Do Protestant churches accept Catholic baptism as valid?

[crixus]

Root of Jesse: You asked a question and have gotten several answers. But all you've done is bemoan their responses.

 

[Albion]

If Christianity Today was "misleading" I have not seen anyone actually point that out.

Here's the deal. You say that SDA worldwide is the 5th largest denomination. BUT that's only true to the extent that we take all the SDA churches of the world as one. They may be that, of course, because of the structure of the church, but anyone who is attempting to be straightforward about this knows that there are many, many more Lutherans, Anglicans, Presbyterians, etc. than Adventists. EXCEPT that each of their national churches is considered--and counted by the religious statisticians--as separate organizations. Yet no one supposes that they are different denominations.

Then too, you may say "Look at us. We are in 5th place!" Yes, fifth behind the Roman Catholic Church with over a billion members, etc. So, if we for example look at a ranking like this:

1,000
800
700
550
12

We COULD say that "12" is in 5th place, but that doesn't make it more than an also-ran. It may be bigger than other also-rans because of the way of counting that's used (as described above), but that's all.

 

[Albion]

If there is no scriptural evidence for immersion(I'm not making the argument, just raising a question), why would be used in "very many cases" in the Catholic churches?

It actually is not used in very many cases, but I suppose that depends on what any of us would consider to be "very many."

But as to why it would be used at all in the Catholic churches, it's because the RCC and most other denominations do not consider immersion to be wrong. It's just not obligatory. If they considered immersion wrong to do, that would be different.

These churches consider the baptism to be valid so long as water and the Trinitarian formula are used.

 

[BobRyan]

Here's the deal. You say that SDA worldwide is the 5th largest denomination. BUT that's only true to the extent that we take all the SDA churches of the world as one. They may be that, of course, because of the structure of the church,

Agreed - it is one denomination. In fact as we speek in San Antonio all the SDA Delegates for all Division in the world are meeting to decide the updates to the church manual and to the doctrinal statement of beliefs. The entire world church has to vote on those changes or they don't go in.

There is a single General Conference President (Ted Wilson currently ) that heads the adminstrative items along with the other GC world church officers --

This is why Christianity Today was so emphatic on making that statement that this is one -- exactly one - denomination all the way from the top admin down to the local church level. A portion of all tithe for example from all local churches world wide goes up to the General Conference levels to be redistributed throughout the world church for pastors missionaries bible teachers etc.

It is a single world wide entity.

They may be that, of course, because of the structure of the church, but anyone who is attempting to be straightforward about this knows that there are many, many more Lutherans, Anglicans, Presbyterians, etc. than Adventists. EXCEPT that each of their national churches is considered--and counted by the religious statisticians--as separate organizations.

Indeed they are fractured in many cases due to splits over administrative or doctrine or policy and practice such that there is no such thing as one world church head of all of them.

We refer to that as a "denomination".

In fact I had a member of the IFB Baptist church tell me that they do not allow open communion with Southern Baptists. So just having the same "name" as some part of their church did not make them one single denomination.

Adventists do offer open communion to Catholics - but that does not make us the same denomination.

I don't see anything in your post indicating that the Feb 2015 Christianity Today article was in error.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

It actually is not used in very many cases, but I suppose that depends on what any of us would consider to be "very many."

But as to why it would be used at all in the Catholic churches, it's because the RCC and most other denominations do not consider immersion to be wrong. It's just not obligatory. If they considered immersion wrong to do, that would be different.

These churches consider the baptism to be valid so long as water and the Trinitarian formula are used.

1. In Romans 6 the symbol is stated to be that of death burial and resurrection - only full water baptism does that.
2. In the Gospels "and coming up out of the water" Jesus was baptized by John and I know of no actual denomination that thinks John "sprinkled rose pedals on Jesus".
3. 1 Peter 3 makes it clear that Baptism must include the "appeal to God for a clean conscience" not even possible for infants.
4. Acts 2 makes it clear that repentance is a prerequisite for baptism - not even possible for infants.
5. Even the RCC admits that there were times when the early church found no reason at all for baptism of infants. It did nothing.
6. The value of infant baptism requires the imagined powers/holy water/magic-sacrament idea that something the priest or the water does - makes a change in the infant outside of any choice to accept Christ, or repent, or appeal for forgiveness... A foundational concept to the practice with not a hint of justification in scripture.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[interpreter]

I hear a lot of criticism of us calling Protestants "separated bretheren". But the question comes up...we accept Trinitarian baptisms as valid in the Catholic Church. Do Protestant churches accept Catholic baptism as valid? So, if I wanted to convert to your church, whether non-denom, or Methodist, or whatever, would you require me to be baptized into your denomination?

