Note that for someone to be baptized, it is necessary that the minister intend to baptize and not merely to bathe or to wash the body; but it does not seem necessary, as regards the effect of Baptism, that he should know what Baptism is, or that in it grace is infused, or that it is a sacrament; nor is it needed that he believe this. Indeed, even though he believes the contrary and thinks the whole thing (about Baptism) as nonsense and deception, nevertheless Baptism produces its
effect. Likewise, it is not necessary that he who baptizes should know what the Church is, or from
where the Church or the person baptized is, nor that
he mentally intends to do what the Church does.
Even if he in his mind should wish to perform the
contrary, that is, not to do what the Church does,
nevertheless he does it, because if he keeps the
form, the person nevertheless is baptized, as long
as the minister intends to baptize. That’s why,
if someone in the case of necessity, or even outside
of necessity, were to go to a Saracen and say: “Baptize me,” and teaches him the form, and the Saracen baptizes him, not believing that through the immersion anything happens except a soaking, and does not intend to baptize him, or even to soak him according to the intention of him who asks the Baptism, namely, that Baptism should effect whatever it can effect, and the person baptizing intends to confer whatever the other ministers who confer Baptism intend, although he does not believe it can effect anything, then the Baptism is still valid. But if he does not intend this to practice it, of course he will not baptize, and it is unnecessary that he knows anything else what the Church understands about these things, or even
what he knows or believes to be the Church. (De Baptismo et ejus effectu. Innocent 1570, 459-460)
The person baptizing, therefore, even if he’d be a
non-Catholic, confers a valid Baptism, as long as
he wills to baptize, even though he doesn’t un-
derstand or believe what the Church is, or does
not know anything about what the Church does.
The reason is that the minister does not need to
perform the same thing what the Church intends
but what the Church does. St. Thomas Aquinas
summarizes: “If the form is kept, and nothing
outwardly done which expresses a contrary in-
tention, the Baptism is valid.” (Source: Thomas Aquinas 1947, 237. Distinctio VI, Q. 1, Art. II)
Pope St. Pius V
The Church has ever since, both in theory and
in practice, emphasized that doubts about the
validity of baptisms based upon the minister’s
intention are imprudent and scrupulous. The
Instruction of the Sacred Congregation of the
Inquisition (later the Holy Office) of 30 January,
1833, is of particular interest. A convert to the
Catholic faith said that he was worried about his
Baptism, because a schismatic Bishop, who also
had recently converted to the true faith, had de-
clared, that while he was still in schism, he had
never had the intention of truly baptizing when
he baptized the children of Catholics. This was
because he had hated the Catholic religion before his repentance. The
instruction referred to St. Pius V’s declaration
that Calvinist Baptism was valid, because the
private belief of the minister against baptismal
regeneration does not annul his general prevailing intention of doing what Christ instituted,
or what is done in the true Church of Christ. A
generic intention of doing what the Church does,
or of doing what Christ instituted, or what
Christians do, is sufficient. And the Instruction
rejected the doubt about the validity of the Baptism in question as being imprudent and without
sufficient foundation. (Leeming 1956, 472)
In 1872 the following question was presented
to the Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition:
“Whether Baptism administered by heretics is doubtful, because of lack of intention of doing what Christ willed, if an express declaration were made by the minister before Baptism, that Baptism produced no effect upon the soul.” The answer was: “In the negative, because, notwithstanding the error about the effect of Baptism, the intention of doing what the Church does is not excluded.” ( Note: In France, during the religious wars between Catholics
and Calvinist Huguenots in the 1500s, the question arose
whether to rebaptize those baptized by the Calvinists who
wished to convert to Catholicism. The question was taken
to Pope St. Pius V, who answered that they shouldn’t. The
council of Embrun, in 1576, therefore decided, that since
the Pope had defined that Baptism done by the Calvinists
was valid, because they used correct matter and form, and had the general intention of doing what Christ instituted,
those who were baptized by the Calvinists are not to be baptized again conditionally. (Mangenot 1910, 340))
From Cases Above, we conclude that examples above are Valid Baptisms, but Illicit. But, although that are Illicit, should not be baptized again because Catholic Church taught that only One Baptism which is done,
"There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; one LORD, one Faith, one Baptism " (Ephesians 4:4-6)
So, about Heretics or Schismatics who converted to Catholicism, they only confess The Catholic Faith with Oath to Council of Trent and Council of Florence.
About Invalid Baptism and Conditional Baptism for any doubt :
Invalid Baptism could be happened when there an error to Baptism Formula or Matter which were used for Baptism. Tertullian tells us (On Baptism 13): "The law of baptism (tingendi) has been imposed and the form prescribed: Go, teach the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. (Matthew 28:19)"
St. Justin Martyr (First Apology 1) testifies to the practice in his time. St. Ambrose (On the Mysteries 4) declares: "Unless a person has been baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, he can not obtain the remission of his sins," St. Cyprian (Epistle 72), rejecting the validity of baptism given in the name of Christ only, affirms that the naming of all the Persons of the Trinity was commanded by the Lord (in plena et adunata Trinitate). Pope St. Stephen I agreed what St. Cyprian said, but Pope St. Stephen I received Validity of Baptism from any Heretics without view what denomination was, during they used Valid Form and Matter, Pope St. Stephen still received their baptism. The same is declared by many other primitive writers, as St. Jerome (IV, in Matt.), Origen (De Principiis I.2), St. Athanasius (Against the Arians, Oration 4), St. Augustine (On Baptism 6.25). It is not, of course, absolutely necessary that the common names Father, Son, and Holy Ghost be used, provided the Persons be expressed by words that are equivalent or synonymous. But a distinct naming of the Divine Persons is required and the form: "I baptize thee in the name of the Holy Trinity", would be of more than doubtful validity.
