Rebaptism and conditional Baptism

It would be a grave sin knowingly to baptize again one who has already been validly baptized. So that when a child has been baptized by a nurse or midwife by reason of apparent danger of death, inquiry should indeed be made as to the manner of the Baptism, but if the matter and form were rightly applied the Baptism must not be repeated; only the ceremonies must be supplied in the Church. In case of doubt concerning the validity of the former Baptism, it should be repeated conditionally.

When heretics are converted to the Faith, inquiry should be made in every case concerning their Baptism. If it is found either that they were never baptized, or that the Baptism was invalid, they must be baptized again absolutely. If, after inquiry, a prudent doubt remains as to whether they were ever baptized, or as to whether their Baptism was valid, they should be baptized again conditionally, and in secret so as to avoid scandal.

If it is found that their Baptism was valid, they should only abjure their errors, and make a profession of the Catholic faith.

I. Those doubtfully baptized or doubtfully validly baptized must be rebaptized under condition whenever, after diligent examination has been instituted, a prudent doubt remains about the conferral and its validity (cf. canon 732, § 2). It is said:

1. After diligent examination has been instituted. The reason is that the examination instituted perhaps will procure sufficient certainty about the value of Baptism, so that, the examination being neglected, it would be rash and injurious to the sacrament to repeat Baptism immediately (St. Alphonsus, VI, 136 and following). Some authors indeed judged that those baptized by a layperson can be rebaptized even when no inquiry has been carried out; indeed there were synods which in such a case simply prescribed repetition. But that this opinion must be rejected is clear from the fact that it can happen that the value of Baptism conferred by a layperson is morally certain. Hence the said synods were afterward corrected, and Benedict XIV teaches that they are to be disapproved.¹

2. Whenever a prudent doubt remains about the conferral and its validity. With respect to proof of Baptism, canon 779 establishes: "To prove Baptism conferred, if prejudice is done to no one, one witness beyond all exception suffices, or the oath of the baptized person himself, if he received Baptism in adult age." But authors dispute what things for the most part are required so that one may be permitted to trust, with moral certainty, the testimony of a layperson concerning Baptism duly conferred. Some judge that it suffices that a physician or midwife, taught the method of baptizing, testifies in the particular case that he or she baptized duly, provided nothing occurs which weakens the testimony.² Others besides require that the physician or midwife of unimpaired reputation has often been found to baptize duly. Others require that the testimony of the layperson be confirmed by at least one witness. But the circumstances must be inspected, which certainly can be such that certainty about the value of Baptism is had, although the layperson has not often been found to have baptized duly, or his testimony is not confirmed by another witness. Nor do I think that this is simply denied by any author.³ Nevertheless midwives should be admonished that they baptize in the presence of one or another witness, who attends to the manner of baptizing, warns the midwife if she errs, and afterward can testify concerning Baptism duly conferred. The same must be applied in many regions to catechists, since very great is the levity of many peoples in asserting even grave matters.

Corollary I. Those who, a long time after Baptism received, begin to doubt whether they were duly baptized by a pastor or by a midwife should put away scruples. It must be judged that he was duly examined at the proper time, if it was necessary. Besides, according to many, one born of Catholic parents and educated among Catholics, although no testimony concerning Baptism exists, is not to be rebaptized. Nevertheless the presumption deduced from these things is today rather often destroyed by a contrary presumption in regions where negligence of parents is not rare, for example by easily deferring Baptism. Therefore if, after inquiry, a prudent doubt remains, Baptism is to be repeated under condition. Moreover, the sole reason that no positive testimony exists is not sufficient for repeating Baptism before ordination.⁴ Nor in the case of a mixed marriage, before the marriage, must the non-Catholic party be baptized under condition because of doubt about Baptism, if that party wishes to remain in heresy.⁵

Corollary II. Exposed and found infants, unless, the matter having been diligently investigated, their Baptism is established, are to be baptized under condition (canon 749). In practice they commonly must be baptized under condition, and this even if a slip is attached by which the conferral of Baptism is signified, unless the person who wrote the slip is both certainly known and held for certainly worthy of trust, or it is proved from another source that Baptism was duly conferred (St. Alphonsus, VI, 135).⁶ Considering the documents cited in the note, per se inquiry must first be made, unless there is danger in delay; in practice, however, in some regions it is not customary to do this. The things which have been said about exposed infants are also to be applied to infants abandoned by vagrant parents, and this even if they have already been born, for example, three or five or more years, unless there is indubitable certainty about Baptism received.

