Rss

Baptized using the titles “Father, Son and Holy Ghost”? You’re baptized into the Vatican cult.

Chances are, if you are a Denominational Christian reading this, and you belong to one of the mainline cults, like the Vatican Roman “Catholic” cult, the “Church” of England, Episcopalian, Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, non-”Oneness” Pentecostal, or independent “Charismatic” etc. etc., you were baptized in a ceremony where the baptizing minister called over you “I baptize you in the name of the Father, and in the name of the Son, and in the name of the Holy Spirit” or some such similar spell. This formula is of the Devil. It is a witchcraft mantra designed by the Devil to obliterate the one and only NAME you should have been baptized in, the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, or “Adonay Yeshua Ha-Mashiach” as the original Jewish Christians said it.

The Bible says: KJV John 20. 31 “But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name“. Now you see why Satan wants to obliterate that precious Name of Jesus. He wants you to die spiritually and physically. Eternal life only comes through the Name of Jesus Christ.

Like all heresies this one of substituting the titles Father Son and Holy Spirit for Jesus Christ uses a distorted interpretation of Scripture to back up its lies. Just think how Roman “Catholics” love to quote the Scripture which says “Thou art Peter and on this rock I will build my Church”, and they say “You see Peter is the rock on which the Church was built”! Even if Jesus was saying here Peter was the rock, that wouldn’t mean the so-called POPE is the rock! Neither would it mean the Roman cult is the rock. This interpretation is utter gibberish. But in any case Jesus said here “THOU art Peter, AND on THIS rock”, clearly making a difference between the THOU He was talking to (Peter) directly, and THE ROCK, a different thing, which He was pointing Peter TO. That’s just plain and straight. Now likewise the Trinity baptizers use Matthew 28. 19 where Jesus said to His disciples after His resurrection: Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost (= Holy Spirit). “There” they say “That’s it, Jesus said use that formula”. No, Jesus said use the NAME (singular), NOT THE NAMES (plural) FATHER, SON, HOLY SPIRIT, but THE NAME OF (= BELONGING TO) the Father, which also is “of” (belongs to) the Son and the Holy Spirit. Big difference. That’s why you can read the Book of Acts which tells you how the Apostles themselves baptized people and everywhere, in every case, they used the NAME of JESUS CHRIST. The Father’s Name IS Jesus Christ, the Son’s Name IS Jesus Christ, and the Spirit’s Name IS Jesus Christ, because it is the Spirit of Jesus. We don’t worship three gods, we worship One God who was manifest in the flesh in the form of Jesus the Messiah, and who took upon Himself humanity, and therefore the human name Jesus. He is the LORD (the Father), Jesus (the Son, humanity), Christ, which means Anointed with the Spirit (Holy Ghost).

Why did the Evil spirit do this? As was said above to obliterate the Name of Jesus Christ, by which we get Eternal Life. He splits the One God up into three “gods” (he calls them PERSONS), and so dismembers our LIFE. This happened in Rome because the Roman “Catholic” cult combined Christianity with paganism, and in paganism they commonly worshiped three gods, like Jupiter, Juno and Minerva, the three chief deities of Rome itself.

