What Baptism is and its necessity

THE first of the sacraments, the door by which men enter into the Church of God, by which they are made her children and the sons of God, is Baptism. The Catechism of the Council of Trent defines Baptism as the sacrament of regeneration by water in the word. This is but expressing in other words what our Lord said to Nicodemus, “‘ Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”¹ The new birth which takes place in Baptism is the new life of grace which is given to the soul by the sacrament, and by this vivifying grace the soul which was dead to God lives to him with a supernatural life.

Baptism, then, is a total washing of the soul from the stains of sin, both original and actual, if any have been committed, and a complete cancelling of all the debt of punishment which may be due to sin. This is brought about by the infusion of sanctifying grace into the soul, together with the habits of the theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity. Moreover, by Baptism a character is imprinted on the soul by which it is known to God and his angels as that of a baptized Christian; and the person baptized becomes a member of the Church, a child of God, and heir to the kingdom of heaven.

¹ John iii 5.

By the positive will of Jesus Christ Baptism is necessary for salvation, as may be gathered from the words quoted above. This truth was defined by the Council of Trent,¹ “ If anyone saith that Baptism is optional, that is, not necessary unto salvation—let him be anathema.” Without Baptism, then, it is impossible to be saved, not merely because Christ commanded all to receive this sacrament, but because it infuses sanctifying grace into the soul, that nuptial garment without which no one can be admitted to the beatific vision. If, however, for one cause or another it is not possible to receive the Baptism of water, its place may be supplied by an act of perfect contrition or of the pure love of God, and by martyrdom. On this account Baptism is said by theologians to be threefold: the Baptism of water, the Baptism of desire, and the Baptism of blood. Perfect conversion to God by contrition for sin or by Se certainly infuses sanctifying grace into the soul and forgive: sin, as Holy Scripture frequently declares, and as the Council of Trent teaches² In this, therefore, its effect is similar to the primary effect of Baptism, and it is rightly called the Baptism of desire. Still, after the promulgation of the New Law the Baptism of desire only produces its effect because explicitly or implicitly it contains a desire and a purpose to receive the Baptism of water, should occasion offer. Although the Baptism of desire reconciles the sinner to God, yet it does not imprint any character on the soul, nor does it necessarily remit all the temporal punishment due to sin. The extent to which it does this will depend on the intensity of the act.

Martyrdom, also, or death patiently endured for the sake of Christ or for some Christian virtue, has the same effect as the Baptism of desire. “‘ Greater love than this,” said our blessed Lord, “no man hath, that a man lay down his life for his friends.’’³ Still martyrdom does not produce its effect simply as an act of love, but in a manner ex opere operato, by a special privilege, as being an imitation of the passion and death of Christ. Thus the Church honours as saints in heaven the Holy Innocents and other children who have been put to death for the sake of Christ. In the case of adults who have committed sin there must at least be attrition for sin in order that martyrdom may produce its effect as a kind of Baptism.

¹ Sess. vii, c. 5, de Bapt.

² Sess. xiv, c. 4.

³ John xv 13.

Baptism is necessary by necessity of means and of precept.¹

¹ On the notion of each necessity, see vol. I, n. 484.

What is baptism? - The word baptismus or baptisma signifies the same as immersion and washing; whence baptism is also called a laver, because it wipes away sins. Baptism is defined: "The sacrament of regeneration through water in the word." Roman Catechism 5; St. Thomas 3 p., q. 66, a. 1; E. M.

How many kinds of baptism are there? - Baptism is threefold. For from the sacrament of baptism, or baptism of water, so called from its proper matter, there is distinguished baptism of spirit and of blood. St. Thomas 3 p., q. 66, a. 11.

What is baptism of spirit? - "Baptism of spirit is perfect conversion to God through contrition, or love of God above all things, with the explicit or implicit desire for true baptism of water, whose place it supplies as regards the remission of guilt, but not as regards imprinting the character, nor as regards removing every debt of punishment: it is called of spirit, because it is done through the impulse of the Holy Spirit, who is called flamen. But that men are saved through baptism of spirit is of faith." L. 96; E. M.

What is baptism of blood; what are its required conditions? - Baptism of blood is the shedding of blood or death endured for faith, or for another Christian virtue. But this baptism is equated with true baptism, because as if ex opere operato, after the manner of baptism, it remits guilt and punishment. As if, because martyrdom does not operate so strictly and properly as the sacraments do, but from a certain privilege by reason of real imitation of the Passion of Christ. Therefore martyrdom profits even infants. The Church honors the Holy Innocents as true martyrs.

For the martyrdom of an adult, that it be such as is necessary for salvation, five things are required: 1. the infliction of death; 2. acceptance of the same from a pious cause; 3. that one not resist the tyrant; 4. that by faith he hold the truth for which he suffers; 5. legitimate disposition for grace. But what such a disposition is, is controverted. The first opinion teaches that true contrition, perfect from love of God above all things, is necessary. The second holds that the will of suffering for Christ suffices, and that there is no need of another penance, even if the man remembers his sins. The third asserts that at least attrition is required, if the man is conscious of sin.

Moreover, contrition can be required for the fruit of martyrdom in two ways: first directly, as a necessary disposition; second indirectly, as a work necessary for avoiding a new sin. - If the one for whom martyrdom is imminent is in mortal sin, contrition is necessary for him for the fruit of martyrdom indirectly, or at least attrition which is thought to be contrition, as a work necessary for avoiding a new sin which would impede its fruit. The reason is that if ever the precept of contrition obliges, it does so especially in danger of death. - Yet contrition is not necessary in itself and directly as a disposition for the fruit of martyrdom, but attrition is required and suffices. The first reason is that the Fathers equate the martyrdom of adults with baptism in its force of destroying sin. Here it must be noted that the very endurance of death according to itself is compared with baptism, and no lesser force in washing away sins is attributed to it than to baptism; nor is this force attributed to internal contrition, but to the external work. Therefore, just as baptism does not require contrition in order to confer grace, so neither does martyrdom. The second reason is that it is certain that for remission of guilt some penance is always required in adults from Trent sess. 14, c. 1.

• Theol. Wirceb. 57 ff.; Suarez d. 29, s. 1, 2; L. 95, 97; St. Thomas Quodl. 6, a. 4; 2.2, q. 124; 3 p., q. 66, a. 12 ad 2.

Note: "Concerning those who die from charity in service of the plague-stricken, the Roman Martyrology, Feb. 28, says: 'Whom religious faith has been accustomed to venerate as martyrs.'" L. 100.

What are the effects of baptism? - Baptism is spiritual regeneration. Hence through the infusion of sanctifying grace: 1. it destroys every guilt. 2. It remits every punishment due to sins. Wherefore it is grave to impose satisfactions on the baptized. 3. It imprints a character; whence it cannot be repeated. 4. It makes one of the body of the Church. It is clear as regards the first from C. Maiores 3, de Bapt. etc.; Trent sess. 5, decree on original sin; sess. 14, c. 2; as regards the second from Trent sess. 5, the cited decree, sess. 6, c. 14, and from Florence in the Decree for the Armenians; as regards the third from Florence, ibid., and from Trent sess. 7, c. 9 de R.; as regards the fourth from Trent sess. 14, c. 2, and from Florence, Decree for the Armenians. - Therefore baptism is as it were the gate of the Church and of the kingdom of heaven. Hence if someone has not been validly baptized, he cannot validly receive any other sacrament. C. 1, 3, de Presb. non bapt.; Florence, Decree for the Armenians; St. Thomas Suppl. q. 35, a. 3. - Trent sess. 7, c. 1, 6-11, 13, 14; Roman Catechism 42 ff.; St. Thomas 3 p., q. 69; q. 68, a. 5; E. M.

Is baptism necessary? - Baptism of water in reality or in desire, from divine institution, is altogether necessary for salvation, by necessity of means. This is clear from the words of Christ, John 3:5: Unless someone has been reborn of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. And from Trent sess. 6, c. 4; sess. 7, c. 5: If anyone shall say that baptism is free, that is, not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema. - Decree of the Holy Office Lamentabili, July 3, 1907, prop. 42, 43; Roman Catechism 21, 31; St. Thomas 3 p., q. 68, a. 1, 2; Commentary on Necessity of Means.

234. • The word Baptismus or Baptisma signifies the same as immersion and washing; whence Baptism is also called a laver, because it wipes away sins.

Baptism is defined: The Sacrament of regeneration through water in the word. Thus the Roman Catechism; or: It is the first Sacrament of the new law, and most necessary for the spiritual regeneration of man, instituted by Christ.

From Baptism of water, which is called that of the stream, Baptism of the Spirit and of blood are distinguished, by which Baptism properly so called can be supplied, if this latter is impossible ¹. The former is an ardent desire of receiving Baptism of water, with full conversion to God, namely with contrition or perfect charity ². The latter is the shedding of blood, or death endured for the Faith, or for another Christian virtue. But Baptism of water alone is properly called Baptism in reality. Baptism of the Spirit and of blood are called Baptisms in vow.

¹ It is not at all necessary that Baptism of water be impossible. For even before Baptism of water, which otherwise is possible but is delayed, Baptism of the Spirit can have place.

² The desire here is to be understood not as explicit, which would presuppose some notion of real Baptism, but as implicit; and it signifies not so much a longing in the proper sense of the name, as a prompt will of doing all those things which are commanded by God. Since this prompt will is necessarily contained in an act of perfect contrition or charity, therefore this Baptism of the Spirit in reality consists in conversion to God through contrition or charity, which will contain the vow or purpose, either implicit or explicit, of receiving Baptism of water, according as the notion of this Baptism is, or is not, present to the mind of him who is thus converted to God.

235. • The chief effects of Baptism are numbered as three, namely:

1. the remission of original sin and of actual sins, if there are any, through the infusion of sanctifying grace; 2. the total remission of eternal and temporal punishment due to sins; 3. the impression of the character, by which the baptized person is marked as a son of God and coheir of Christ, and is rendered incapable of receiving Baptism again. As to the first, it is clear from Trent, sess. 5, in the Decree on original sin; as to the second, from Trent, ibid., and from the Council of Florence in the Decree for the Armenians; as to the third, from the Council of Florence, ibid., and from Trent, sess. 7, on Baptism.

Baptism, therefore, is as it were the gate of the Church and of the kingdom of heaven. Hence if anyone has not been validly baptized, he can validly receive no other Sacrament.

Baptism of water, in reality or in vow ³, by divine institution is altogether necessary for salvation by necessity of means. This is clear from the words of Christ, John 3.5: Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. And from Trent, sess. 7, can. 5, on Baptism: If anyone shall say that Baptism is free, that is, not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema.

