Where Were the Baptists During the Reformation? - A Lecture

Four hundred and ninety-three years ago today, an inconspicuous event took place in the middle of Europe that has had a direct influence upon your decision to be here in this worship service today.  A Roman Catholic priest and professor of theology by the name of Martin Luther lived in the little German town of Wittenburg.  On this day in the year 1517, Dr. Luther issued a call to a theological debate of 95 theses or points of contention which he had with the Roman Catholic Church.  So, as was the custom in those days, he took his list of 95 points of debate and nailed them to the church door which served as a kind of community bulletin board.  

Neither Luther nor anyone else had any idea his actions that day would change the course of the history of the entire world.  He had hoped to provoke discussion among his peers in order to bring theological reform to the Church.  But what actually happened (among many other things) was what we know as the Protestant Reformation and the formation of a new Christian entity which eventually came to bear his name: the Lutheran Church.  

At the beginning of the 16^th century, the spiritual and political situation in Europe was a kind of “perfect storm” for the selling of indulgences by the Church.  Death and Purgatory and Hell were all too real in the minds of the people.  Between diseases that claimed the lives of many, and the Turks [i.e. Muslims] who were continuing to consume multitudes in the Crusades, life was most definitely not good.  

It was also commonly taught by the Church that entrance into Heaven was based upon one’s own pious efforts and one’s relationship to the Church.  This is the precise motivation behind Luther becoming a monk.  He was certain that the best way to insure a relatively brief stay in Purgatory and an eventual eternity in Heaven was through a lifestyle of penitence, piety, self-denial and submission to the Church.  It was understood both by Luther and the people in general that the austere life of the monastery was the best possible opportunity to insure one’s eternal life.  If anyone deserved to go to Heaven, monks did.

But for most people, there was a much easier alternative to monkery to insure eternal bliss: the purchase of indulgences.  An indulgence was an official document from the Roman Catholic Church, or more precisely, from the pope.  Initially, they were sold to those who went to battle in the Crusades.  Then, because of their popularity, they were extended to those who were unable to participate in battle.  Later they became available for the general public, and eventually they were sold for the sake of the dead in Purgatory.  The reason for buying an indulgence was for the forgiveness of sins.  All sins.  And the primary reason the pope made these pardons for sin available was because the funds raised were used to build St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.

The indulgence “Salesperson of the Year” in Germany was a man commissioned by the pope named Johann Tetzel.  Listen to this description of his “sales pitch”:

“As he approached a town, he was met by the dignitaries, who then entered with him in solemn procession.  A cross bearing the papal arms preceded him, and the pope’s bull(1) of indulgence was borne aloft on a gold-embroidered velvet cushion.  The cross was solemnly planted in the market place, and the sermon began:

‘Listen now, God and St. Peter call you.  Consider the salvation of your souls and those of your loved ones departed.  You priest, you noble, you merchant, you virgin, you matron, you youth, you old man, enter now into your church, which is the Church of St. Peter.  Visit the most holy cross erected before you and ever imploring you.  Have you considered that you are lashed in a furious tempest amid the temptations and dangers of the world, and that you do not know whether you can reach the haven, not of your mortal body, but of your immortal soul?  Consider that all who are contrite and have confessed and made contribution will receive complete remission of all their sins.  Listen to the voices of your dear dead relatives and friends, beseeching you and saying, “Pity us, pity us.  We are in dire torment from which you can redeem us for a pittance.”  Do you not wish to?  Open your ears.  Hear the father saying to his son, the mother to her daughter, “We bore you, nourished you, brought you up, left you our fortunes, and you are so cruel and hard that now you are not willing for so little to set us free?  Will you let us lie here in flames?  Will you delay our promised glory?”

Remember that you are able to release them, for 

As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, The soul from purgatory springs.