Christian water baptism is a baptism of fellowship between Jews and Gentiles (= non-Jews). It is a ritual washing which God ordained in the Old Testament to be done by anyone who wished to fellowship with Jews in their worship of the One True God. (Read Leviticus 17.) When it is done by Christians it is done using the Name of Jesus the Messiah. Not just “Jesus”, now, like some Oneness Pentecostals baptize. There are many Jesuses, especially in Hispanic countries, as you know. But there is only ONE JESUS THE CHRIST, THE MESSIAH, that is Jesus of Nazareth. When the Apostles and their disciples baptized people, they said “in the Name of Yeshua (Jesus) Ha-Mashiach (the Messiah)”. That immediately cut out of it any establishment Pharisee or Sadducee who didn’t believe in Jesus of Nazareth. No way would such a Jew be baptized in the Name of Jesus the Messiah who they utterly rejected and cursed. Now the Apostles could have said, “I baptize you in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit” and no Pharisee would have had any problem with it, because the Pharisees believed in the Father (God, the Father of Israel), they too believed in a Son of God (the pre-existent Messiah, the Son of David to come), and they too believed in the Holy Spirit who inspired the prophets of Israel. There was no controversy there. There was no hindrance there. But there was in that hated name of Jesus the Crucified One. The pagans too had no problem at all with Father Son and Holy Spirit. They had a Father god, Jupiter, a Son, the Logos, and a (female) Spirit, Juno. So you could say “Father, Son and Holy Spirit” in their pagan baptisms and that was OK. So the Roman “Catholic” cult adopted this anti-God mantra because it was good pagan theology. It satisfied the anti-Christian Rabbis, it satisfied the pagans, and every other Tom, Dick and Harry except the Bible-believing Christians.

If you read Acts chapter 19 you will see that all believers, in order to fellowship with the original Jewish Apostles, HAD TO BE REBAPTIZED IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST IF THEY HAD BEEN BAPTIZED ANY OTHER WAY. That hasn’t changed at all. If you are baptized in the titles of “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” you are baptized in pagan, Roman “Catholic” cult baptism, and you must be rebaptized in the Name of Jesus Christ to enter the Jewish-Christian true Bible fellowship.

Now not only that but our great Rabbi, our only Rabbi, Jesus Himself, taught another thing from Leviticus 17, which even the Apostles, who had been brought up, many of them, as Pharisees, did not know from their previous Rabbis. That was this. In the last verse of Leviticus 17 it says that the washing of fellowship is only complete, when the feet are trampled in water also. The original Hebrew says “trample in water” using the Hebrew word “kabbes” which describes the action of a clothes washer when he tramples clothes in water to clean them. In our King James version it translates this word “wash them” meaning “wash clothes”, but the word “them” has been added in the translation, as shown by the King James translators because they put that word in italics. The translators thought the meaning was wash clothes, because in the Hebrew it refers to the action of a clothes washer, and washing of clothes is mentioned in the previous verse, but there is no word for clothes at all in this verse. God said the baptized person must put their clothes in the baptism water too, along with their whole body (showing sprinkling or pouring water for baptism is wrong), AND MUST ALSO TRAMPLE HIS FEET IN WATER. Moses commanded THAT NOT ONE WORD MUST BE ADDED TO THE LAW, OR TAKEN AWAY FROM IT, BUT IT MUST BE DONE EXACTLY AS WRITTEN (Deuteronomy 4. 2). WE CANNOT ADD THE WORD “CLOTHES” HERE. No the Scripture says, UNLESS WHEN A PERSON IS RITUALLY WASHED FOR FELLOWSHIP, HE ALSO TRAMPLES HIS FEET IN WATER, THEN HIS INIQUITY WILL REMAIN AND NOT BE COUNTED AS FORGIVEN BY GOD. That is because that person has not done exactly what God instructed. Now if you read John’s Gospel Chapter 13 you will find this passage:

“3 Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God;
4 He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself.
5 After that he poureth water into a bason, and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded.
6 Then cometh he to Simon Peter: and Peter saith unto him, Lord, dost thou wash my feet?
7 Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter.
8 Peter saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him, If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me.
9 Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head.
10 Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.
11 For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, Ye are not all clean.
12 So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments, and was set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you?
13 Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.
14 If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another’s feet.
15 For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.
16 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him.
17 If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.”

