Sect. 253The Minister and the RecipientThe Minister and the Recipient
I. To understand the teaching of the Church regarding the minister of baptism, we must carefully bear in mind the distinction between the lawful and unlawful, valid and invalid, reception of a sacrament. Moreover, we should note that, besides the immersion or pouring of the water, there are in solemn baptism a number of ceremonies and prayers which are not essential.
1. Since God wills all men to be saved, and has ordained baptism as a necessary means of salvation, it follows that this means should be at the ready disposal of all. Hence our Lord chose the common element water, and gave every human being, whether priest or layman, man or woman, Christian or pagan, the power of conferring valid baptism (Fourth Lateran Council, cap. Firmiter; Council of Florence, Decr. pro Armenis; Council of Trent sess. vii., De Bapt., c. 4)
2. Nevertheless, this power can only be lawfully used by the laity in case of necessity.
(a) It was to the Apostles and their successors, the bishops, that Christ entrusted this office when He said to them, “Go ye, therefore: teach all nations, baptizing them,” etc. (Matt. 28:19). So we find that the early Fathers, e.g. St. Ignatius (Ep. ad Smyrn.), teach that without a bishop it is not lawful to baptize; and Tertullian says, “The power of baptizing belongs to the chief priest (summus sacerdos); then to the priests and deacons, but not without the authority of the bishop” (Lib. De Bapt., c. 17). And even as late as the sixth century, says Chardon (Bapt., p. ii. ch. 9), it was still the custom for the bishops alone to baptize, or at any rate the priests did not do so without special permission of the bishop.
(b) In the course of time, as the Christian religion extended itself into the country districts, it became impossible for the bishops to be the sole ministers of the sacrament. Simple priests, therefore, were permitted to confer it by virtue of their office and without special authority. The reason why priests possess this power is thus explained by St. Thomas: “By baptism a man is made a participator in the union of the Church, and acquires the right to approach the Lord’s Table, and therefore, as it belongs to the priest to consecrate the Eucharist, so it is his office to baptize; for it belongs to one and the same person to perform the whole, and to arrange the part in the whole (ejusdem enim videtur esse operari totum et partem in toto disponere). Though the office of baptizing,” continues the saint, “was committed to the Apostles and their successors, the bishops, yet it was so entrusted as to be exercised by others; for St. Paul says, ‘Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach’ (1 Cor. 1:17). And the reason of this is that whereas teaching (likewise entrusted to the Apostles) depends upon the merit and knowledge of the minister, baptism is independent of these” (q. 67, a. 2). Hence, according to the Council of Florence (Decr. pro Arm.), it is said, “The minister of this sacrament is a priest, who by virtue of his office possesses the power of baptizing (cui ex officio competit baptizare).”
(c) The functions of a deacon are, as we shall see (infra, chap. vii.), and as his name implies, to assist those who administer the sacraments. Nevertheless, at his ordination he is told that it is his duty to baptize: “Diaconum oportet ministrare ad altare, baptizare, et prædicare.” This is a further extension of the permission granted to priests. According to present discipline, however, a deacon may not baptize solemnly without special permission from the bishop (St. Liguori, Theol. Mor., lib. vi. n. 116).
The persons who, according to the practice of the Church, assist at the solemn administration of baptism to make profession of Christian faith in the name of the baptized, are called “sponsors,” or “godparents,” and are in no way ministers of the sacrament. They are mentioned by the Fathers under the various names of Sponsores, Fideijussores, Susceptores, or Offerentes (Tertull., Lib. de Bapt.; St. Basil, Epist., cxxviii.; St. Augustine, Serm. clxiii. De Temp.). Concerning these, St. Thomas observes that, just as in carnal birth the nurse receives the child and takes care of it, and later on a teacher has charge of it, so in baptism, which is a spiritual birth, the services of similar persons are required for the newly made Christian.
II. In treating of the necessity of baptism (supra, § 252), we have seen that every human being is bound to be baptized. We have now to consider the conditions required on the part of the recipient of the sacrament; and in connection with this we shall speak of infant baptism.
1. Seeing that by baptism a person dies to the old life of sin, and begins a new life (Rom. 6:4), he must have the will to give up the old life and begin the new; and hence he must have the intention of receiving the sacrament which is the means of entering on this life. So in solemn baptism the catechumen is asked, “Wilt thou be baptized?” and he answers, “I will.” For the valid reception of baptism, however, neither faith nor detestation of sin is required. Hence those who have been baptized without proper dispositions cannot afterwards be rebaptized. See St. Thom., 3, q. 68, aa. 7, 8.