Will you not then for a quarter of a florin receive these letters of indulgence through which you are able to lead a divine and immortal soul into the fatherland of paradise?’”(2)

In the entire history of the world there has never been a product easier to sell than indulgences for the forgiveness of sins to people who were perpetually terrified by the inevitability of endless horrors of Purgatory and the merciless eternal punishment Hell.  The selling of indulgences was so successful that author Roland Bainton referred to them as “the bingo of the sixteenth century.“  For more than one hundred years, it had been considered by many to be a form of extortion.  Luther wrote in his 95 Theses, (#65)  . . . [T]he treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.  (#66)  The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men.

But Luther wrote his theses primarily to address the selling of forgiveness of sins as heresy.  (#32)  They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of pardon.  (#33)  Men must be on their guard against those who say that the pope's pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to Him.

In the years 1513 through 1517, Luther had lectured in the university at Wittenburg as the Professor of Theology on the books of Psalms, Romans, and Galatians.  It was in Psalm 22 that he began to understand the real purpose of the life and death of the Lord Jesus.  When he read verse 1, He saw Jesus in a completely different light: My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?  Why are you so far from saving me, from the words of my groaning? (Psalm 22:1 ESV).  Those words of Jesus rang true for Luther because they sounded like the cries of his own heart.  And in Romans, as he studied chapter 1 and verse 17, he finally understood the message of the gospel: “The just shall live by faith.”  In other words, those who are justified by God are made right in His sight through their faith in Christ.  

“Night and day I pondered until I saw the connection between the justice of God and the statement that ‘the just shall live by his faith.’  Then I grasped that the justice of God is that righteousness by which, through grace and sheer mercy, God justifies us through faith.  Thereupon I felt myself to be reborn and to have gone through open doors into paradise.  The whole of Scripture took on a new meaning, and whereas before the ‘justice of God’ had filled me with hate, now it became to me inexpressibly sweet in greater love.  This passage of Paul became to me a gate to heaven. . . .”

Luther had discovered the biblical gospel.  And this is why he had such great difficulty with the teachings of Rome.  As time went on, and as he studied the Scriptures with this new understanding of salvation, Luther became more and more bold in his renunciation of the unbiblical doctrines of Roman Catholicism.  He wrote books and published pamphlets that eventually led to his trial before the church council in the city of Worms.  

He was commanded by the representatives of the Church to recant and renounce all of his writings.  After asking and receiving permission to sleep on it, he came back to court the next day and said, “Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason - I do not accept the authority of popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other - my conscience is captive to the Word of God.  I cannot and I will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe.  Here I stand.  I cannot do otherwise.  God help me.  Amen.”

What Luther accomplished in his refusal to violate his own conscience was the re-establishment of the Scriptures as the sole authority for the Christian faith.  This is the Reformation doctrine known as Sola Scriptura, or The Scriptures Alone.  Four other major doctrines eventually grew out of the teachings of Luther and other Reformation leaders: Sola Fide (Faith Alone), Sola Gratia (Grace Alone), Solus Christus (Christ Alone), and Soli Deo Gloria (Glory to God Alone).  

Whether or not you were actually aware of it, this is a large part of the reason why you are here in this church today, and you are not Roman Catholic.  For a number of you, this is why you are no longer Roman Catholic.  It is because of the lives and the biblical teachings of men like John Wycliffe (England - 1300’s), Jan Hus (Germany - 1400’s), Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli (Switzerland - 1500’s), and John Calvin (France -1500’s) that the Bible once again became the sole spiritual authority for Protestant Christians.  This was in direct opposition to the teaching that the Roman Catholic Church is an equal authority with the Scriptures.  This is how we came to hold to the five solas of the Reformation. 

• • Sola Scriptura - The Scriptures alone are authoritative in what they teach and we must submit our consciences and our wills to the doctrines of the Bible and not to the doctrines of men.

• • Sola Fide - We’re saved by faith alone, and not faith plus good works.  Good works are the product of saving faith, salvation is not the product of good works.