³ According to what was said in the preceding note, understand: in vow, either explicit or implicit.

“To your inquiry We respond thus: the priest whom you signified to have ended his last day without the water of Baptism, because he persevered in the faith of Holy Mother Church and in the confession of the name of Christ, We unhesitatingly assert to have been freed from original sin and to have attained the joy of the heavenly fatherland.” Innocent III, chapter Apostolicam, 2, De Presbytero non baptizato.

— The sacrament of baptism is the sacrament of regeneration, through water in the word (Roman Catechism).

This regeneration comprehends the impression of character, by which one becomes a member of the Church and, remotely or proximately, fit for the other sacraments, especially for participating in the sacrifice of the New Law; remission, by way of ablution, of original guilt and of personal sins, made by the infusion of sanctifying grace; condonation of every debt of punishment; adoptive filiation of God; and the special right of the help of actual graces for the profession of Christian life. Regeneration has its beginning from character, but is perfected by the infusion of sanctifying grace.

Water, in the definition, is placed for ablution by immersion; word, for the form which contains the invocation of the Most Holy Trinity over the one to be baptized.

Baptism, besides its essential unity, also has numerical unity in the same supposit, which we profess in the very Apostles' Creed when we say: I believe one baptism.

As to the remission of faults and punishments, observe that not even in baptism is any fault remitted without attrition. But, that attrition being placed as a condition, every fault and every punishment, by force of baptism, is condoned ex opere operato.

In baptism the reality and sacrament, or baptismal character, according to Cardinal Billot (De baptismo, Thesis XXIII), has the account of consecration to the worship of the Most Holy Trinity, according to the rite of the Christian religion, and of passive potency, by which man is made capable of receiving those things which belong to Christian worship. It is the character of the Christian man. But according to R. P. de la Taille (Mysterium Fidei, p. 581 note), it is "the interior consecration by which man is aggregated to the priesthood of Christ in order to offering, through the ministry of priests, the victim of redemption and to participating by communion."

— Analogically, insofar as they in some way supply for the sacrament, a twofold other baptism is distinguished: of the Spirit, or of the Holy Spirit, and of blood.

1. Baptism of the Spirit is an act of perfect charity or contrition, insofar as it contains at least a tacit desire for the sacrament. Therefore it can be had in adults alone. It imprints no character; it does not necessarily take away every venial fault; and, that it take away every debt of temporal punishment, an act is required whose intensity is equivalent to the punishments otherwise to be sustained. But it takes away every mortal fault together with the debt of eternal punishment, according to this: "He who loves me will be loved by my Father" (Gospel of St. John, 14:21).

2. Baptism of blood is martyrdom itself of a non-baptized person. For from a privilege which the Fathers most clearly teach and read as promised in St. Matthew, 10:32 and 39, "He who shall confess me before men, I also will confess him before my Father... He who has lost his life on account of me will find it," every debt of fault and punishment is blotted out by true martyrdom. The chief reason of the privilege seems to be perfect imitation of the death of Christ.

Martyrdom is defined as the suffering of death for the faith or for Christian virtue. The suffering of death is as it were the material element, concerning which the more common opinion holds that it suffices that a lethal wound has been received, or that a cause has been placed which, without miracle, had to bring on death. Thus Benedict XIV, De Beatif., 3, 12 and following, perhaps against St. Thomas, 2, 2, q. 124, art. 4. - The formal element is that one suffer for the faith or for Christian virtue: hence formal heretics cannot be martyrs; but it suffices that death be inflicted in hatred of Christian virtue. Indeed there are those who think it enough that someone, for example while plague rages, as he ministers to the sick from charity, contracts the plague and thus falls for Christian virtue. Cf. St. Alphonsus, l. 6, n. 100.

He dies a martyr who is killed while sleeping, if before, conscious of threats, he persevered in faith or virtue. Nor is an option between life and apostasy necessary, provided the dying person accepts the killing. Probably they are martyrs who, earning stipends for the cause of the Pontiff or of the Church, have been killed while fighting. Indeed probably soldiers can be martyrs who, falling in a just war, refer their devotion to their fatherland to God. For piety toward the fatherland and legal justice are Christian virtues, and "any human good whatever can be a cause of martyrdom, according as it is referred to God" (St. Thomas, 2, 2, q. 124, art. 5 ad 3). But since it is unknown with what soul soldiers died, the Church does not honor them as martyrs.

Martyrdom cannot be denied without rashness to infants who are killed in hatred of Christ; but in an adult there is required: a) consent to death, or acceptance of martyrdom at least habitually; b) if he had been outside the state of grace because of actual sin, a movement of penance. Must this be of contrition, or does attrition suffice? And we judge the effort made to elicit contrition to suffice. Moreover, that the grace of perfect charity or contrition should be lacking in him who gives to Christ the greatest sign of love seems to be a chimerical hypothesis.

Not a few demand, for the true account of martyrdom, that the martyr not resist, so that thus he may perfectly imitate Christ, who was killed as a lamb. Yet more probably force which martyrs have opposed to the impious does not stand in the way of martyrdom, if they defended the cause of Christ more than themselves: for instance, if a missionary wished to protect a Christian people.

That a martyr be increased with the honors of the blessed, miracles properly so called are not required; nevertheless, certain signs are demanded of themselves, so that the martyrdom itself may be certain. Among signs this one stands out: if the blood poured out has been the seed of Christians.

— Comparison of the Three Baptisms. 1. Baptism of water operates ex opere operato; of the Spirit, ex opere operantis; of blood, as it were ex opere operato, and in adults, at the same time ex opere operantis.

2. Baptism of blood excels the others: it equally blots out faults and punishments; it configures more perfectly to the death of Christ (Philippians 3:10). For in martyrdom conformity is had by imitation, in baptism of the Spirit by affection, and in baptism of water by figural representation; it manifests a more splendid efficacy of the power of the Holy Spirit, who operates hiddenly in the sacrament, moves the heart in baptism of the Spirit, and in baptism of blood exhibits the greatest proof of love; finally, it confers the aureole, or the reward, the accidental joy on account of an excellent victory reported over the enemy in this life (St. Thomas, supplement to 3 part, q. 96, art. 1, c.).

Yet baptism of water alone imprints character, renders the baptized person capable of the other sacraments, and confers sacramental graces. Wherefore neither other baptism dispenses from the obligation of receiving, when occasion is given, the sacrament of baptism; just as it does not dispense the baptized from use of the sacrament of penance for mortal sins not yet confessed and committed after baptism of water.

— Remote Matter. 1. Valid matter is every water, in a liquid state, which, according to the common estimation of men, is held as natural⁽¹⁾ and usual. Such is water of a spring, of a well, of rain; water dissolved from snow, hail, ice; distilled water or water chemically made. Nor does an accidental change of color, taste, or odor stand in the way, which is had in sea water or in sulphurous water. It does not harm the value if it has been mixed with another body so moderately that it retains the common use and name of water, for instance lye with a little soap, a broth thinly cooked with meat. For in every liquid of this kind one can truly be reborn from water, which from the Gospel of St. John, 3:5, is necessary.

Inept matter for baptism is saliva, sweat, tears, urine, water expressed from the juice of roses, herbs, plants; beer; water which from mixture is no longer suitable for ablution, nor is named water: for instance mud, broth, wine mixed with water. For in the moral estimation of men, such water is not judged natural and usual.

Doubtful matter is water dissolved from salt, flowing from a vine or trees, physically drawn from wine, flowers, or plants,⁽²⁾ ice itself and snow not dissolved (St. Alphonsus, l. 6, n. 104); very thin broth and beer, lye, indeed rosewater.

2. Licit remote matter is, in private or non-solemn baptism, any natural and pure water, although use of baptismal water is especially to be advised to a priest; in solemn baptism, water blessed for this is of itself to be used.

Baptismal water is to be prepared twice in the year, on Holy Saturday and on the vigil of Pentecost, with oils recently consecrated, if these could be had. Recently, that is, on Thursday, in the Supper of the Lord, which preceded the preparation. If water in the baptistery has diminished so that it does not seem likely to suffice, "other non-blessed water is to be mixed in, even repeatedly, yet in a lesser quantity" (c. 767, §2) than that which remains pure or already once or twice mixed. If the water has entirely failed, the pastor should pour fresh water into the well-cleaned font and bless it with the special rite prescribed in the liturgical books. And to missionaries there is also conceded the faculty of using the shorter formula which has its name from Paul III and is found in the Appendix of the Ritual, at the beginning. Where true danger of disease is present, especially where an infant is to be baptized in the womb, the Holy Office, August 21, 1901 (Coll. P. F., n. 2121), permitted use of water mixed with mercury bichloride corrosive, or sublime corrosif. The proposed proportion was 1/1000.

Use of doubtful matter is permitted only in necessity and under condition. To use very impure water, when other can be had, is a grave sin of irreverence. He who uses natural water instead of baptismal in solemn baptism from negligence seems to sin gravely.

⁽¹⁾ In c. 737, §1, by the words "natural water" is understood that which is commonly held as true and is usual. It matters little whether it has been made by human art or by nature.

⁽²⁾ Since chemically made water is certain matter, we do not see what can be objected against water whose elements have been found chemically in plants rather than immediately in hydrogen and oxygen.

— The proximate matter of baptism is ablution which, as St. Thomas notes, 3 p., q. 66, art. 7 ad 2, preserves some account of immersion, since always in ablution at least some part of the body is placed under water. Each account seems to be required. Or, better, the proximate matter should be called ablution by way of immersion. For in the Scriptures themselves baptism is said to us to be a "washing of water" (Ephesians 5:26) and "burial together" with Christ: "For we were buried together with him by baptism into death" (Romans 6:3). In baptism we die with Christ, so that with him we may rise again. And the very word baptizo, baptizein, means to dip, to immerse.

Therefore for the value of baptism there is need that water in such quantity physically touch the body, at least as to a principal part, that someone morally can be said to be washed.

This can be had in either way, whether the body is moved toward the water, as in immersion, or the water is moved to the body by infusion or by sprinkling. Moreover water can be moved in such a way that either several parts of water, for example of water springing forth, simultaneously touch several parts of the body, or a smaller quantity of water, yet more than one drop, as it seems, successively touches several parts of the body. This same is obtained in a twofold way: either water flows by running down, or by hand or even by a well-wetted finger it successively reaches the parts of the body. Observe that movement of the hand or finger is required, since simple application of a wetted hand is not judged to be ablution.

