Paedo-Baptism Answers Church of Christ baptisms

[Goodcheer68]

I was asked by a baptist friend if the Reformed and Presbyterian churches would require a person to be re-baptized if they were baptized in a Church of Christ? My initial thoughts (I haven't replied yet) are as follows: "The short answer is yes Reformed would generally see it as a valid baptism. A valid baptism is one done in a Trinitarian formula (in the name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit), that is also done by a church whose beliefs are within the bounds of historical Christian orthodoxy. In other words those who would affirm (I understand that COC rejects confessionalism) the doctrine's taught in the historical creeds e.g. Christ- one person two natures, one substance with the Father, and so on. So while the Church of Christ has some major faulty views (baptismal regeneration,Perfectionism, etc) not all are as extreme and many still have some semblance to that of a True Church. Whereas Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons and such are not!

Any thoughts would be appreciated, thanks.

 

[Ryan&Amber2013]

I don't know about the church of Christ, but yes, this was how my pastor explained it to me. If the essential Christian doctrines are accurate, a reformed Church should accept that baptism.

 

[Guido's Brother]

Historically, Reformed churches of a Dutch background have also accepted Roman Catholic baptisms -- I think most, if not all, still do today. In Presbyterianism there has been a difference of opinion on that -- the most famous example being the 19th century debate between Hodge and Thornwell.

 

[Bill Duncan]

Does he consider his baptism to be valid? That's the real question. That question is the key to unlocking a whole world for him that he never knew. A good pastor could probably give that man much needed assurance by digging into his notions of validity. There are some in the PCA who have called for a more clear and defined position on what constitutes the validity of the Baptizing church. In fact, some call into question a Baptism by a female PCUSA "minister", by citing the "lawfully called thereunto" clause of the WCF. I think we open a whole can of worms with that debate, which could be detrimental to the assurance of many souls. My dad was baptized RC but was given to a relative to be raised at age three, in a Southern Presbyterian church. This used to plague me.

 

[Scott Bushey]

"Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as 'Roman Catholic' baptism. Neither, for that matter, is there any such entity as 'Baptist' baptism -- as if that were something different from what some might perhaps (though erroneously) call 'Presbyterian' baptism. Indeed, there is only one baptism that is validly Christian. That is Biblical baptism: the only baptism Calvin the Presbyterian upheld. Of course, Christian baptism can indeed be administered irregularly. Thus, a baby may irregularly be submerged three times -- by an Anti-Protestant Greek 'Orthodox' priest. Or an adult may be baptized trinitarianly with an irregular sevenfold submersion -- by a maverick, noisy & enthusiastic yet insufficiently informed Ultra-Pentecostalist. Again, a perfectly valid (though highly irregular) baptism might be performed by an immersionistic 'Plymouth Brethren' layman -- or by an ordained Campbellite or 'Church of Christ' clergywoman. On the other hand, Christian baptism can (and should) be administered optimally -- that is, in the best possible circumstances. Those who profess Christ as their Saviour, and their children, should be baptized only once – and in the best possible way. This, of course, would mean seeking to receive unrepeatable baptism from godly and knowledgeable and male Presbyterian Ministers of the Word and sacraments."

F. N. Lee

 

[TylerRay]

I was asked by a baptist friend if the Reformed and Presbyterian churches would require a person to be re-baptized if they were baptized in a Church of Christ? My initial thoughts (I haven't replied yet) are as follows: "The short answer is yes Reformed would generally see it as a valid baptism. A valid baptism is one done in a Trinitarian formula (in the name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit), that is also done by a church whose beliefs are within the bounds of historical Christian orthodoxy. In other words those who would affirm (I understand that COC rejects confessionalism) the doctrine's taught in the historical creeds e.g. Christ- one person two natures, one substance with the Father, and so on. So while the Church of Christ has some major faulty views (baptismal regeneration,Perfectionism, etc) not all are as extreme and many still have some semblance to that of a True Church. Whereas Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons and such are not!

Any thoughts would be appreciated, thanks.

I don't know of any Presbyterian body with an official position. It would be up to the local session in the first place to determine whether a man's baptism is valid. It could be appealed to presbytery, etc., or a body could study it, come to a position, and make it constitutional. But like I said, I don't know that any have come to an official position on Campbellite baptism.

My own view is that the Campbellites have always been a heretical, restorationist sect outside of the visible church, so I wouldn't consider their baptisms valid, any more than I would the JWs, Mormons, SDAs, Anabaptists, etc.