Rituals

A religious ritual, such as baptism or communion, can be thought of as a performative. In many religions, a ritual is only considered valid if performed by the correct person, a person who has been authorized to perform the act. That person’s role in the ritual is just as important as the act itself or the results of the ritual. For example, in baptism, the only person authorized to perform the act is the pastor or priest (in the religions with which I familiar enough to speak with some knowledge). It is their duty and privilege to perform this act; others do not have the permission to complete the ritual. This also must take place within a religious setting, otherwise there would more than likely be insincerities tied to the act as well.

I recently was told about a group of missionaries who were traveling abroad without an ordained minister. At one point, there were people who wanted to be baptized, so the missionaries went ahead and baptized them. By Austin’s definition, this was not a valid speech-act. The circumstances may have been fine, what was said may have been according to tradition, and there may have been the right intentions in place. However, the events were “misinvocations” because it was not performed by the correct person. Because there was no minister to baptize according to tradition, the act did not have validity. In this way, this action fails to pass Austin’s tests of pure explicit performatives.