Baptism: Where Sins are Forgiven

There is an issue with the substance of Baptism between the Catholic and Protestant believers. Getting straight into the lesson here is the positions of each:

Protestant: Baptism is the public display of faith done as a Christian’s willingness to follow the example of Jesus. It is not required but should be accomplished early in one’s conversion. As a pastor once stated, “it is an outward symbol of an inward change.” NOTE: Protestants are not unified on this or any definition.

Catholic: Holy Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit, and the door which gives access to the other sacraments. Through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mission: "Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration through water in the word" (CCC, #1213). NOTE: Catholics are united on this definition.

The Catholic Church is a huge advocate of scripture and also are protestants. I would love to give the many references from first, second, and third century Christians regarding their agreement with the current Catholic view, but as I know I am defending the Catholic view to Protestants, primarily, I will stick to the Bible. I think personally that John and Acts are the two most stalwart scriptures referencing the need for Baptism. To begin, the Gospel of John mentions the act of Baptism with the word “baptize” four times in just the first chapter; two more times in Ch. 3. John the Baptist says that he baptized with water, but the Messiah will baptize with the Holy Spirit. In Ch. 3 we have the well-known conversation with Nicodemus about being born again. Jesus says, “I assure you, unless someone is born of water and spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God. What is born of the flesh is born of the flesh, and what is born of the spirit is born of the spirit.”  Jesus says these things in response to Nicodemus simply looking at the flesh perspective and not the spiritual perspective. There are in fact two separate baptisms in the Gospel of John: one of the spirit and one of water; one from John and one from Jesus. We know from John 1:31 and especially Acts 19:4 that John’s baptism was to prepare hearts for the coming of the Lord. He preached in this order: 1) repent, 2) be baptized (also reflected in Matt 3:6, Mark 16:16). This is part of “Gods plan” in Luke 7:30 and part of “Gods way of righteousness” in Luke 7:29.

Before we leave the gospels we need to remember an important thing. The Catholic Church has sacraments. These are seven things the RCC holds that Christ instituted.  As an important supplement to this conversation, do not forget that before Jesus left the disciples, He then instituted baptism, “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” And that’s what Catholics do. Jesus gave three things for them to do as a closing statement: 1) baptize, 2) teach, 3) remember He is there with them forever.

All of this is echoed in Acts. 2:38, the crowds asked, “brothers, what must we do.” “Repent,” Peter said to them, “and be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” Again, the story of the Eunuch in Ch.8 shows how the man had to believe “with all his heart” and then could be and was baptized. Peter in 10:48 commands the people to be baptized. Acts 16:15, 16:33, 18:8, 19:5 all show how baptism was urgent to the Apostles, and also could not be accomplished without believing. I would look up those and see the narrative conveying urgency and requirement. We continually see a common “when they heard this, they were baptized.” Finally, we observe as Acts closes in 22:16, “…be baptized, wash away your sins by calling on His name.”  

I see a continual message: believe, be baptized. I opened by pointing how the RCC views baptism, and that its purpose is twofold: 1) for the remission of sins, and 2) to be raised with Christ. The second is a tradition of the protestant churches as well, which I don’t think you will disagree with. So, the real contention is the first point – that baptism is for the remission of sins. When I was baptized, and I have heard this put no other way besides in the RCC, I was told that it was a mere symbol and that we only do it cause we should, and to follow Gods example. In that opinion I do not see the urgency, the requirement, and I do not hear remission of sin.

I have reviewed the Catechism, #1213-1284, which discuss baptism as a whole issue (it is well worth the read) and do not see where it states that Baptism is required for salvation. I do see however in #1281 that “Those who die for the faith, those who are catechumens, and all those who, without knowing of the Church but acting under the inspiration of grace, seek God sincerely and strive to fulfill his will, can be saved even if they have not been baptized.” This is one of several misconceptions about the Roman Catholic Faith, that baptism is required to be saved. You said “if baptism is a requirement for salvation…” but please do not be confused by my words, I was pointing out that baptism is for the remission of sins, and not a requirement for salvation.    

The thief on the cross! This was my last straw against the Catholic teaching of Baptism (finding out later that I was mistake in what they actually teach). I looked at everything, and the last stand I took versus baptism the RCC way was the question, “if the thief on the cross was saved and guaranteed entrance into paradise, why was he not baptized?” First, there is no telling that he was not baptized. Many, many, Jews were baptized by John and others. The other important factor many overlook is that the Gospel was not in effect until Jesus was raised from the grave, which is the chief reason we are baptized – to be raised again with Christ, in His baptism (Romans 6:3). Again, John’s baptism was not for remission of sin but for the preparedness of the coming of the messiah; Jesus baptism was for the remission of sin. Third, and most importantly, baptism by the Church and the Apostles in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, was not in effect until Pentecost.  How could the thief have been baptized by a Church that was not existent? How could the thief be baptized in Christ’s death and resurrection before Jesus had died? He didn’t need to be and he probably wasn’t. 

                For a more comprehensive understanding of what the Roman Catholic Church teaches regarding the sacrament of baptism, see The Catechism of the Catholic Church. You can find this online, and look for particularly #1312 thru 1380ish.