Corollary III. Those baptized by a layperson, for example by a physician or by a midwife, must not rarely be baptized under condition, because, when inquiry has been made, a doubt often remains. Except if a duly instructed, Catholic, sincere person of proven solidity affirms that he or she baptized duly. If the case concerns a non-Catholic person, some doubt will more easily remain; indeed if a hater of religion, for example a Jew, baptized, there can be reason for doubting due intention.

If an infant was baptized by a layperson, let the priest inquire: 1. what form he used; 2. whether the water was natural; onto what part it was poured; whether it touched the skin, or only the hair or the uncleanness of birth; whether it was poured in sufficient quantity, so that it flowed; whether he washed the infant and pronounced the form with sufficient simultaneity.

Corollary IV. Converted heretics commonly must be baptized under condition, because, when examination has been instituted, doubt about the value commonly remains. The Holy Office declared that examination must be instituted.⁷ Inquiry should be made whether the sect to which the newly converted person belonged holds Baptism in great esteem and is accustomed to take great care about the form and matter; whether the little minister is religious, and in what manner he was accustomed to baptize. When the matter has been examined, outside the case of imminent danger of death, the judgment of the Bishop must always be sought; he will judge in particular cases whether some probable doubt concerning validity underlies.

¹ De Synodo dioecesana, book 7, chapter 6, n. 7.

² Benedict XIV, De Synodo dioecesana, book 7, chapter 7, n. 11.

³ The Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide on 8 September 1869 for the East Indies established: "In order that the missionary not be bound to baptize under condition those baptized by a trustworthy catechist, it is required that there be two witnesses who can testify that Baptism was legitimately conferred; excepting, however, certain cases in which, with the individual circumstances weighed, and with attention paid to the skill and probity of the catechist, to whom nevertheless trust is not to be granted too easily, it can happen that no probable doubt at all about the validity of Baptism arises, even if two witnesses were not present."

⁴ Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, 30 September 1848 (Collectanea, n. 1034).

⁵ Holy Office, 13 April 1878.

⁶ Holy Office, 5 January 1724 (Collectanea, n. 299).

⁷ 20 November 1878 (Collectanea, n. 1504); 21 February 1883 (Collectanea, n. 1590).

II. The order to be observed in reconciling a heretic from the responses of the Holy Office is this:¹

1. If Baptism is conferred absolutely, no abjuration nor absolution is required, because the sacrament of regeneration washes away all things.

2. When Baptism has been judged valid, only the abjuration or profession of faith is received, which is followed by absolution from censures.

3. If Baptism is to be repeated under condition, it is permitted to proceed in a twofold order, namely:

a) Either thus: 1. Abjuration or profession of faith; 2. conditional Baptism; 3. sacramental confession with conditional absolution.

b) Or thus: 1. Abjuration or profession of faith; 2. sacramental confession without absolution; 3. conditional Baptism; 4. a summary repetition of the confession and conditional absolution.

With respect to abjuration, the Profession of Faith which is found at the beginning of the Code suffices; and it "is held juridically performed when it is made before the local Ordinary himself or his delegate and at least two witnesses" (canon 2314, § 2).

¹ 20 July 1859 (Collectanea, n. 1178); 2 December 1874 (Collectanea, n. 1426).

