What is required before getting baptized in a pool of water?

[FireDragon76]

Hello John, I've never heard that before (where did you hear it?).

Of course, if being "sinlessly perfect" is required for baptism to "count", then it is the Lord Jesus' baptism, and His alone, that "counted".


Roman Catholic, Greek & Oriental Orthodox, Lutheran, the Churches of Christ, as well some of the Christian cults come to mind, as those who hold to water baptism being salvific.

Just to clarify, Lutherans do not believe the water in baptism itself saves us, but the water joined with the promise of grace according to Christ's ordinance (the Word). The water is an outward sign by which God joins us to Christ's Church and gives us the grace of salvation.

 

[The Liturgist]

Just to clarify, Lutherans do not believe the water in baptism itself saves us, but the water joined with the promise of grace according to Christ's ordinance (the Word). The water is an outward sign by which God joins us to Christ's Church and gives us the grace of salvation.

@MarkRohfrietsch @ViaCrucis and @Ain't Zwinglian , do Evangelical Catholic Lutherans also believe that about water baptism? Also does your theology recognize a participation through Christian baptism in the One Baptism of Christ in the Jordan, as is commonly believed by Anglo Catholics and Orthodox?

 

[ViaCrucis]

@MarkRohfrietsch @ViaCrucis and @Ain't Zwinglian , do Evangelical Catholic Lutherans also believe that about water baptism? Also does your theology recognize a participation through Christian baptism in the One Baptism of Christ in the Jordan, as is commonly believed by Anglo Catholics and Orthodox?

The Lutheran Confessions explicitly state that Baptism does not save ex opere operato, but by the Word of God joined to and connected to the water.

Here is how the Large Catechism puts it:

"From this now learn a proper understanding of the subject, and how to answer the question what Baptism is, namely thus, that it is not mere ordinary water, but water comprehended in God’s Word and command, and sanctified thereby, so that it is nothing else than a divine water; not that the water in itself is nobler than other water, but that God’s Word and command are added.

Therefore it is pure wickedness and blasphemy of the devil that now our new spirits, to mock at Baptism, omit from it God’s Word and institution, and look upon it in no other way than as water which is taken from the well, and then blather and say: How is a handful of water to help the soul?

Aye, my friend, who does not know that water is water if tearing things asunder is what we are after? But how dare you thus interfere with God’s order, and tear away the most precious treasure with which God has connected and enclosed it, and which He will not have separated? For the kernel in the water is God’s Word or command and the name of God, which is a treasure greater and nobler than heaven and earth.

Comprehend the difference, then, that Baptism is quite another thing than all other water; not on account of the natural quality but because something more noble is here added; for God Himself stakes His honor, His power and might on it. Therefore it is not only natural water, but a divine, heavenly, holy, and blessed water, and in whatever other terms we can praise it,-all on account of the Word, which is a heavenly, holy Word, that no one can sufficiently extol, for it has, and is able to do, all that God is and can do [since it has all the virtue and power of God comprised in it].

Hence also it derives its essence as a Sacrament, as St. Augustine also taught: Accedat verbum ad elementum et fit sacramentum. That is, when the Word is joined to the element or natural substance, it becomes a Sacrament, that is, a holy and divine matter and sign.

Therefore we always teach that the Sacraments and all external things which God ordains and institutes should not be regarded according to the coarse, external mask, as we regard the shell of a nut, but as the Word of God is included therein." - The Large Catechism, Part IV, 14-19

-CryptoLutheran

 

[The Liturgist]

The Lutheran Confessions explicitly state that Baptism does not save ex opere operato, but by the Word of God joined to and connected to the water.

Here is how the Large Catechism puts it:

"From this now learn a proper understanding of the subject, and how to answer the question what Baptism is, namely thus, that it is not mere ordinary water, but water comprehended in God’s Word and command, and sanctified thereby, so that it is nothing else than a divine water; not that the water in itself is nobler than other water, but that God’s Word and command are added.

Therefore it is pure wickedness and blasphemy of the devil that now our new spirits, to mock at Baptism, omit from it God’s Word and institution, and look upon it in no other way than as water which is taken from the well, and then blather and say: How is a handful of water to help the soul?

Aye, my friend, who does not know that water is water if tearing things asunder is what we are after? But how dare you thus interfere with God’s order, and tear away the most precious treasure with which God has connected and enclosed it, and which He will not have separated? For the kernel in the water is God’s Word or command and the name of God, which is a treasure greater and nobler than heaven and earth.

