Categories
Uncategorized

VATICAN SAYS SOME CHRISTIANS MAY NEED TO BE REBAPTISED.

7 AUGUST 2020, THE TABLET by Madoc Cairns

The announcement, signed by Pope Francis, stresses that baptisms must use the approved formula in order to be valid.

Cardinal Reinhard Marx, Archbishop of Munich and Freising, baptises a catechenumen, 11 July 2020, Bavaria, Munich
Lino Mirgeler/DPA/PA Images

The Vatican’s doctrinal experts have advised that certain baptisms may need to be redone, after clarifying that baptisms using an adjusted formula are not valid. 

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), the Vatican body in charge of overseeing doctrinal issues, responded to a question on baptism yesterday.

The questioner asked whether baptisms were valid when administered using the form of words: “We baptise you in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost.” There have been recorded instances in some Christian Churches of that form of words, or one similar to it, being used.

In their response, the CDF clarified that the only acceptable formula for baptism is “I baptise you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”

This means that anyone who was baptised using a different form of words should be considered not to have received the sacrament yet.

In some cases, this will mean that baptisms will need to be redone. Although the doctrinal office generally emphasises that baptisms “In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit” are valid, this is not universally the case.

In one notable example, the CDF previously ruled that Mormon baptisms, despite using the correct formula, are invalid due to the non-trinitarian theology of that religion. 

According to the announcement, the modifications to the baptismal formula were introduced to “to express the participation of the family and of those present”, as well as to “avoid the idea of the concentration of a sacred power in the priest to the detriment of…the community”.

The traditional formula, was, however necessary, in part so that participants “recognise with absolute clarity the gesture of Christ in the ritual action of the Church”.

When an individual priest or layperson administers the sacrament of baptism, the document states “it is really Christ Himself who baptises”.

The response, approved by Pope Francis, goes on to emphasise that the parents, godparents, and community already have a significant role in the sacrament – but that this does not justify a change in the baptismal formula. 

PAT SAYS

It’s hard to understand how saying WE instead of I maked baptism invalid.

The intention of the minister is to do what the Church does – to baptise.

Anyone can baptise – be the minister of baptism.

And if we believe God is present, as we do, does God not know what we mean and release the grace of baptism on the baptised?

Is this not an example of Phariseeism?

JOHN PAUL LYTTLE ONGOING CONCERNS.

The word from Portsmouth diocese is that Bishop Philip Egan is concerned that John Paul Lyttle is not staying where the bishop told him to stay.

The blog has also received some information of people being concerned about other matters in the Channel Islands where JPL is from.

This follows a complaint from a young police detective working in Reading where he is also a parishioner and a church volunteer.

JPL told the young man: “I watch porn, I wank and I’m horney all the time”

He was encouraging the young man to stay overnight in the presbytery as the PP was away.

I think Egan had made a great big stick to beat his back with by ordaining JPL hastily.

And all of this will come to a very bad end !

139 replies on “VATICAN SAYS SOME CHRISTIANS MAY NEED TO BE REBAPTISED.”

920
Where does it say in the Bible that Asda smartprice loo paper is s**t?
Well it is. In my opinion. 😀

Like

It was an earlier commenter who said immersion is Biblical. The word or concept of immersion isn’t mentioned in the Bible (same with the Proddy heresy of Sola Scriptura, which is not in the Bible).

Like

11.56
Immersion is certainly suggested. John in the Jordan, the black guy baptised by Philip in Acts

Like

12.51
Thanks for that.
It suggests, though, that infant baptisms weren’t performed in the early days: trauma for the child; that sort of thing.

Like

That’s right. It was full immersion in the early Church.
What is important is intention, not ritual and words: both have repeatedly changed down the centuries.
Early followers of Christ could express the same ‘concern’ about ALL baptisms today, cos they weren’t carried out in the old way.
The Big Dean can confirm this. Doesn’t he have a dactarate in Liturgy? 🎓

Like

Ah, another blog auto-didact who misses the mark.
First, the Didache allows for the pouring of water three times instead of full immersion.
Second, in the third century, Cyprian defended both sprinkling and pouring instead of full immersion.