Therefore baptism conferred over an infant's clothing or over the mother's womb is null: in neither way is the infant himself physically touched. Baptism conferred over the afterbirth, or the deciduous membrane by which the body is contained in the mother's womb, is very doubtful, since it is not proved to be a true part of the infant. There seems to be lesser reason for doubting concerning baptism by which only the hair has been wetted. Yet the matter is controverted. Wherefore, where the hair is thick, let it be parted by hand, or, what is better, let baptism be conferred on the forehead. And because it sometimes happens that the whole body of a newborn infant is anointed with oil, he will act more cautiously who, not content with pouring, at the same time washes the forehead by hand.

Baptism in which only a less principal part, such as finger, hand, foot, is washed is also doubtful. And unless the head has been washed, sufficient doubt remains so that baptism ought to be repeated (St. Thomas, 3 p., q. 68, art. 11 ad 4). Wherefore this manner of acting, by which, the membrane ruptured, an infant in the womb is washed by means of a small tube, is less certain than Ballerini proclaims it to be, De baptismo et de quinto praecepto. Add that there is some doubt whether an infant, before he is separated from the mother or brought forth, is capable of baptism.

Baptism is doubtful and to be repeated under condition if only one or another drop has been used, for example, if a multitude has been sprinkled as though with holy water. And the Holy Office, December 14, 1898, ordered that baptism conferred by way of anointing on the forehead with the thumb wetted in baptismal water be repeated under condition.

In baptism by immersion, a few with Soto and Toledo require that the baptized person emerge from the water. This seems false, because for the body to be washed there is no need that the body emerge, and baptizein is merely to dip. Therefore the baptism of an infant whom, while pronouncing the words, you cast into a river seems to be valid. But unless the death of the infant is already imminent, the effect of death is badly permitted, so that the guilt of a certain homicide is contracted. In the case of extreme necessity, where the infant otherwise would die without baptism, some indeed, with St. Alphonsus, l. 6, n. 106, condemn the action as homicide, but others probably say that the effect of baptism at least probable is immediate and so good that, on account of that proportionate reason, the other effect of accelerated death can be permitted. Cf. Lehmkuhl, II, 86, 5, with Palmieri approving, t. IV, n. 729. But all permit that in extreme necessity an infant be washed with cold water.

— By canon 758 four modes of washing are held as valid: infusion, which now is almost the only one used by Western Catholics; immersion; sprinkling; the mixed mode of infusion and immersion, when the one to be baptized is immersed and, while he is in the pool, is at the same time poured over with water by the baptizer. The Code prescribes, however, that "the first or second mode, or the mixed mode from both, which is more in use, be retained, according to the approved ritual books of the various Churches." In reality baptism by sprinkling is plainly less secure. Through twelve centuries, immersion was the ordinary mode, which still is used for infants at Milan. St. Thomas held it as safer, 3 p., q. 66, art. 7, c.

— The prescribed form of baptism in the Latin Church is this: "I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." From this, this form of the Greeks does not differ substantially: "The servant of Christ is baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

That we may judge concerning the essential words, these five things are to be observed, which are signified in the utterance of the form: 1. the person baptizing, at least implicitly, which in the form of the Greeks is not neglected: the words "the servant of Christ is baptized," uttered assertively, are equivalent to "is baptized by me"; 2. the act of baptizing, so that the form be connected with the matter and, by indicating the end of the ablution, determine the same; 3. the person who is baptized: for the form no less than the ablution must affect a certain person; 4. the unity of the divine nature, by the word in the name; 5. the trinity of Persons, and that explicitly and distinctly, by common words.

At least practically, these things are to be demanded. Concerning the necessity of each one, theoretically, one can doubt greatly. Thus in the year 1633, September 8, the Holy Office declared this form of the schismatic Armenians true and legitimate: "May my hand now baptize in the name of the Father; may my hand now baptize in the name of the Son; may my hand now baptize in the name of the Holy Spirit" (Coll. P. F., I, n. 74).

— Therefore he baptizes validly, although he sins venially, who for I baptize says: I wash, I dip, etc.; for the action is well indicated by these words. It is not entirely the same thing to indicate the action and to indicate the effect of the action, so that the English formula "I christen thee" can give some occasion for doubting.⁽¹⁾ - He baptizes validly who for you designates the subject by the common name servant of Christ, in the manner of the Greeks, or by the proper name "Peter"; or who for the sake of honor says, "I baptize Your Lordship"; or who omits I, or adds Amen. - The Sacred Congregation of Propaganda Fide and the Holy Office declared valid the formula "with the name" used without bad intention. A very brief interruption, "I baptize you (this water is cold) in the name," etc., does not stand in the way of value; nor do these additions stand in the way: "in the name of the Father who created you, of the Son who redeemed you," etc. - If, with the order changed, you say, "In the name of the Father... I baptize you," the baptism is valid.

⁽¹⁾ Lehmkuhl, II, 88, while he observes this, nevertheless adds that this form is much more probably valid. Sabetti-Barrett, Comp., n. 657, incline rather toward the negative side. Moreover another certain form is available to English speakers: to baptise.

— These forms are not valid: "I baptize in the name," etc., when the designation of the person to be baptized is entirely omitted; - "I baptize you in the names..." since the essence or divine nature is thus signified as multiple; - "I baptize you in the name of God or of the Most Holy Trinity," or "in the name of one and triune God," or "in the name of the three Persons," or "of the Father and of the Son," with the person of the Holy Spirit omitted. The reason is because the three divine Persons are not distinctly expressed; - "I baptize you in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit"; or "with the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit"; or "in the name of the Father through the Son, in the Holy Spirit," because either all or certainly clear signification of unity of essence is lacking; - "in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ," at least today, because of the omitted invocation of the Most Holy Trinity. How the texts which seem to sound as if baptism was conferred by the Apostles in the name of Christ, and the response of Nicholas I to the Bulgarians which seems to hold this formula as valid, are to be explained: this must be borrowed from the dogmatic theologians; - if you should say of the Mother, of me, because the sense varies; - if a cough, not plainly momentary, separates the syllables of one word, or, too protracted, for instance through half a quarter of an hour, takes away the coherence of the words; - if you add the name of the Blessed Virgin Mary as a part of the form: therefore the value then will depend upon the intention of the agent.⁽²⁾

— The forms are doubtful if, with the particle in removed, you say only "name," or substitute "in the virtue, in the majesty of the Father," etc. For it is not plainly certain whether in the name signifies "by the authority of the Father," etc., in which case the indicated changes would be only accidental; or "with the Father invoked." - There has been doubt concerning the formula: "I baptize you in the name of the Father, in the name of the Son, in the name of the Holy Spirit," or "I baptize you in the name of the Father; I baptize you in the name of the Son; I baptize you in the name of the Holy Spirit," because the unity of essence might not be sufficiently expressed. But the Holy Office, January 11, 1882, declared that these are valid. Also it does not seem that one should doubt concerning the value of the form: "In the name of God the Father and God the Son and God the Holy Spirit," unless you wished to express three gods. - The omitted conjunction and before the word "Holy Spirit" gives place to lighter or graver doubt, according as, for example, while you pronounce the words, you separated the Son from the Holy Spirit sufficiently or not. On the contrary, if it is omitted before the word Son, since Father and Son of themselves bring in distinction, it introduces not even doubt; - "I baptize you in the name of the Begetter, the Begotten, and the Spirated"; or "in the name of the Almighty, the Wise, and the Good"; or "in the name of the Unbegotten, the Begotten, and the Good"; because the Trinity of Persons is not explained by words by which it ought and can be apprehended by all the faithful.

⁽²⁾ Although the form must be sensible, nevertheless interior intention can effect that this or that be said as a part of the form, just as interior intention effects that these droplets adhering to the chalice be consecrated or not. Wherefore it is not required that it appear what is said as the form or what is added as an invocation.

— The same person must wash and pronounce the form. Wherefore baptism seems to be invalid if the one to be baptized, while another says the form, slips into the water,⁽³⁾ or is pushed forward by someone other than the baptizer, or places himself under water springing from a fountain or falling in drops. But it is valid if the minister himself places the one to be baptized under water thus naturally falling.

What if the water falls not naturally but by the work of another? Ballerini thinks it does not matter for what cause the water flows. But others object that then from two persons one washer is constituted, so that baptism is doubtful (Lehmkuhl, II, 86, 4).

⁽³⁾ It is confirmed by a response of the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments, November 17, 1916 (A. A. S., VIII, 478). Yet in a case of necessity the thing will be able to be attempted under condition, because of the moral unity of persons, by which the one to be baptized seems to act at the minister's command.

— When a triple pouring of water is made, the form is more rightly uttered in such a way that it is not finished before the third ablution, because the form with any first ablution constitutes baptism. But whether you have pronounced the form immediately before or immediately after the ablution, this does not stand in the way of value.

— The invocation of the Most Holy Trinity is to be made upon the one to be baptized, not upon the baptizer, who will have thought in this way to call upon the help of the Most Holy Trinity for baptizing.

— Necessity of Baptism. "Baptism, the gate and foundation of the sacraments, necessary for all unto salvation in reality or at least in desire," is such: this c. 737 pronounces concerning the sacrament of baptism.

— I. The sacrament of baptism is the sacrament of regeneration through water in the word. It imprints character, remits, by way of ablution, original guilt and, with the condition of attrition placed, personal sins before baptism, indeed, probably those committed in baptism itself; condones every debt of punishment; makes an adoptive son of God; confers the right of special help for the profession of Christian life.

The sacrament is in some way supplied by: baptism of the Spirit, or the act of perfect contrition or charity, insofar as it contains at least tacit desire for the sacrament; through that act at least mortal fault with the debt of punishment is taken away; and baptism of blood, or death suffered for the faith or Christian virtue. Killing in hatred of Christ completes the martyrdom of infants, while in adults acceptance of martyrdom is necessary, and, if they have been stained by personal mortal fault, effort toward contrition. By martyrdom every debt of punishment is taken away, and the aureole is conferred. Yet character is imprinted by the sacrament alone.

II. The remote matter of the sacrament is natural water, or that which is commonly held as true and usual. Moderate admixture of another thing does not harm the value, provided the name and common use of water are preserved. And in private baptism all pure water is licit; in solemn baptism, water blessed for this is to be used, and indeed, as it seems, under grave fault. Baptismal water is to be prepared twice in the year with oils consecrated in that year, if these could be had. Deficiency of water is provided for in various ways. The shorter formula of blessing, that of Paul III, is permitted to missionaries.

The proximate matter is ablution, which can be done by immersion, simple or mixed with infusion, by infusion, and by sprinkling. That baptism be certain, there is need that on the head the man can morally be said to be washed. The mode in use must be observed. Sprinkling today has become obsolete.