Comprehend the difference, then, that Baptism is quite another thing than all other water; not on account of the natural quality but because something more noble is here added; for God Himself stakes His honor, His power and might on it. Therefore it is not only natural water, but a divine, heavenly, holy, and blessed water, and in whatever other terms we can praise it,-all on account of the Word, which is a heavenly, holy Word, that no one can sufficiently extol, for it has, and is able to do, all that God is and can do [since it has all the virtue and power of God comprised in it].

Hence also it derives its essence as a Sacrament, as St. Augustine also taught: Accedat verbum ad elementum et fit sacramentum. That is, when the Word is joined to the element or natural substance, it becomes a Sacrament, that is, a holy and divine matter and sign.

Therefore we always teach that the Sacraments and all external things which God ordains and institutes should not be regarded according to the coarse, external mask, as we regard the shell of a nut, but as the Word of God is included therein." - The Large Catechism, Part IV, 14-19

-CryptoLutheran

Thank you, that’s extremely helpful.

I was not asking, however, if the sacrament of Baptism was efficacious ex opere operato, since as far as I am aware the Lutherans regard no sacraments as efficacious in that manner. The idea of ex opere operato was mainly taught by St. Augustine in reaction to the Donatist error, but it is not my belief that the refutation of Donatism requires sacramental efficacy ex opere operato, and the Orthodox, who believe ordination is a mystery of the Church, do not believe ordination functions ex opere operato. Specifically, the Orthodox believe that a schismatic heretic cannot pass apostolic succession in the consecration of bishops as per St. Cyprian of Carthage, so that apostolic succession is meaningless in the presence of someone outside the church due to heresy of a schismatic nature. Thus, the hierarchy of the Gnostics, for instance, lacked apostolic succession.

Interestingly the effects of this can be the opposite of what one might expect, in that it has resulted in ordinations being accepted by us that Roman Catholics rejected, in that, really quite remarkably, ROCOR, arguably the most theologically conservative Eastern Orthodox jurisdiction (and certainly the most anti-communist) received some Anglican priests into its jurisdiction at least as recently as 1947 by vesting, that is without re-ordaining them as would have been required in the case of Roman Catholicism because the Romans believe the form of their ordination is incorrect, and thus discount Anglican apostolic succession on formal grounds. Likewise we accept Roman Catholic clergy by vesting rather than re-ordination and we have probably received Lutherans. But we would always have to reordain someone who had been ordained by a sect like the Mormons or J/Ws, and we would never accept their baptism as valid, even though the Mormons, for example, use not only the correct liturgical formula but also baptize through full immersion (albeit they do not, as far as I am aware, baptize infants, whereas we do, by immersion, unless there is a medical reason not to, in which case affusion could be used.

+

Returning to Lutheran Baptism, what I really want to find out is this:

Insofar as Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Word of God, was baptized in the Jordan, and the Spirit descended upon Him as a dove, how would a Lutheran react to the idea that that the Word is joined to the Sacrament both incarnationally and in Sacred Scripture, and thus the waters of baptism are sacred because of this sacramental union which happened upon the occasion of His baptism, and that the grace received from the Word of God included in the sacred water of Baptism results from this sacramental union and participation with the one Baptism of Christ in the Jordan?

Orthodox and High Church Anglicans, tend to regard there as having been one baptism, and one Eucharist, in which we participate through anamnesis, in communion with the entire Church, as mentioned by our Lord in the Words of Institution. It seems to me that the idea of participation in the Baptism of the incarnate Word in the Jordan should be compatible with the Lutheran concept of sacramental union, and the water being sanctified by the Word, and likewise with Holy Communion,
but I have not read the entire wealth of material on the subject.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Thank you, that’s extremely helpful.

I was not asking, however, if the sacrament of Baptism was efficacious ex opere operato, since as far as I am aware the Lutherans regard no sacraments as efficacious in that manner. The idea of ex opere operato was mainly taught by St. Augustine in reaction to the Donatist error, but it is not my belief that the refutation of Donatism requires sacramental efficacy ex opere operato, and the Orthodox, who believe ordination is a mystery of the Church, do not believe ordination functions ex opere operato. Specifically, the Orthodox believe that a schismatic heretic cannot pass apostolic succession in the consecration of bishops as per St. Cyprian of Carthage, so that apostolic succession is meaningless in the presence of someone outside the church due to heresy of a schismatic nature. Thus, the hierarchy of the Gnostics, for instance, lacked apostolic succession.