• • Sola Gratia - Salvation is by the grace of God alone, not the result of merit on our part.  It is a gift granted, not a gift earned, and certainly not a gift to be purchased.

• • Solus Christus - Salvation is granted to us through faith in Christ alone.  The work of Christ upon the cross is the all-sufficient basis of our salvation, and nothing else is needful.  We do not need the intercession of any other person or institution to secure eternal life for us.

• • Soli Deo Gloria - Salvation is entirely the work of God.  therefore He alone is worthy of receiving glory for it and He will not share that glory with another.  To God alone be the glory for the great things He has done.

These are not simply “Doctrines of the Reformed Faith.”  These are the doctrines of the Bible, the core values of Christianity, the non-negotiable foundational truths of the Scriptures.  But they were lost for centuries and buried by doctrines and traditions of men.  What happened to these doctrines is not unlike the account of King Josiah in 2 Kings 22 when the workers in the Temple find the Book of the Law of Moses.  They take it to Josiah and he realizes this is the Word of God which has been misplaced, neglected, ignored, and disobeyed for many years.  

[11] When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law, he tore his clothes. [12] And the king commanded Hilkiah . . . and Ahikam . . . and Achbor . . . and Shaphan . . . and Asaiah . . . saying, [13] “Go, inquire of the LORD for me, and for the people, and for all Judah, concerning the words of this book that has been found. For great is the wrath of the LORD that is kindled against us, because our fathers have not obeyed the words of this book, to do according to all that is written concerning us.”  (2 Kings 22:11-13 ESV)

That should have been the response of Pope Leo X when Luther found the biblical gospel buried in the book of Romans at the university.  But Rome was not willing to entertain the thought of abdicating her power and glory and authority in the world.  It eventually became a struggle between the authority of the Church and the authority of the Scriptures.  In Roman Catholicism, the church trumps the Bible.  But in the Scriptures, the Church is subject to the Word of God.

It was Luther’s intention to debate and discuss and reason together within the Church regarding what the Scriptures actually teach, rather than bow to doctrines which were not to be found in the Bible at all.  The indulgences of Rome were nothing less than doctrines of demons.  That battle for the authority of Scripture then spilled over into many other areas and ultimately resulted in the many Protestant denominations we see today.  

I believe we now see the two extremes of the religious spectrum.  You have the monolithic Roman Catholic Church that, at least during the Middle Ages, ruled over the lives and souls of its people with very little mercy.  In Europe, there was one denomination and it was terrible.  It was like the nation of Israel with the Scriptures buried somewhere out of sight.  But still very, very religious and very demanding of its adherents.  And while there have been minor, superficial cultural changes over the years within Catholicism, there has been very little change doctrinally.  The Five Solas are still considered by Rome to be heretical today.

On the other end of the spectrum is Protestantism: Hundreds of different churches with different convictions regarding what the Bible teaches.  One Book and literally hundreds of denominations of churches.  In America, the vast majority of Christians have no real understanding of the significance of the Reformation and no conscious ties to it.  So in a similar sense, many Protestant churches have lost “the history Book” of their own religious heritage somewhere in the church library and no one seems to notice it’s gone.  The majority of Protestant Evangelical churches seem to be chugging along just fine with no clear understanding of these necessary biblical doctrines over which so many lost their lives in their defense of them.

Now if you’ve stuck with me so far, you may be thinking, “OK, I kind of understand why we’re not Catholics.  But if these Five Solas came out of the Protestant Reformation, why aren’t we Lutherans?  How did we get to be Baptists?”  Well, you can’t imagine how glad I am that you asked that question because I just happen to have an answer for you right here in my notes!

The Sixth Sola which obviously didn’t make the cut was Sola Baptidzo Fidelis.  And as far as I know, that is original with me.  So I will take all the credit, or the blame for it.  Presumably, that is sort of like Latin for “baptism of believers only.”  Not only did the big-name reformers not embrace this "sola", but they persecuted those who did.