You can see that Jesus did everything EXACTLY AS GOD SAID WITHOUT QUESTION EVEN IF NO OTHER RABBI DID IT, HE DID IT EXACTLY BY THE WORD OF GOD IN LEVITICUS 17. Notice even the WAY Jesus fulfilled this verse EXACTLY AS WRITTEN. The action done by the person with his feet must be LIKE A FULLER OR CLOTHES-WASHER, that is, standing OUT OF THE WATER and HAVING HIS FEET IN THE WATER. (Unlike the full body-baptism in the preceding verse.) Also a clothes-washer USUALLY, NOT ALWAYS, does this act FOR OTHERS (in order to wash the clothes of other people). So here Jesus commanded the disciples to SERVE ONE ANOTHER. Clothes type the human spirit. They must be WASHED by the ministry of other believers serving us and administering to us the Word (water).

Without foot-washing like this you have no valid Scriptural baptism at all. He that is washed (= baptized) STILL NEEDS TO WASH HIS FEET (trample in water like a clothes washer, last verse Leviticus 17) OR HE HAS NOT DONE WHAT MUST BE DONE FOR ANY GENTILE TO FELLOWSHIP WITH A LAW-KEEPING JEWISH FELLOW-BELIEVER IN THE MESSIAH JESUS. IF YOU HAVE BEEN BAPTIZED WITHOUT FOLLOWING IT UP WITH FOOT-WASHING YOU HAVE NO PART IN JESUS, ACCORDING TO THE VERY WORDS OF JESUS HIMSELF. Happy are ye if ye do this commandment. Dump your pagan ceremonies and teachings, repent and believe in the Messiah!

Messages (13)

  1. Excellent article! I’m looking for a quote by John Paul where he said that anyone baptised in the titles came under the banner of the Catholic Church…I had the information at one time but have misplaced it.
    My whole website it about the Power of Jesus name Baptism, drop by and enjoy, download as many bible studies as you wish and get them into the main stream.
    God Bless!

    REPLY: the link to the quote of John Paul is as follows: comment link http://www.christianhospitality.org/wp/?p=208#comment-131

  2. ok now……u halfto read carefull it says in matthew 28:19 baptise in the (name) of the father,son and the holy ghost! what is the name of the father,son and the holy ghost? (jesus) right? yes and in acts 2:38 it say be baptised in the name of (jesus) and ye shall recieve the gift of the holy ghost!!! now why does people miss that? why? so the point is: you dont get baptised in the father,son and holyghost!!!! you get baptised in jesus!!!!!!!!! name okay! good!

  3. Anonymous

    What kind of cult do you belong to? Church of God (Armstrongism?) What? And using the King James Bible and Textus Receptus? Are you some kind of CIA funded nutcase, to discredit Bible believing Baptists? That’s what I think. You’re a kook. Satan is really a roaring lion, roaming about, seeking whom he may devour. You’re of the devil. And taking a position against women wearing pants too, to boot! You’re sole purpose on the internet is to discredit conservative Baptists and lump them all into some hyper-extremism that the government can round up and do away with. PLEASE go away.

    • REPLY #1 (APPROPRIATE REPLY):
      Der, der, mama understands, little babsy has wet his diaper. Now little babsy go to sleep cuddling lil furry pastor-doll, and in the morning, he’ll feel lot better.

      REPLY #2 (POLITICALLY CORRECT REPLY):
      You have a bad case of insecurity. Which is strange for a “Baptist”, as Baptists believe in eternal security. You also seem to be thrashing around trying to label me. Let me help you. I am a Bible-believing, Spirit-filled, born-again Christian, who follows Jesus Christ as Lord, Savior, Healer and King. You have trouble comprehending there may be believers out there who ACTUALLY DIFFER FROM YOU IN SOME AREAS OF BELIEF. I suppose you want everyone to bow down to your little set of dogmas. There are of course many genuine Baptist brothers and sisters in Christ who have a true experience of God’s salvation and thank God for them! You also seem to have a vastly over-worked “fortress” mindset, afraid the “Government” might arrest you at any minute. Why? What are you up to??? I love true Government, Government, that is, which punishes evil and praises them that do well, as the Bible commands governors to do. I’m sure true, solid, conservative, Bible-based, Baptists are not going to be threatened my little Blog-posts on the internet, so I don’t think you have to worry on that one. I thank you for the complement of bracketing me with Jesus our Lord and Savior, who was similarly accused for no reason of being “mad” (that is “crazy”) and “having a devil” (John 10. 20) , and as He prophesied, his true followers will be treated the same (Matthew 10. 25). You have just fulfilled it.

