Dear Father Angelo,

My girlfriend is a pediatrician. She has found herself dealing with the delivery of a premature baby with serious health complications.

Another doctor, right before the baby passed away, baptized him by doing the sign of the cross on his forehead. Though it wasn’t possible to contact the parents, they later thanked him.

However, the doctor did not use water.

The canon foresees even the use of unblessed water in case of emergency. But, in extreme cases (while traveling, on a mountain, in an operating room, etc.) when water is not available, is it possible to baptize without it? Is the intention of those who baptize enough?

I also wonder about an adult in a situation of extreme danger who asks to be baptized by another baptized individual.

Thank you.

Dear friend,

1. The doctor who traced the sign of the cross on the dying baby’s forehead, he did not make just a good gesture, but he accomplished a salvific action.

He intended to deliver this baby to Christ, so that He could instill the grace of the Baptism. The sign of the cross is the sign of belonging to Christ.

2. That doctor did it in place of the baby, interpreting his desire, if he would have been able to comprehend its meaning.

There is no doubt the Lord heard the doctor’s desire, after all, he had also received the cordial approval of the baby’s parents.

3. It must be said right away that this was not a Baptism of water, since for such a Baptism water is necessary. However, it must be remembered that next to a Baptism of water the Church has always retained that a Baptism of blood and desire exists as well.

4. The Baptism of blood is that of those who, now catechumens, are killed because of their faith in Christ.

Saint Cyprian writes in their regard: “They certainly are not deprived of the sacrament of Baptism who are baptized with the most glorious and greatest Baptism of blood, concerning which the Lord has spoken in Lc 12,50” (Ep. 73,22).

5. The Sacred Scriptures, in analogy with the Baptism of desire, offer us some precious indication. Indeed, when the Lord says “Whoever loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and reveal myself to him” (John 14,21) suggests that there is a justification, a salvation, an infusion of sanctifying grace also through a way that it is not that of the Baptism of water.

Equally suggests this when He said of the sinner: “So I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven; hence, she has shown great love” (Luke 7,47). At that moment she was forgiven her many sins, even though she had not yet received the Baptism of water.

6. Saint Thomas, interpreter of the doctrine of the Church writes: “The sacrament or Baptism may be wanting to someone in two ways. First, both in reality and in desire; nor wished to be baptized: which clearly indicates contempt of the sacraments, in regard to those who have the use of the free-will. Consequently those to whom Baptism is wanting thus, cannot obtain salvation: since neither sacramentally nor mentally are they incorporated in Christ, through Whom alone can salvation be obtained.

Secondly, the sacrament of Baptism may be wanting to anyone in reality but not desire: for instance, when a man wishes to be baptized, but by some ill-chance he is forestalled by death before receiving Baptism.

And such a man can obtain salvation without being actually baptized, on account of his desire for Baptism, which desire is the outcome of “faith that worketh by charity”, whereby God, Whose power is not tied to visible sacraments, sanctifies man inwardly.

Hence Ambrose says of Valentinian, who died while yet a catechumen: “ I lost him whom I was to regenerate: but he did not lose the grace he prayed for” (Summa Theologiae III, 68,2).

7. Back to our case, certainly the baby did not express his desire to be baptized, as indeed, even the children who receive the Baptism of water do not express it.

For them, the will expressed by their parents in their place applies.

Likewise, the gesture made by the doctor has been a particularly eloquent one. He called for the salvation and sanctification of that baby.

For this purpose, he did what he could: lacking water, he traced the sign of the cross so that the child would be counted among those belonging to Christ.

8. If the ancient Jews were saved from the angel of death in virtue of the blood of a lamb that was the prefiguration of Christ’s blood, we must believe even more that the sign of the cross is no less than the blood of the ancient lamb.

Equally, we must believe that Christ surely appreciated the gesture of that doctor who delivered the baby to him. Indeed, Our Lord said: “Let the children come to me” (Mc 10,14).

We have to trust that Christ received him, blessed him, sanctified him and then welcomed him in His eternal bliss.

9. In conclusion that baby, although he did not receive a Baptism of water because for it water is indispensable, he did, however, received a Baptism of desire thanks to the voluntary interpretation of that medic.

Using the words of St. Thomas, we must say that Christ’s sanctifying power is not bound to water, especially if it is lacking.

Instead, in the case in which water is available, we must not limit ourselves to a sign of the cross, because the Baptism of water engraves the character also.

For this reason, according to the law of the Church, if a catechumen is near death a Baptism of desire is sufficient for salvation. But, in case the catechumen recovers his/her health, the Baptism of water must be received, as well.

10.I am sure that that baby will always send his blessing from heaven to the doctor who used so much charity towards him.

I wish you a Blessed and happy Easter.

I remind you to the Lord and bless you.

Father Angelo

Questo articolo è disponibile anche in: Italian