During the 16^th century, people like Luther and Zwingli began to see more and more of the false teachings within their own church, and they spoke out against it particularly in regard to the matter of salvation.  It should be obvious that if we are wrong regarding salvation, then getting all the other teachings of the Bible right is rather pointless.  If you believe correctly that only believers in Christ should be baptized, but you believe incorrectly that salvation is accomplished by your own work instead of by Christ alone, then it won’t matter much that you were right about baptism if you’re in Hell.  So the Reformers were very right about the most important issue: Salvation

The biblical doctrine of believer’s baptism was not a “core value” of the Reformation but it was obviously extremely important.  Running parallel throughout the centuries with the Roman Catholic Church was a quiet, but persistent belief among a very few Christians that Rome was wrong.  One of the things Rome was wrong about was baptism.  While the first century church practiced baptism of believers only by immersion as we can see in the Scriptures, that practice eventually deteriorated into paedo-baptism, or the baptism of infants.  Those who disagreed with this practice during the Reformation period were referred to as Anabaptists, which literally means “to baptize again.”  Listen to what one writer says about the mindset of the Anabaptists:

“The earliest form of Christianity describes scattered house fellowships of believers who viewed the [Roman] state as evil.  They boldly served one greater than Caesar, and unapologetically proclaimed Jesus Christ as the Lord of their kingdom.  New Testament writers made a clear distinction between the church and the world.  [The] Apostle John stated: Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world.  If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. - 1 John 2:15.  When the church became espoused to the state under Constantine, the Anabaptists saw an unrelenting series of compromises in principles of faith.  Although the Edit [sic] of Milan (313) only legalized Christianity, the emperor Theodosius made it the state religion on February 20, 380, and required everyone to be baptized.  This meant that all soldiers where [sic] now Christians; a new twist for believers who previously desisted military service because of their allegiance to a greater emperor.  Anabaptists saw this historical event as the beginning of a spiritually injurious domino effect which progressively compromised spiritual principles - century after century.”  

In other words, the emperor Theodosius created the Church/State in a big way!  If you were Roman, you had to be a Christian.  It was the law.  And it was baptism that made you a Christian, not faith in Christ.  And baptism was made mandatory.  But what made matters even worse was the institution of infant baptism:

“The joy of New Testament baptism through repentance and conversion of adult believers had been lost in this practice which originated in about the Fourth century.  Anabaptists reserved their strongest criticism for this practice, because they esteemed it to have repudiated the foundation of salvation by grace.  No longer did people have the opportunity to turn from their evil ways and join a community of believers through recognition of their own sinfulness.  Their lives and destinies were imprisoned by the Church from near the moment of their birth.  Salvation lost its majesty.  Grace became only a distant theme.  It was no longer a divine particular to be cherished, for it had become a regulated state of existence.”  

If you become a Christian by means of baptism at birth, where is the requirement of repentance?  Where is the requirement of faith in Christ?  How can an infant have a genuine conversion?  And if everyone is a Christian on the basis of forced baptism of adults by the state, and imposed baptism of infants by the church, then why preach the gospel?  But the Church/State was so powerful and so completely in control of people’s lives from the cradle to the grave, that it was dangerous to question official state-sponsored theology.  Listen once again to this writer’s comments:

“For the Anabaptists, . . . This powerful hold on the soul of a person was a theological road block to understanding and appreciating the very joy of being a Christian.  Rebaptizing adult believers was therefore a theological expression, a political statement, an act of dissent, and perhaps the medieval equivalent of burning one's draft card.  This analogy is not intended to legitimize draft-card burning nor to denigrate Anabaptist martyrdom, only to illustrate the Severe Cost that is required of those who follow their beliefs with the full knowledge that their actions are in direct opposition to Church State authorities.” 

