What is a "valid baptism" according to the Roman Catholic Church?

[YoursTrue]

Invalid baptisms in Arizona point to something very wrong in the Catholic Church (nbcnews.com)

 

[Rival]

CCC 1240 In the Latin Church this triple infusion is accompanied by the minister's words: "N., I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." In the Eastern liturgies the catechumen turns toward the East and the priest says: "The servant of God, N., is baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." At the invocation of each person of the Most Holy Trinity, the priest immerses the candidate in the water and raises him up again.

Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 2 SECTION 2 CHAPTER 1 ARTICLE 1

 

[YoursTrue]

CCC 1240 In the Latin Church this triple infusion is accompanied by the minister's words: "N., I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." In the Eastern liturgies the catechumen turns toward the East and the priest says: "The servant of God, N., is baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." At the invocation of each person of the Most Holy Trinity, the priest immerses the candidate in the water and raises him up again.

Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 2 SECTION 2 CHAPTER 1 ARTICLE 1

Thanks for that. I was wondering what it means if the baptism is "invalidated" by the Roman Catholic Church, (Not my beliefs, but according to the Roman Catholic Church.)

 

[PureX]

They are all valid if done with honest intent.

 

[Rival]

Thanks for that. I was wondering what it means if the baptism is "invalidated" by the Roman Catholic Church, (Not my beliefs, but according to the Roman Catholic Church.)

It would mean such as:

- Marriages may be affected (essentially annulled and of no consequence).
- A priest who was wrongly baptised may not be validly ordained.
- Questions about taking Communion, the efficacy thereof for the wrongly baptised etc.
- Salvation may be at stake.

Etc. These are things that would generally be worked out individually.

For instance, a Jehovah's Witness who comes to the Catholic Church needs to be rebaptised, as his was not valid as it was not Trinitarian.

 

[Rival]

They are all valid if done with honest intent.

That would be nice, but not how it works in the real world of an institutional Church such as the CCC, which has strict guidelines.

 

[PureX]

That would be nice, but not how it works in the real world of an institutional Church such as the CCC, which has strict guidelines.

The church should be ashamed of itself for encouraging such superstitious nonsense. As if baptism was some sort of magical ritual requiring special incantations.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It would mean such as:

- Marriages may be affected (essentially annulled and of no consequence).

As an unbaptized person who was married in the Catholic Church, I have to ask:

Ummmm... what?

 

[Rival]

As an unbaptized person who was married in the Catholic Church, I have to ask:

Ummmm... what?

You must have missed the context. We're talking about a baptism that was later found to be invalid after the marriage.

I mean, invalid baptism is the thread topic

In any case Catholic Wedding Help: Can a Catholic marry someone who is not baptized?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You must have missed the context. We're talking about a baptism that was later found to be invalid after the marriage.

I mean, invalid baptism is the thread topic

I know the context. Why would the fact that someone turns out to be not validly baptized affect whether their marriage is valid?

Keep in mind that the Catholic Church considers only some rule violations to affect the validity of a sacrament. There are many rules that, if broken, make the sacrament illicit but not invalid.

So why do you think that the validity of someone's baptism would have any of the effects you describe? Why would this scenario impact the validity of the Sacraments of Marriage or Holy Orders?

 

[Rival]

I know the context. Why would the fact that someone turns out to be not validly baptized affect whether their marriage is valid?

Keep in mind that the Catholic Church considers only some rule violations to affect the validity of a sacrament. There are many rules that, if broken, make the sacrament illicit but not invalid.

So why do you think that the validity of someone's baptism would have any of the effects you describe? Why would this scenario impact the validity of the Sacraments of Marriage or Holy Orders?

Dude, this isn't a debate thread.

In the words of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, baptism is “the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit, and the door which gives access to the other sacraments. Through baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as Sons of God; we become members of Christ, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mission.”

If you aren’t baptized, you can’t receive the other sacraments.

In rare cases, there have been invalidly baptized men, who thought they were priests, acting as priests.

After the 2020 announcement from the Vatican, some men who thought they were priests looked back at videos of their own baptisms only to realize that the priest or deacon who baptized them hadn’t followed the basic rite in important ways.

In both cases, these would-be priests weren’t really priests, or even Christians! Both men had to be baptized, confirmed, and ordained deacons and then priests for the first time.

Compounding this problem, these men who were mistaken to be priests did not in fact consecrate the Eucharist at the Mass. Their confessions, confirmations, and anointings of the sick weren’t valid.

Invalid baptisms: A Catholic explainer about the facts and the fears

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Dude, this isn't a debate thread.