III. The prescribed form in the Latin Church is: "I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Therefore there must be signified: the baptizer, the baptized, the act of baptizing, for it would not suffice to indicate the effect, the unity of the divine nature, "in the name," the Trinity of persons explicitly and distinctly, by common names, so that baptism conferred in the name of Christ is to be repeated. The same person must wash and pronounce the form. It does not stand in the way of value whether the form is pronounced immediately before or immediately after the ablution. The addition of the name of some saint will corrupt this form or not according to the intention by which the name is pronounced as part of the form or otherwise. The Trinity is to be invoked upon the baptized person, not upon the baptizer.

94. 1. Diverse names. The name baptism is taken from the Greek word βαπτισμός or βάπτισμα, which signifies the same as immersion or washing.¹ In Sacred Scripture the word baptism is not rarely taken in diverse senses, for example, for "to take a bath,"² and for legal purifications,³ in which sense "baptisms of cups and pitchers" are narrated as having been performed by the Pharisees.⁴ Among the Greeks baptism is often called φωτισμός, that is, illumination. Baptism is also often called the sacrament of regeneration or the sacrament of faith. There are still several other denominations of baptism which there is no leisure to enumerate here.⁵

¹ The German word taufen also signifies untertauchen, "to submerge," or to immerse; cf. Grimm, Deutsches Wörterbuch.

² Judith 12:7.

³ Heb. 9:10.

⁴ Mark 7:3 sq.

⁵ See Gihr, Die hl. Sakr. I, § 28, and Cat. Rom. P. 2, c. 2, q. 3.

95. 2. Definition. Among the diverse definitions which are given concerning the sacrament of baptism, we adduce only the definitions offered by St. Thomas and by the Roman Catechism. St. Thomas offers the definition given by Peter Lombard, saying: "Baptism is an exterior washing of the body performed under the prescribed form of words."⁶ Hugh of St. Victor thought that the essence of baptism consists in the sanctified water itself. The Angelic Doctor does not approve this opinion, because the water itself is not the principal cause in baptism, but the action of washing joined with the words of the sacramental form; and this is expressed excellently by the definition customarily attributed to St. Augustine: "Baptism is an immersion in water sanctified by the word of life."⁷ The Roman Catechism, however, defines baptism as "the sacrament of regeneration through water in the word."⁸ For by nature we are born from Adam children of wrath, but by baptism we are reborn in Christ as children of mercy.

Baptism is a true sacrament of the New Law. Thus teach all the Holy Fathers, and the Council of Florence defines: "Holy baptism holds the first place among all the sacraments, for it is the gate of spiritual life; for through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church. And since through the first man death entered into all, unless we are reborn of water and the Spirit, we cannot, as the Truth says, enter into the kingdom of heaven."⁹

⁶ S. theol. 3, q. 66, a. 1.

⁷ Cf. IV Sent., dist. 3, q. 1, a. 1, sol. 1.

⁸ Part 2, c. 2, q. 4.

⁹ Denz., n. 696.

96. 3. The institution of baptism was certainly accomplished by Christ. A few non-Catholics teach the contrary, among whom are Harnack¹⁰ and Drews.¹¹

If Christ instituted all the sacraments, as was proved above, a fortiori this holds for baptism, which is the gate of all the sacraments. Theologians dispute greatly, however, when Christ instituted this sacrament. There are four opinions:

1. St. Thomas, almost all Thomists, several others, and the Roman Catechism teach that the sacrament of baptism was instituted when Christ was baptized in the Jordan: "It is perceived that this sacrament [of baptism] was then instituted by the Lord, when He Himself, baptized by John, gave to water the power of sanctifying."¹²

2. Others, among whom is Estius, think that baptism was instituted when Christ said to Nicodemus: "Unless a man be reborn of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."¹³ This opinion is not very probable, since it does not seem so fitting that Christ should have instituted so necessary a sacrament in a private conversation held at night.

3. Others teach that Christ instituted baptism before the Passion, namely, before He first sent the disciples to baptize. Thus teach Scotus, Suarez, Christian Pesch,¹⁴ and others.

4. Others teach that baptism was instituted after the Resurrection, when Christ said to the disciples: "Going therefore, teach all nations, baptizing, etc."¹⁵ Thus teach Alexander of Hales,¹⁶ Melchior Cano,¹⁷ and Schanz¹⁸ and Gihr¹⁹ also seem to think thus. This opinion likewise is not very probable; for then at the Last Supper Christ would have given the Eucharist and conferred the sacrament of order upon Apostles not yet baptized, which seems very unfitting. Moreover, it is read in the Gospel²⁰ that Christ and His disciples baptized. Now, it is not likely that such baptisms were mere ceremonies or were not much more excellent than the baptism of John. Hence it is sufficiently established that the sacrament of baptism was instituted before the Passion of Christ, but the time at which it was instituted is not so established. The first opinion seems better, both because of the great authority of St. Thomas and the Roman Catechism, and because it is most fitting that Christ instituted baptism at that time when in the Jordan He approved by His example the exterior rite of this sacrament and when, by the appearance of the whole Trinity ("This is My Son" ... "the dove"), the form of baptism was indicated not obscurely.

While Christ was still living, the Apostles were already baptizing;²¹ nevertheless, baptism before the Passion and Resurrection of the Savior was not under strict precept. For the New Law began to oblige only when Christ said in the Passion, "It is consummated," and when, as a sign of the Old Law having been abolished, the veil of the temple was torn. But the words of Christ to Nicodemus, "Unless a man be reborn of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God," are to be understood in the same manner as the words of the same Savior: "Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you shall not have life in you"; namely, the obligation both of baptism and of the Eucharist would be most strict after the redemption had been completed. For no one teaches that the Eucharist was instituted or commanded from the time these words were uttered. Therefore, the obligation of receiving baptism began when Christ said to the Apostles after the Resurrection: "Going therefore, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."²²

¹⁰ Dogmengesch. I, 68, note 3: "That Jesus instituted baptism cannot be demonstrated."

¹¹ Realencyklop. f. prot. Theol., s.v. "Taufe" (p. 427).

¹² Cat. Rom. P. 2, c. 2, 16; cf. S. theol. 3, q. 66, a. 2.

¹³ John 3:5.

¹⁴ Prael. dogm. VI, n. 354.

¹⁵ Matt. 28:19.

¹⁶ In IV Sent., q. 12, membr. 3, a. 1.

¹⁷ De loc. theol., l. 8, c. 5.

¹⁸ Die Lehre v. d. hl. Sakr. I, § 15.

¹⁹ Die hl. Sakr. I, § 29. The author does not clearly express his opinion.

²⁰ John 3:22-26. Cf., however, c. 4, v. 2, where Christ is said not to have baptized Himself, but through His disciples.

²¹ Cf. John 3:22 sqq.

²² Matt. 28:19. Cf. St. Thomas, S. theol. 3, q. 66, a. 2, and Billuart, De bapt., diss. 1, a. 2, § 2.

97. 4. Divisions.

a) Baptism is solemn and non-solemn or private, according as it is administered with all the rites and ceremonies which are prescribed in the ritual books, or without them.²³ Private baptism is customarily employed a) in danger of death, for example, if a midwife baptizes a dying infant (baptism of necessity, Nottaufe, emergency baptism); b) if baptism is repeated under condition, for example, in some regions if a newly converted person doubtfully baptized is received into the bosom of the Church.

b) According to the diverse mode of producing grace, baptism is customarily distinguished as baptism of water, of desire (flaminis), and of blood.

Baptism of water is the sacrament itself instituted by Christ.

Baptism of desire (flaminis) is a perfect act of charity including at least virtually and implicitly the desire for baptism of water. It is called flaminis because the Holy Spirit, who is sometimes called the flamen, moves the heart of man to love God above all things and to grieve concerning sins.

Baptism of blood is martyrdom endured in any manner for Christ before baptism of water. The innocent infants slaughtered by Herod received such a baptism of blood.

This threefold distinction was already known to the Holy Fathers.²⁴ But if the same Fathers in other places do not speak so clearly, or seem to teach the contrary, a correct interpretation must be employed.²⁵ An example of baptism of desire (flaminis) is found in the centurion Cornelius and others who had already received the Holy Spirit before baptism of water.²⁶

²³ Code of Canon Law, c. 737, § 2.

²⁴ St. Ambrose, In Ps. 118, sermon 3 (Migne, Patr. lat. 15, 1292); St. Augustine, De bapt., l. 4, c. 21 (Migne, ibid. 43, 172); St. Jerome, Super Eph. 4 (Migne, ibid. 26, 523); St. Gregory Nazianzen, Orat. 39 in sancta lumina (Migne, Patr. graec. 36, 355).

²⁵ Cf. Drouven, De re sacr., l. 2, q. 6, c. 4, app. I.

²⁶ Cf. Acts 10:44. The efficacy of these three baptisms will be discussed below, n. 106 sqq.

114. Principle. Baptism is necessary by a necessity of means for eternal salvation; nevertheless, baptism of water, as regards its principal effect, namely, sanctifying grace, can be supplied a) through baptism of blood in adults and infants; b) through baptism of desire (flaminis) in adults alone.

The stated principle has three parts: 1. baptism is necessary by a necessity of means; 2. the principal effect of baptism of water, namely, sanctifying grace, can be obtained by adults through baptism both of desire and of blood; 3. by infants, or the perpetually insane, the same effect cannot be obtained except through baptism of blood.

Concerning the first and second parts no controversy exists among Catholic theologians. Concerning the third part, however, several theologians, for example, Durandus, Biel, Gerson, Toletus, Cajetan, Klee, Laurent, Schell, and others, think otherwise, judging that infants can be saved even without baptism of water or of blood. Cajetan¹⁰² hesitantly and "subject to correction" opines that such infants can be saved through baptism received not in reality but in the desire of their parents. Others think, according to that saying of St. John, "He enlightens every man coming into this world,"¹⁰³ that these infants before death are miraculously enlightened by God and are saved if they consent to such illumination, but are damned if they do not. The reason why these theologians devised a substitute for baptism of water for infants is the very great difficulty of how otherwise God supplies sufficient grace for eternal salvation to children, and how otherwise it can truly be said: "God wills all men to be saved."

Nevertheless, Sacred Scripture, the Holy Fathers, and the definitions of the Church constantly teach the absolute necessity of baptism. Thus Christ says to Nicodemus: "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless a man is reborn of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God,"¹⁰⁴ upon which text St. Ambrose notes: "Certainly He excepts no one; not an infant, not one overtaken by some necessity; ... no one ascends into the kingdom of heaven except through the sacrament of baptism."¹⁰⁵ St. Augustine says: "Do not believe, or say, or teach that infants overtaken by death before they are baptized can attain the forgiveness of original sins, if you wish to be a Catholic."¹⁰⁶ St. Thomas teaches: "These [children] cannot be assisted by another remedy except through the sacrament of baptism."¹⁰⁷ The Council of Trent, however, defines: "If anyone says that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema."¹⁰⁸

¹⁰² Comm. in 3, q. 68, aa. 1 and 2.

