Case 3. Remembered His Own Baptism

Caius, converted from the Anglican sect to the Catholic faith, is questioned about his Baptism by Titius, the priest who is to receive him into the Church. “I remember all the circumstances well,” says Caius, “for I was born a Unitarian and, when I had reached twenty years of age, became an Anglican. Indeed, before Baptism the Anglican minister explained to me that the rite of Baptism had no supernatural efficacy and was only an external ceremony by which men are joined to the Christian community. Astonished by this declaration, I began to inquire further, and now at last I wish to be received into the true Church.” From Caius’s other statements Titius gathers that the Anglican minister did not use in conferring Baptism the reverence and attention that he ought to have used, but that otherwise he duly applied the matter and form. Nevertheless, he doubts whether or not he ought at least conditionally to baptize Caius. Hence it is asked:

1. What attention and intention are required in conferring the sacraments?

2. What is prescribed in England concerning converts to the faith who are to be baptized?

3. What is to be said of the case?

1. What attention and intention are required in conferring the sacraments?

Attention, or advertence of the mind to what is being done, is requisite under pain of venial sin for the lawful administration of the sacraments, but it is not necessary for their validity. What sort of intention is required is explained by all approved authors.

2. What is prescribed with regard to baptizing converts in England?

The First Council of Westminster (d. XVI, n. 7), decreed: “ We renew the rule absolutely, commanding that all converts from Protestantism are to be baptized conditionally unless it is most certainly established by indubitable proofs that in their baptism everything was duly performed with regard to the application of the matter and form. Such a baptism shall not be done publicly but entirely privately, with lustral water and without ceremonies. Sacramental confession also is always to be required in such a case.”

From this decree may be gathered what is prescribed by other ecclesiastical regulations: viz., that whenever there is question of receiving any one into the Church, inquiry should be made about the postulant’s Baptism. After inquiry, when there is any prudent doubt whether the person was ever baptized or whether the Baptism was valid, Baptism is to be administered conditionally, according to the method laid down in the decree.

3. The case. Caius well remembered all the circumstances of his Baptism administered by an Anglican minister when he was twenty years old. The Anglican minister did not act very reverently, but he rightly applied the matter and form. The intention to baptize Caius must be presumed. As all the essentials for valid Baptism were present, the Baptism was valid, and Titius must not baptize him again. He must absolve him from censures after he has made a profession of faith, and then direct him to make a general confession of his sins committed after Baptism. The Anglican minister did not hold the Catholic faith about Baptism, but his heresy could not make the sacrament invalid, if it had all the essentials for validity.