During the 16^th century, as the common people began to have more and more access to the Scriptures in their own languages for the first time, they also began to interpret the Bible for themselves.  This gave the Anabaptists a renewed vigor for those peculiar Baptist doctrines which Rome had rejected for 1300 years.  They became so outspoken that even the Reformers who didn’t have a problem with Church and State being joined together, eventually joined hands once again with the Catholic Church in  merciless persecution of Baptists.

“Anabaptists were viciously dealt with by the main three church denominations in league with government officials because they were viewed as subversives.  Luther and other reformers believed that abuses by the church, such as the temporal authority of the pope or the immoral excesses of the clergy should be corrected while still retaining the historical legacy of the church structure.  They viewed themselves as protectors of the historically true church.  If medieval church structure may be viewed as a brick wall, Luther wanted to realign and replace those few bricks that would correct the problem yet preserve the integrity of the wall.  

Anabaptists saw these same bricks as indicative of a foundation that had shifted.  Repair meant changing the position of the foundation, no matter what happens to the bricks.  Not even mainline reformers could accept the magnitude or the consequences of such radical change.  Persecution from many sides was resolute throughout Europe because nobility, church officials, and merchants viewed Anabaptism as a fundamental threat to their own destinies.  Thousands were drowned, tortured or burned at the stake, but martyrdom only fortified their belief that suffering was a touchstone of their genuine faithfulness to true Christianity.  Drowning was often employed because authorities thought it a befitting punishment for rebaptizers.”

“The dual hand of church and state released its severest form of tyranny on the Anabaptists.  The Rhine Valley during the mid 1500's witnessed nightly torches of burning saints.  They were mocked and scorned by angry crowds as they were led to their executions.  It is ironic that the very entity that suffered the initial pain of affliction in the Roman arena now became the Afflicter.  Doubly ironic is [it] that many of the Reformers who enjoyed their newly gained freedom from the Roman Catholic Church, likewise chose to be the new Afflicters.  The wanton slaughter of Anabaptists was severe, vitriolic, and offered as entertainment in some locations; but still they grew in number, and became even more resolute in their convictions and activities.”

This is part of our heritage.  Behind us stands a people who were zealous for the Scriptures and for a more complete reformation than what actually took place.  That is not to minimize what Luther and others were able to accomplish through the grace of God.  But there is much more to the story than the rediscovery of the Five Solas or Calvin’s Five Points.  What eventually happened was the immigration of Baptists to America to escape the persecution of the church in Europe and England.  And it is the Baptists who could arguably be seen as the most influential force behind the establishment of this nation through the writing of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

I realize most of you have very little if any prior knowledge of the the things I’ve talked about today.  And I also realize this kind of sermon, if you can even call it that, is a serious departure from what you’re used to.  I promise not to make it a habit.  But it is extremely important for us to know who we are spiritually, where we came from, why we believe the things we say we believe, and why those things are important.  

We do believe in believer’s baptism for good and biblical reasons.  We believe in the separation of Church and State for very good reasons.  We believe that men cannot impose upon our consciences any doctrine which does not come from the clear teaching of Scripture.  We believe in the priesthood of all believers.  And we believe the great doctrines that are so often identified with Luther, Calvin, and the Reformation because they are biblical.

I am grateful to God, first of all, because I belong to Christ.  I am thankful for His saving grace toward me.  Above all else, I thank God for forgiving me of my sins and granting me eternal life.  But I am also finding as I look through the pages of church history that I should be grateful to be a Baptist.  While I know quite well that that statement might be construed by some as prideful, or arrogant, or the result of some kind of self-righteous spiritual superiority complex, I still am grateful to God for sparing me from the blatant ecclesiastical errors that we see in other churches and denominations.  I thank the Lord for the Protestant Reformation.  And I thank Him for bringing me here to this place called Grace Fellowship, a Baptist church.  

May the Lord protect us from the grievous errors that always result from neglect of the Scriptures, and lead us always in the truth of His word.