Like

Cyprian? Isn’t he the fella who hissyfitted: ‘Extra ecclesiam nulla salus!’?
I think he blurted that out after he stubbed his big toe against ornate marble on rising from one of those Roman communal dips for big hairy men.

Like

11:51
Didache and Cyprian are interesting for examining the reception of immersion/baptism.

Neither enjoys the authority of inspired scripture.

Your offensive ad hominem remarks add nothing to the discussion. If anything, they detract from any potential persuasiveness of your argument.

Btw, an aim of education is to make auto-didacts of lovers of learning.

Like

11.51, I’m the poster you called an ‘auto-didact’.
I’d return the compliment, but even such pale praise is too ruddy for you.
The Didache does indeed allow for baptism by affusion, but only if immersive baptism is not practical. Therefore baptism by immersion is the preferred and superior ritual, and almost certainly was the much more common.
So what mark did I miss? Because the mark you thought you made is inside your head alone. Tempting though it may be, I’m too charitable to try hitting it with anything other than wry humour.

Like

But didn’t Jerusalem Jewish aristocrats, like Joseph of Arimathea, have indoor pools? Some of these must have become Followers. Their private pools may have been used for immersive baptism.

Like

7th Aug. @ 11:05 pm
So if a person is in danger of imminent death, in a hospital bed and, connected to electronic medical equipment and they want to be baptised, what do we do? What do you do? What do I do? What do they do?
I believe the Lord we know and love would never deny anybody such grace; as long as the heart and soul desire such a bestowing, His love and grace will flow.
… That’s the whole point of the Incarnation; He takes great pains to meet us where we are, He will do whatever it takes.
He endured Calvary for you and I; us; me; you; him and her — and I do not believe God required a bloody sacrifice for our attonement; I am warmly inclined to the Pauline notion of our ‘Participation in Christ.’
It works both ways: the Son of God unites Himself to our human nature (what an absolute fool: a fool for love!), potentially renewing creation (sometimes this can become quite difficult to see lol: but not always!); but we also become partakers of His divine nature…
He descends into the depths of our humanity, sharing in our hurts and pains, and accompanies us in our dying; but then we take part in His resurrection and glorification. Therefore, death’s hold over you and I, us, is destroyed: as we are now caught up with, and in, our immortal and incorruptible God. We become one in Christ, as St Paul says).
——–
Anyway, back on track with baptism and water. You, I, we; them and us – take your choice. But try not to get your knickers in too much of a twist lol.
——–
Could you imagine Our Lord turning His back on somebody in their hour of need? If we can honestly answer Yes to this question, then maybe there is a piece of the Gospel which we need to rekindle and enliven within our lives. No?
— “He who believes in Me, as scripture says, ‘From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.”‘ [Love].
John 7:38

Like

The Catholic criterion of validity is threefold: the words, the water (intinction suffices), and the intention. Churches recognizing the validity of each other’s baptisms are a major ecumenical enterprise, and presumably takes account of these factors.

Like

Bishop Pat, Gorgeous of Dublin is residing in a diocesan house in the parish of Donaghmede where he frequently entertains Canon Damien O;Reilly and his ‘friend’ Father Gerry Corcoran – PP of the said parish. His Disgrace of of Dublin is well aware of this and does nothing.

Like

12.19: And what business is it if yours, you begrudging fool. He pays his own way. Find something worthwhile to worry about. You morons. Get an education….

Like

12:19 – I wonder if the obsession with Byrne has always been the dastardly work of just one disgruntled ex seminarian? Did he have the misfortune of calling you a friend? Do you think about him late at night when you are drunk? I wonder.