Interestingly the effects of this can be the opposite of what one might expect, in that it has resulted in ordinations being accepted by us that Roman Catholics rejected, in that, really quite remarkably, ROCOR, arguably the most theologically conservative Eastern Orthodox jurisdiction (and certainly the most anti-communist) received some Anglican priests into its jurisdiction at least as recently as 1947 by vesting, that is without re-ordaining them as would have been required in the case of Roman Catholicism because the Romans believe the form of their ordination is incorrect, and thus discount Anglican apostolic succession on formal grounds. Likewise we accept Roman Catholic clergy by vesting rather than re-ordination and we have probably received Lutherans. But we would always have to reordain someone who had been ordained by a sect like the Mormons or J/Ws, and we would never accept their baptism as valid, even though the Mormons, for example, use not only the correct liturgical formula but also baptize through full immersion (albeit they do not, as far as I am aware, baptize infants, whereas we do, by immersion, unless there is a medical reason not to, in which case affusion could be used.

+

Returning to Lutheran Baptism, what I really want to find out is this:

Insofar as Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Word of God, was baptized in the Jordan, and the Spirit descended upon Him as a dove, how would a Lutheran react to the idea that that the Word is joined to the Sacrament both incarnationally and in Sacred Scripture, and thus the waters of baptism are sacred because of this sacramental union which happened upon the occasion of His baptism, and that the grace received from the Word of God included in the sacred water of Baptism results from this sacramental union and participation with the one Baptism of Christ in the Jordan?

Orthodox and High Church Anglicans, tend to regard there as having been one baptism, and one Eucharist, in which we participate through anamnesis, in communion with the entire Church, as mentioned by our Lord in the Words of Institution. It seems to me that the idea of participation in the Baptism of the incarnate Word in the Jordan should be compatible with the Lutheran concept of sacramental union, and the water being sanctified by the Word, and likewise with Holy Communion,
but I have not read the entire wealth of material on the subject.

Lutheranism connects Christ's baptism with our own. In Christ's baptism "God mingles Himself" in the water, thereby sanctifying it with Himself.

The "Flood Prayer" is an important prayer that is included in the Lutheran Rite of Holy Baptism, Here is a form of the Flood Prayer:

"Almighty and eternal God, according to Your strict judgment You condemned the unbelieving world through the flood, yet according to Your great mercy You preserved believing Noah and his family, eight souls in all. You drowned hard-hearted Pharaoh and all his host in the Red Sea, yet led Your people Israel through the water on dry ground, prefiguring this washing of Your Holy Baptism. Through the Baptism in the Jordan of Your beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, You sanctified and instituted all waters to be a blessed flood, and a lavish washing away of sin. We pray that You would behold (name) according to Your boundless mercy and bless him with true faith by the Holy Spirit that through this saving flood all sin in him which has been inherited from Adam and which he himself has committed since would be drowned and die. Grant that he be kept safe and secure in the holy ark of the Christian Church, being separated from the multitude of unbelievers and serving Your name at all times with a fervent spirit and a joyful hope, so that, with all believers in Your promise, he would be declared worthy of eternal life, through Jesus Christ, our Lord."

The prayer connects the flood language used by St. Peter in his epistle, Christ's own baptism, and our own.

In 1534 Luther delivered a series of sermons about Baptism, included in these we find quotes such as:

"For we see how God in heaven pours out his grace through his Son’s baptism. Heaven, which before was closed, is opened by Christ’s baptism and a window and door now stand open for us to see through. No longer is there a barrier between God and us, since God himself descends at the Jordan. The Father lets his voice be heard, the Son sanctifies baptism with his body, and the Holy Spirit descends in the form of a dove. Is this not a great manifestation, a truly great sign of how precious baptism is to God, that he does not abstain from it?"

It is simply not possible to disconnect what happened at the Jordan River with what happens when we ourselves come to the waters of Holy Baptism: Here is God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Here is the water of life, sanctified by Jesus Christ, from God the Father, by the power of the Holy Spirit; which by Christ's Word and Institution delivers us, washes us, cleanses us, by which we are born again of God and made partakers of Eternal Life.