2. In the case of those who are incapable of actually intending to receive the sacrament, their intention to receive it may be presumed. Hence the practice of baptizing children before they come to the use of reason. They have contracted original sin, and, should they die before being cleansed from it, they would be shut out from the bliss of heaven. “He came to save all men through Himself: all, I repeat, who through Him are born again unto God; infants and children, and boys and youths, and elders. Therefore did He pass through every age; to infants made an infant, sanctifying infants; to children a child, sanctifying those of that age” (St. Irenæus, Adv. Hær., lib. ii. c. 22). “Whence is it that, since the baptism of the Church is given for the remission of sins, baptism is, according to the observance of the Church, given even to little children? Since assuredly if there were nothing in little children which must relate to remission and pardon, the grace would seem to be superfluous” (Origen, In Lev., hom. viii. n. 3). The same Father also says, “The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of baptizing even little ones (parvulis)” (In Ep. ad Rom., lib. v. n. 9). St. Cyprian, writing in his own name and in that of the bishops present at the Council of Carthage (253), says to Fidus, “Now, as to the case of infants, who you say ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after birth, and that the law of ancient circumcision ought to be observed, so that in your opinion the child born ought not to be baptized and hallowed within the eighth day, it has seemed far otherwise to all of us in our council. For in what you thought ought not to be done, not one agreed; but we all, on the contrary, gave our judgment that to none born of man was the mercy and grace of God to be denied” (Ep., lix.). Concerning this passage St. Augustine says, “Not forming any new decree, but maintaining the most assured faith of the Church” (Ep., clxvi., ad Hieronym., n. 23; cf. also Serm., ccxciv. n. 19, and Contra Duas Ep., Pelag., l. iv. n. 23, and elsewhere in his writings). “Let the child be sanctified from its infancy; let it be consecrated to the Spirit from its earliest days. Thou fearest the seal on account of the weakness of nature, O mother of mean spirit and of little faith! Ann, before Samuel was born, promised him to God, and when born instantly consecrated him to Him” (St. Greg, of Naz., Orat., xl.). The Second Council of Milevis (416) anathematized those who denied that infants should be baptized (can. 2). This condemnation was repeated by the Councils of Lateran (Fourth), Vienne, Florence, and Trent (sess. vii. cann. 12, 13). The objection drawn from the baptism of Christ at the age of thirty is of no weight. He needed no sanctification; the baptism was merely John’s baptism; and, moreover, He had already been circumcised at the usual time. See St. Thom., q. 68, a. 9.
On the whole of this chapter, see St. Thomas, 3. qq. 66–71; Chardon, liv. i. sect. 1; De Augustinis, i. 325; Billot, p. 205; Dict. de Théol. Catholique, BAPTÊME; Dict. d’Archéologie, BAPTÊME; Catholic Encyclopædia, BAPTISM; Turmel, Hist. de la Théol. Positive, pp. 123, 245, 296, 419.
I. To understand the teaching of the Church regarding the minister of baptism, we must carefully bear in mind the distinction between the lawful and unlawful, valid and invalid, reception of a sacrament. Moreover, we should note that, besides the immersion or pouring of the water, there are in solemn baptism a number of ceremonies and prayers which are not essential.
1. Since God wills all men to be saved, and has ordained baptism as a necessary means of salvation, it follows that this means should be at the ready disposal of all. Hence our Lord chose the common element water, and gave every human being, whether priest or layman, man or woman, Christian or pagan, the power of conferring valid baptism (Fourth Lateran Council, cap. Firmiter; Council of Florence, Decr. pro Armenis; Council of Trent sess. vii., De Bapt., c. 4)
2. Nevertheless, this power can only be lawfully used by the laity in case of necessity.
(a) It was to the Apostles and their successors, the bishops, that Christ entrusted this office when He said to them, “Go ye, therefore: teach all nations, baptizing them,” etc. (Matt. 28:19). So we find that the early Fathers, e.g. St. Ignatius (Ep. ad Smyrn.), teach that without a bishop it is not lawful to baptize; and Tertullian says, “The power of baptizing belongs to the chief priest (summus sacerdos); then to the priests and deacons, but not without the authority of the bishop” (Lib. De Bapt., c. 17). And even as late as the sixth century, says Chardon (Bapt., p. ii. ch. 9), it was still the custom for the bishops alone to baptize, or at any rate the priests did not do so without special permission of the bishop.
(b) In the course of time, as the Christian religion extended itself into the country districts, it became impossible for the bishops to be the sole ministers of the sacrament. Simple priests, therefore, were permitted to confer it by virtue of their office and without special authority. The reason why priests possess this power is thus explained by St. Thomas: “By baptism a man is made a participator in the union of the Church, and acquires the right to approach the Lord’s Table, and therefore, as it belongs to the priest to consecrate the Eucharist, so it is his office to baptize; for it belongs to one and the same person to perform the whole, and to arrange the part in the whole (ejusdem enim videtur esse operari totum et partem in toto disponere). Though the office of baptizing,” continues the saint, “was committed to the Apostles and their successors, the bishops, yet it was so entrusted as to be exercised by others; for St. Paul says, ‘Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach’ (1 Cor. 1:17). And the reason of this is that whereas teaching (likewise entrusted to the Apostles) depends upon the merit and knowledge of the minister, baptism is independent of these” (q. 67, a. 2). Hence, according to the Council of Florence (Decr. pro Arm.), it is said, “The minister of this sacrament is a priest, who by virtue of his office possesses the power of baptizing (cui ex officio competit baptizare).”