Like

Anon@ 11:57.
Kindly explain what you mean by “melts.” And perhaps you could also explain in what way it applies to ex seminarian, the late John Hume RIP.
MMM

Like

Yes, it is Pharasaism: liturgical legalism.
There’s also a touch of neurosis about these concerns, an insulting nod in God’s direction that he won’t understand our intentions unless our language and behaviour is just so. These concerns reduce God to the functionary of an incantation: a magic spell.
‘How do I love thee? Let me count the ways.’
The opening lines of a poem by Elizabeth Barrett Browning.
There are, of couse multiple such ways; no one way is the correct way, the only valid way.
The same goes for baptism.

Like

10.52
Words didn’t matter to the woman caught in adultery. Jesus knew her heart, and responded to her wordless appeal for mercy.
And the woman with an 18 year haemorrhage wordlessly sought Jesus’ healing by touching the hem of his garment.
Intentions matter ultimately, not words.
The ‘Church’, as you put it, has learned nothing but neo-Pharisaism.

Like

There is a principle of sacramental theology which runs “Lex orandi lex credendi.” (“The law of what must be believed is the law of what must be prayed.”) With two thousand years behind it the church has learned from experience that it does matter which words are used.

Yes, change occurs. For example, the introduction of the word “filioque” (“and from the Son”) into the phrase that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. Today, that single Latin word is one of the two fundamental points of doctrine separating Roman Catholic Christians from Orthodox (Oriental and Eastern) Christians (The other is the universal primacy of the bishop of Rome). Changes, even small ones have a habit of developing from an option to an obligation.

So, all in all, the decision of the CDF, whose role includes oversight of matters of faith and belief makes sense.

Like

John Paul Little – We have not got a clue where he is, and the Bishop does not know. Anything else you are told is a total lie. What is, even more to be questioned is Egan’s actions in ordaining him against all advice, and Bishop Hollis refusing to go to the ordination. Other Bishops also told Egan not to do the ordination. No action is being taken against Egan for this mess. Many of us ask how the ordination could have taken place after the question at the start ” Do you judge him to be worthy ?” It is clear that after any inquiry amongst the people of Christ, and those concerned with his training the answer was ” No .”

Like

Wondering how Cuthbert Brogan is on the Diocesan Safeguarding Committee.
The blog ‘Another Abbot Extraordinary’ shoves a lot of shit. Just waiting for it to hit the fan.

Like

Without any indicator guaranteeing that one is correctly baptized or married or ordained, the church loses all identity as a society, In the case of marriage society loses all identity as a society. Who needs words and forms, let’s just get married and divorced on the basis of feelings and mute gestures. After all, animals do fine without marriage and without legal forms.

Like

Baptism of desire would still apply in a case where this formula had been used if the person were to die, or were in danger of death, which is the context of baptism of desire.

Like

Boy! You sound a right friggin’ jobsworth.

I bet you still drive with your hands in the Ten to two position.

Like

11.01
That is NOT baptism of desire.
No verbal formula is necessary for this.
Are you a canonist?
Or does OCD and ignorance explain your error?

Like

1.02 pm
It’s a good idea to think before you dash into print, to respond rather than to give a knee-jerk reaction so that you avoid mistakes.
If that formula had been used it would have been invalid.
If someone who was invalidly baptised wished they had been baptised in the face of death, they are baptised by desire.

Like

2.04
It’s an even better idea to learn the importance of clear writing.
Your post at 11.01 can suggest that baptism of desire is dependent on a vebal formula.

Like

Who changed it and why? They must have had a theological intention. It’s rather like the deliberate mistranslation in Paul VI’s Mass, where Credo becomes “We believe”.

Liked by 1 person

11:30
The Creed of Nicea (325) uses in Latin “credo” (I believe) and in Greek “πιστεύομεν” (We believe). The primary language of the city of Nicea in the fourth century was Greek. The two are contemporaneous.

Like

I realise that people have not read the documents of Vatican II. I have. Sacrosanctum Concilium states:
“No other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.”

Like

Does that no other person bit include Jesus, or his inspiration?

