Friday, March 5, 2021

Peter Heers (EO) on the Minister of Baptism in Catholic Sacramental Theology

 

 

Baptismal Minister: Baptized or Unbaptized, Believer or Infidel

 

With respect to the minister of the mystery, it must be noted that from at least the Fourth Lateran Council there ceased to be a distinction between believer and unbeliever in the performance of Baptism in case of need. That is, the Roman Catholic Church claimed that the ”right of any person whatsoever to baptize in case of necessity is in accord with the constant tradition and practice of the Church” (William Fanning, “Baptism,” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 1 [New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1907]). “Any person” here includes the unbaptized and unbelievers, such as Jews or Moslems.

 

The doctrinal testimonials for this teaching, at least those of a conciliar origin, are all post-schism. Tertullian and St. Jerome are cited as sources as well (ibid.); however, they speak of nothing more than the possibility for a layman to baptize in case of need. In fact, St. Jerome supports the legitimacy of a baptized layman baptising by saying “for as a person receives, so may he give” (St. Jerome, Against the Luciferians 9, NPFP 1.6). Since an unbaptized person has not received the mystery, neither can he give it. Therefore, St. Jerome actually stands in opposition to this teaching.

 

Blessed Augustine’s maxim “It is Christ who baptizes” (see, for example, Book III of St. Augustine’s Answer to Petilian, the Donatist, NPFP 4.1.49) is cited as a source for the teaching, although it can be considered as such only directly, for he never expressly acknowledged that the non-baptized. His own confession of faith, however, made at the end of his longest tratise on the subject, De Baptismo, if read apart from the entire treatise, could be seen to leave room for such an idea (“If anyone were to press me—supposing I were duly stead in a Council in which a question were raised on points like these—to declare what my own opinion was, without reference to the previously expressed views of others, whose judgment I would frather follow, if I were under the influence of the same feelings as led me to assert that I have said before, I should have no hesitation in saying that all men possess Baptism who have received it in any place, from any sort of men, provided that it were consecrated in the words of the gospel, and received without deceit on their part with some degree of faith.” Significantly, he immediately adds: “although it would be of no profit to them for the salvation of their souls if they were without charity, by which they [might be grafted into the Catholic Church.” De baptism, 53-102 (emphasis added]).

 

St. Isidore of Seville is probably the explicit source of the teaching as he declares: “The Spirit of God administers the grace of Baptism, although it be a pagan who does the baptizing” (Fanning, “Baptism,” provides the following source: can. Romanus de cons., iv). Pope Nicholas (858-867) likewise held the opinion that Baptism by a Jew or a pagan is acceptable (Henry Denzinger, The Sources of Catholic Dogma [Fitzwilliam, NH: Loreto, 2007], 135. From his response to the decrees of the Bulgars in November 866, chap. 104, we read: “You assert that in your fatherland many have been baptized by a certain Jew, you do not know whether Christian or pagan and you consult us as to what should be done about them. If indeed they have been baptized in the name of the Holy Trinity or only in the name of Christ, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles [cf. Acts 2:38; 19:5]., [surely, it is one and the same, as Saint Ambrose sets forth] it is established that they should not be baptized again”).

 

The Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 defended heretical Baptism, teaching: “The mystery of Baptism . . . rightly conferred by someone in the form of the Church is useful unto salvation for little ones and for adults” (Concilium Lateranense IV, chap. I, De fide catholica. See Denzinger-Bannwart, Enchiridion Symbolorum, no. 430, p. 190). (Peter Heers, The Ecclesiological Renovation of Vatican II: An Orthodox Examination of Rome’s Ecumenical Theology Regarding Baptism and the Church [Simpsonville, S.C.: Uncut Mountain Press, 2015], 33-35)

 

Further Reading


John Salza and Robert Siscoe, What is the intention to do what the Church does?

Blog Archive