The singular form "In the name", not "names", is also to be employed, as it expresses the unity of the Divine nature. When, through ignorance, an accidental, not substantial, change has been made in the form (as In nomine patriâ for Patris), the baptism is to be held valid.
The mind of the Church as to the necessity of serving the trinitarian formula in this sacrament has been clearly shown by her treatment of baptism conferred by heretics. Any ceremony that did not observe this form has been declared invalid. The Montanists baptized in the name of the Father and the Son and Montanus and Priscilla (St. Basil, Epistle 188). As a consequence, the Council of Laodicea ordered their rebaptism. The Arians at the time of the Council of Nicæa do not seem to have tampered with the baptismal formula, for that Council does not order their rebaptism during The Arians used the True Form for Baptism. When, then, St. Athanasius (Against the Arians, Oration 2) and St. Jerome (Against the Luciferians) declare the Arians to have baptized in the name of the Creator and creatures, they must either refer to their doctrine or to a later changing of the sacramental form. It is well known that the latter was the case with the Spanish Arians and that consequently converts from the sect were rebaptized like Clovis I who was rebaptized by St. Remigius. The Anomæans, a branch of the Arians, baptized with the formula: "In the name of the uncreated God and in the name of the created Son, and in the name of the Sanctifying Spirit, procreated by the created Son" , their baptism is Invalid and must be re baptized or baptized again conditionally (Epiphanius, Hær., lxxvii)
Other Arian sects, such as the Eunomians and Aetians, baptized "in the death of Christ". Converts from Sabellianism were ordered by the First Council of Constantinople (can. vii) to be rebaptized because the doctrine of Sabellius that there was but one person in the Trinity had infected their baptismal form. The two sects sprung from Paul of Samosata, who denied Christ's Divinity, likewise conferred invalid baptism. They were the Paulianists and Photinians. Pope Innocent I (Ad. Episc. Maced., vi) declares that these sectaries did not distinguish the Persons of the Trinity when baptizing. The Council of Nicæa (canon 19) ordered the rebaptism of Paulianists, and the Council of Arles (can. xvi and xvii) decreed the same for both Paulianists and Photinians.
Nor let anyone suppose that it is repeated by the Church when she baptises anyone whose previous Baptism was doubtful, making use of this formula: " If thou art baptised, I baptise thee not again but if thou art not yet baptised, I baptise thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." In such cases Baptism is not to be considered as impiously repeated, but as holily, yet conditionally, administered.
In this connection, however, there are some matters, in which, to the very great injury of the Sacrament, abuses are of almost daily occurrence, and which therefore demand the diligent attention of pastors. For there are not wanting those who think that no sin is committed if they indiscriminately administer conditional Baptism.
Hence if an infant be brought to them, they think that no inquiry need be made as to whether it was previously baptised, but proceed immediately to baptise the child. Nay more, although they be well aware that the Sacrament was administered at home, they do not hesitate to repeat its administration in the Church
conditionally, making use of the solemn ceremonies of the Church. This certainly they cannot do without sacrilege and without incurring what theologians call an irregularity. According to the authority of Pope Alexander the conditional form of Baptism is to be used only when after due
inquiry doubts are entertained as to the validity of the previous Baptism. In no other case is it ever lawful to administer Baptism a second time, even conditionally.
On Valid and Licit Baptism according to Traditional Roman Catholic:
Three Classes Of Ceremonies In Baptism
In order that the pastor's instructions may follow a certain plan and that the people may find it: easier to remember his words, all the ceremonies and prayers which the Church uses in the administration of Baptism are to be reduced to three heads. The first comprehends such as are observed before coming to the baptismal font; the second, such as are used at the font; the third, those that usually follow the administration of the Sacrament.
Ceremonies That Are Observed Before Coming To The Font: Consecration Of Baptismal Water
In the first place, then, the water to be used in Baptism should be prepared. The baptismal font is consecrated with the oil of mystic unction; not, however, at all times, but, according to ancient usage, only on certain feasts, which are justly deemed the greatest and the most holy solemnities in the year. The water of Baptism was consecrated on the vigils of those feasts; and on those days alone, except in cases of necessity, it was also the practice of the ancient Church to administer Baptism. But although the Church, on account of the dangers to which life is continually exposed, has deemed it expedient to change her discipline in this respect, she still observes with the greatest solemnity the festivals of Easter and Pentecost on which the baptismal water is to be consecrated.