Honestly. Y’id think the Sacraments belonged to the Vatican.

Like

Why is William Mulvihill suddenly interested in the popular US author Tom Clancy, best known for his technically detailed espionage and military-science storylines set during and after the Cold War?

Like

I’ve seen them on sale in airport bookshops and in charity shops. I haven’t read any of his and at this stage of my life I probably never will.

Like

11:27 am

Never say never. There’s more than one Clancy clan.
William might have a book or two up his sleeve.
Be open to new authors.
Expand your mind Bro.

Like

The Catholic Church shows itself yet again to be mechanistic and legalistic, more interested in the niffnaff and trivia than in what is in people’s hearts and desires. Ridiculous.

Like

JP Power Bottom Lyttle will have run off to be with some buddies, no doubt with whom he is able to engage in his PB activities, and to disappear, with no intention of returning to ministry, or of completing the ‘special project’ which was given out as his cover story at the beginning of his ‘furlough’. + Egan does have big questions to ask about ordaining this man when there were so many red flags. Arrogant or what ? Maybe the Virgin Mary told him to do it ?!

Like

Re Baptisms: What a load of shite too many people with too much time on their hands in the Vatican trying to count angels dancing on the head of a pin.

Re JPL: Gone to live his chosen lifestyle, and the best of luck to him!

Like

the problem may lie in the “we” but don’t expect the Tablet or the CDF to tell a story clearly. If by “we” the Roman communion as such, or any other specific denomination, were meant, then it’s not valid. If it meant those who were ministers at the time (which is what I think Pat has in mind), it could pass: then the “I” doesn’t mean “I” as ordained clergyman anyway, it merely means the person(s) doing the splashing. In the former case the remedy should be to consider the invalidity as having been “commuted” to validity, and usual catholic sponsoring and instructing should suffice.

Like

But it’s not the Catholic Church ; it’s just a few aul men we’re talking about here.

They ain’t the Church.

The People of God make the rules, and I don’t believe those people would call the Vatican’s concerns anything other than an inane quibble.

Like

Drop this Vatican II “People of God” crap. God does not have favourites, there are no chosen people. Everyone on earth is the People of God, not just Catholics.

Like

Well@9:48, I’ve certainly dealt with it. As said below, telling it all, kit and caboodle, to stick it ……….🌞 sunshine 🌞
MMM

Like

The Vatican would tell Jesus he didn’t do the Crucifixion right. Y’know, left out an important detail. Didn’t say all that stuff on the Cross in Latin.

Like

He did. He spoke beautiful English. ‘Verily, I say unto you.’ And all that.
All thon stuff he said in the Bible is in English. 😨

Like

Did John or the first Christians baptise in the name of the Trinity. Had they even got the packaged and branded Jesus we are presented with. Trading Standards boys I said Trading Standards.

Like

‘Sacrament’, from the Latin, ‘sacramentum’, meaning ‘sign of the sacred’.
If you study liturgical history, you’ll learn that the signs of the sacred have varied with taste and custom. So obviously the signs aren’t of paramount importance, otherwise they’d have been a uniform fixture from the beginning.
What’s wrong with a bit of variety? God responds with grace to heartfelt intention, not to verbal and ritualistic formulas.
Grace comes from God, not from words and ritual.

Like

I hate to tell you this, but not all the words in Scripture that are attributed to Jesus were actually spoken by him. Even if we assume they were, their meanings weren’t all to be taken literally:
‘I am the vine; you are the branches’;
If your eye offends you, pluck it out’;
‘I am the good shepherd’.
And so on.
‘He who hears you, hears me’ Yes, when we speak in his name. But the ‘Church’ has not always spoken, or acted, in HIS name.
Resesrch Church history. You’ll see.

