“Clinical”
baptism
“Clinical” baptism refers to seriously
ill people confined to be, whether or not catechumens, who are baptized by
sprinkling with an abbreviated baptismal rite. Among these were many who
through no fault of their own or ulterior motive received baptism on their
deathbed. But there were others who deliberately put off their baptism for unworthy
reasons. We learn from a letter of Sy. Cyprian that the word “clinics” (klinikoi)
was used instead of “Christians” for those baptized during an illness, which
gave the impression that they were second-class Christians. Cyprian rues
against the term to remove any stigma from them. (Cyprian, Ep. 69.13)
But in spite of this, a second category of “clinics” gradually emerged who deliberately
postponed baptism after the end of their period as catechumens. They hoped in
this way in the event of a fatal illness to receive forgiveness at the last
moment through the grace of baptism. However, there were doubtless those who
delayed being baptized out of a zealous concern to be as perfectly prepared as
possible for their Christian rebirth in baptism. The majority, afraid through
laziness or cowardice of losing the grace acquired through baptism, postponed
the rite until the last moment before death. They thus hoped that at the hour
of death they would be forgiven all the sins they and previously committed
through “the bath of regeneration.”
The ”clinically” baptized were barred
from any grade of priesthood whatsoever. This principle was laid down by the
Council of Neocaesarea in Canon 12: “If anyone is baptized during illness, he
cannot be promoted to the presbyterate, for his faith has come not by free
choice but by necessity” (Neocaesarea 12). The reason for this exclusion is obvious:
to bar those who postponed baptism out of an ulterior motive. By such behavior
they manifested the superficiality of their faith, and their lack of a
self-denial essential to the pursuit of perfection. There was consequently no
doubt that they were unfit to assume priestly duties. How could they have
attracted others to imitate Christ when they themselves were unable to provide
a personal example of imitation?
But if there was no doubt about the
unworthiness of such candidates, the same could not be said of others who accepted
“clinical” baptism without any ulterior motive. With regard to these the
question was put whether their decision to receive baptism was sincere. There
was genuine uncertainty about their conversion, given the conditions under
which it had come about. Could their faith be relied upon as secure? The decision
to exclude them from the ranks of the clerk is understandable. Nevertheless,
Canon 12 allows for exceptions to be made. These are, on the one hand, evidence
of perseverance in a genuine Christian life and, on the other hand, the lack of
suitably qualified candidates: “unless perhaps on account of subsequent zeal
and faith and through the scarcity of men” (Neocaesarea 12).
The case of Novatian provides us with
a historical example. He received “clinical” baptism on account of a serious
illness. Nevertheless, he was later ordained a presbyter, probably by Pope Fabian,
in spite of the protests of the clergy and a large number of the laity “because
it was not lawful for a man such as he who had been sprinkled on his bed to
enter the clergy.” (Letter of Pope Cornelius [251-253] to Fabius [in Eusebius, Hist.
eccl. 6.43) The ordination was carried out after the ordaining bishop had
appealed to the clergy and laity to consent to this single case. It is
inconceivable that he would have done this if he had known of any suspicious
conduct in Novatian incompatible with the priesthood. Information to the
contrary is later, coming from Pope Cornelius whose election Novatian had
strongly opposed. But even Pope Cornelius portrays Novatian as a person from
whom one would not have expected any evil. (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 6.43: “How
extraordinary a change and transformation, dear brother, we have seen take
place in him in a short time.”) (Lewis J. Patsavos, A Noble Task: Entry into
the Clergy in the First Five Centuries [trans. Norman Russell; Brookline,
Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2007], 193-95)