The Roman Catholic Church is in an uproar, but it’s not about its pedophile priests or the bishops who diligently cover for them. This venerable institution has its theological panties in a wad because some of the faithful might have received “invalid sacraments.” Michael Stechschulte’s August 24, 2020, article in America, a Jesuit publication, gives readers the jaw-dropping details.
It seems that Father Matthew Hood, associate pastor of St. Lawrence Parish in Utica, Michigan, watched a video of his 1990 baptism and was thunderstruck to discover that Deacon Mark Springer, the officiating clergyman, had used improper wording while performing this sacrament. Hood’s baptism had therefore been (gasp of horror) invalid!
And that’s not all. From a Catholic perspective, it gets even worse. “Because the sacraments of confirmation and holy orders (that is, ordination as a Roman Catholic priest) can be only conferred upon validly baptized Catholics,” Stechschulte noted, “Father Hood was ‘devastated’ to learn that not only was he not baptized or confirmed, but he was also not a validly ordained priest.” (If that is indeed the case, then why does Stechschulte refer to him as “Father” Hood? “Mr.” Hood would be more accurate.)
Hood was heartsick to learn that his life as a priest had been a sham. “There was definitely shock and sadness at finding out 30 years later that I was never baptized,” he admitted in an interview with The Detroit Catholic. “It was an alienating sense that even though I was following the Lord, I wasn’t a Christian, and I wasn’t a priest and I wasn’t a deacon.”
Because Hood wasn’t actually a priest, he lacked the sacerdotal authority (read: alleged supernatural power) to administer sacraments. I was raised Catholic and was taught that priests possessed the power to forgive sins that were confessed to them during the sacrament of Penance. Ordinary tap water blessed by priests became holy water that the Catholics of my day sprinkled throughout their homes during thunderstorms to protect them from lightning strikes. And above all, while saying Mass Catholic priests could transform ordinary bread and wine into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ.
The Catholic faithful thought they were getting the real deal when Hood ministered to them. Instead, they were getting bamboozled. Now the church is in damage-control mode as it begins to clean up the mess inadvertently created by Hood. Stechschulte quotes an August 22 letter sent by Archbishop Allen H. Vigneron to Catholics in his archdiocese that reads, in part:
The parishes where Father Hood has been assigned—Divine Child in Dearborn and St. Lawrence in Utica—will be working with the archdiocese to contact those who sought out the sacraments with Father Hood, so that each individual’s circumstance may be examined and rectified.
The archdiocese is also trying to contact anyone who might have been invalidly baptized by Springer.
And what, specifically, needs to be “examined and rectified”? Stechschulte refers to Father Stephen Pullis, director of evangelization and missionary discipleship for the archdiocese, for the answer to that question.
Although Father Hood was not able to validly perform some marriages, celebrate Mass, grant absolution, administer confirmation or anoint the sick, any baptisms he performed are presumed valid, since a priest is not required to baptize so long as the correct formula, matter and intention are present.
Pullis’s response evoked one of the few humorous memories I have from my Catholic school days. We students were indeed taught that a Catholic layperson can baptize someone who is in dire straits—say, dying in the street after being struck by a vehicle—if there’s no priest around and said dying person asks to be baptized. Our teacher said that should we lack access to water, any liquid would do, such as milk or even soda. One of the class clowns whispered, “Just piss on him!” I shudder to contemplate that student’s fate had his comment been overheard by our teacher.
It’s difficult to convey to anyone not raised Catholic the consternation felt by those who have now been informed that Hood lacked the power to grant absolution for the sins they confessed to him. Because their sins are unforgiven, they might have to spend additional time in Purgatory when they die. If they had committed mortal sins such as missing Mass on Sundays or church-designated “holy days,” these Catholics will stew about going to hell. By taking Holy Communion in a state of mortal sin, they inadvertently furthered their transgressions. Laugh if you wish, but this is no laughing matter for the faithful.
Pullis’s assertion that “Father Hood was not able to validly perform some marriages” will perturb the couples he supposedly married to a degree unimaginable for most of us. In my day, Catholics were taught that any sex outside of marriage is a mortal sin. These poor women and men thought their religion had finally given them the green light to enjoy sex without feelings of guilt. If Hood wasn’t authorized to perform marriages, however, they’ve been sinning aplenty since their wedding nights.
And why was Hood’s 1990 baptism invalid? Springer had changed a single word in the formula that priests are required to utter when administering this sacrament. Instead of “I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” Springer said, “We baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Yes, changing the pronoun from first-person singular to first-person plural gummed up the whole works.
Perhaps you’re mumbling to yourself, “But it was just one word! Can’t the Catholic Church cut Springer a little slack and rule that Hood’s baptism was valid after all?” Not on your life! Stechschulte notes, “On August 6, the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a note clarifying that baptisms using an improper formula are not valid.”
The Vatican’s intransigent ruling immediately brought to mind Paul’s remark in 2 Corinthians 3:6: “Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament, not of the letter; but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.” It would have been so simple to quote this verse and say that Springer’s baptism of Hood had satisfied the spirit of the law. The matter would then be promptly and painlessly resolved.
Such a compassionate, commonsense approach, however, was never even considered. Why? My guess is that the church feared it would have lessened the perceived gravity and sacredness of its sacraments. The faithful must be kept in sufficient awe of the mumbo jumbo that Catholic clergymen perform if the Church is to maintain its control over them. And the Roman Catholic Church is all about control.