Like

12:51 is insulting the intelligence of the blog’s readers. Secondly, it’s tactless to state the obvious. She or he may have just discovered that all the words put into Jesus’ mouth by NT authors were not spoken by him. Does she or he think Henry V said “This day is called the feast of Crispian.” before Agincourt?
It’s their inclusion in the canon which indicates the inspired status of the gospels rather than their historicity.
Christians have betrayed these words of scripture throughout the centuries. That doesn’t invalidate them. On the contrary, their enduring worth is thereby vindicated.

Like

3.07
It was not my intention to insult anyone’s intelligence.
And it is hardly tactless to state the ‘obvious’ if it isn’t, well, obvious. The poster at 12.03 clearly HADN’T discovered that all the words attributed to Jesus in the NT were spoken actually by him. This is the only obvious thing here.
I have come to have serious doubts about the so-called ‘inspiration of Scripture’. It is too corrupted by the self-evident culturally conditioned personal preferences, ignorance, prejudices, and (goodness knows what else) of the ‘sacred authors’ to make such a brassy claim.

Like

JPL is a bit of a rascal is he not? I wonder what he has done now.
Also, do the concerns in the Channel Islands relate to other ol’ gingers?

Like

You mean all those words printed in red in my bible are not the actual words spoken by Jesus?
I’m shocked – the world will never be the same again.

Like

Now howl on there a minute or two while I give y’ an eddication.
It’s possible, so ’tis, that the holy authors paraphrased at least some of what Jesus said; y’know, expressed the gist of it, like we all do wi’ one another, cos human memory loses elasticity over the decades, and the gospels weren’t written down until some thirty or more years after Jesus’ death. If anything before this was written down piecemeal, we have no evidence of it; so the purity of Jesus’ teaching probably got a bit tweaked here and there, not just by time’s corrosion of human memory, but also by quite deliberate alteration to suit the preference or prejudice of some one or other. His pet project, or his pet hate.
The only words in the Gospel more likely to have been spoken by Jesus are those expressed in Aramaic. Y’know, words like : ‘Elhoi! Elhoi! Lama sabbachthani?’

Like

Mother and Teacher of all nations—such is the Catholic Church in the mind of her Founder, Jesus Christ; to hold the world in an embrace of love, that men, in every age, should find in her their own completeness in a higher order of living, and their ultimate salvation. She is “the pillar and ground of the truth.” To her was entrusted by her holy Founder the twofold task of giving life to her children and of teaching them and guiding them—both as individuals and as nations—with maternal care. Great is their dignity, a dignity which she has always guarded most zealously and held in the highest esteem.

Like

Believe me, Johnny boyo: the Catholic Church was the farthest thing from my mind back in the day.
If you think I had anything to do with the corrupt, child-raping institution you are idolising in my name, you had better pass into the next life in nothing but your birthday suit, because where you’ll be spending eternity there are no air conditioners. Amen.

Like

3.16
Cohort of haters?
I’ll take that as a backhanded compliment, because I’m more than happy to hate the corruption and child-rape of an institution that has become one of the most morally repugnant in human history.
Thank you.

Like

I have never used “we” in celebrating baptisms. I definitely know I’m not royalty!! This concern of Vatican Liturgists seems suoerfluous.

Like

I’d love t’know the opinion of the Big Dean on this angels-on-a-pinhead quibble.
The Big Dean is a Daktur of Liturgy, so I’m sure he cud do some chin-rubbin’ opinin’ on the matter.

Like

Rest assured – all mistakes such as elective or selective mutism, or incorrect wording ,or water too hot or too cold, or past present or future mistakes, with mutual understanding co-operation calmness sincere charity- all mistakes can be rectified.

Like

Judging by the antics of some of the Meath clergy the priests of Dublin will be major donors for the erection of that wall.

Like

I can assure you of one thing, Dublin will not pay a single penny toward that wall.
I told Tom Deenihan that under my watch there will be no priests incardinated into Dublin from Meath, no priests will be allowed to go AWOL on my patch and that for far too long Dublin has had to put up with the shenanigans of MEATH.
He told me that he would withdraw all support for me and my campaign, and I looked him in the eyes and said, ”the wall has just got 6 feet taller” 🙂
#Hep2020
#MakeDublinGreatAgain

Like

Pat, a more interesting topic for discussion might be held around the ‘ordination’ of self-selecting bishops without the papal mandate.

