Section — Wouters, Manual of Moral Theology

Section II. On Proximate Matter

54.

I. The proximate matter required for validity is the washing of the one to be baptized, done by the baptizer himself. This is clear from Sacred Scripture, which declares that man through Baptism is born again of water,1 and is washed.2 Canon 737, § 1, declares the same.

It is said:

  1. Washing; and this indeed can be done in three ways, namely by immersion, pouring, and sprinkling. As regards validity, however, it makes no difference in what way it is done (can. 758). Nevertheless, true washing wholly requires:

a) That the water physically or immediately touch the one to be baptized. Hence: 1. Baptism is doubtful if the water has touched only the hair, scab, or birth matter still adhering in notable quantity. To birth matter there also seems to be numbered the vernix caseosa, which is accustomed to adhere to the fetus before cleansing. Hence surgeons and midwives, having removed scab and filth if need be, should either part the hair with the left hand while baptizing, or rather effect that the water flow over the temples of the head. Likewise, the sacred minister can, while pouring the water, divide the hair, or rather proceed in such a way that the water flows somewhat over the forehead (St. Alphonsus, VI, 107, q. 3).

  1. With regard to Baptism conferred on the afterbirth, some teach absolutely that it is invalid, in whatever afterbirth the conferral may be done; namely, they judge that no afterbirth is a part of the fetus. Others hold Baptism conferred on the external afterbirth, or decidua, as certainly invalid, but Baptism on the inner afterbirths as doubtfully invalid. The reason is that they judge the decidua certainly, but the other afterbirths only probably, not to be parts of the fetus. According to others, Baptism conferred on whatever afterbirth is doubtfully valid. Many allege as the reason that the afterbirths are united with, or constitute as it were one continuum with, the umbilical cord, which probably belongs to the fetus; and thus Baptism conferred on the afterbirths would not be certainly invalid. There is added, they say, with regard to the inner afterbirths, that it is not yet wholly established that they do not belong to the fetus.3 In what way, all things considered, the fetus must be baptized will be explained in n. 93.

  2. Baptism on the umbilical cord is more probably valid than on the afterbirths, because the cord is united immediately with the infant, while the afterbirths are united with the infant by means of the cord.4

b) That the water touch the one to be baptized with successive motion, unless several parts of water touch several parts of the body at the same instant, as happens, for example, in Baptism by sprinkling. For the rest, successive motion can occur in two ways, namely both by moving the body to the water, as in immersion, and by moving the water to the body, as in pouring and in sprinkling.

Moreover, a small quantity of water suffices, provided nevertheless that it flows over a sufficient part of the body; hence only one or another little drop, even if it flows, will leave Baptism practically doubtful (St. Alphonsus, VI, 107, q. 6). It also suffices that the baptizer, by the motion of a finger or of a moistened cloth, wash a part of the body (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.). Note, however, that according to the Holy Office, Baptism conferred "by way of anointing on the forehead, with the thumb moistened in baptismal water," had to be repeated.5

  1. Of the one to be baptized; namely, in such a way that the man can morally be said to have been washed. Further, Baptism is certainly valid if the washing is done on the whole body or on the head, whether on the forehead, cheek, or crown; most probably if on another more principal part, as on the shoulder-blades, shoulders, or chest; it is more doubtful if on a less principal part, as on the hand, finger, or foot. The reason why Baptism conferred otherwise than on the whole body or on the head remains doubtful is "because ... in none of the exterior parts does the integrity of life consist as in the head" (St. Thomas, III, q. 68, a. 11, ad 4; St. Alphonsus, VI, 107, qq. 3 and 4). Hence canon 746, §§ 2 and 3: If the infant has put forth the head and danger of death threatens, let him be baptized on the head; nor afterwards, if he comes forth alive, is he to be baptized again under condition. If he has put forth another member, let him be baptized on it under condition if danger threatens; but then, if he is born alive, he is again to be baptized under condition.

  2. Done by the baptizer himself. Therefore it does not suffice that the washing be done by the one to be baptized, or by a third party, or by a natural cause alone. Therefore:

a) Baptism would certainly be invalid: 1. if someone, seeing another washing himself or falling into a river, were to pronounce the form; 2. if someone were to utter the form while a third party poured the water (n. 20).

b) It would be doubtfully invalid if the baptizer himself were to place the one to be baptized under water poured by a third party, provided that the third party is not employed as applying the matter.

c) Baptism would be almost certainly valid if the baptizer himself moved the one to be baptized to water falling from a roof or from the sky, or springing from a fountain (St. Alphonsus, VI, 106).

Corollary I. If Baptism is conferred by immersion, it does not suffice that someone be held motionless in motionless water, because the baptizer cannot be said to wash the one to be baptized. Besides, according to some authors it is also required that the one to be baptized be drawn out of the water, according to that saying of Paul: Do you not know that all we who have been baptized in Christ Jesus have been baptized in His death? For we have been buried together with Him through Baptism into death, so that, as Christ rose from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also may walk in newness of life; for if we have been planted together in the likeness of His death, we shall also be in that of His resurrection.6

Corollary II. They also ask about the throwing of the one to be baptized, for example an infant, into a river. Now Baptism of this kind is doubtfully valid, for example because there is not had, as we suppose, emergence. Moreover, a manner of acting of this kind seems absolutely illicit, because the said throwing of itself tends only to killing. "Nevertheless it is licit to baptize a child soon to die with even icy water, if other water cannot be had, even if it were feared that death would be hastened by this ... because then death would not occur of itself, but accidentally; since such an action of itself does not tend to killing, but to washing" (St. Alphonsus, VI, 100). The same, with the same circumstances supposed, holds concerning poisoned or boiling water from which the infant would be killed.

1 John 3:5.

2 Eph. 5:26; Tit. 3:5; Acts 22:16; Heb. 10:22.

3 The fetus is enveloped in three membranes or afterbirths, which are: 1. the exterior afterbirth, which is called the decidua; 2. the inner afterbirths, namely the chorion and amnion. Cf. Cavellmann-Bergmann, Pastoral-Medizin, p. 242; Nouvelle Revue Theologique 1912, p. 581.

4 Nederlandsche Katholieke Stemmen, 1927, p. 146.

5 14 December 1898 (Collectanea, n. 2028); cf. Holy Office, 8 November 1770; 9 July 1779 (Collectanea, nn. 486, 530).

6 Rom. 6:3-5.

55.

II. The proximate matter required for liceity in solemn Baptism is gathered from canon 758 and the Roman Ritual. The cited canon declares: "Although Baptism can be conferred validly either by pouring, by immersion, or by sprinkling, nevertheless the first or second mode, or one mixed from both, which is more in use, is to be retained, according to the approved ritual books of the diverse Churches." Therefore the third mode, by sprinkling, is no longer to be used. The Roman Ritual defines the mode of baptizing more by these words: "The priest takes baptismal water in a small vessel or pitcher and pours it three times over the head of the infant in the form of a cross ... But where there is a custom of baptizing by immersion, the priest takes the infant and, taking care that he not be harmed, cautiously immerses him and baptizes by a triple immersion."1 The triple pouring or immersion in solemn Baptism obliges under grave obligation (St. Thomas, III, q. 66, a. 8; St. Alphonsus, VI, 107, q. 5); in private Baptism it is recommended insofar as it can be done.

1 Title II, chapter 2, nn. 19, 20. In almost all Churches which use the Latin rite, Baptism is conferred by pouring.