¹⁰³ John 1:9.

¹⁰⁴ John 3:5.

¹⁰⁵ De Abraham, l. 2, c. 11 (Migne, Patr. lat. 14, 521). The words which immediately follow in some editions of the works of St. Ambrose seem to be interpolated. These are the words: "Let them nevertheless have that hidden immunity from punishments; I do not know whether they have the honor of the kingdom."

¹⁰⁶ De anima, l. 3, c. 9 (Migne, Patr. lat. 44, 516).

¹⁰⁷ S. theol. 3, q. 68, a. 3.

¹⁰⁸ Sess. 7, can. 5 on baptism (Denz., n. 861).

115. As regards the principal effect, that is, sanctifying grace, in a case of necessity baptism of water can be supplied, and indeed:

1. Through baptism of desire (flaminis), which is an act of perfect charity with the desire for baptism, as was said above, n. 97. It is evident of itself that infants before the use of reason cannot, without a miracle, receive this baptism of desire, because they cannot elicit any act of perfect charity. Baptism of desire causes sanctifying grace insofar as it is joined with the desire to receive baptism of water as soon as possible.

That baptism of desire truly causes sanctifying grace is of faith. For the Council of Trent defines:¹⁰⁹ The justification of the impious is "a translation from that state in which man is born a son of the first Adam, into the state of grace and of the adoption of the sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ our Savior; this translation, after the Gospel has been promulgated, cannot take place without the laver of regeneration or the desire thereof." Under this desire for baptism, baptism of desire is understood. St. Pius V condemned the following proposition of Baius (31): "Perfect and sincere charity, which is from a pure heart and a good conscience and an unfeigned faith, can exist both in catechumens and penitents without the remission of sins."¹¹⁰ The same is established from Innocent III¹¹¹ and from several Holy Fathers already cited above, n. 97. Added to these is the authority of St. Thomas, who teaches: "Without actual baptism [someone] can attain salvation because of the desire for baptism, which proceeds from faith working through charity, by which God sanctifies man inwardly, whose power is not bound to visible sacraments."¹¹² The desire for baptism need not necessarily be explicit, but an implicit desire, which is present with an act of perfect charity, seems to suffice. Therefore, when a catechumen, with the assistance of God moving him, elicits an act of perfect charity, he always receives sanctifying grace; but if afterward he receives baptism, grace is increased, and the sacrament, per accidens, does not give but increases grace; if, however, he culpably neglects to receive baptism, he transgresses a grave precept of Christ and, consequently, by sinning mortally loses the grace previously possessed.

¹⁰⁹ Sess. 6, c. 4 (Denz., n. 796).

¹¹⁰ Denz., n. 1031.

¹¹¹ c. 4, X 3, 42, and c. 2, X 3, 43.

¹¹² S. theol. 3, q. 68, a. 2.

116. 2. Through baptism of blood, or martyrdom endured for preserving the faith and other religious virtues, baptism of water is supplied both in adults and infants. Above, II, n. 622, when the virtue of fortitude was discussed, enough was already said concerning the essence and effects of martyrdom.

Baptism of blood, or martyrdom, gives sanctifying grace not only to adults possessing the use of reason, but also to infants. Thus stands the constant doctrine of the Church, which celebrates the feast of the "Innocents" slain for Christ. St. Thomas gives the reason: Baptism of water has its efficacy from the Passion of Christ, to which it is conformed. Now through martyrdom every man, even an infant, is conformed in a very perfect manner to Christ crucified. Therefore, it is fitting that martyrdom have the principal effect of baptism, namely, sanctifying grace. Moreover, in adults martyrdom is always joined with a perfect act of charity, according to that saying: "Greater love no man has than that a man lay down his life for his friends."¹¹³ Martyrdom effects the remission of guilt and punishment as if ex opere operato, and not because of a preceding formal act of contrition or charity; this indeed is evident of itself in infants, since they are not capable of eliciting those acts. In adults, however, martyrdom is not of less efficacy than in infants; and therefore a formal act of perfect charity or contrition is not required in them either. Faith and hope are required, however, since otherwise they are not true martyrs; moreover, aversion from the personal sins committed is required, at least through attrition, because no sin is remitted without detestation of it, as was already said above, n. 109. St. Thomas¹¹⁴ says simply: "Martyrdom cleanses from every guilt, both venial and mortal, unless it actually finds the will adhering to sin."

¹¹³ John 15:13.

¹¹⁴ S. theol. 3, q. 87, a. 1 ad 2.

117. Scholion. On the lot of infants who have died without baptism. Theologians treating the necessity of baptism are accustomed to discuss the lot of infants dying without baptism. Since, however, this question pertains more to Dogmatic Theology than to Moral Theology, and since, moreover, nothing certain can be said about it, we touch upon it only in passing. The Council of Florence defined: "The souls of those who depart in actual mortal sin or in original sin alone descend immediately into hell, to be punished, however, with unequal punishments."¹¹⁵ From these words it seems to follow, 1. that some men depart with original sin alone; 2. that the same suffer punishments. Hence the opinions of those theologians are excluded who admit in dying infants some miraculous illumination at the moment of death, by the acceptance of which they are saved, but by the rejection of which they are damned. For then there would be either eternal salvation from grace accepted, or hell from grace rejected and actual sin. Likewise excluded are those opinions which admit at least perfect natural beatitude. For how can perfect beatitude exist together with the punishments by which these infants are afflicted? For at the resurrection before the Last Judgment, infants will know the existence of heaven; and, moreover, every man has a natural desire to see God through His essence.¹¹⁶ Nevertheless, these infants do not have the punishment of sense, as St. Thomas¹¹⁷ teaches with the most common opinion against Gregory of Rimini, because the punishment of sense is not owed except for a disordered conversion to earthly goods, and such a disordered conversion cannot exist in infants. Since these things are so, either some very slight punishment in the limbo of children must be admitted with St. Augustine,¹¹⁸ or with St. Thomas¹¹⁹ it can be granted that these infants rejoice greatly in the natural knowledge and love of God. Moreover, possessing a right will and knowing well that they do not merit supernatural beatitude, they do not grieve so greatly over the lack of the beatific vision.¹²⁰

¹¹⁵ Denz., n. 693. Cf. also the rather severe words of the Second Council of Milevis, Denz., n. 102, note 3.

¹¹⁶ Cf. S. theol. 1, q. 12, a. 1.

¹¹⁷ De malo, q. 5, a. 2.

¹¹⁸ Contra Julian., l. 5, c. 11, n. 44 (Migne, Patr. lat. 44, 809).

¹¹⁹ 2, dist. 33, q. 2, a. 2 ad 5, and De malo, q. 5, a. 3.

¹²⁰ Cf. Synod of Pistoia, prop. 26 (Denz., n. 1526), and Schanz, Die Lehre v. d. Sakr. I, § 20.

We must treat: 1. of the notion, efficacy, and necessity of Baptism; 2. of the matter and form by which it is constituted.

1448. DEFINITION. Baptism is derived from the Greek verb βαπτίζω, that is, I wash, dip, immerse, and it is customarily distinguished as threefold, namely, of blood, of spirit, and of water.

1. Baptism of blood is the pouring out of blood, or death endured for the faith, or for another Christian virtue. 2. Baptism OF SPIRIT, or of desire, is perfect conversion to God through contrition, or love of God above all things, with the explicit or implicit vow of true Baptism of water. 3. Baptism OF WATER is the Sacrament itself, concerning which we must now treat.

It is defined: A Sacrament of the New Law instituted by Christ, for spiritual regeneration, through external washing of the body, under the prescribed form of words.

1449. Principles. I. It is of faith that BAPTISM is a true Sacrament of the New Law. The reason is that the three requisites for a true Sacrament concur in it: 1. a sensible rite, namely washing with water and the express invocation of the Most Holy Trinity. 2. The institution of Christ, as is proved from Matthew 28:19. More probably, it was instituted before His Passion, namely at the time when He Himself was baptized by John; whence it is said, John 3:22: "Jesus came ... and baptized," namely through the disciples, as is established from chapter 4:2: "although Jesus Himself did not baptize." 3. The conferral of grace, from divine institution: "Unless anyone shall have been born again, etc." (John 3:3).

1450. II. The EFFECTS of the Sacrament of Baptism are: 1. Remission of all guilt, original and personal, which it finds in the soul; whence Trent (sess. 5, can. 5): "In those reborn God hates nothing" (see, with respect to adults, n. 1475). 2. The condonation of all punishment, eternal namely and temporal, so that absolutely nothing delays the baptized from entrance into heaven, as the same Council of Trent has (ibid.); and hence no penance, at least laborious and satisfactory, ought to be imposed on baptized adults, from the Council of Florence.⁵ 3. The bestowal of sanctifying grace, by which we are made sons of God and heirs of heaven; and at the same time the infusion of the gifts of the Holy Spirit and of all virtues, both theological and moral, as the Roman Catechism has. Moreover, in view of the same grace, actual graces accommodated to the end of Baptism are conferred in their own time, namely for living holily and Christianly, as befits adoptive sons of God. 4. The impression of character, which is as it were the seal of Christ, a sign of eminent dignity, by which the baptized person is consecrated to God and bound forever to His service.⁶ 5. Co-optation into the company of the faithful, by which namely the baptized person becomes a member of the Church and is subjected to her authority.⁷

"Yet there remains in the baptized the tinder of sin, which is not sin, and if it is resisted, it will profit unto the crown."⁸ There remain also the penalities of this life, for example pains, death, etc., both so that we may be conformed to Christ, and because God, in raising man up, did not will that he put away the traces of his fall.⁹

1451. III. Baptism, after the sufficient promulgation of the Gospel, IS NECESSARY for all unto salvation, by necessity of means, unless the vow of the Sacrament or martyrdom supplies its place. It is of faith, from Trent, defining thus: "If anyone shall say that Baptism is free, that is, not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema."¹⁰ Declaring this necessity, it teaches that the translation of man from the state of original sin into the state of grace, after the Gospel has been promulgated, cannot be done without the laver of regeneration or its vow, from that which is written (John 3:5): "Unless anyone shall have been born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."¹¹

From these things it follows: 1. that any adult, as soon as he has been sufficiently instructed, is held, and indeed by divine law, to receive Baptism, and through this to enter the Church of Christ and profess her faith. 2. That little children, since they are incapable of a vow or desire, cannot be saved, outside the cause of martyrdom, except through Baptism in reality;¹² whence St. Augustine: "Do not say, do not teach, that infants overtaken by death before they are baptized can arrive at indulgence of original sins, if you wish to be Catholic."¹³ 3. That those sin gravely who, without an urgent cause, notably delay the Baptism of an infant. But a notable delay, more commonly and more probably, is judged to be that which would run beyond 10 or 11 days.¹⁴ Hence several Synods threaten the penalty of excommunication to parents who through negligence prolong Baptism beyond the eighth day.¹⁵

1452. Questions. Q. 1. How does Baptism OF SPIRIT and OF BLOOD supply the place of the Sacrament?

Resp. 1. Baptism OF SPIRIT supplies from the work of the worker, inasmuch namely as man, the divine Spirit breathing upon him, is justified by force of charity with respect to original sin, but by force of perfect contrition with respect to actual sins of which he is conscious. Nor, for producing these effects, is it required that the vow of Baptism be explicit, but there suffices, at least in him who is ignorant of the law of Baptism, or does not advert to it, an implicit vow, such namely as is included in the disposition of doing all things whatsoever have been enjoined by God. Thus St. Alphonsus¹⁶ with St. Thomas.¹⁷ Yet this baptism does not impress a character, nor confer a right to the other Sacraments; nor does it remit all temporal punishment, unless perhaps charity is so intense that it merits relaxation of every punishment (cf. n. 1674).