Yes, we do insist that it is not "water" that saves, it is the Word; but it's as impossible to separate water and Word in Baptism as it is to separate heat and light from fire. It is these two, together, that constitutes baptism: Water and Word. Which is why St. Paul says in Ephesians that Christ has cleansed His Church by the washing of water with the Word. "washing of water with the Word", the two are together, inseparable: Holy Baptism. And thus this is not ordinary water, but indeed saving water. Water and Word, water and the Spirit, water and God the Father. God is here. He baptizes, He washes, He cleanses, He renews, He is Author of it all.

Addendum: This is true of also Scripture and all the Sacraments. Indeed, ink and paper have no power, and yet when the Holy Gospel is proclaimed, and read, and the powerful words of Holy Scripture bear forth, it is not the word of mere men, it is not dead letters on a page, here are living words, from God; God Himself speaks, and here is Christ Himself, here is the Holy Spirit bearing and bringing these living, powerful, divine words not merely into our ears and mind, but into our hearts, changing us, bringing faith into us. So that the Bible itself is a Holy Mystery, because here is the Christ-bearing text. To call Scripture the word of God is not to confuse it with the Second Person of the Trinity; but here, truly and certainly, is the Second Person of the Trinity for us.

Word and Sacrament.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

Thank you, that’s extremely helpful.

I was not asking, however, if the sacrament of Baptism was efficacious ex opere operato, since as far as I am aware the Lutherans regard no sacraments as efficacious in that manner. The idea of ex opere operato was mainly taught by St. Augustine in reaction to the Donatist error, but it is not my belief that the refutation of Donatism requires sacramental efficacy ex opere operato, and the Orthodox, who believe ordination is a mystery of the Church, do not believe ordination functions ex opere operato. Specifically, the Orthodox believe that a schismatic heretic cannot pass apostolic succession in the consecration of bishops as per St. Cyprian of Carthage, so that apostolic succession is meaningless in the presence of someone outside the church due to heresy of a schismatic nature. Thus, the hierarchy of the Gnostics, for instance, lacked apostolic succession.

Interestingly the effects of this can be the opposite of what one might expect, in that it has resulted in ordinations being accepted by us that Roman Catholics rejected, in that, really quite remarkably, ROCOR, arguably the most theologically conservative Eastern Orthodox jurisdiction (and certainly the most anti-communist) received some Anglican priests into its jurisdiction at least as recently as 1947 by vesting, that is without re-ordaining them as would have been required in the case of Roman Catholicism because the Romans believe the form of their ordination is incorrect, and thus discount Anglican apostolic succession on formal grounds. Likewise we accept Roman Catholic clergy by vesting rather than re-ordination and we have probably received Lutherans. But we would always have to reordain someone who had been ordained by a sect like the Mormons or J/Ws, and we would never accept their baptism as valid, even though the Mormons, for example, use not only the correct liturgical formula but also baptize through full immersion (albeit they do not, as far as I am aware, baptize infants, whereas we do, by immersion, unless there is a medical reason not to, in which case affusion could be used.

+

Returning to Lutheran Baptism, what I really want to find out is this:

Insofar as Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Word of God, was baptized in the Jordan, and the Spirit descended upon Him as a dove, how would a Lutheran react to the idea that that the Word is joined to the Sacrament both incarnationally and in Sacred Scripture, and thus the waters of baptism are sacred because of this sacramental union which happened upon the occasion of His baptism, and that the grace received from the Word of God included in the sacred water of Baptism results from this sacramental union and participation with the one Baptism of Christ in the Jordan?

Orthodox and High Church Anglicans, tend to regard there as having been one baptism, and one Eucharist, in which we participate through anamnesis, in communion with the entire Church, as mentioned by our Lord in the Words of Institution. It seems to me that the idea of participation in the Baptism of the incarnate Word in the Jordan should be compatible with the Lutheran concept of sacramental union, and the water being sanctified by the Word, and likewise with Holy Communion,
but I have not read the entire wealth of material on the subject.

The person of John the Baptist serves as a link between the first Israel and the new Israel His Church. However, John changes certain aspects of the OT washings pointing to Christian baptism. First of all, John's recipients of baptism are baptized passively. They are not active in their baptism. Secondly, all OT ceremonial washings do not have promises attached to them excluding the washing of Namaan. Additionally, in Jesus' baptism we see the Spirit given in baptism.

So in one sense, John stands with the OT prophets testifying what God will do in the future, and also stands with Jesus giving a rudimentary form of the ritual. Jesus elevates John's baptism to Christian baptism by linking it to his death and resurrection (Romans 6:2ff) as Peter would say Repent, be baptized for the forgiveness of sins and you shall receive the HS.

