Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
Baptism Is An Act Of Faith And Not An Act Of Magic

Baptism Is An Act Of Faith And Not An Act Of Magic

Last updated on: February 23, 2022 at 3:48 am by Henry Karlson

Baptism Is An Act Of Faith And Not An Act Of Magic 2022-02-23T03:48:40-05:00 Henry Karlson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

No photographer listed: Old Russian Image Depicting Baptism /pxhere

Baptism is important. Through it, we begin our Christian life, regenerated by grace. It is also how we are incorporated into Christ, becoming a part of the church, the body of Christ. While grace can be said to be bound to baptism so that a valid baptism will always bring us grace, God is not bound by the ritual. God can offer that grace by other means. However one receives it, one is born again, regenerated by grace, incorporated into Christ, and so, even if they have not undergone the ritual of baptism, they receive what is normally given by that ritual, baptismal grace. Through the reception of that grace, one can be said to be baptized, even if one did not receive ritual baptism, which is why baptism of desire and baptism of blood are also designated as baptism.

Scripture only gives a few elements as to what is expected for the execution of the baptismal ritual which means it does not indicate all that is to be done in the ritual. Thus, on the one hand, we are shown baptism must somehow connect to the Trinity. “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” (Matt. 28:19 RSV). And yet, on the other hand, we are shown that some baptisms were done in the name of Christ alone: the apostles did not believe Jesus’ words were indicative of what had to be said in the rite of baptism. “And Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit’”(Acts 2:38 RSV). Historically, both forms have been used and seen as valid, even as other forms, other words have also been used, as Nicholas of Cusa observed: “It is manifest in the praxis of the Church, even in the forms of its sacraments. The apostles baptized in the name of Jesus; at another time the Church did so in the name of the Trinity. Today the Greek church baptizes otherwise than the Latin church does, and always with effect.” [1] There is a wide range of possibilities as to how ritual baptism could be executed, and in each form, baptismal grace is given out:

Hence those who once were baptized “in the name of Christ,” – even infants – whose faith was sound on all articles, and also [those baptized in the name of] the Trinity, are no less reborn in Christ than those today [who are baptized] “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”[2]

The fact that there have been, and continue to be, a variety of ways in which baptism can be performed has led Christians to consider what is and is not necessary for the rite to be valid. St. Thomas Aquinas tells us the basics include: proper form, proper matter (water), and a minister to the baptism. While there can be reasons why other things should be included in the rite, they are not essential:

I answer that, In the sacrament of Baptism something is done which is essential to the sacrament, and something which belongs to a certain solemnity of the sacrament. Essential indeed, to the sacrament are both the form which designates the principal cause of the sacrament; and the minister who is the instrumental cause; and the use of the matter, namely, washing with water, which designates the principal sacramental effect. But all the other things which the Church observes in the baptismal rite, belong rather to a certain solemnity of the sacrament. [3]

What constitutes the proper form is what is most often questioned. It should be clear, because we can find a variety of examples over time where the baptismal words differ from each other, it is not the words themselves but the intention behind the words which is necessary. This is why baptism can be done in the name of Christ, or in the name of the Trinity, or in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. What is key is that baptism should be done with a belief in and adherence to the Trinity, as St. Ambrose taught:

And so they were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, and baptism was not repeated among these, but was received for the first time; for there is one baptism. Moreover, where there is not the full sacrament of baptism, there is not considered to be a beginning or any kind of baptism. But baptism is full, if you confess the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. If you deny one, you will ruin the whole. And just as when you comprehend one in words, either Father or Son or Holy Spirit, yet do not deny in faith either the Father or the Son or the Holy Spirit, the sacrament of faith is full, so also, although you mention the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and reduce the power of the Father or of the Son or of the Holy Spirit, the entire mystery is void. [4]

Hugh of St. Victor and Peter Lombard used this reasoning to point out that it would be possible to baptize in the name of the Father or in the Holy Spirit without mentioning the other Trinitarian persons. For, once you believe in the Trinity, a mention of one of the persons implies the rest of them. For example, Ambrose explained that in the case of those who baptized in the name of Christ alone, the validity of that baptism was ascertained because mention of Christ implies the Father and the Spirit: “If you say Christ, you have designated also God the Father by whom the Son was anointed, and Him Himself who was anointed, the Son, and the Holy Spirit with whom He was anointed.” [5] It is faith in the Trinity, and not the words themselves, which is essential. “You see, then, how in the faith of the Trinity, when the Father alone or the Son or the Holy Spirit is mentioned, the sacrament of baptism is complete and how without the faith of the Trinity, even when the three have been named together, it is imperfect.” [6] Thus, naming one person of the Trinity, understanding the relationship of that one person with the rest of the Trinity, would make the baptism Trinitarian, and so would suffice:

From these statements, you have plainly understood that true baptism is conferred in Christ’s name. It also appears to be indicated that a true baptism can be conferred in the name of the Father alone, or of the Holy Spirit alone, so long as the one who baptizes has faith of the Trinity, which Trinity is understood in each of these names. But if someone who believes perversely, and who intends to foment error, invokes only one of the three, he has not fulfilled the mystery. [7]

This does not mean that the church errs in making the typical baptismal formula to be one which is done in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit: though such words are not essential, they are important as they help ensure a Trinitarian faith is involved in the baptism instead of merely assuming it:

And so someone who baptizes in Christ’s name baptizes in the name of the Trinity, when this is understood there. But it is safer to name the three persons there, so as to say: In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. [8]