Resp. 2. Baptism OF BLOOD OR MARTYRDOM is equated with true Baptism, because quasi from the work worked, after the manner of true Baptism, it remits every guilt and punishment. It is said quasi, because it does not operate so strictly as the Sacrament, but from a certain privilege by reason of imitation of the passion of Christ.¹⁸ Therefore martyrdom profits even infants. The practice of the Church confirms this, for she honors as Saints and true martyrs both the holy Innocents slain for Christ and those witnesses of the faith who were slaughtered without having perceived Baptism of water.¹⁹

Q. 2. What is required that martyrdom be true and produce the aforesaid effects?

Resp. 1. There is required the suffering of death, or of lethal torment, or of such evils as by their own nature lead to death, even if someone miraculously escapes from them, as Benedict XIV affirms according to the common doctrine of theologians.²⁰

2. A pious cause is required; because "punishment does not make martyrs, but the cause," says St. Augustine.²¹ Whence it is necessary that violent death be sustained for the profession of faith, as is established from Luke 9:26; 12:8; or for the exercise of some other Christian virtue, because the works of all virtues are certain protestations of faith, as the Angelic Doctor says.²² Indeed, as true martyrs, more probably, those are to be held who, in service to those suffering plague, die from charity; and St. Alphonsus affirms that for this opinion stand 12 Academies, 13 Cardinals, and more than 300 authors against Hurtado and others.²³

3. In adults there are required certain positive dispositions, which are: 1. acceptance of death, at least habitual, from a supernatural motive, as is commonly held against some; because death, that it be meritorious, must be in some way voluntary in those who are capable of voluntary acts. Whence there must be absent the will to defend oneself, as also the rash exposure of one's own life; and therefore soldiers who are killed in a war of religion are probably not true martyrs, because they defend themselves. 2. Supernatural sorrow for sins; otherwise these are not remitted.

But whether perfect charity is required is indeed denied by some; but more probably it is affirmed by others with St. Alphonsus,²⁴ both from 1 Corinthians 13:3 and because martyrdom does not necessarily import perfect charity, namely when someone from fear of hell prefers to die rather than to sin. St. Thomas seems to agree, when he says: "The outpouring of blood does not have the notion of baptism, if it is without charity."²⁵ From this it is clear that baptism of spirit is included in baptism of blood, but not vice versa.

The remote matter of Baptism is water; but the proximate matter is the washing itself.

1453. Principles. I. The VALID matter of Baptism is natural or elemental water. It is of faith, as is established from the Councils, especially from Trent, sess. 7, can. 2, on Baptism: "If anyone shall say that true and natural water is not of the necessity of Baptism, and therefore shall twist to some metaphor the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Unless anyone shall have been born again of water and the Holy Spirit: let him be anathema."

Hence: 1. Matter certainly valid is: 1. water of springs, wells, the sea, rivers, lakes, ponds, cisterns, and rainwater; and thus any simple and pure water which retains the proper species of water; nor does it matter whether it is cold or warm, from the Roman Ritual; 2. water resolved from snow, ice, and hail; 3. sulphurous or mineral water; 4. water flowing in stormy weather from a wall, leaves, etc.; 5. turbid water mixed with another thing, provided water is the predominant matter; 6. dew, and water collected from condensed vapors, for example on the lid of a pot; 7. water simply distilled, roses or other leaves having been infused in the water.²⁶

2. Matter certainly invalid is: 1. blood, milk, wine, urine, phlegm, saliva, sweat, tears; 2. juice expressed from flowers, herbs, and roots.¹

3. Doubtful matter is: 1. broth and lye; 2. water from dissolved salt; 3. thin beer, thin ink, water flowing from a vine or other trees, and ice or snow not melted; 4. water drawn out by chemical art from flowers, plants, roots, wine, or oil; 5. one or another drop of water.²

1454. II. The LICIT matter of Baptism is clean water alone, and in solemn Baptism it must moreover be consecrated. The reason is that this is required both from the prescription of the Church and on account of reverence for the Sacrament.³

Hence: 1. He commits sacrilege who without necessity uses impure, turbid, or muddy water, although natural. 2. He sins gravely against the precept of the Church who does not use consecrated water in solemn Baptism. 3. If the consecrated water has been corrupted, natural water is to be preferred; but if time is sufficient, new water should be consecrated by the brief formula, as is contained in the Ritual. Thus from the Response of the Holy Office, April 17, 1839.⁴ 4. In private Baptism, unconsecrated water is probably licit; nevertheless care must be taken that at least blessed or lustral water be employed, for greater decency.⁵

1455. III. In cases OF NECESSITY, when certainly valid matter is lacking, doubtful matter is to be employed, but with this CONDITION added: "If this matter is sufficient"; for then even a slight probability concerning the value of the matter suffices (see nn. 82 and 1407). But if one so baptized survives, once a supply of matter certainly valid has been had, he must again be baptized under this condition: "If thou art not baptized, I baptize thee, etc."⁶

1456. Principles. I. For the validity of Baptism there is required a true WASHING of the body through water: that is, such an application of water as, in moral estimation, is necessary that a man be said truly washed or bathed.⁷

Whence there is required: 1. That water immediately touch the body of the one to be baptized. Therefore Baptism is invalid if, the child not yet having been born, the body of the mother is washed; likewise, if the water touches only the garments of the one to be baptized; but doubtful, if only his hair, or the afterbirth. 2. That it be done on the head, as is becoming, because in it all the senses flourish, or at least, as is very commonly taught, on another notable part of the body, for example on the shoulders or on the breast. Whence, if from necessity Baptism has been conferred on a less notable part, for example on the hand, fingers, or foot, it must altogether be repeated under condition; nay more, the same seems to be done for caution, even if Baptism has been conferred on a notable part; "because, from St. Thomas,⁸ in none of the exterior parts does the integrity of life consist as in the head." 3. That the contact of water be successive, namely in such a way that either water is applied successively to the body, or the body to water. Hence Baptism would be doubtful if the one to be baptized were thrown into water from which he did not emerge. 4. That there be a quantity of water truly sufficient for washing: therefore he would validly baptize who would put the one to be baptized under water flowing from a roof and would pronounce the form; but, according to the common opinion, he would not validly baptize if he touched the body of the one to be baptized with only one or another drop. Baptism conferred thus, especially if the drop has not flowed, would be altogether doubtful. Yet if the one baptizing, by motion of a moistened finger, were to wash a part of the body of the one to be baptized, authors commonly hold such Baptism as certain, although not a few still doubt concerning its validity.⁹

For validity it makes no difference whether the washing is done by immersion, or by sprinkling, provided water flows; whether by threefold or single infusion.¹⁰

1457. II. With respect to LICEITY, the manner of washing which is used in individual Churches must be observed, and indeed generally under grave obligation. The Greeks indeed retain threefold immersion, which they can also employ while they stay among Latins, as is established from Benedict XIV's Constitution Etsi pastoralis. But the ROMAN RITUAL has these things: "The priest takes baptismal water with a small vessel or pitcher, and from it pours three times over the head of the infant in the manner of a cross, and at the same time pronouncing the words, says distinctly and attentively only once: N... I baptize thee in the name of the Father, he pours the first time; and of the Son, he pours the second time; and of the Holy Spirit, he pours the third time." But where there is the custom of baptizing by IMMERSION, for example in the Milanese Church, the priest receives the infant, and taking care lest he be injured, cautiously immerses his head, and baptizes by threefold immersion, saying only once: N... I baptize thee, etc.¹¹

The threefold washing, outside the case of necessity, from the truer opinion, is prescribed under grave obligation; because a rite of this kind is sufficiently grave matter: for in it the mystery of the Most Holy Trinity is expressed. And it must be noticed that the form is not to be ended before the third washing.¹²

1458. I. The valid and legitimate FORM of Baptism in the Latin Church is: I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.¹³

Thus the Council of Trent defined according to the words of the Lord Himself (Matthew 28:19): "Going therefore teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." Among the Greeks it is equivalently said: The servant of Christ is baptized in the name of the Father, etc. This form is valid from the Instruction of Eugene IV to the Armenians; but it is licit only in the Greek Church.¹⁴

1459. II. That, in a variation of the form, the validity of Baptism may be discerned from invalidity, attention must be paid to whether the substance of the sense remains or not. Now, the substance requires that there be expressed: 1. the person baptizing, at least in the act exercised; 2. the person baptized; 3. the action of the one baptizing; 4. the invocation of the Most Holy Trinity expressing both the unity of the divine nature and the distinction of the Persons, and more probably with the proper words.¹⁵