==============================================================

The Lord’s Supper

Roman Catholic Doctrine:

By the 16th century, some Reformers (excluding Luther) also taught that Christ's presence in the Eucharist was only figurative or metaphorical. Since there were other opinions being taught as truth (figurative presence and metaphorical presence) a teaching authority (see Chapter 5) had to be appealed to discern error from the truth. The way of the Church was to follow the model of Acts 15.

The Council of Trent (1545 - 1563) defined the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and the Eucharist as both the continuing sacrifice of Christ and a real sacrament. The institution of the Eucharist as sacrament was contained in the words "Do this in remembrance of me."

“Roman Catholics believe that the bread and wine become the real Body and Blood of Jesus Christ and remain such until the elements are entirely consumed. The Body and Blood not consumed at one Eucharist are reserved for the next celebration of the Eucharist and venerated as the Body and Blood of Jesus.”  http://www.catholicapologetics.org/ap060500.htm

Lutheran Doctrine:

Q: What is the Sacrament of the Altar?

It is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ under the bread and wine, instituted by Christ Himself for us Christians to eat and to drink.

Q: What is the benefit of this eating and drinking?

These words, “Given and shed for you for the forgiveness of sins,” show us that in the Sacrament forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation are given us through these words. For where there is forgiveness of sins, there is also life and salvation.

Q: How can bodily eating and drinking do such great things?

Certainly not just eating and drinking do these things, but the words written here: “Given and shed for you for the forgiveness of sins.” These words, along with the bodily eating and drinking, are the main thing in the Sacrament. Whoever believes these words has exactly what they say: “forgiveness of sins.”  http://www.cph.org/t-topic-catechism-altar.aspx

It appears that the most significant difference between the Catholic Mass and the Lutheran Eucharist is in who changes simple bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ.  The Lutheran argument is that no mere man, regardless of how holy he may be, cannot cause the transformation of the elements into the Body of Christ.  But if Christ Himself has said the elements are His body, then that is the end of the argument.  Since Christ Himself is attendant to the Eucharist, and the Lutheran priest does not attempt to change or claim to have the power to change the elements, then consubstantiation is the correct term, “con” meaning “with”.  Christ Himself is with the Eucharist, as opposed to a priest transforming the elements by means of the power of his office.

Both churches agree, however, that the elements actually become the body and blood of Christ.  One, at the hand of the priest.  The other by the word and presence of Christ.

Baptist Doctrine

1._____ The supper of the Lord Jesus was instituted by him the same night wherein he was betrayed, to be observed in his churches, unto the end of the world, for the perpetual remembrance, and shewing forth the sacrifice of himself in his death, confirmation of the faith of believers in all the benefits thereof, their spiritual nourishment, and growth in him, their further engagement in, and to all duties which they owe to him; and to be a bond and pledge of their communion with him, and with each other.  ( 1 Corinthians 11:23-26; 1 Corinthians 10:16, 17,21 )

2._____ In this ordinance Christ is not offered up to his Father, nor any real sacrifice made at all for remission of sin of the quick or dead, but only a memorial of that one offering up of himself by himself upon the cross, once for all; and a spiritual oblation of all possible praise unto God for the same. So that the popish sacrifice of the mass, as they call it, is most abominable, injurious to Christ's own sacrifice the alone propitiation for all the sins of the elect.  ( Hebrews 9:25, 26, 28; 1 Corinthians 11:24; Matthew 26:26, 27 )

3._____ The Lord Jesus hath, in this ordinance, appointed his ministers to pray, and bless the elements of bread and wine, and thereby to set them apart from a common to a holy use, and to take and break the bread; to take the cup, and, they communicating also themselves, to give both to the communicants.  ( 1 Corinthians 11:23-26, etc. )

4._____ The denial of the cup to the people, worshipping the elements, the lifting them up, or carrying them about for adoration, and reserving them for any pretended religious use, are all contrary to the nature of this ordinance, and to the institution of Christ.  ( Matthew 26:26-28; Matthew 15:9; Exodus 20:4, 5 )

5._____ The outward elements in this ordinance, duly set apart to the use ordained by Christ, have such relation to him crucified, as that truly, although in terms used figuratively, they are sometimes called by the names of the things they represent, to wit, the body and blood of Christ, albeit, in substance and nature, they still remain truly and only bread and wine, as they were before. 

