments of the faith.
It is also most fitting that sponsors have been signed with the sacrament of confirmation. Thus the old Roman Ritual, tit. 2, c. 1, n. 24.
- That they not be religious of either sex or novices, unless necessity urges and the express permission of at least the local superior is had.
Such necessity can easily occur in foreign missions.
- That they not be constituted in sacred orders, unless the express permission of their own Ordinary is added.
Therefore a secular priest cannot undertake the office of sponsor without the express permission of the bishop or vicar general, while an exempt religious priest cannot do so without the express permission of his major superior.
The office of sponsors, since they are spiritual parents, is "to have their spiritual child perpetually commended to them and, in those things which pertain to instruction in the Christian life, to take diligent care that throughout his whole life he show himself to be such as they solemnly promised at his baptism that he would become."238 This obligation of caring for the Christian education of the child is grave of itself, but it does not bind unless it is established that the child is not sufficiently educated by his parents and those who take their place. Thus St. Thomas239 and theologians commonly teach.
236 Code of Canon Law, c. 766.
237 By the name of legitimate ecclesiastical acts are signified: exercising the office of administrator of ecclesiastical goods; discharging the parts of judge, auditor and relator, defender of the bond, promoter of justice and of the faith, notary and chancellor, messenger and apparitor, advocate and procurator in ecclesiastical causes; exercising the office of sponsor in the sacraments of baptism and confirmation; casting a vote in ecclesiastical elections; exercising the right of patronage (Code of Canon Law, c. 2256, § 2).
238 Code of Canon Law, c. 769.
239 S. theol. 3, q. 67, a. 8.
147. Scholion 1. On the pastoral prudence to be employed in rejecting an unworthy sponsor. In doubt whether someone can be admitted validly or licitly to the office of sponsor, the pastor, if time permits, should consult the Ordinary.240 In rejecting the unworthy from the office of sponsor, the pastor should employ all prudence and kindness, lest he offend others or harm the good of religion. Hence he should never use harsh and injurious words, but should say in a gentle manner that he is acting solely from the prescriptions of the Church and cannot admit such a person as sponsor. When an infant is announced to be baptized, the priest should at once inquire concerning the quality of the sponsors and not wait until all are prepared in the church. He should then immediately admonish them that another sponsor be designated. If very great inconveniences would arise from the rejection of an unworthy sponsor, he should take care that the sponsor not touch the one to be baptized in the act of baptism; and if not even this is possible, he can tolerate the unworthy sponsor, provided that grave scandal does not arise therefrom. For the law concerning the rejection of unworthy sponsors is a positive ecclesiastical law. But no positive law binds with great inconvenience, nor is our pious mother the Church judged to urge that law in such great straits, especially since in our times the principal office of a sponsor, namely, the spiritual education of the baptized infant, can scarcely ever be put into practice.
Although the admission of a heretical sponsor is gravely prohibited, and indeed today is invalid, nevertheless several authors, for example, Lehmkuhl241 and Noldin,242 think that, in order to avoid grave evils, the pastor can tolerate a heretic touching the one to be baptized in the act of baptism. For the office of sponsors today is honorific rather than practical. Therefore, the Sacred Penitentiary also permitted on December 10, 1860, that a bishop could admit to the office of sponsor one notoriously bound by ecclesiastical censures, if otherwise graver evils would occur.
240 Code of Canon Law, c. 767.
241 Cas. consc. II, n. 86.
242 De sacr., n. 78.
148. Scholion 2. On the book of the baptized. The pastor or one taking his place is bound diligently to record in the book of the baptized those baptized, whether born legitimately or illegitimately, according to the prescriptions of the new Roman Ritual, tit. 12, c. 2, and of the Code of Canon Law, c. 777.243 In this book of the baptized it is also to be noted if the baptized person has received confirmation, contracted marriage, unless it concerns a marriage of conscience, received the sacred order of the subdiaconate, or made solemn profession; and these annotations are always to be included in the certificate of baptism received.244
243 Cf. our Man. iur. can., q. 283.
244 Code of Canon Law, c. 470, § 2. For the faithful from Russia, cf. Sacred Congregation for the Oriental Church (Pontifical Commission for Russia, July 13, 1928), Acta Apostolicae Sedis XX, 260.
149. Scholion 3. On the blessing of a woman after childbirth. It is a pious and laudable custom, but not a precept, that a woman after childbirth come to church to give thanks to God for her safety and receive the special blessing found in the Roman Ritual, tit. 7, c. 3. This blessing is not among strictly parochial rights, but can be given by any priest in any church or public oratory.245 A bishop, and a fortiori a pastor, cannot by his own authority derogate from this statute of common law. If the pastor himself has been requested, he cannot refuse this blessing. This blessing is not to be denied to a Catholic woman, even if her offspring was born dead without baptism.246 On the contrary, this blessing is to be denied: a) to a non-Catholic mother, at least if scandal of the faithful is rightly feared therefrom; b) to all mothers who have borne offspring from manifestly illegitimate intercourse, for example, from fornication, adultery, a merely civil marriage, and so forth; c) to a mother whose offspring is baptized and educated in heresy or schism; d) to a mother who, without a dispensation of the Church, entered a mixed marriage, even though valid.247
245 Sacred Congregation of Rites, January 12, 1704, and November 21, 1893 (Decr. auth., n. 2123 ad 6; n. 3813).
246 Sacred Congregation of Rites, May 19, 1896 (Decr. auth., n. 3904).
247 Code of Canon Law, c. 2375.