Any ideas for me?  I was baptized by a Lutheran minister around age three, and the Novus Ordo did not think that such was a "big deal" when I was received into the Church (I hope) in 2001.  I have thought about being conditionally baptized, also.  I am unable to reach any traditional priests; a priest from the CMRI corresponded with me in a single email, but I have been unable to reach him since then and have given-up trying to.

Why do you feel this needs to happen?  I thought the Church has always taught that all Christian baptisms are legit and valid.  I'm not sure what the issue would be with confirmation.  I didn't think there was a change to that sacrament.

There was, though the major concern would be more with the matter of the sacrament than the form, I think.  If the bishop performing the confirmation was consecrated in the new rite, even if the NO confirmation rubrics were followed to a T, the problems surrounding the validity of the bishop challenge the validity of the confirmation.

Jehanne, as to baptism, do you have some sort of certificate or letter stating that you were baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost/Spirit?  What Protestant denomination were you baptized by?  Some protestant baptisms are more trustworthy than others (E.g., Missouri Synod Lutherans).  Are you able to investigate this a little more on your own?  

It was my understanding that traditional Catholic priests, as a rule, conditionally baptize nearly every Protestant convert.  As my infant baptism was over 40 years ago, it is going to be difficult to verify its validity.  Now that I have all but left the New Church, I feel like I should just "start over."  Of course, I will follow the instructions of any traditional priest whom I should encounter in this matter.  As it is, I am not even sure of the Lutheran church where I was baptized or where it is located.

It was my understanding that traditional Catholic priests, as a rule, conditionally baptize nearly every Protestant convert.  As my infant baptism was over 40 years ago, it is going to be difficult to verify its validity.  Now that I have all but left the New Church, I feel like I should just "start over."  Of course, I will follow the instructions of any traditional priest whom I should encounter in this matter.  As it is, I am not even sure of the Lutheran church where I was baptized or where it is located.

Obviously this is something you'll want to talk to a traditional priest about.

I know someone who was "baptized Lutheran" and did not have a conditional baptism.  The reasons are as follows: provided proper form and matter, intent is presumed (unless there is a MANIFEST sign that contradicts the intent).  A certificate satisfies form and matter, and then you presume intent.  It is also my understanding that conditional baptisms were given frequently within the last hundred years or so (for those baptized by a protestant minister), though I think this is more of a disciplinary manner than anything else.  If you open Denzinger, there are quite a few passages (I think at least three by my count) that attest to the validity of baptisms performed by heretics so long as matter and form are satisfied (from which intent is presumed).  

Quote from: Jehanne

It was my understanding that traditional Catholic priests, as a rule, conditionally baptize nearly every Protestant convert.  As my infant baptism was over 40 years ago, it is going to be difficult to verify its validity.  Now that I have all but left the New Church, I feel like I should just "start over."  Of course, I will follow the instructions of any traditional priest whom I should encounter in this matter.  As it is, I am not even sure of the Lutheran church where I was baptized or where it is located.

The CMRI Priests most likely will Conditionally Baptise all new members - Not because anyone needs 2 Baptisms - only one Sacrament is valid - But because in some cases - Validity will be hard to verify - as a precaution-  a Conditional Baptism will need to be performed for your benefit.  You cannot receive the other Sacraments without a valid Baptism.  If your original Baptism was Valid then you are Baptised already and a conditional Baptism will have no effect on you  

As for Confirmation - Only the Bishop can perform that.

I was conditionally baptized when I entered the VII Church because there was some question about my previous baptism.  If I remember correctly a conditional baptism does not involve water.  Am I remembering correctly?

Quote from: 2Vermont

Quote from: Malleus 01

Quote from: Jehanne

It was my understanding that traditional Catholic priests, as a rule, conditionally baptize nearly every Protestant convert.  As my infant baptism was over 40 years ago, it is going to be difficult to verify its validity.  Now that I have all but left the New Church, I feel like I should just "start over."  Of course, I will follow the instructions of any traditional priest whom I should encounter in this matter.  As it is, I am not even sure of the Lutheran church where I was baptized or where it is located.