Hence it follows: 1. The form is VALID per se, although illicit at least venially, if a Latin uses the words of the Greeks; if the language is changed, although it is better for lay persons, especially women, to use the vernacular tongue, to avoid the danger of erring; if synonymous words are substituted, for example "I bathe thee, wash, dip, etc."; if the words are corrupted at the end, because Pope Zacharias declared valid this form employed from ignorance of the Latin tongue: "I baptize thee in the name of the Fatherland, and Daughter, and Holy Spirita"; likewise, if the word I is omitted, because the sense is still rendered sufficiently, though otherwise in a vernacular tongue, for example in French, English, German; or the conjunction and, provided it is set before the third Person; likewise if one says "with the name of the Father, etc.," from the decision of the S. C. C., May 24, 1823.¹⁶ The form is also valid if words not corrupting the sense are added, for example if someone should say: "In the name of the almighty Father" or "who created thee, etc."; or if transpositions are made: "In the name of the Son and of the Father, etc."; because the name of Father of itself sounds as being the principle of the Son, and therefore there the confession of the Most Holy Trinity is still right substantially; nor does it obstruct that the minister errs internally concerning the faith, because internal error does not prejudice the value of the Sacrament.¹⁷ We have said per se; because, as St. Thomas notices, if someone, by so changing the form, intended to introduce another rite, he would no longer intend to do what the Church does, and thus the Sacrament would be invalid.¹⁸

2. INVALID is this form: "I anoint thee in the name, etc.," or "I baptize in the name, etc."; because the word thee, or an equivalent, is of the essence.¹⁹ Likewise, if someone should say: "I baptize thee in Father and Son, etc.," or "with Father and Son, etc."; or "in the name of the Father through the Son"; or "in the names of the Father, etc."; because these and similar things either signify diversity of divine nature, or do not express its unity sufficiently. Likewise, if he should say: "In the name of the greater Father and of the lesser Son"; for thus the truth of the Sacrament would openly be taken away. Likewise, if someone were to use these words: "I baptize thee in the name of God," or "in the name of Christ." Nor do the things which are read in Acts 8:12 obstruct; because, according to the more probable opinion, there by the name of Christ is understood Baptism instituted by Christ, in distinction from the baptism of John.²⁰

3. DOUBTFUL is the form of Baptism: "In the name of the Most Holy Trinity," or "in the name of God one and triune," or "in the name of the three Persons"; indeed, according to several, it would certainly be invalid. Likewise Baptism conferred "In the name of the Begetter and of the Begotten and of the One Proceeding from both" must be held doubtful, from St. Thomas, because the common names must more probably be used. Likewise, if someone says: "In the name of the Father, in the name of the Son, etc."; because, although this repetition more probably does not change the sense, nevertheless the opposite opinion is not altogether improbable.²¹ Likewise, the omission of the word in introduces some doubt concerning value; and much more the total omission of the word and, if namely one says: In the name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit.

But if someone should add the name of the Blessed Virgin Mary to the names of the three Persons, St. Thomas says²² that, if he did this with a heretical mind, intending to confer Baptism in the name of the Virgin as in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, it would be invalid; because the true confession of Divinity would be perverted. Otherwise, if some rustic should add the name of the Virgin only from intrusive devotion.

Note. The pastor must take care, says the ROMAN RITUAL, that the faithful, especially midwives, know and observe well the right rite of baptizing.²³

1249. - The word Baptism or Baptisma signifies the same as immersion and washing; hence Baptism is also called a washing, because it wipes away sins.

Baptism is defined: the Sacrament of regeneration through water in the word. Thus the Roman Catechism; or: It is the first Sacrament of the New Law, and the one most necessary, instituted by Christ for the spiritual regeneration of man.

From the Baptism of water, which is called fluminis, there is distinguished the Baptism flaminis and of blood, by which Baptism properly so called can be supplied, if this is impossible. The former is an ardent desire, at least implicit, of receiving Baptism of water with full conversion to God, namely with contrition or perfect charity. The latter is the shedding of blood, or death borne for the Faith, or for another Christian virtue, in adults probably with contrition or perfect charity. But only Baptism of water is properly called Baptism in reality. Baptism flaminis and of blood are called Baptisms in vow. Yet Baptism of blood is more excellent than Baptism flaminis, because 1° this latter does not always, as the former does, take away every debt of punishment, and because 2° the former produces its effect almost ex opere operato, i.e. although not so strictly as the Sacraments, nevertheless from a certain privilege by reason of the imitation of the Passion of Christ; for otherwise it would not have profited the Holy Innocents, whom nevertheless the Church honors as martyrs.¹ But only Baptism fluminis imprints character, and renders man capable of receiving the other Sacraments.

1250. - The principal effects of Baptism are numbered as three, namely: 1° remission of original sin and of actual sins, if there are any, through the infusion of sanctifying grace, to which is added the habit of all the virtues;² 2° total remission of eternal punishment and temporal punishment due for sins, but not liberation from the penalties of the present life, which nevertheless by virtue of Baptism will be taken away from the just in the Resurrection, when this mortal thing will put on immortality;³ 3° the impression of character, by which the baptized person is marked as a son of God and coheir of Christ, and is rendered incapable of receiving Baptism again. It is clear as regards the first from Trent, Session 5, in the Decree on original sin; as regards the second from Trent in the same place, and from the Council of Florence in the Decree for the Armenians; as regards the third, from the Council of Florence in the same place, and from Trent, Session 7, on Baptism.

Therefore Baptism is as the gate of the Church and of the kingdom of heaven. Hence if someone has not been validly baptized, he can validly receive no other Sacrament.

Baptism of water in reality or in vow, at least implicit, from divine institution is altogether necessary for salvation by necessity of means. It is clear from the words of Christ:⁴ Unless a man has been born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. - And from Trent.⁵

St. Thomas, III, q. 68, a. 1 and 2; q. 66, a. 11 and 12.

133. Principle I. After the Gospel has been promulgated, by the positive ordination of God the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for all men per se and ordinarily, by necessity of means for salvation; but for adults it is also necessary by necessity of natural and divine precept, since that means must be received by them voluntarily. - It is of faith.

It is proved: For adults from the words of Christ, Mt. XXVIII, 19 and Mk. XVI, 16; for all, even children, from John III, 5-6: Unless someone shall have been born again of water and the Holy Spirit..., which words affirm that Baptism is the condition without which there is no spiritual life; and the Church has understood that this is so, even for children. As is established from perpetual tradition; and from the Council of Florence, decree for the Armenians and for the Jacobites; and from the definition of Trent, sess. 7, can. 5, sess. 5, can. 5, and sess. 6, c. 4 (can. 737, § 1).

The necessity of Baptism as a means is denied by the Pelagians, who reject original sin, and by Protestants, who hold that faith alone suffices; for children, Lutherans say that it is necessary; Calvinists, on the contrary, although they hold it as a rite of introduction into the Church; Baptists deny the validity of Baptism in infants. Several Modernists say that the necessity of Baptism arose from ecclesiastical law (prop. 42).

134. Principle II. The sacrament of Baptism can extraordinarily or per accidens be supplied by Baptism of blood, or martyrdom, or by Baptism of the Spirit, or an act of charity or perfect contrition with at least an implicit desire of the sacrament itself. - It is certain from the tradition of the Church.

It is proved: A. Baptism of blood is martyrdom, or death inflicted and endured for Christ, for the true faith, or for another Christian virtue.

It takes the place of the sacrament, as is established from the words of Christ, Mt. X, 32, 39; Luke IX, 24; even in children, which is clear from the fact that the Church has always honored as martyrs the innocents killed by Herod, "who confessed not by speaking but by dying." This is altogether most fitting: for since the sacraments have efficacy from the Passion of Christ and His merits, it is necessary that a real imitation of the Passion of Christ, by which man is most greatly configured to Christ, obtain the application of the merits of the Passion and the effect of the sacrament (q. 66, a. 11).

B. Baptism of the Spirit¹ or of desire is not so called because the desire of Baptism is present, since this is also present in the other baptisms of adults, but because only the desire of Baptism is present: it is an act of charity or of contrition perfected by charity, which includes at least implicitly the desire or vow of Baptism, in the will of doing all things which God commands under grave obligation and of applying all means necessary for salvation, among which the first is Baptism; "insofar," says St. Thomas, q. 66, a. 11, "as someone's heart is moved by the Holy Spirit to believing and loving God, and to repenting of sins."

¹ This denomination is in use from the beginning of the thirteenth century.

It takes the place of the sacrament in adults, because, since the sacraments have power from the Holy Spirit as from the first cause, someone can through the power of the Holy Spirit obtain the effect, not only without Baptism of water, but even without Baptism of blood. As is established from the altogether general assertions concerning the love of God (John XIV, 23) and concerning penance (Ez. XVIII, 21), which are confirmed by the fact of Cornelius, upon whom, before he had been baptized, the Holy Spirit visibly descended (Acts X, 33, 44); likewise from the Council of Trent, sess. 6, c. 4, and from the doctrine concerning justification ex opere operantis, i.e., by an act of charity and perfect contrition, which is demonstrated in the treatise on grace, and is drawn from the condemnation of proposition 30 of Baius.

But since the vow of the sacrament is required, it follows that those who have been justified by Baptism of the Spirit or of blood remain obliged, given the opportunity, to receive the sacrament of Baptism; whence one already lethally wounded in hatred of the faith would be to be baptized if he should continue to live for a few further instants.

135. Corollary. - Baptism is threefold: of water, of the Spirit, and of blood.

1. Baptism of water, namely, the sacrament of Baptism, is an external ceremonial sign: a sacred rite instituted by Christ and ministered in His name, so that it may be His instrument unto the remission of sins and insertion into the Church. It justifies ex opere operato with attrition alone, imprints a character, and remits all punishments due to sins, as was explained above, n. 130.

2. Baptism of the Spirit, or of desire, is an act of charity or of contrition perfected by charity. It is not a sacrament, because it is not an external sign, and consequently does not imprint a character; whence after such a baptism there remains the obligation of receiving the sacrament of Baptism. It justifies ex opere operantis, and ordinarily does not remit all punishments.

3. Baptism of blood, or martyrdom. It is not a sacrament, because it is not a sacred ceremonial sign or a rite instituted by Christ, which is ministered in His name so that it may be His instrument for sanctification; whence it does not imprint a character. It justifies quasi ex opere operato, namely not actively, but passively, with attrition alone, and in it all punishments due to sins are remitted. It excels the others on account of greater and more perfect conformity with Christ, and therefore God bestows greater grace in it (q. 66, a. 12).

Do not think that attrition does not suffice for Baptism of blood, but that the disposition of charity is required according to that text, I Cor. XIII, 3. - For a) by martyrdom received in due disposition without an obstacle, charity is obtained by that very fact; b) charity is required for this, that martyrdom be not only a means of justification, but also a meritorious work; and in this sense the Apostle seems to speak.