At Pentecost, with the outpouring of the Spirit, the baptism given by John now becomes the Baptism of Jesus. Here we see, John's baptism like his preaching was anticipatory and therefore incomplete.

 

[The Liturgist]

Lutheranism connects Christ's baptism with our own. In Christ's baptism "God mingles Himself" in the water, thereby sanctifying it with Himself.

The "Flood Prayer" is an important prayer that is included in the Lutheran Rite of Holy Baptism, Here is a form of the Flood Prayer:

"Almighty and eternal God, according to Your strict judgment You condemned the unbelieving world through the flood, yet according to Your great mercy You preserved believing Noah and his family, eight souls in all. You drowned hard-hearted Pharaoh and all his host in the Red Sea, yet led Your people Israel through the water on dry ground, prefiguring this washing of Your Holy Baptism. Through the Baptism in the Jordan of Your beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, You sanctified and instituted all waters to be a blessed flood, and a lavish washing away of sin. We pray that You would behold (name) according to Your boundless mercy and bless him with true faith by the Holy Spirit that through this saving flood all sin in him which has been inherited from Adam and which he himself has committed since would be drowned and die. Grant that he be kept safe and secure in the holy ark of the Christian Church, being separated from the multitude of unbelievers and serving Your name at all times with a fervent spirit and a joyful hope, so that, with all believers in Your promise, he would be declared worthy of eternal life, through Jesus Christ, our Lord."

The prayer connects the flood language used by St. Peter in his epistle, Christ's own baptism, and our own.

In 1534 Luther delivered a series of sermons about Baptism, included in these we find quotes such as:

"For we see how God in heaven pours out his grace through his Son’s baptism. Heaven, which before was closed, is opened by Christ’s baptism and a window and door now stand open for us to see through. No longer is there a barrier between God and us, since God himself descends at the Jordan. The Father lets his voice be heard, the Son sanctifies baptism with his body, and the Holy Spirit descends in the form of a dove. Is this not a great manifestation, a truly great sign of how precious baptism is to God, that he does not abstain from it?"

It is simply not possible to disconnect what happened at the Jordan River with what happens when we ourselves come to the waters of Holy Baptism: Here is God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Here is the water of life, sanctified by Jesus Christ, from God the Father, by the power of the Holy Spirit; which by Christ's Word and Institution delivers us, washes us, cleanses us, by which we are born again of God and made partakers of Eternal Life.

Yes, we do insist that it is not "water" that saves, it is the Word; but it's as impossible to separate water and Word in Baptism as it is to separate heat and light from fire. It is these two, together, that constitutes baptism: Water and Word. Which is why St. Paul says in Ephesians that Christ has cleansed His Church by the washing of water with the Word. "washing of water with the Word", the two are together, inseparable: Holy Baptism. And thus this is not ordinary water, but indeed saving water. Water and Word, water and the Spirit, water and God the Father. God is here. He baptizes, He washes, He cleanses, He renews, He is Author of it all.

Addendum: This is true of also Scripture and all the Sacraments. Indeed, ink and paper have no power, and yet when the Holy Gospel is proclaimed, and read, and the powerful words of Holy Scripture bear forth, it is not the word of mere men, it is not dead letters on a page, here are living words, from God; God Himself speaks, and here is Christ Himself, here is the Holy Spirit bearing and bringing these living, powerful, divine words not merely into our ears and mind, but into our hearts, changing us, bringing faith into us. So that the Bible itself is a Holy Mystery, because here is the Christ-bearing text. To call Scripture the word of God is not to confuse it with the Second Person of the Trinity; but here, truly and certainly, is the Second Person of the Trinity for us.

Word and Sacrament.

-CryptoLutheran

Nice. Very nice.

The person of John the Baptist serves as a link between the first Israel and the new Israel His Church. However, John changes certain aspects of the OT washings pointing to Christian baptism. First of all, John's recipients of baptism are baptized passively. They are not active in their baptism. Secondly, all OT ceremonial washings do not have promises attached to them excluding the washing of Namaan. Additionally, in Jesus' baptism we see the Spirit given in baptism.

So in one sense, John stands with the OT prophets testifying what God will do in the future, and also stands with Jesus giving a rudimentary form of the ritual. Jesus elevates John's baptism to Christian baptism by linking it to his death and resurrection (Romans 6:2ff) as Peter would say Repent, be baptized for the forgiveness of sins and you shall receive the HS.

