Invalidated baptism: when theology rhymes with madness

I was truly amazed to read about the priest from the Archdiocese of Detroit whose baptism was considered "invalid" because the deacon who had baptized him as a child said, "we baptize you" instead of "I baptize you". 

I told myself that the poor priest -- and, even more so, Archbishop Allen Vigneron -- had allowed themselves to be sucked into a delusional logic. The archbishop decided to quickly "re-baptize", "re-eucharize", "re-confirm" and "re-ordain" him as a deacon and then as a priest!

We are no longer in the field of theology, but in the realm of madness!

Delusional logic

According to Archbishop Vigneron it would seem that all sacramental acts (apart from baptism, which can be administered by a non-baptized person) administered by this priest over the years (including the Eucharist, confession, the anointing of the sick...) are invalid and must be re-done. 

Too bad for the dead who thought they had received the Lord's forgiveness before they breathed their last, and must have died without forgiveness!

Too bad for the sick who, having died or recovered since then, believed they had received the sacrament of God's tenderness, but must have experienced only an illusion!

Too bad for all those who came to experience the Sacrament of Reconciliation but who, in reality, must have been forgiven because the minister who pronounced the absolution never had the power to do so!

Too bad for all those who, from Sunday to Sunday, thought they had received the body of the Lord in the Eucharist, but in reality ate only unconsecrated hosts, because the one who though he had consecrated them was never validly baptized -- and, therefore, never validly ordained!

Since the beginnings of the Church, deacons, priests, bishops and, no doubt, popes have committed errors in the application of the ritual of the sacraments, out of fatigue, distraction, senility or foolishness. I know that I have made some (unintentionally!) myself during my forty-two years of priesthood, and I am afraid, as I grow older, that I may make others.

Were the ordinations received and given by certain debauched popes of the Middle Ages valid, some of whom were hardly concerned with the strict observance of rituals? Doubt is permitted, less because of their sinfulness than because of their lack of rigor in the application of the ritual!

But if they performed invalid acts (which is highly probable), and if we follow the logic of Archbishop Vigneron, then many episcopal ordinations were invalid, and therefore the ordinations of priests ordained by them, and therefore... millions and millions of sacramental acts that have since been dispensed!

Grace helps the weakness

I am neither an appointed theologian, nor, even less, a canon lawyer. I only try to use common sense!

But I know that there is an old adage in the Church, which takes into account the always possible weakness of ordained ministers and, more broadly, the possible errors of communities of the baptized. It is the "Ecclesia supplet". In other words, the grace given to the Church of Christ compensates for the weakness, and even the sins, of ordained ministers and communities of the baptized.

Even the sacraments delivered by an unworthy priest are a reality -- not a masquerade -- because the grace given to the whole Church comes to rectify what was "twisted" in the first place. This is how sacraments delivered by a priest who is a pedophile or perpetrator of other crimes remain valid.

As St. Augustine rightly said: “Judas may baptize, it is still Christ who baptizes". This is even more so when it is a question of a good priest, even if he is "badly baptized"!

Christian Delorme is a priest of the Archdiocese of Lyon (France), a best-selling author and prominent advocate of interreligious dialogue and the promotion of Catholic social teaching.