"... Generally and without selection, even with the addition or condition, anyone whatever is not to be rebaptized.... They are permitted to administer Baptism conditionally only to those concerning whom, after diligent inquiry has been premised, there remains a grave and reasonable doubt of law or fact whether they have at another time duly received the Sacrament. In this matter it will profit them to have before their eyes the things handed down by Benedict XIV in his Institutions 84 in the diocesan Synod, especially book VII, chapter VI. But although it appears perhaps hardly ever that one should abstain from a diligent previous inquiry of this kind without danger of injury to the Sacrament; nevertheless, all things maturely weighed and balanced which are noted in the above-mentioned letter by the worker Boyer and confirmed by the testimony of Your Amplitude, concerning certain places of that Vicariate, with attention to the quality of the Catechists and faithful, so that the inquiry or examination for discerning or arguing the valid or invalid conferral of Baptism either cannot be instituted at all, or would certainly be done uselessly and without any illustration of the doubt, the same S. C., in these circumstances and according to the things set forth, and while the circumstances continue without other things, so that the salvation of souls may be placed in safety, declared that Baptism can be administered with the condition added." Instr. S. C. de P. Fide, 8 Sept. 1869.

“...That generally and without discrimination, even with the addition of a condition, not everyone is to be rebaptized.... Conditional Baptism is permitted to be administered only to those concerning whom, after a diligent investigation has first been made, a grave and reasonable doubt of law or fact remains whether they otherwise received the Sacrament rightly. In this matter it will profit them to keep before their eyes what was handed down by Benedict XIV in his Institution 84 and in On the Diocesan Synod, especially book 7, chapter 6. Although it very easily appears that perhaps scarcely ever can one abstain from a diligent preliminary investigation of this kind without danger of injury to the Sacrament, nevertheless, all those things which are noted in the aforesaid letter by the missionary Boyer and confirmed by the testimony of Your Excellency concerning certain places of this vicariate having been maturely weighed and balanced, and with attention to the character of the catechists and faithful, such that an investigation or examination for recognizing or proving a valid or invalid conferral of Baptism either cannot be instituted at all, or would certainly be made fruitlessly and without any clarification of the doubt, the same Sacred Congregation declared that, in those circumstances and according to the matters set forth, and while those circumstances and no others continue, Baptism can be administered with a condition added, so that the salvation of souls may be placed in security.” Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, 8 September 1869.

“1. Whether those baptized by heretics are indiscriminately to be baptized conditionally.—2. Whether at least those concerning whom it is not established in particular that they were validly baptized.—Response. To the first and second: Let the response issued by the Sacred Congregation of the Council on 27 March 1683 be given, namely, that they are not to be rebaptized unless there is a probable doubt concerning the invalidity of the Baptism.” Holy Office, 6 April 1859, Bishop of Haarlem.

“Whether Baptism ought to be conferred conditionally upon heretics who are converted to the Catholic faith, from whatever place they come and to whatever sect they belong.—Response. Negative; but in the conversion of heretics, from whatever place or whatever sect they have come, inquiry must be made concerning the validity of the Baptism received in heresy. Therefore, an examination having been instituted in each case, if it is discovered that Baptism was either not conferred or was conferred invalidly, they are to be baptized absolutely. But if, in view of the circumstances of the times or places, after the investigation has been completed, nothing is discovered either for validity or for invalidity, or if a probable doubt concerning the validity of the Baptism still remains, then they are to be baptized conditionally and secretly. Finally, if it is established that it was valid, they are to be admitted only to abjuration and profession of faith.” Holy Office, 21 February 1883; 20 November 1878; Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, 23 June 1830. “Therefore, a threefold method of proceeding in reconciling heretics is distinguished: 1. If Baptism is conferred absolutely, no abjuration or absolution follows, because the Sacrament of regeneration washes away all things. 2. If Baptism is to be repeated conditionally, the procedure will be in this order: a) abjuration or profession of faith; b) conditional Baptism; c) sacramental confession with conditional absolution. 3. Finally, when the Baptism has been judged valid, only the abjuration or profession of faith is received, followed by absolution from censures.” Instruction of the Holy Office, 20 July 1859; Collectanea of the Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, no. 642 ff., 1689.

“As regards abjuration, however, the rule of Albizzi is to be followed, namely, that if it concerns adolescents who have attained the fourteenth year, only a profession of the Catholic faith is to be required from them before they are admitted to the Sacraments; but if it concerns those who have passed the fourteenth year of age, a formal abjuration of the sect to which they belonged is to be required.” Instruction of the Holy Office, 20 November 1878.

