Case 4. A Too Zealous Pastor

Caius, a priest most zealous for the salvation of souls, is accustomed not only to visit Catholics but also to seek lost sheep outside the fold. If he finds in Protestant families weak or sick infants who probably will never attain the use of reason, after asking permission to bless them he secretly baptizes them by applying to their heads a handkerchief previously moistened. Julius, however, another priest who serves the same Mission, condemns Caius for an injury against the sacrament and against the infants’ parents. Hence it is asked:

1. Who are the minister and the subject of Baptism?

2. Is it lawful to baptize infants against their parents’ will?

3. What is to be said of the case?

1. Who is the minister and who the subject of Baptism?

The ordinary minister of solemn Baptism is the parish priest, who may delegate his office to another priest, and for just cause even to a deacon. In case of necessity any one may baptize.¹

1 Manual of Moral Theology, vol. ii, p. 52.

The subject of Baptism is any living person who has not been baptized.

2. Is it lawful to baptize children against the wish of their parents?

If the parents are baptized Christians the Church has a right to baptize their children even against their will, inasmuch as they themselves are subjects of the Church, and bound to obey her laws. In practice, such a right can only be used rarely and with great caution and proper safeguards. If the parents are not baptized and therefore not subject to the Church’s laws, their children may not be baptized before they have reached years of discretion without the consent of the parents except when they are in danger of death. After they have attained years of discretion they are not subject to their parents in the matter of religion.¹

1 Manual of Moral Theology, vol. ii, p. 63.

3. The case. Caius should exercise discretion in his zeal. If the children that he baptizes have never previously been baptized and are in danger of death his zeal may be praised. No injury is done to the parents and the children on dying are assured of a place in heaven. If the children have previously been baptized or if they are not in danger of death when he baptizes them, Caius does wrong. In the former case he is guilty of reiterating Baptism, in the latter he baptizes a child who will not be brought up as a Catholic. The mere probability of their dying before they attain the use of reason is not sufficient to justify his action. Mere application of the wet handkerchief to the children’s heads would not be valid Baptism; the water must run, or at least the wet handkerchief must Be moved so as to express the sacramental sign of washing.