  4. [2 ranting replies from Anonymous deleted]

  5. [2 more ranting replies from Anonymous deleted.]

  6. Truly., there will ALWAYS be differences of opinions; “Bible based” beliefs, etc.
    However, as a born again, justified, sanctified, Holy Ghost baptized, tongue talking “son” of the Living God, I am in favor of this “doctrine”. Clearly, in these “last days” of the end time in which we are living, it is nearly mandatory that we promote the Gospel of Salvation.
    We do this by “coming together”, loving one another, and putting aside our (shall we say) “petty” differences< and concentrate on “winning” souls to the Christ of Calvary.
    Let us always “go on” lifting up the Name of Jesus (Yeshua, in Hebrew, I believe, actually the Angel NEVER siad to Mary (the mother of “Jesus”) “thous shalt call His mane “Jesus”. Actually, he said “thou shalt call His Name “YESHUA”) But that’s another subject altogether.
    The THING that will bring us all together is the Power of the Holy Spirit (which,if we do a thorough search/study), and give Him “first place” in our lives, He will lead us into all truth. And the truth is; in this day and time, and the “perilous times” Paul speaks about that will soon come upon us, it behooves us to “work while it is day, for the night cometh when no man can work”

    God speed to all who believe,
    CWT

  7. Since the name of “the Father, of the Son, and the of the Holy Ghost” is “The Lord Jesus Christ” in English why are they both not acceptable and interchangeable?

    Also should the English more properly pray in Hebrew or Greek (languages that the majority don’t understand) instead of our own language?

    • Thank you, my friend, for your very relevant questions. Jesus told his Israelite disciples clearly in Matthew 28. 19 to baptize all Gentile believers in the NAME of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. One NAME attached to three titles of God — “Father” is not a name, but a title of Divinity, “Son” is not a name but a title of relationship, “Holy Spirit” is not a name but a title describing the Divine nature (God is a Spirit, and He is holy). Similarly in a human way, I am a father, but my name is not “father”, I am a “son” (of my Dad), but my name is not “son”, and I am a human being, but my name is not “human”. If I go to the bank (not a safe thing to do these days) and sign the check “Father” or “Son” or “Human Being”, watch it bounce, brother! You gotta use the name! So Jesus Christ is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, but His Name is Jesus Christ, not Father, Son or Holy Spirit. What Jesus was saying to His disciples was “Go USING THE NAME and in the AUTHORITY OF THE IDENTITY OF THE ONE PERSON Who IS the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit”. Well, WHO IS THAT PERSON, and WHAT IS HIS NAME? We all as born-again Christians should know the answer to that, as Peter said –

      Acts 4: 10 “Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.
      11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.
      12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”

      The Lord Jesus Christ is GOD IN FLESH, He is God the Father Who has come down to us as a Human, the Word (the spiritual Son) of God made flesh and tabernacling amongst us, the Spirit of God revealed so He can be seen, touched, communicated with. So that is God’s NAME OF REDEMPTION and that’s the Name which SAVES us figuratively speaking in baptism (1 Peter 3. 21 “The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ”). Since salvation is only by the Name of Jesus Christ then it is the only Name which can be used in baptism. That’s why you will only find in the Acts of the Apostles the disciples baptizing people in the Name of Jesus Christ or the Lord Jesus, never any other way. Did they get Jesus’ instruction wrong???? Of course not, since the Apostles’ doctrine is what the whole Church is built on (Acts 2. 42: “And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine” Ephesians 2. 20: “And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone”).

