Is Your Baptism Valid?

This is a deep and loaded question. But in light of all the Scriptural statements regarding Baptism, it is definitely a question worthy of our consideration.

Is your Baptism valid? When you were baptized, did it count? What if you've been baptized multiple times?

When you look at the didactic epistles in particular, it's really easy to see that Baptism is a huge deal in Christianity. (Rom 6:3-4, Gal 3:27, Eph 4:5, 5:26, Col 2:11-12, 1Pe 3:21, Tit 3:5, etc.) Not to mention in the historical book of Acts, it's a big deal too. (Acts 2:38-39, 22:16 in particular)

It's obvious from Scripture that Baptism does something in a salvific sense. Therefore, Baptism is God's work done to us via water and the Word, and not our work done for God. Thus, to know whether a Baptism is valid is a big deal.

What makes a Baptism valid? Well, first of all, Baptism is a washing done with water. So, there is water involved. Second, and equally important, are the words Jesus used when instituting Christian Baptism in St. Matthew 28:19.

So, water and the Word; specifically the Triune Word given by Christ in Matthew 28, is what makes a Baptism. Baptism is a promise specifically and objectively for you, given by God. You are Baptized into the Triune Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

So, let's keep it simple. A Baptism is valid if it is done by a Trinitarian church with water in the Triune Name of God, as Jesus instituted. So, what churches have valid Baptisms? Here is a short list: Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran, Anglican, Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, Reformed, and others which I have not named. These are all Trinitarian churches that confess the Trinity.

What Baptisms are invalid? Well, a few would be Mormonism (they reject the Trinity, even though using the Trinitarian formula, they mean three different deities by it.), Jehovah's Witnesses (reject the deity of Christ), and Oneness Pentecostalism (Reject the Trinity, do not even use the Triune formula).

What if you've been baptized twice, once as an infant as a Roman Catholic than another time as a Baptist after making a decision? Simply put, only one of those is valid. Rebaptism is unbiblical. God forbid we mock the promise and work of God given to us by repeating it due to ourselves. Thus, in that case, the Roman Catholic Baptism is the valid one. The Baptist Rebaptism, despite being well-intentioned, is pretty useless in this case, because the person has already been given the promise by God in their original Baptism. If anything, it rejects the promise given on some level. If the Baptist Baptism is the first and only Baptism the person has received, then by all means, it is completely valid.

Martin Luther, in the Large Catechism on Holy Baptism, says this;

"Further, we say that we are not so much concerned to know whether the person baptized believes or not; for on that account Baptism does not become invalid; but everything depends upon the Word and command of God. This now is perhaps somewhat acute, but it rests entirely upon what I have said, that Baptism is nothing else than water and the Word of God in and with each other, that is, when the Word is added to the water, Baptism is valid, even though faith be wanting. For my faith does not make Baptism, but receives it. Now, Baptism does not become invalid even though it be wrongly received or employed; since it is not bound (as stated) to our faith, but to the Word.

Thus you see that the objection of the sectarians is vain. For (as we have said) even though infants did not believe, which, however, is not the case, yet their baptism as now shown would be valid, and no one should rebaptize them; just as nothing is detracted from the Sacrament though some one approach it with evil purpose, and he could not be allowed on account of his abuse to take it a second time the selfsame hour, as though he had not received the true Sacrament at first; for that would mean to blaspheme and profane the Sacrament in the worst manner. How dare we think that God's Word and ordinance should be wrong and invalid because we make a wrong use of it? " (LC, Holy Baptism, 52-53, 55)

The stance of the Lutheran church has always been that there is one baptism, administered but once to a person, with water and the Triune Name of God. And to rebaptize a person at a later date is, in the words of Dr. Luther, "...to blaspheme and profane the Sacrament in the worst manner. How dare we think that God's Word and ordinance should be wrong and invalid because we make a wrong use of it?"

Here we stand.

+Grace and Peace+