Can or must baptism ever be repeated? - It can and must be repeated conditionally whenever there is some not-to-be-despised doubt concerning its validity; otherwise it cannot be repeated without grave sin, because an attempt to minister a sacrament to an incapable subject is sacrilege. L. 134; A. S. v. 25, p. 258; Roman Ritual, de Bapt. adult.; E. M.

Are exposed infants to be baptized? - Resp. In the affirmative, if these have been exposed without testimony of baptism conferred, unless from elsewhere it is clear that they were duly baptized. But if they have been exposed with a note attesting that they were baptized, it is controverted. The more common and truer opinion teaches that all these are to be baptized conditionally, "whenever moral certitude is not had concerning baptism conferred, and duly conferred," after diligent inquiry has been made. L. 135; E. M.

Are infants baptized either by midwives or by laymen to be rebaptized? - Resp. In the negative, unless there is a probable suspicion of error in the baptism conferred. Thus the most common and true opinion, says St. Liguori 136, where he recalls a decision of the Sacred Congregation. E. M.

Must those baptized by heretics be rebaptized? - Resp. It is certain by faith from Trent that baptism conferred by heretics is valid when all the things required for the sacrament are used. But in the conversion of heretics, from whatever sect they have come, inquiry must be made concerning the validity of baptism received in heresy. And thus they are to be baptized absolutely, conditionally, or in no way, according as, inquiry having been made, it is certainly clear that baptism was not duly conferred, or the matter is probably doubtful, or nothing has been detected either for validity or for invalidity, or it is certainly clear that baptism was valid. Holy Office, Nov. 20, 1878. - Lugo Resp. Mor. l. 1, d. 2; E. M.

I. Baptism can and must be repeated under condition whenever there is some positive, serious, and prudent doubt, not to be despised, concerning its validity, founded on reasons of some gravity, not on scruples; e.g., as always happens when Baptism has been conferred in the uterus, the head not yet having been emitted (can. 746, § 2 and 5). Otherwise it cannot be repeated without grave sin. For in the first case the law of charity of procuring eternal salvation prevails over the law of religion which forbids exposing the sacrament to nullity; in the second case it is sacrilege to administer the sacrament to one incapable.

Because of the practical importance of the matter in the sacred ministry, it may be pleasing to apply these principles not only to Baptism administered by a lay person in necessity from an embryological event or because of another danger, but, so that they may be more fully manifest, universally to all the various other cases which occur.

II. According to the principles enunciated, of themselves children baptized by midwives, physicians, or the faithful are not to be rebaptized; but in practice they are rather often to be rebaptized, because some suspicion is generally present, unless the testimony of the baptizer is confirmed by the testimony of educated witnesses, even of one wholly trustworthy witness, or unless the baptizer himself is wholly trustworthy. Therefore, where a wholly serious person, even a mere midwife, who is trustworthy, circumspect, and instructed in the rite of baptizing, asserts that the infant was rightly baptized by her, there would not be reason for serious doubt about the validity of Baptism; nevertheless trust is not easily to be given to the declarations of midwives, because they do not dare confess that they baptized badly lest they lose the confidence of the parents, or because, on account of agitation, or sometimes also of drunkenness, they were not in possession of themselves at that moment.

An examination is to be instituted concerning such Baptism, unless someone is certain that he cannot arrive at certitude, or knows that the manner of acting of the baptizer is doubtful, or the parish priest who examined the matter, or another trustworthy person, testifies that the Baptisms conferred are to be held doubtful, etc. In this examination one must ask:

a) who baptized and in what circumstances; for if Baptism was conferred by a person who is accustomed to be anxious, disturbed, and perplexed, or if Baptism was conferred by a prudent person but in more difficult circumstances, in which, because of the danger of a sudden case, all things had to be done hastily and in disturbance, there is more easily room for doubting;

b) what form he pronounced, and whether he pronounced it vocally, and not only in the mind;

c) what water and how much water he poured out, and where;

d) whether he at the same time uttered the form and washed;

e) what intention he had.¹

¹ The examination will be chiefly about the matter and form, because a right intention is presumed, unless there is a special reason for doubting.