(c) The functions of a deacon are, as we shall see (infra, chap. vii.), and as his name implies, to assist those who administer the sacraments. Nevertheless, at his ordination he is told that it is his duty to baptize: “Diaconum oportet ministrare ad altare, baptizare, et prædicare.” This is a further extension of the permission granted to priests. According to present discipline, however, a deacon may not baptize solemnly without special permission from the bishop (St. Liguori, Theol. Mor., lib. vi. n. 116).
The persons who, according to the practice of the Church, assist at the solemn administration of baptism to make profession of Christian faith in the name of the baptized, are called “sponsors,” or “godparents,” and are in no way ministers of the sacrament. They are mentioned by the Fathers under the various names of Sponsores, Fideijussores, Susceptores, or Offerentes (Tertull., Lib. de Bapt.; St. Basil, Epist., cxxviii.; St. Augustine, Serm. clxiii. De Temp.). Concerning these, St. Thomas observes that, just as in carnal birth the nurse receives the child and takes care of it, and later on a teacher has charge of it, so in baptism, which is a spiritual birth, the services of similar persons are required for the newly made Christian.
II. In treating of the necessity of baptism (supra, § 252), we have seen that every human being is bound to be baptized. We have now to consider the conditions required on the part of the recipient of the sacrament; and in connection with this we shall speak of infant baptism.
1. Seeing that by baptism a person dies to the old life of sin, and begins a new life (Rom. 6:4), he must have the will to give up the old life and begin the new; and hence he must have the intention of receiving the sacrament which is the means of entering on this life. So in solemn baptism the catechumen is asked, “Wilt thou be baptized?” and he answers, “I will.” For the valid reception of baptism, however, neither faith nor detestation of sin is required. Hence those who have been baptized without proper dispositions cannot afterwards be rebaptized. See St. Thom., 3, q. 68, aa. 7, 8.
2. In the case of those who are incapable of actually intending to receive the sacrament, their intention to receive it may be presumed. Hence the practice of baptizing children before they come to the use of reason. They have contracted original sin, and, should they die before being cleansed from it, they would be shut out from the bliss of heaven. “He came to save all men through Himself: all, I repeat, who through Him are born again unto God; infants and children, and boys and youths, and elders. Therefore did He pass through every age; to infants made an infant, sanctifying infants; to children a child, sanctifying those of that age” (St. Irenæus, Adv. Hær., lib. ii. c. 22). “Whence is it that, since the baptism of the Church is given for the remission of sins, baptism is, according to the observance of the Church, given even to little children? Since assuredly if there were nothing in little children which must relate to remission and pardon, the grace would seem to be superfluous” (Origen, In Lev., hom. viii. n. 3). The same Father also says, “The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of baptizing even little ones (parvulis)” (In Ep. ad Rom., lib. v. n. 9). St. Cyprian, writing in his own name and in that of the bishops present at the Council of Carthage (253), says to Fidus, “Now, as to the case of infants, who you say ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after birth, and that the law of ancient circumcision ought to be observed, so that in your opinion the child born ought not to be baptized and hallowed within the eighth day, it has seemed far otherwise to all of us in our council. For in what you thought ought not to be done, not one agreed; but we all, on the contrary, gave our judgment that to none born of man was the mercy and grace of God to be denied” (Ep., lix.). Concerning this passage St. Augustine says, “Not forming any new decree, but maintaining the most assured faith of the Church” (Ep., clxvi., ad Hieronym., n. 23; cf. also Serm., ccxciv. n. 19, and Contra Duas Ep., Pelag., l. iv. n. 23, and elsewhere in his writings). “Let the child be sanctified from its infancy; let it be consecrated to the Spirit from its earliest days. Thou fearest the seal on account of the weakness of nature, O mother of mean spirit and of little faith! Ann, before Samuel was born, promised him to God, and when born instantly consecrated him to Him” (St. Greg, of Naz., Orat., xl.). The Second Council of Milevis (416) anathematized those who denied that infants should be baptized (can. 2). This condemnation was repeated by the Councils of Lateran (Fourth), Vienne, Florence, and Trent (sess. vii. cann. 12, 13). The objection drawn from the baptism of Christ at the age of thirty is of no weight. He needed no sanctification; the baptism was merely John’s baptism; and, moreover, He had already been circumcised at the usual time. See St. Thom., q. 68, a. 9.
On the whole of this chapter, see St. Thomas, 3. qq. 66–71; Chardon, liv. i. sect. 1; De Augustinis, i. 325; Billot, p. 205; Dict. de Théol. Catholique, BAPTÊME; Dict. d’Archéologie, BAPTÊME; Catholic Encyclopædia, BAPTISM; Turmel, Hist. de la Théol. Positive, pp. 123, 245, 296, 419.
Seção 88% da obra, de A Manual of Catholic Theology (Wilhelm & Scannell, sobre a Dogmatik de Scheeben). Ver o original.