At Pentecost, with the outpouring of the Spirit, the baptism given by John now becomes the Baptism of Jesus. Here we see, John's baptism like his preaching was anticipatory and therefore incomplete.

Indeed so.

In Eastern Orthodoxy, and probably in the Ukrainian Lutheran church which also uses the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom albeit without certain intercessory prayers, but otherwise pretty much intact, we have some beautiful hymns we sing on the Feast of the Baptism of Christ (Theophany, on January 6th, or January 18th for those on the Julian calendar), and instead of the Trisagion we sing Galatians 3:27 “As many as you have been baptized in Christ have put on Christ, alleluia!” This hymn, and several others used at Theophany, is sung tonally, using four part harmony. (except on Mount Athos and in the subset of Greek, Romanian, Bulgarian and Antiochian churches where Byzantine chant is preferred) despite not technically being a chorale. These hymns might be an enjoyable way for you to see some types of hymns other than the Chorale, and are of interest since historically this feast known as Epiphany in the West mainly focused on the Three Wise Men, and so there is not as much hymnody for it as in the East, and most of the Orthodox hymns are devoid of anything I think would offend Lutheran piety. Especially since our Great Litany has become a popular part of the 2006 Lutheran Service Book (and was previously in the 1959 Lutheran Service Book and Hymnal, which I really liked, but the ALC and LCA replaced it and the beautiful distinctive and unusual hymnal of the Augustana Synod which translates the Swedish Psalter into English, with the very controversial Green Hymnal of 1978). Although the worst part of that IMO was the Blue Hymnal, because it replaced the lovely 1941 Lutheran hymnal in several LCMS churches. The 2006 hymnal is much better.

I do however have as an exotic part of my library a special glossy folio-sized edition of the Blue Hymnal (Lutheran Worship) from a 1984 LCMS church conference which is in very good condition and has elegant typography, and it is one of the more rare, unusual and interesting items in the library.

*Interestingly the Syriac Orthodox Church that I love so very much, which along with the Coptic Orthodox I have always regarded as fully Orthodox, also sings a verse from Galatians (1:8-9) as part of a hymn, which is used in lieu of a gradual (or prokeimenon in Orthodox terminology) to introduce the Pauline epistle: “I heard the Apostle Paul say that if anyone comes preaching another Gospel then the one we have received, let them be anathema. Blessed is He who begins and ends in the teaching of the Lord.”

 

[RileyG]

Just to clarify, Lutherans do not believe the water in baptism itself saves us, but the water joined with the promise of grace according to Christ's ordinance (the Word). The water is an outward sign by which God joins us to Christ's Church and gives us the grace of salvation.

That sounds like the Baltimore (Catholic) definition of Sacrament to me.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

Just to clarify, Lutherans do not believe the water in baptism itself saves us, but the water joined with the promise of grace according to Christ's ordinance (the Word). The water is an outward sign by which God joins us to Christ's Church and gives us the grace of salvation.

That sounds like the Baltimore (Catholic) definition of Sacrament to me.

@FireDragon76 quotation is Lutheran.

 

[The Liturgist]

@FireDragon76 quotation is Lutheran.

I found the extremely helpful the additional information provided by yourself and @ViaCrucis along with our friend @FireDragon76 who if I recall is a member of the church I used to work for in the early part of my career.

 

[RileyG]

@FireDragon76 quotation is Lutheran.

I’m aware. His quotation just reminded me of the Baltimore Catechism.

 

[The Liturgist]

I’m aware. His quotation just reminded me of the Baltimore Catechism.

I would love it if you could quote that for us.

 

[RileyG]

I would love it if you could quote that for us.

sacrament: an outward sign instituted by Christ to give grace

here

 

[BobRyan]

"The one who BELIEVES AND is baptized shall be saved." Mark 16:16

1 Peter 3:19 in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, 20 who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. 21 Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you—not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience—through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, after angels and authorities and powers had been subjected to Him.

IN every case in the Bible - the person first believes (or as Peter says -- makes an appeal to God for a good conscience) and is then baptized

 

[fhansen]

I have heard that one should be sinlessly perfect first before they go, and if not the baptism won't count.

Where is that in the Bible, and what denomination believe that water baptism in a pool of water is where somebody gets saved?

Were cleansed after baptism, as a result of it. We come to God as sinners with nothing: in need of forgiveness, healing, cleansing, being made new creations, i.e. being justifed by He who, alone, can justify the ungodly. The prerequesite for baptism is faith. In fact, it's called the "sacrament of faith".