No. We accept all baptisms. To be safe, I was baptized my a Nazarene minister in a Baptist Church, and later confirmed by an Episcopalian bishop who is descended from St. Peter (through the process of laying on of hands)..

 

[outsidethecamp]

This reflects the Scriptural order: the exercise of faith first, then the baptism as a testimony of faith.

Infant baptism may be a ritualistic denominational requirement to be a member in their religious organization, but it does nothing to make you a member of Christ.

John_1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Gal_3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

 

[Albion]

Agreed - it is one denomination. In fact as we speek in San Antonio all the SDA Delegates for all Division in the world are meeting to decide the updates to the church manual and to the doctrinal statement of beliefs. The entire world church has to vote on those changes or they don't go in.

There is a single General Conference President (Ted Wilson currently ) that heads the adminstrative items along with the other GC world church officers --

This is why Christianity Today was so emphatic on making that statement that this is one -- exactly one - denomination all the way from the top admin down to the local church level. A portion of all tithe for example from all local churches world wide goes up to the General Conference levels to be redistributed throughout the world church for pastors missionaries bible teachers etc.

It is a single world wide entity.

Sure. And that's not unique. Many denominations are structured that way. But many others are not. So when it comes to membership statistics, any of the "worldwide" church jurisdictions, regardless of how widespread the membership actually is or is not, are going to seem bigger than they are.

And BTW, your dismissal of other more prominent and larger denominations than yours is in error. Deliberately so, it appears. It's not that they are fractured over administrative disputes, etc. etc. but that the very same denomination on both sides of a border, each of them completely in harmony with the one on the other side, simply incorporates in each country as a separate legal entity. It has nothing to do with doctrine or any alleged fractures. It's just a technicality, but if each is reported separately, that denomination will APPEAR smaller in a rundown of church membership figures than really is the case.

I don't see anything in your post indicating that the Feb 2015 Christianity Today article was in error.

I didn't say it was in error. I said that your report, which included a reference to that article, was misleading.

 

[BobRyan]

Sure. And that's not unique. Many denominations are structured that way. But many others are not. So when it comes to membership statistics, any of the "worldwide" church jurisdictions, regardless of how widespread the membership actually is or is not, are going to seem bigger than they are.


I didn't say it was in error. I said that your report, which included a reference to that article, was misleading.

Then your statement was incorrect.

Here is the article statement.

====================================quote
In 2014, for the 10th year in a row, more than 1 million people became Adventists, hitting a record 18.1 million members. Adventism is now the fifth-largest Christian communion worldwide, after Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Anglicanism, and the Assemblies of God.

===================================== end quote

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct...ts-can-ben-carson-church-stay-separatist.html

 

[Albion]

Infant baptism may be a ritualistic denominational requirement to be a member in their religious organization, but it does nothing to make you a member of Christ.

It makes you a member of His church, though. That doesn't seem insignificant.

 

[Kirsten]

I hear a lot of criticism of us calling Protestants "separated bretheren". But the question comes up...we accept Trinitarian baptisms as valid in the Catholic Church. Do Protestant churches accept Catholic baptism as valid? So, if I wanted to convert to your church, whether non-denom, or Methodist, or whatever, would you require me to be baptized into your denomination?

If you want to attend my church, you don't need to do a formal conversion or anything of the sort. If you are a born-again Christian, you are considered part of the family, and your baptism is between you and God. It isn't something 'formal' that people track.

 

[Albion]

Then your statement was incorrect.

I was correct.

Here is the article statement.

Nothing in the article conflicts with what I explained. Of course, there is no chance that you will accept the facts, but I thought other readers ought to be set straight in case they were taken in by the suggestion that there are more Seventh Day Adventists in the world than Lutherans or Presbyterians, etc. All the SDAs in the world barely exceed the number of Baptists who belong just to the Southern Baptist Convention, in fact.

 

[BobRyan]

As even the Catholic research into that history shows - the issue with infants is whether or not they are doomed to mythical limbo or in some way excluded from real heaven - should they fail to repent and ask for baptism before they die.