The Person To Be Baptised Stands At The Church Door
After the consecration of the water the other ceremonies that precede Baptism are next to be explained. The persons to be baptised are brought or conducted a to the door of the church and are strictly forbidden to enter, as unworthy to be admitted into the house of God, until they have cast off the yoke of the most degrading servitude and devoted themselves unreservedly to Christ the Lord and His most just authority.
Catechetical Instruction
The priest then asks what they demand of the Church; and having received the answer, he first instructs them in the doctrines of the Christian faith, of which a profession is to be made in Baptism.
This the priest does in a brief catechetical instruction, a practice which originated, no doubt, in the precept of our Lord addressed to His Apostles: Go ye into the whole world, and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. From this command we may learn that Baptism is not to be administered until, at least, the principal truths of our religion are explained.
But as the catechetical form consists of many interrogations, if the person to be instructed be an adult, he himself answers; if an infant, the sponsor answers for him according to the prescribed form and makes the solemn promise.
The Exorcism
The exorcism comes next in order. It consists of words of sacred and religious import and of prayers, and is used to expel the devil, to weaken and crush his power.
The Salt
To the exorcism are added other ceremonies, each of which, being mystical, has its own clear signification. When, for instance, salt is put into the mouth of the person to be baptised, this evidently means that, by the doctrines of faith and by the gift of grace, he shall be delivered from the corruption of sin, shall experience a relish for good works, and shall be delighted with the food of divine wisdom.
The Sign Of The Cross
Next his forehead, eyes, breast, shoulders and ears are signed with the sign of the cross, to declare, that by the mystery of Baptism, the senses of the person baptised are opened and strengthened, to enable him to receive God, and to understand and observe His Commandments.
The Saliva
His nostrils and ears are next touched with spittle, and he is then immediately admitted to the baptismal font. By this ceremony we understand that, as sight was given to the blind man mentioned in the Gospel, whom the Lord after He had spread clay on his eyes commanded to wash them in the waters of Siloe, so through the efficacy of holy Baptism a light is let in on the mind, which enables it to discern heavenly truth.
The Ceremonies Observed After Coming To The Font
After the performance of these ceremonies the persons to be baptised approach the baptismal font, at which are performed other rites and ceremonies which present a summary of the Christian religion.
The Renunciation Of Satan
Three distinct times the person to be baptised is asked by the priest: Dost thou renounce Satan, and all his works, and all his pomps? To each of which he, or the sponsor in his name, replies, I renounce. Whoever, then, purposes to enlist, under the standard of Christ, must first of all, enter into a sacred and solemn engagement to renounce the devil and the world, and always to hold them in utter detestation as his worst enemies.
The Profession Of Faith
Next, standing at the baptismal font, he is interrogated by the priest in these words: Dost thou believe in God, the Father Almighty? To which he answers: I believe. Being similarly questioned on the remaining Articles of the Creed, he solemnly professes his faith. These two promises contain, it is clear, the sum and substance of the law of Christ.
The Wish To Be Baptised
When the Sacrament is now about to be administered, the priest asks the candidate if he wishes to be baptised. After an answer in the affirmative has been given by him, or, if he is an infant, by the sponsor, the priest immediately performs the salutary ablution, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
As man, by yielding the assent of his will to the wicked suggestions of Satan, fell under a just sentence of condemnation; so God will have none enrolled in the number of His soldiers but those whose service is voluntary, that by a willing obedience to His commands they may obtain eternal salvation.
The Ceremonies That Follow Baptism: Chrism
After the person has been baptised, the priest anoints the crown of his head with chrism, thus giving him to understand, that from that day he is united as a member to Christ, His Head, and ingrafted on His body; and that he is, therefore, called a Christian from Christ, as Christ is so called from chrism. What the chrism signifies, the prayers then offered by the priest, as St. Ambrose observes, sufficiently explain.
The White Garment
On the person baptised the priest then puts a white garment saying: Receive this white garment, which mayest thou carry unstained before the judgmentseat of our Lord Jesus Christ; that thou mayest have eternal life. Instead of a white garment, infants, because not formally dressed, receive a white cloth, accompanied by the same words.
According to the teaching of the Fathers this symbol signifies the glory of the resurrection to which we are born by Baptism, the brightness and beauty with which the soul, when purified from the stains of sin, is invested in Baptism, and the innocence and integrity which the person who has received Baptism should preserve throughout life.
The Lighted Candle
A lighted taper is then put into the hand of the baptised to signify that faith, inflamed by charity, which is received in Baptism, is to be fed and augmented by the exercise of good works.
The Name Given In Baptism
Finally, a name is given the person baptised. It should be taken from some person whose eminent sanctity has given him a place in the catalogue of the Saints. The similarity of name will stimulate each one to imitate the virtues and holiness of the Saint, and, moreover, to hope and pray that he who is the model for his imitation will also be his advocate and watch over the safety of his body and soul.
Wherefore those are to be reproved who search for the names of heathens, especially of those who were the greatest monsters of iniquity, to bestow upon their children. By such conduct they practically prove how little they regard Christian piety when they so fondly cherish the memory of impious men, as to wish to have their profane names continually echo in the ears of the faithful.