Like

indeed! For one who ridicules ‘ontological change’ – what is ordination? Surely just a public promulgation of a designated office by a competent authority. So Pat you may have the hat but without the mandate you are to juxtapose the scriptures like a shepherd without sheep.

Like

Eusebius, leave the poor man alone. If he wants to declare himself the Patriarch of Toytown that’s his prerogative; it’s harmless nonsense. Don’t go getting those frilly lace knickers in a knot.

Like

2:36 pm
God, and God alone, is the ordainer of all virtues.
And of what significance are so-called Roman papal-mandates to non-Romans?
From what keeps cropping up in the news, so-called papal mandates are nothing to be proud of: quite the contrary in fact.
———-
Article xxxviii.—”The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this realm of England.”

— By “hath” is meant “ought to have,” as the Articl in the 36th Canon and the Oath of Supremacy show, in which the same doctrine is drawn out more at length. “No foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate, hath, or ought to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm.” — (I hear through the grapevine that this has just been made abundantly clear, with great ferocity, in Liverpool).
— This is the profession which every one must in consistency make, who does not join the Roman Church. If the Bishop of Rome has jurisdiction and authority here, why do we not acknowledge it, and submit to him? To say then the above words, is nothing more or less than to say “I am not a Roman Catholic;” and whatever reasons there are against saying them, are so far reasons against remaining in the English Church. They are a mere enunciation of the principle of Anglicanism.
— Here endeth the lesson. For now.

Like

I have. But the real successors of Christ are those who do his will.
This isn’t ancient Judaism, y’know, where being a descendant of Abraham alone was believed sufficient ground for special privilege before Yahweh.
The so-called ‘Successors of the Apostles’, the Roman Catholic episcopate, haven’t exactly been leading moral lights in history, especially recent history, now have they?

Like

5:15
Father Flunk
Are YOU at it again. Are YOU fooling around into frills while back on the booze.
Are YOU back doing the usual.
If his Lordship gets wind he will have a pink fit.
Come clean.

Like

Bishop I think all Christians should be baptised again because the first one obviously didn’t work, going by the raving on your blog today.

Like

Actually baptism is wasted on babies.
When I joined the Orthodox I asked to be rebaptized. I didn’t feel my Roman baptism was invalid but I wanted the baptismal experience and to be cleansed of all the sins of my wicked past. They hesitated but finally acquiesced. What an exhilarating experiencel The hymn, And Can It Be, conveys many of the feelings I have when I think about it.

Like

Is it just me, or are people a bit more tetchy on the lately? I wonder if it’s the lockdown and the extra worries we have? My mental health has certainly deteriorated.

Like

4 39: Yes, delight in being a hater but tell me anywhere in history or in your personal life where hatred achieved anything positive!! Or is your mind so entrenched in hatred that you too are morally reprehensible? Think so. If you are a Christian, you should reaquaint yourself with Jesus’s words.

Like

👜👜👜👜👜👜👜: MYOB or I’ll hand bag you…👠👠👠👠👒👒👒🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😁😁😁

Like

The cheesy background music (haha). What is the cape for? He needs to look at himself; the sin of gluttony. Lay off the food.

Like

Has this gut stepped out of a time machine from the 1940’s? What a buffoon. Id Dublin are pinning their hopes on the likes of him theyr’e f%&$£d.
Are you sure this isn’t a comedic sendup – a reincarnation of Fr, Ted
“This might be an ecumenical matter”

Like

O Pat. What are we coming to? Just visited his facebook – the guy is a pathetic relic of a long gone era. Makes my flesh crawl!

Like

Pat go all out and expose the West of Ireland priest moral dilemma of having an affair and sending the woman to England for an abortion. His bishop must remove him from all public ministry at least.

Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s