I. QUESTION I. Of how many kinds is the minister of Baptism? ANSWER. Threefold. First, ordinary by office. Second, extraordinary by delegation. Third, of necessity. The ordinary minister of the solemnity is the bishop, then parish priests, thereafter presbyters. When formerly the bishops solemnly baptized, it was not lawful for presbyters or parish priests to do the same. And even now, if the parish priest be at hand, a priest ought not to baptize without consulting him. A deacon can administer Baptism not by office but by commission. Laymen are ministers of necessity, who baptize without the solemn rite. A layman would sin mortally if, a priest being present, he should baptize, because in a grave matter he would usurp to himself a right proper to the priest. Gravely also would a layman sin if, a deacon being present, he should baptize; because, a priest being absent, this devolves upon the deacon, as the more probable opinion teaches. A layman baptizing without necessity, with the solemn rite, incurs irregularity.

II. QUESTION II. Can one minister by a single aspersion baptize several? ANSWER. They commonly affirm it, because the sense of the form is not changed by using you for thee; and they confirm it by the example of St. Peter, who in one day baptized a great multitude. He nevertheless who without necessity should so baptize would sin, and indeed gravely. It is besides to be observed that such an aspersion must be of a kind that can truly be called a washing, so that the water flow upon the baptized: for one drop or another does not suffice. If two, of whom one lacked a tongue and the other hands, should baptize, the baptism would be null, as St. Thomas teaches, III, q. 46, art. 4, reply 4. If to a boy in danger there were present an excommunicated priest and a midwife, she would be preferred to the excommunicated priest, cut off from the body of the Church. Nor is it an objection that an excommunicated priest can absolve in extreme necessity, because in no case can a layman absolve. No one can baptize himself. Therefore, says St. Thomas, III, q. 66, art. 5, reply 4, Christ willed to be baptized by John. The same man cannot be baptized by several: wherefore the Baptism would not be valid if several should say, We baptize thee, as St. Thomas teaches, III, q. 47, art. 6: because we is not the same as I, but I and thou: and thus the form would be changed.

III. A parish priest sins who, that he may consult the infant's salvation, privately administers Baptism at home, awaiting a godparent, that afterwards he may perform the solemn rite in the church. Since in the Council of Vienne under Clement V it was laid down, in the Clementines, Book 3, title 15, sole chapter, that baptism be conferred not in halls or in chambers, but in churches in which are the sacred fonts deputed to this.

IV. Parents who in extreme necessity baptize their own children do not lose the right of demanding the marriage debt. But outside extreme necessity, if they should baptize their own children, they would lose that right. Baptism conferred by a pagan or a Jew is valid. And this is today the universal doctrine of the Church.

V. QUESTION III. When was Baptism instituted? ANSWER. That Baptism was instituted by Christ the Lord all confess, both Catholics and heretics. Concerning the time of the institution there is dispute. Many contend that Christ instituted Baptism after the resurrection, when he said, Matthew 28: Going therefore, teach ye all nations, baptizing them, and so forth. The more probable opinion to me is that Christ instituted this sacrament when he himself was baptized in the Jordan, as St. Augustine, St. Ambrose, St. Thomas, and the Roman Catechism itself teach. The law of Baptism began to oblige as soon as it was promulgated after the resurrection: Going therefore, teach ye … baptizing, and so forth. But when it was sufficiently promulgated, so as to oblige all, some assert after Pentecost, others protract it somewhat longer. See Vol. VI, dissertation 5, On Laws, where all these things are explained.

VI. QUESTION IV. What is the necessity of receiving Baptism? ANSWER. A twofold necessity: of means and of precept. Without that which is necessary in the first way, salvation cannot be obtained unless it be had either in fact or in desire. And of this kind are Baptism for all, and Penance for sinners who are adults. That is said to be necessary in the second way which is imposed by a precept, and which cannot knowingly be omitted without sin. Salvation nevertheless can be had without it, either through ignorance or through some other obstacle which hinders the observance. But no ignorance and no impossibility avails in respect of those things which are necessary with the necessity of means. Again a twofold necessity of means is distinguished. One exterior, as is the baptismal washing; and this can be supplied by faith and charity with the desire. The other intrinsic, as is sanctifying grace; and this can be supplied in no way. Unless it be really had, eternal salvation is impossible. The desire likewise is twofold. One implicit, as is the general desire or wish of observing all the precepts of Christ, which cannot be separated from perfect charity. The other is an express desire or wish, which arises from knowledge of the thing, and is required when the thing is necessary with the necessity of means.

VII. Wherefore without baptism either in fact or in desire no one can enter into Paradise. To infants themselves begotten of faithful parents Baptism is necessary in fact, whatever Calvin may prate to the contrary. But to all adults it is necessary either in fact or in desire. And this desire or wish of receiving Baptism in adults must be express, as the more probable opinion teaches.

VIII. QUESTION V. At what time ought Baptism to be received? ANSWER. Many examples of the ancients occur concerning the deferring of Baptism. St. Ambrose before his ordination, St. Paulinus of Nola in his eighteenth year, St. Augustine in his thirty-third, were baptized. Holy men for the sake of humility persevered a long time as catechumens. Others, that they might lead a voluptuous life, deferred Baptism. The reasons why Baptism ought not to be deferred are obvious. What prudent man would wish to procrastinate the loosing of the bonds of his own servitude, or the antidote of his own infirmity?

IX. QUESTION VI. Does the precept of receiving Baptism oblige adults to receive Baptism as soon as they conveniently can? ANSWER. Those things which are necessary with the necessity of means are by a stronger right necessary with the necessity of precept. It is disputed whether according to the present discipline of the Church the precept obliges under grave sin, so that adults are bound to receive Baptism as soon as they conveniently can. Some deny it; but the common and certain opinion affirms it. Wherefore parents gravely offend when without reasonable cause they defer the Baptism of infants, because they expose them to the danger of eternal damnation.

X. The ancient heretics the Anabaptists or Rebaptizers, the Waldenses, and the Cathari asserted that little ones before the use of reason are not to be baptized, whose error Trent condemned, session 7, canons 12 and 13. Those conceived from a brute and human seed are not to be baptized. A monster procreated from a man and a woman, if a person appear, especially in the head, is to be baptized. If there be doubt, let the bishop be consulted. If the doubt persist, he can be baptized with a condition added.

XI. QUESTION VII. Can the infants of unbelievers be baptized, the parents resisting? ANSWER. The discourse is of infants destitute of reason. St. Thomas denies it, to whom theologians commonly subscribe, and this custom of the Church obtains: namely, that the infants of unbelievers, although living under the civil power of Christian princes, are not to be baptized while the parents resist. Benedict XIV in a letter given in the year 1747 to the Archbishop of Tarsus set forth this controversy in full light. The chief reason of our opinion is the custom of the Church and the danger of apostasy to which baptized infants are exposed, the parents resisting. There is added the paternal power, to which infants are subject.

XII. In these days here at Rome it was disputed who come under the name of parents. All affirmed that the father and the grandfather are to be preferred to the mother, because the male line prevails over the female. In the disputation it was asked whether a grandmother ought to be preferred to a mother. A Jewish grandmother, become a Christian, consented that her grandson be baptized. The Jewish mother resisted the baptism of her son. Some contended that the grandmother's consent was to be preferred. Others maintained that one must stand by the mother's dissent. The matter was brought to the Supreme Pontiff Benedict XIV, who in a letter given to the most illustrious William, Assessor of the Holy Office, decreed that the grandmother's consent was to be attended to, and the boy to be baptized, the Jewish mother resisting.

XIII. In proximate danger of death the sons of unbelievers are to be baptized, because then there is no danger of apostasy. In confirmation of this opinion Benedict XIV reports a decree of the Holy Office of the year 1678, and another given in 1701. Similarly to be baptized are the sons of unbelievers who are called exposed, or cast forth — namely, abandoned by their parents — because then injury is done to no one. Likewise the children of unbelievers taken captive by Christian pirates, because they have been drawn out of the parents' power. If one of the unbelieving parents consent, although the other resist, the boy is to be baptized, because consent in favour of religion is to be preferred. Valid also is baptism conferred upon boys whom unbelievers offer to be baptized, not that they may be regenerated to eternal life, but that they may be cured of infirmity, as St. Augustine teaches, Epistle 98 to Boniface. The demented from birth are to be baptized in the faith of the Church, says St. Thomas, III, q. 68, art. 12. Of adults who from a sound mind fall into dementia, the will is to be regarded which they had while they were sound. The sleeping are not to be baptized unless proximate danger of death threaten.

The NEGATIVE opinion is attributed to Alexander of Hales 4. part. quaest. 22. memb. 5. art. 1. Adrian in 4. quaest. ult. de Baptismo, Armachanus lib. 8. de qq. Armen. cap. 37. D. Bonaventure in 4. dist. 4. part. 2. art. 1. quaest. 2. — where however he did not teach it, nor can this opinion be found in his writings, as Suarez disp. 29. sect. 1. Vasquez disp. 153. cap. 7. Mastrius disp. 2. quaest. 7. art. 4. and other recent authors cited by him testify.

The SECOND opinion, the assertive one, is that of D. Thomas 2. 2. quaest. 114. art. 1. ad 1. et quodl. 6. art. 4. Richard in 4. dist. 4. art. 2. quaest. 3. Scotus dist. 4. quaest. 3., whom the others commonly imitate, as in Mastrius loc. cit. Soto disp. 3. art. 11. Suarez, and Vasquez above. This is the opinion of D. Bonaventure dist. 4. part. 2. art. 1. quaest. 2., where he limits the opinion of Alexander of Hales, who said that Baptism of water profits more persons than that of blood. Whence he makes no distinction here between infants and adults, as Suarez notes.

MORE CLEARLY, in the fourth part of that distinction, dub. 4. cit., where he confesses that the Holy Innocents are Martyrs by privilege. And in dubio 4. he asserts that an infant who, while being carried to Baptism, is killed so as not to be baptized, and dies for Baptism, is rightly and piously believed baptized in his blood: what could be clearer?

THE Innocents indeed the Church venerates as Martyrs, and the Holy Fathers confess it: Augustine lib. 3. de lib. arb. cap. 23. et lib. 2. de Symbolo ad Catech. cap. 5. et lib. 3. cap. 4. Cyprian serm. de Stella, et Magis. Leo Pope serm. de Epiph. primo, et secundo. Origen homil. 3. in varia Evang. loca. And the Church prays for them in its prayer as Martyrs.

S. Bonaventure adds, dub. 1., that the liberty of will was wanting to them, and therefore their Martyrdom was not so perfect as in holy adults; for to perfection charity is required, moving the will, as is said Ioan. 15. Wherefore, when Mastrius infers: If contrition were necessary, it would follow that in infants the Martyrdom is imperfect, according to the Fathers — which is readily granted to him: Nay, I retort: If the reason is equal, therefore no disposition of will is required in adults.