III. Exposed children are to be baptized under condition, even if a note is attached attesting their Baptism, unless certain knowledge is had of the person by whom the note was written, or unless it indicates who baptized. Whence can. 749: "Exposed and found infants, unless, the matter having been diligently investigated, their Baptism is established, are to be baptized under condition."

IV. One who was educated among Christians and does not have testimony of Baptism, written or oral, generally can be judged and is presumed baptized in a region where all are altogether baptized. If nevertheless serious doubt, from positive indications, arises because of some circumstance, e.g., because the parents, indifferent or negligent, or wandering, or altogether disturbed, led their life at the time of birth, etc., let him be baptized under condition.

V. An examination is to be instituted, the bishop having been consulted, concerning Baptism conferred by a heretic or schismatic.

But if:

1. it has been judged valid, it is not renewed, but the abjuration or profession of faith is received before two witnesses, and absolution from censures in the external forum is given by the bishop or by a cleric specially delegated for this, and the sacrament of Penance is administered.

2. If Baptism has been invalid, let it be conferred again absolutely,² and no abjuration is made, nor is confession made, nor is absolution given.

² Thus in order to reception into the Church; for as Noldin notes, Th. M., III, n. 75, in the case of a mixed marriage Baptism is not repeated under condition if someone would wish to remain in heresy: for in order to marriage certitude concerning the validity of the Baptism received is not required (S. Off., 13 Apr. 1878).

3. If Baptism is doubtful, or if no inquiry can be instituted or nothing can be learned concerning the validity of the sacrament, it is to be presumed doubtful and repeated under condition (S. Off., 20 Nov. 1878). In this case this order is to be observed:

a) abjuration or profession of faith, with absolution from censures in the external forum, for those of puberty;

b) hearing of sins, and excitation to contrition;

c) conditional Baptism;

d) confession summarily repeated and conditional absolution (Instr. S. Off., 20 Jul. 1859 and 2 Dec. 1874).

VI. Epilogue. These are the most certain principles and safest safeguards which our mother, the Church, places before the eyes of ministers of the sacraments and inculcates. In the course of the ages, as vindicator of morality and justice, she has protected human life; but much more, indefectibly, as the best mother, has she shown herself solicitous for the eternal life of men. Mindful of her doctrine, and relying upon salutary principles, priests will labor, as much as is theirs, watchful over the salvation even of every smallest creature of God, for the building up of the body of Christ and the flowering of the kingdom of God.

1476. It is asked: Whether and when Baptism must be repeated UNDER CONDITION?

Resp. 1. There has always been in the Church the practice of baptizing, at least under a tacit condition, those concerning whom it was doubted whether by the laver of regeneration they had been expiated from original fault, as Benedict XIV proves at length against Natalis Alexander.¹⁴ But Alexander III established thus: "Concerning those of whom it is doubtful whether they have been baptized, let them be baptized with these words premised: If thou hast been baptized, I do not baptize thee; but, if thou hast not yet been baptized, I baptize thee, etc."¹⁵

2. "Baptism must be repeated under condition, not everywhere and without cause; but only then when a prudent and probable doubt underlies whether someone has been baptized, nor, diligent inquiry having first been made, could the truth of the matter become known," as the same Benedict XIV has.¹⁶ And this is to be observed under grave obligation, both in doubt of law, namely when it is established that baptism was conferred with doubtful matter, or form, or intention, or with one concerning whose value there is controversy; and in doubt of fact, when it is prudently doubted, whether positively or negatively, whether Baptism has been given or not: because in each doubt, the salvation of man is equally endangered. Hence the rule which the Fifth Council of Carthage hands down: "Whenever there are not found most certain witnesses who testify without doubt that they have been baptized, they are to be rebaptized without scruple."¹⁷