( 1 Corinthians 11:27; 1 Corinthians 11:26-28 )

6._____ That doctrine which maintains a change of the substance of bread and wine, into the substance of Christ's body and blood, commonly called transubstantiation, by consecration of a priest, or by any other way, is repugnant not to Scripture alone, but even to common sense and reason, overthroweth the nature of the ordinance, and hath been, and is, the cause of manifold superstitions, yea, of gross idolatries.  ( Acts 3:21; Luke 14:6, 39; 1 Corinthians 11:24, 25 )

7._____ Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements in this ordinance, do then also inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally, but spiritually receive, and feed upon Christ crucified, and all the benefits of his death; the body and blood of Christ being then not corporally or carnally, but spiritually present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses.  ( 1 Corinthians 10:16; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 )

8._____ All ignorant and ungodly persons, as they are unfit to enjoy communion with Christ, so are they unworthy of the Lord's table, and cannot, without great sin against him, while they remain such, partake of these holy mysteries, or be admitted thereunto; yea, whosoever shall receive unworthily, are guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, eating and drinking judgment to themselves. 

( 2 Corinthians 6:14, 15; 1 Corinthians 11:29; Matthew 7:6 )

http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc30.html

==============================================================

Baptism

Roman Catholic

Roman Catholic Christians believe that in the sacrament of baptism the individual is both regenerated through water and the Holy Spirit and truly incorporated into the Church of Jesus Christ.

It is frequently asked by non-believers how an infant is capable of making an act of faith in order to receive baptism. The response of the Catholic Church is to follow the Biblical example of Christ. Jesus accepted the faith of others as an occasion of salvation, forgiveness and healing of another. The Church has always done likewise. In infant baptism, the faith of parents and sponsors is required.

http://www.catholicapologetics.org/ap060200.htm#ap060201

Lutheran

Q: What benefits does Baptism give?

It works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.

Q: Which are these words and promises of God?

Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Mark: “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:16)

Q: How can water do such great things?

Certainly not just water, but the word of God in and with the water does these things, along with the faith which trusts this word of God in the water. For without God’s word the water is plain water and no Baptism. But with the word of God it is a Baptism, that is, a life-giving water, rich in grace, and a washing of the new birth in the Holy Spirit, as St. Paul says in Titus, chapter three:

“He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by His grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. This is a trustworthy saying.” (Titus 3:5–8)  http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=585

Baptist

Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, to be unto the party baptized, a sign of his fellowship with him, in his death and resurrection; of his being engrafted into him; of remission of sins; and of giving up into God, through Jesus Christ, to live and walk in newness of life. 

Those who do actually profess repentance towards God, faith in, and obedience to, our Lord Jesus Christ, are the only proper subjects of this ordinance.

The outward element to be used in this ordinance is water, wherein the party is to be baptized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. 

Immersion, or dipping of the person in water, is necessary to the due administration of this ordinance.

http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc29.html

=====================================================================================

1. a formal document issued by the pope, written in antiquated characters and often sealed with a leaden bulla.  "bull." Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition. HarperCollins Publishers. 29 Oct. 2010. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bull>.

2.  Bainton, Roland Here I Stand:A Life of Martin Luther, Meridian 1995, pp 59-60.

3. Ibid., p. 54.

4. Ibid., p. 49-50

5. http://www.reformedreader.org/history/anabaptism16thcentury.htm  The following quotes are also from this source.