Newspaper Page Text
4
THE BULLETIN OF THE CATHOLIC LAYMEN’S ASSOCIATION OF GEORGIA
CREMATION, BAPTISM AND
EXCLUSIVENESS
Below are found a typical letter to the Publicity
Bureau and the reply thereto. The limits of The
Bulletin forbid giving space to more than one in
a single issue, but this is reproduced because it
not only displays the style of correspondence followed,
but also contains information useful to the layman
who frequently meets similar questioning. The sub
jects of Baptism, Cremation, the attitude of Cath
olics toward non-Catholic ceremonials, the oft-re
peated assertion about Catholic exclusiveness, are all
touched upon, and much information not generally
at the finger tips of the average layman is furnished.
Here is the letter without name and address which,
of course, it would not be seemly to publish:
“I am in receipt of your letters about cremation
and the burning of Huss, and if I am correctly in
formed it is admitted by your Church that Christ was
immersed, and if this be true, why is it you do im
merse instead of sprinkling? You lay stress on the
fact that because Christ’s body was not cremated it
would be wrong to cremate now, and why not apply
the same rule to baptism? And if your Church be
the only true one, as you claim, why is it you are
not more practical and open to an outsider or non-
Catholic? For instance, you refuse to bury the dead
or marry the living or refuse to attend any religious
services unless it is all Catholic, and you know all
can’t be Catholics. How can we? Take, for in
stance, this town has at least a population of 1 0,000,
and the priest comes here once a month and stays
at one place, and so far as I know never goes out
anywhere other than to the church. Why don’t your
priest do like the twelve, go in the streets and by
ways and preach? How can we non-Catholics know
unless you do?
“Please understand I have nothing but the kindest
feelings for your church, and I merely ask these ques
tions as a matter of information.’’
The Reply.
Permit me to say, first, that you are mistaken in
your thought that Catholics admit that Christ was
immersed. It is not certain, exegetically, historically
or traditionally, in what form Christ received bap
tism. Second, the form of administering this sacra
ment followed among Catholics is not sprinkling, but
pouring. Third, cremation is not a wrong thing in
itself, but in the mind of the Church it is an unbecom
ing thing for Christians.
The Church recognizes any form of baptism as
essentially valid, provided the words are spoken and
the water is administered by the same person at the
same time, and it makes no difference whether the
person ministering is a Catholic or not. Any person
of any religion, or one of no religion, can validly ad
minister baptism, by applying water to the person to
be baptized and at the same time saying the words:
“I baptize thee in the name of the Father and of the
Son and of the Holy Ghost.’’ It is Catholic belief
that, as Christ said to Nicodemus, “Unless a man be
born of water and the Holy Ghost he cannot enter the
Kingdom of Heaven.” Therefore, this sacrament,
which is so necessary for all, should be, as far as
possible, at all times, available. Hence, our Lord
chose water, a most common and abundant element
on this planet, as the material, while any person hav
ing the use of reason can act as minister, and the form,
likewise, it would seem, should be one adapted to
every circumstance where the material and the min
ister can be had. Nothing more, we Catholics be
lieve, should be required for the valid reception of
this sacrament without which we cannot enter Heaven.
Why Not Immersion?
But immersion is, of course, very inconvenient; at
times it is impossible. It must have been impossible
to St. Peter while he was in prison, where, you will
remember, he administered baptism. Likewise, it must
have been impossible for him to immerse the 5,000
persons converted on the first Pentecost Day. How
could one asking to be baptized be immersed while
pinned under a wreck; when shot and dying on the
battlefield; in various other circumstances that you
can readily imagine? The Church meets every con
dition. Like the Sabbath, the Church was made for
man.
Catholics do not refuse to bury the dead who were
not Catholics. On the contrary, they are required
by the strictest law of the Church to bury the dead
and to do all other acts of charity that our common
humanity dictates, without giving a thought to the
religion of those in need. And they fail in their
Catholicity who fail in charity toward their fellow-
man of whatever creed, color or condition of life.
True, non-Catholics are not buried with the rites of
the Church, for surely it is not for the Church to
impose her good offices on one dead when such an
one while living showed no willingness to accept
them.
The Priest and Marriage.
As to marrying the living, who not a Catholic
would wish to be married according to the teaching
of the Church, in preference to the teaching of their
own religion? And why? After all, do you know
that the sacrament of marriage is administered by
the parties themselves, that a priest, when the cere
mony is performed before him, is there merely as the
official witness of the Church and to give her blessing
to the union of her children, that Protestants married
before their ministers administer to each other the
holy sacrament no less than do Catholics when mar
ried before a priest, the blessing of the Church alone
being lacking?