      On the Hebrew or Greek — it’s not the language in which we say the Name, it’s the Name itself which identifies the PERSON. For example, a person called William in English is called Guillaume in French, but when my old French teacher called someone in our class “Guillaume” we all knew who he meant — William. The language doesn’t matter at all. That’s why all this rubbish about pronouncing the “right” name of Jesus, Yahshua, Yashua etc. etc. is right off track. Jesus is the English pronunciation of the Latin Iesus, which is their pronunciation of the Greek Iesous, which is their pronunciation of the Aramaic and Hebrew Yeshua. But it all is the Name of the Messiah Jesus of Nazareth. Since the Name of Jesus of Nazareth was enough to kick out demons from people, and still is, the demons know Who you mean, OK? In the spiritual world it’s the IDENTITY OF THE PERSON NAMED that counts, and that applies to baptism too.

  8. chris

    DO you believe if you were baptized in the name of the father and son and holy ghost that you will not make it into heaven?

    • Thank you friend for your question. I do not believe anyone would be excluded from heaven for doing something wrong IN ERROR. That means, if you are baptized in the Vatican baptism of the titles “Father, Son, Holy Ghost” because you know no different and have never heard the Truth, then you’re in error, and God will overlook it because you did it IGNORANTLY IN UNBELIEF. See 1 Timothy 1. 13:
      “Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.” Paul says he was forgiven for his many wrongs because he did it IGNORANTLY — he didn’t have a knowledge of the Christian truth at the time. Likewise Peter told the Jews who were guilty of collaborating to kill Christ: Acts 3. 17 “And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers.” Then he says verse 19: “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.” So you can see if a person does not know Christ, then he is acting IGNORANTLY, and forgiveness is open to repentant ones who have acted ignorantly. But if a person knows Christ, IGNORANCE is no excuse, when error has been pointed out to a professing Christian by the Scriptures: he or she is DUTY BOUND TO DO THE RIGHT THING THAT THE SCRIPTURE SAYS. As John says in 1 John 4. 6: “We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.” True Christians who are “of God”, when they hear what John and the other disciples all taught in the New Testament (and they all baptized using the Name Jesus Christ, not using titles of Father, Son and Holy Ghost), then a true Christian DOES WHAT THEY TOLD US TO DO. In this case a Christian subject to the need to be baptized MUST be baptized or rebaptized in the Name of Jesus Christ, because “there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we MUST be saved.” Acts 4. 12. Also putting it off by claiming it doesn’t matter or claiming not enough time now to look into it is NOT acceptable to a Christian. “Today is the day of salvation.” “Today if ye will hear His voice, harden not your hearts.” As Paul says in Hebrews 4. 7.

  9. REPLY TO LOIS (comment link http://www.christianhospitality.org/wp/?p=208#comment-97) ON “CATHOLIC” TRINITY FORMULA FOR BAPTISM

    It’s been a long time since you asked this question — still, here’s the answer. Yes John Paul II did make this statement in his official document “Ecumenical Directory” 1993. This quote from the official Vatican document published by John Paul II shows WHOEVER baptized a person (whether a Roman “Catholic” or not, heretic, freak, guru or otherwise), SO LONG AS the person was “baptized” using water (sprinkling will do for the Vatican, though of course in the New Testament the word baptizo, “baptize”, means IMMERSE FULLY in water), and SO LONG AS the person who did the “baptism” called out the mantra “in the name of the Father and in the name of the Son and in the name of the Holy Spirit”, then, AND THEN ONLY did that count as a Roman “Catholic” valid baptism, according to the official Vatican doctrine. The person “baptized” in that way does not have to be rebaptized or go through any other baptism ceremony when they want to be accepted into the Roman “Catholic” cult, since their original “baptism” was a valid “Catholic” baptism — so says the Vatican. You can see then that when you’re “baptized” with the Trinity formula you’re baptized into the Roman “Catholic” cult. There is a clear magic necessity for the Trinity formula in the Vatican cultic system. I quote the whole passage on Baptism from that document here, and in bold are the statements re. the Trinity formula making a valid “Catholic” baptism, even if administered by groups outside the “Catholic” church:

    On 25 March 1993 Pope John Paul II approved the revised Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism, confirmed it by his authority and ordered that it be published.