The bible never presents this as an issue for infants. In fact Christ said "their angels do always behold the face of My Father who is in Heaven" and NT writers state that "to him that knows to do right" and does it not - to him it is sin.

They simply are not held accountable as infants. So they are fine as they are.

 

[BobRyan]

I was correct.

Not according to the actual quote of the article.

All the SDAs in the world don't exceed the number of Baptists who belong to just the Southern Baptist Convention, in fact.

Again -- your speculation is in error. The Christianity Today article is correct especially if you compare the SBC world wide to the SDA church world wide. It is simply fact.

 

[Kirsten]

So, do you allow infants to choose their clothes and what they eat? Who their doctor is, and where they go to school? I hope you make those decisions, which are all very important, for them. So why can't you decide their salvation for them?

Salvation is between a person and the Lord. You cannot choose salvation for someone else.

 

[Kirsten]

So, it seems that you wouldn't accept my infant baptism, would require me to be re-baptized (even though it only means you get wet), would I choose to join your denomination. So, while Catholics include all Trinitarians as validly baptized, not requiring re-baptism to join, you don't consider Catholic baptism, even though the same formula, valid.

Your baptism didn't save you, is all, like you might think it did. Baptism doesn't save.

 

[BobRyan]

So, do you allow infants to choose their clothes and what they eat? Who their doctor is, and where they go to school? I hope you make those decisions, which are all very important, for them. So why can't you decide their salvation for them?

Does the Bible say that they must choose to repent before they can wear clothes?

 

[Albion]

Not according to the actual quote of the article.

Oh yes.

You can read it--and comment on it--to your advantage, but the article's wording completely bears out what I explained (and you haven't even tried to rebut).

 

[Albion]

Salvation is between a person and the Lord. You cannot choose salvation for someone else.

Well, I don't know anyone who thinks he's doing THAT when he has his child baptized.

This ^ is more of an old wives tale told among people who belong to churches that don't baptize infants.

 

[BobRyan]

I was correct.

Not according to the actual quote of the article.

All the SDAs in the world don't exceed the number of Baptists who belong to just the Southern Baptist Convention, in fact.

Again -- your speculation is in error. The Christianity Today article is correct especially if you compare the SBC world wide to the SDA church world wide. It is simply fact.

Oh yes.

You can read it--and comment on it--to your advantage, but the article's wording completely bears out what I explained (and you haven't even tried to rebut).

How does your response fit in with the facts given above?? Your statement was observably false.

For 1998 the SBC reported a decline of 1.02%, or 162,158 members, giving the denomination a world total of 15,729,356 members (almost all in the U.S.).
The SBC reported weekly attendance averaging 5,398,692 for 1998. The actual number of resident members in 1998 was 10.7 million. (Source: "Any way you count it, fewer Southern Baptists" by Cary McMullen, Palatka Daily News, Florida.) The SBC reported a slight membership gain for 1999, but total membership (15,851,756) was still lower than previous levels.

[Source: Associated Press, "Southern Baptists tallied a membership gain in 1999", 15 April 2000; URL: http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,160007426,00.html?]

"over 16 million members."

Annual
of the 2013
Southern Baptist Convention

What difference is the church making during these perilous times?
Now, ladies and gentlemen, I need to get a little bit more specific about this question.
I’m not asking what difference the Methodist church is making about this lostness;
I’m not asking what difference the Lutheran church is making about this lostness;
I’m not asking what difference the Catholic church is making about this lostness;
I’m not asking what difference the Assembly of God church is making about this lostness;
I’m not asking what difference the Presbyterian church is making about this lostness;
I’m not asking what difference the Full Gospel church is making about this lostness;
I’m not asking what difference COGIC churches are making about this lostness.
Brothers and sisters, I cannot speak for any of those churches. I cannot speak for any of
those denominations. However, I just happen to be the president of the largest protestant
denomination in the world! I just happen to be the president of the largest protestant
denomination in America! I just happen to be president of the Southern Baptist Convention!
SO I CAN speak for this Convention!!
A Convention made up of over 16 million members.
A Convention made up of over 45,000 churches.
A Convention made up of 6 of the best seminaries in the world.
A Convention made up of some of the best colleges and universities in the world
http://www.sbcec.org/bor/2013/2013SBCAnnual.pdf