The CMRI Priests most likely will Conditionally Baptise all new members - Not because anyone needs 2 Baptisms - only one Sacrament is valid - But because in some cases - Validity will be hard to verify - as a precaution-  a Conditional Baptism will need to be performed for your benefit.  You cannot receive the other Sacraments without a valid Baptism.  If your original Baptism was Valid then you are Baptised already and a conditional Baptism will have no effect on you  

As for Confirmation - Only the Bishop can perform that.

I was conditionally baptized when I entered the VII Church because there was some question about my previous baptism.  If I remember correctly a conditional baptism does not involve water.  Am I remembering correctly?

OK, after reading up/researching, I'm now wondering whether I actually was "conditionally" baptized. I'm pretty sure we went through the motions without water, so I'm guessing that the priest felt I was validly baptized (as I was not technically re-baptized).  I'm trying to figure out why he felt the need to do the rest.  Maybe it was to make me feel better.

A conditional baptism is definitely done with water.  Was this in the Novus Ordo?  I know that in the past, if an infant was in danger of death, he would be baptized by a nurse, doctor or parent.  Then, if the child lived, the priest would offer to supply the extra baptismal rites, without the actual baptism (conditional or otherwise).  I'm not sure if this is done in the Novus Ordo.  But if they had doubts about your baptism, a conditional baptism would absolutely require water.  Are you sure you're remembering correctly?

This is a hot-button issue for me.  

The NO Church is weird as hell about Baptism anyway, with infant Baptisms regularly delayed weeks or months at all the NO parishes I've ever been part of.  Traddy priests I know, all of them, have a real sense of urgency about Baptizing infants.  

Now, on conditional Baptisms, the NO Church is just crazy IMO.  Catholic priests are almost never experts in Protestant praxis, certainly not in historical Protestant praxis.  Despite not knowing anything about recent Protestant history, NO priests, instructed (pressured) by NO diocese, accept Protestant Baptisms from anyone, anytime, with very little proof.  I was Protestant in the 70's and 80's.  I can tell you from experience that there is no guarantee, NONE, that any Protestant Baptism was done validly.  

Presbyterians experimented with different Trinitarian formulations (Creator, Redeemer, Sanctifier - or-  Father, Mother, Son).  All kinds of mainline Protestants were infected with one-ness pentecostalism and Baptized solely in Jesus' name for years.  Nobody really knows!  

In this environment, Trad priests rightly Baptize all converts conditionally.  The NO Church refuses to Baptize conditionally under almost all conditions (I went through NO RCIA.  My family did too.  I have had these fights) as part of their bizarre ecuмenical surrender to Protestantism.  

 This policy is bad.  Wrong.  Evil, I think.  Just Baptize conditionally!  It costs nothing!    So it offends a Protestant somewhere.  WTH cares?  Not me.  

 :dancing-banana:
I was baptised in 1960, Catholic, so I've never doubted the validity.  I've seen the pictures in my baby album.  As for Confirmation, by 1976, the Church had been decimated by Vatican II.  When I called the n.o. parish for a certificate, they had no entry in the records except for a sheet of looseleaf with Confirmands, May 1976 and a list of names, a few of which were crossed off, checked, or followed by a question mark.  The writing is in pencil.  All I recall of the actual Confirmation is that there were four mandatory classes prior to it, the classes were taught by an elderly nun to whom nobody listened, and the actual confirmation ended with the newly confirmed forming a conga-line and dancing out of the church to an africanized version of Faith of Our Fathers with guitar, tambourine, and bongo drums.  I do not recall the bishop anointing us, and I know I wasn't slapped.  I did it because it was expected and my parents required it.  I had no idea of what it was about.  I didn't know what a sacrament was, or the what was the Catholic religion.  Needless to say, I was conditionally reconfirmed upon becoming a traditional Catholic.  Bishop Williamson came in 2007.  I no longer question being anointed and I was most definitely slapped.  My only question now is whether H.E. shouldn't have slapped me harder!
I would definitely get both rebaptized, if any doubt at all exists, and then confirmed.