1477. From what has been said you will deduce:¹⁸ I. The following MUST be baptized under condition: 1. Exposed infants who are found without a certificate concerning Baptism. And the same must be thought with Benedict XIV, even if they carried on the neck testimony of Baptism, when the paper does not produce certainty, that is, when it is not discovered that the author of the paper is worthy of faith. Thus from the declaration of the S. C. C., December 18, 1723.¹⁹ 2. All those for whom no sign can be had of received Baptism, nor of the marriage of the parents. 3. Many heretics. But these are to be rebaptized, not because they have been baptized by heretics, but because heretics baptizing are not accustomed to fulfill the conditions which the Church prescribes. And St. Alphonsus asserts this by name concerning Lutherans and Calvinists, who, since they judge Baptism not to be absolutely necessary, care little for matter and form. "Some of them," he says, "use distilled waters; others are accustomed in baptizing to observe this custom, that one pronounces the form and another applies the matter; some pour water upon the garments only, and others more commonly fail in intention."²⁰

Note. 1. The Greek Schismatics, Eutychians, Nestorians, and other Oriental heretics are accustomed to confer Baptism accurately and VALIDLY; likewise the French Schismatics (petite Eglise), Old Catholics, and among Anglicans Ritualists. 2. Less accurately, and therefore DOUBTFULLY, Methodists and Presbyterians administer Baptism, who are accustomed to baptize by sprinkling; also Episcopalians, who especially today judge Baptism to be a bare rite without true efficacy; then finally Congregationalists, Unitarians, and Universalists, who consider Baptism as something free. 3. Baptists baptize adults only, and indeed doubtfully, because they pronounce the whole form before the immersion begins. Socinians and Quakers confer no baptism at all.²¹

Moreover, let it be noticed that Sects are changeable, and that today, in various places, they approach Rationalism more and more.

1478. II. The following are not to be baptized again, not even under condition: 1. Infants whose Baptism at least one witness worthy of faith affirms, as Benedict XIV himself teaches.²² And this, even if the witness is a woman, provided she is above exception, and there are not other witnesses deposing the contrary. 2. An adult who was born from truly Christian parents and was educated among the faithful; because, unless most evident reasons to the contrary are given, for his Baptism stands a violent presumption, which produces certitude. Yet if he is to be ordained, positive testimony of Baptism is required. 3. One baptized by a midwife, or by another skilled person, unless, the matter having been diligently examined, a probable suspicion of error is present.²³

1479. Let the following Responses of the HOLY OFFICE be noted: I. To the proposed doubt whether Baptism should be conferred under condition on heretics who are converted to the Catholic faith, from whatever place they come, and to whatever sect they belong, the Eminent Fathers responded Negatively; but in the conversion of heretics, from whatever place or from whatever sect they have come, inquiry must be made concerning the validity of Baptism received in heresy. Therefore, an examination having been made in individual cases, if it has been found either that none was conferred or that it was conferred invalidly, they will have to be baptized absolutely. But if, according to the account of times or places, the investigation having been completed, nothing is detected either for validity or for invalidity, or a probable doubt concerning the validity of Baptism still remains, then they are to be baptized secretly under condition. Finally, if it has been established that it was valid, they are to be received only to abjuration or profession of faith²⁴ (Decree, Wednesday, November 20, 1878).

II. It was asked: "1. Whether, in a case of doubt concerning the value of Baptism, Japanese persons who have thus received Baptism are still to be considered as Christians or unbelievers? 2. Whether, if doubt concerning the value of Baptism remains, and it has not seemed opportune to solve the doubt concerning those who have thus been doubtfully baptized, in matters which look to Matrimony, judgment must be made as if they had truly and validly been baptized, or not? To 1. Generally speaking, those concerning whom it is doubted whether they have been validly baptized are to be held as Christians. To 2. Baptism is to be judged valid in order to the validity of Matrimony" (Decree, September 9, 1868).¹

164. Principles. - Baptism can and must be repeated under condition whenever there is some positive, serious, prudent, and not-to-be-despised doubt concerning its value: namely a doubt founded not in mere scruples but in reasons of some gravity, as always happens when Baptism was conferred in the womb while the head had not yet been put forth (can. 746, § 5); - but if positive and serious doubt is lacking, Baptism cannot be repeated without grave sin.