    PONTIFICIUM CONSILIUM AD CHRISTIANORUM UNITATEM FOVENDAM

    DIRECTORY FOR THE APPLICATION OF
    PRINCIPLES AND NORMS ON ECUMENISM

    Known as the Ecumenical Directory 1993

    Start Quote:–

    “IV

    COMMUNION IN LIFE AND SPIRITUAL ACTIVITY AMONG THE BAPTIZED

    A. THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM

    92. By the sacrament of baptism a person is truly incorporated into Christ and into his Church and is reborn to a sharing of the divine life. Baptism, therefore, constitutes the sacramental bond of unity existing among all who through it are reborn. Baptism, of itself, is the beginning, for it is directed towards the acquiring of fullness of life in Christ. It is thus ordered to the profession of faith, to the full integration into the economy of salvation, and to Eucharistic communion. Instituted by the Lord himself, baptism, by which one participates in the mystery of his death and resurrection, involves conversion, faith, the remission of sin, and the gift of grace.

    93. Baptism is conferred with water and with a formula which clearly indicates that baptism is done in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It is therefore of the utmost importance for all the disciples of Christ that baptism be administered in this manner by all and that the various Churches and ecclesial Communities arrive as closely as possible at an agreement about its significance and valid celebration.

    94. It is strongly recommended that the dialogue concerning both the significance and the valid celebration of baptism take place between Catholic authorities and those of other Churches and ecclesial Communities at the diocesan or Episcopal Conference levels. Thus it should be possible to arrive at common statements through which they express mutual recognition of baptisms as well as procedures for considering cases in which a doubt may arise as to the validity of a particular baptism.

    95. In arriving at these expressions of common agreement, the following points should be kept in mind:

    a) Baptism by immersion, or by pouring, together with the Trinitarian formula is, of itself, valid. Therefore, if the rituals, liturgical books or established customs of a Church or ecclesial Community prescribe either of these ways of baptism, the sacrament is to be considered valid unless there are serious reasons for doubting that the minister has observed the regulations of his/her own Community or Church.

    b) The minister’s insufficient faith concerning baptism never of itself makes baptism invalid. Sufficient intention in a minister who baptizes is to be presumed, unless there is serious ground for doubting that the minister intended to do what the Church does.

    c) Wherever doubts arise about whether, or how water was used, respect for the sacrament and deference towards these ecclesial Communities require that serious investigation of the practice of the Community concerned be made before any judgment is passed on the validity of its baptism.

    96. According to the local situation and as occasion may arise, Catholics may, in common celebration with other Christians, commemorate the baptism which unites them, by renewing the engagement to undertake a full Christian life which they have assumed in the promises of their baptism, and by pledging to cooperate with the grace of the Holy Spirit in striving to heal the divisions which exist among Christians.

    97. While by baptism a person is incorporated into Christ and his Church, this is only done in practice in a given Church or ecclesial Community. Baptism, therefore, may not be conferred jointly by two ministers belonging to different Churches or ecclesial Communities. Moreover, according to Catholic liturgical and theological tradition, baptism is celebrated by just one celebrant. For pastoral reasons, in particular circumstances the local Ordinary may sometimes permit, however, that a minister of another Church or ecclesial Community take part in the celebration by reading a lesson, offering a prayer, etc. Reciprocity is possible only if a baptism celebrated in another Community does not conflict with Catholic principles or discipline.