I wasn't debating. I was trying to make the point of my original question clear enough that it wouldn't get dismissed with mockery again.

 

[Altfish]

Invalid baptisms in Arizona point to something very wrong in the Catholic Church (nbcnews.com)

Good grief, is your god really that pedantic?
Surely a compassionate god would shrug his shoulders (do gods have shoulders??) and say, "No worries, I'll drop the priest a line so he gets it right next time"

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Invalid baptisms in Arizona point to something very wrong in the Catholic Church (nbcnews.com)

It seems strange to me that they would declare baptisms invalid over this issue considering that there's a fair bit of diversity among the churches in communion with Rome of what the exact words ought to be.

For instance, here's the wording in the Byzantine Rite churches (one of the Eastern Rite churches under the authority of the Pope):

THE BAPTISMAL FORMULA

” St. John the Bapt ist tells us that not man but Christ baptizes us, saying: ‘There comes after me He who is mightier than 1, .. . And He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.’ (Lk. 3:16 ) For this reason , when the priest baptized us, he did not say, ‘I baptize you,” but rather, ‘The servant of God NN. is baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. ‘ This way the priest showed that it was not he who baptized us, but God in the Blessed Trinity.” (ct. St. John Chrysostom, 8aptismallnstructions XI, 13-14)

Holy Christening Baptism according to The Practice Of The Byzantine Rite - Archeparchy of Pittsburgh

If Latin Rite priests think that "we baptize you" is too vague, I wonder what they make of the churches that use the passive voice like the Byzantine Rite (which apparently Rome considers valid).

 

[metis]

The church should be ashamed of itself for encouraging such superstitious nonsense. As if baptism was some sort of magical ritual requiring special incantations.

All religions have some "rituals" with "superstitious nonsense". My guess is that yours does as well. Am I correct?

 

[YoursTrue]

They are all valid if done with honest intent.

According to the article it was declared invalid. But that's not the question. I am asking according to RCC theology, what is an invalid baptism, and what does it mean if a person is baptised or according to church theology has an "invalid" baptism?

 

[YoursTrue]

It would mean such as:

- Marriages may be affected (essentially annulled and of no consequence).
- A priest who was wrongly baptised may not be validly ordained.
- Questions about taking Communion, the efficacy thereof for the wrongly baptised etc.
- Salvation may be at stake.

Etc. These are things that would generally be worked out individually.

For instance, a Jehovah's Witness who comes to the Catholic Church needs to be rebaptised, as his was not valid as it was not Trinitarian.

I see. So that's what I was wondering. ("If salvation is at stake.") ok later maybe for the rest.

 

[YoursTrue]

It seems strange to me that they would declare baptisms invalid over this issue considering that there's a fair bit of diversity among the churches in communion with Rome of what the exact words ought to be.

For instance, here's the wording in the Byzantine Rite churches (one of the Eastern Rite churches under the authority of the Pope):


Holy Christening Baptism according to The Practice Of The Byzantine Rite - Archeparchy of Pittsburgh

If Latin Rite priests think that "we baptize you" is too vague, I wonder what they make of the churches that use the passive voice like the Byzantine Rite (which apparently Rome considers valid).

(Good question...I haven't the vaguest idea, but it certainly is a good question as to what baptism is and what it means -- for the future, I suppose.)

 

[YoursTrue]

It seems strange to me that they would declare baptisms invalid over this issue considering that there's a fair bit of diversity among the churches in communion with Rome of what the exact words ought to be.

For instance, here's the wording in the Byzantine Rite churches (one of the Eastern Rite churches under the authority of the Pope):


Holy Christening Baptism according to The Practice Of The Byzantine Rite - Archeparchy of Pittsburgh

If Latin Rite priests think that "we baptize you" is too vague, I wonder what they make of the churches that use the passive voice like the Byzantine Rite (which apparently Rome considers valid).

O, see I didn't know that the Byzantine church is under the Pope's authority. And of course it was brought out that if a priest was not ordained according to rite and ritual anything he says religiously or performs as a priest might be declared invalid as well. (oh well...)

 

[Rival]

(Good question...I haven't the vaguest idea, but it certainly is a good question as to what baptism is and what it means -- for the future, I suppose.)

The CCC paragraph I posted covers this:

CCC 1240 In the Latin Church this triple infusion is accompanied by the minister's words: "N., I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." In the Eastern liturgies the catechumen turns toward the East and the priest says: "The servant of God, N., is baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." At the invocation of each person of the Most Holy Trinity, the priest immerses the candidate in the water and raises him up again.

Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 2 SECTION 2 CHAPTER 1 ARTICLE 1

There's no 'we' in either.