For in the first case the law of charity of procuring eternal salvation prevails over the law of religion which forbids exposing a sacrament to nullity; in the other case, to minister a sacrament to one incapable is sacrilege.

Because of the practical importance of these principles in sacred ministry, it is pleasing to apply them to various cases which occur.

165. Children baptized by midwives, physicians, or laypersons are not of themselves and indiscriminately to be rebaptized; - and in practice, because generally some suspicion is present, they are more often to be rebaptized, unless the testimony of the baptizer is confirmed by the testimony of educated witnesses, even of one worthy of faith, or unless he himself is wholly worthy of faith.

Therefore, where an altogether serious person, even a mere midwife, who is worthy of faith, circumspect, and instructed in the rite of baptizing, should assert that an infant was duly baptized by her, there would be no reason why doubt should seriously arise concerning the value of Baptism; yet confidence is not easily to be given to declarations of midwives, because often they do not dare to confess that they baptized badly, lest they lose the confidence of the parents, or because, on account of agitation or sometimes even of drunkenness, they were not self-possessed at that moment.

An examination is to be instituted concerning such Baptism, unless someone is certain that he cannot arrive at certitude, or knows that the mode of acting of the baptizer is doubtful, or the pastor who examined the matter or another person worthy of faith testifies that the Baptisms conferred are to be held doubtful, etc. Let the examination be instituted according to the norm indicated above, n. 141, 3.

166. Exposed children are to be baptized under condition, even if a little note is attached attesting their Baptism, unless certain notice is had of the person by whom the note was written, or unless it indicates who baptized. Whence can. 749: "Exposed and found infants, unless after diligent investigation concerning their Baptism it is established, are to be baptized under condition."

167. One who, educated among Christians, lacks written or oral testimony of Baptism can be considered and is presumed baptized in a region where absolutely all are baptized.

Yet if serious doubt should arise, from positive indications, on account of some circumstance, for example because the parents were indifferent or negligent, or led a wandering or altogether disturbed life at the time of birth, etc., let him be baptized under condition.

168. Baptism conferred by a heretic or schismatic is to be subjected to examination; which examination is to be instituted in individual cases, after consulting the bishop.

1. If Baptism has been judged valid, it is not renewed; but abjuration or profession of faith is received before two witnesses, and besides, for those who have reached puberty, absolution from censures in the external forum is given by the bishop or by a cleric specially delegated for this, and the sacrament of Penance is administered.

2. If Baptism was invalid, it is again conferred absolutely,¹ and no abjuration is made, nor is confession made, nor is absolution given.

¹ This is to be understood in order to reception into the Church; for in the case of mixed marriage Baptism is not repeated under condition if someone wished to remain in heresy: for in order to marriage, certitude concerning the value of Baptism received is not required (Holy Office, April 13, 1878).

3. If Baptism is doubtful, or if no inquiry can be instituted, or nothing can be found out concerning the value of the sacrament, it is to be presumed doubtful and repeated under condition (Holy Office, November 20, 1878).

In which case this order is to be observed:

1. abjuration or profession of faith, with absolution from censures in the external forum (for those who have reached puberty);

2. more fittingly then, hearing of sins and excitation to contrition;

3. conditional Baptism;

4. confession of sins, which, if it was made before Baptism, is to be repeated summarily, and conditional absolution.

Thus conformably to the Instruction of the Holy Office, July 20, 1859 and December 2, 1874.

VI. Those who have been baptized by a midwife ought not to be rebaptized, when the parish priest detects the midwife to be prudent, awake, and constant in an examination upon the exact observance of the form. Are exposed infants having a certificate of the Baptism conferred hung upon the neck to be rebaptized? A precise resolution cannot be given. When even the least suspicion arises concerning the Baptism validly conferred, they are to be rebaptized under a condition, as the Roman Ritual, published by order of Paul V, lays down.