    98. It is the Catholic understanding that godparents, in a liturgical and canonical sense, should themselves be members of the Church or ecclesial Community in which the baptism is being celebrated. They do not merely undertake a res- ponsibility for the Christian education of the person being baptized (or confirmed) as a relation or friend; they are also there as representatives of a community of faith, standing as guarantees of the candidate’s faith and desire for ecclesial communion.

    a) However, based on the common baptism and because of ties of blood or friendship, a baptized person who belongs to another ecclesial Community may be admitted as a witness to the baptism, but only together with a Catholic godparent. A Catholic may do the same for a person being baptized in another ecclesial Community.

    b) Because of the close communion between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches, it is permissible for a just cause for an Eastern faithful to act as godparent; together with a Catholic godparent, at the baptism of a Catholic infant or adult, so long as there is provision for the Catholic education of the person being baptized, and it is clear that the godparent is a suitable one.

    A Catholic is not forbidden to stand as godparent in an Eastern Orthodox Church, if heshe is so invited. In this case, the duty of providing for the Christian education binds in the first place the godparent who belongs to the Church in which the child is baptized.

    99. Every Christian has the right for conscientious religious reasons, freely to decide to come into full Catholic communion. The work of preparing the reception of an individual who wishes to be received into full communion with the Catholic Church is of its nature distinct from ecumenical activity. The Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults provides a formula for receiving such persons into full Catholic communion. However, in such cases, as well as in cases of mixed marriages, the Catholic authority may consider it necessary to inquire as to whether the baptism already received was validly celebrated. The following recommendations should be observed in carrying out this inquiry.

    a) There is no doubt about the validity of baptism as conferred in the various Eastern Churches. It is enough to establish the fact of the baptism. In these Churches the sacrament of confirmation (chrismation) is properly administered by the priest at the same time as baptism. There it often happens that no mention is made of confirmation in the canonical testimony of baptism. This does not give grounds for doubting that this sacrament was also conferred.

    b) With regard to Christians from other Churches and ecclesial Communities, before considering the validity of baptism of an individual Christian, one should determine whether an agreement on baptism (as mentioned above, n. 94) has been made by the Churches and ecclesial Communities of the regions or localities involved and whether baptism has in fact been administered according to this agreement. It should be noted, however, that the absence of a formal agreement about baptism should not automatically lead to doubt about the validity of baptism.

    c) With regard to these Christians, where an official ecclesiastical attestation has been given, there is no reason for doubting the validity of the baptism conferred in their Churches and ecclesial Communities unless, in a particular case, an examination clearly shows that a serious reason exists for having a doubt about one of the following: the matter and form and words used in the conferral of baptism, the intention of an adult baptized or the minister of the baptism.

    d) If, even after careful investigation, a serious doubt persists about the proper administration of the baptism and it is judged necessary to baptize conditionally, the Catholic minister should show proper regard for the doctrine that baptism may be conferred only once by explaining to the person involved, both why in this case he is baptizing conditionally and what is the significance of the rite of conditional baptism. Furthermore, the rite of conditional baptism is to be carried out in private and not in public.

    e) It is desirable that Synods of Eastern Catholic Churches and Episcopal Conferences issue guidelines for the reception into full communion of Christians baptized into other Churches and ecclesial Communities. Account is to be taken of the fact that they are not catechumens and of the degree of knowledge and practice of the Christian faith which they may have.

    100. According to the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults, those adhering to Christ for the first time are normally baptized during the Paschal Vigil. Where the celebration of this Rite includes the reception into full communion of those already baptized, a clear distinction must be made between them and those who are not yet baptized.

    101. In the present state of our relations with the ecclesial Communities of the Reformation of the 16th century, we have not yet reached agreement about the significance or sacramental nature or even of the administration of the sacrament of Confirmation. Therefore, under present circumstances, persons entering into full communion with the Catholic Church from one of these Communities are to receive the sacrament of Confirmation according to the doctrine and rite of the Catholic Church before being admitted to Eucharistic communion.”

    – End Quote

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.