Words, therefore, are important, but we must not treat them as magic, as if we must say the right words without variation for a particular baptism to be effective. Baptismal validity concerns the faith of those being baptized. God is not looking for reasons to deny grace to those who come to be baptized with a proper intention. God does not demand one formula for baptism. This does not mean the words used are meaningless. The church has established and promoted various forms to be used as a way to represent and symbolize what is going on with the sacrament. This is why the church can expect and require ministers to use particular words to safeguard our understanding of baptism, not because the words are essential, but because the church tries to determine the best form, the best discipline, by which baptism is to be practiced. It is important for the minister of the sacrament to follow what is expected of them and not to change things when baptizing someone. This makes sure there is no cause for confusion or scandal, but if someone did make a mistake, if they accidentally changed some words or got them wrong, the sacrament itself is not invalidated, as Peter Lombard pointed out with a specific example:

WHETHER THERE IS A BAPTISM, IF THE AFOREMENTIONED WORDS ARE UTTERED IN A CORRUPT FORM. It is also usual to ask whether there is a baptism, if the aforementioned words are uttered in a corrupt form. – POPE ZACHARIAS. Concerning this, Zacharias writes to Boniface: “Your messengers reported to me that there was a priest in that province who was thoroughly ignorant of the Latin tongue and that, while baptizing, in his ignorance of Latin, he stammered: I baptize you in the name of the Fatherland, and the Daughter, and of the Holy She-spirit. Because of this, you wondered whether to re-baptize. But if the one who baptized did not introduce any error or heresy, but stammered as he did only because of his ignorance of Roman speech, we cannot consent to a new baptism.”[9]

Baptism, therefore, can be done in a variety of ways. The intention is what is most important. This is why baptism can be done with the minister of the baptism saying, “I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,” as it is done in the Latin tradition, or with the minister simply saying, “The servant of God (Name) is baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” The words “I baptize” are not essential to the rite of baptism. Using them or not using them does not change the validity of the baptism itself:

The Greeks, however, do not attribute the act of baptizing to the minister, in order to avoid the error of those who in the past ascribed the baptismal power to the baptizers, saying (1 Corinthians 1:12): “I am of Paul . . . and I of Cephas.” Wherefore they use the form: “May the servant of Christ, N . . ., be baptized, in the name of the Father,” etc. And since the action performed by the minister is expressed with the invocation of the Trinity, the sacrament is validly conferred. As to the addition of “Ego” in our form, it is not essential; but it is added in order to lay greater stress on the intention. [10]

What is or is not essential differs from what is normally expected to be said and done in the rite of baptism. The church has developed the rites which it expects its ministers to use. Unless there are legitimate reasons why they cannot be used as they are written down, the minister who changes the words on their own accord (but not the intention) will provide a valid but illicit baptism. We should not confuse what is necessary for the rite to be licit for what is essential for the sacrament to be valid. If we do so, we misunderstand baptism and begin to treat the ritual as if it is an act of magic which requires everything to be done in a particular way for it to be effective. What is not essential, but important, to the rite, is determined by the church, and is a part of the discipline surrounding the act of baptism itself. The church establishes the rite in the way it thinks will best express or symbolize the sacramental grace being offered. Sacraments are not bound to particular words, which is why the words have changed throughout the centuries without diminishing the sacramental grace itself.[11] Baptism can, and has been done, in a variety of ways, and there are many other ways which baptism could be done in the future though it is unlikely they should be normally employed. What is essential is the use of water, a minister to proclaim the baptism being done, and faith in the Trinity. [12]

Essentially, baptism is an act of faith; through that act, one is incorporated into the body of Christ. The grace which we receive comes to us by Christ and the Trinity, and is not something which we create ourselves, which is why baptism must not be seen as some sort of magic act in which if we use the right formula, we generate grace and are saved. This is why we must not look merely at the words used, but the intention which lies behind the words, to see if a particular baptism is proper or not; if we get too caught up in the words, we begin to lose sight of how God works, for God is love and not a tyrant bound by legalism.

[1] Nicholas of Cusa, “Letter To The Bohemians on Church Unity” in Nichola of Cusa: Writing on Church and Reform. Trans. Thomas M. Izbicki (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2008), 411.

[2] Nicholas of Cusa, “To The Bohemians: On the Use of Communion” in Nichola of Cusa: Writing on Church and Reform. Trans. Thomas M. Izbicki (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2008), 73.

[3] St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica. trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province (New York: Benziger Brothers, 1948), III-66.10.

[4] St. Ambrose, On the Holy Spirit in Theological and Dogmatic Works. Trans. Roy J. Deferrari (Washington, DC: CUA Press, 1963), 49-50.

[5] St. Ambrose, On the Holy Spirit, 50.

[6] Hugh of St Victor, On the Sacraments of the Christian Faith. trans. Roy J. Deferrari (Cambridge: The Medieaval Academy of America, 1951), 288.

[7] Peter Lombard, The Sentences. Book 4: On The Doctrine Of Signs. Trans. Giulio Silano (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 2010), 36 [IV-iii.4].

[8] Peter Lombard, The Sentences. Book 4: On The Doctrine Of Signs, 36 [IV-iii.4].

[9] Peter Lombard, The Sentences. Book 4: On The Doctrine Of Signs, 35 [IV-vi.4].

[10] St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, III-66.5.

[11] We can see how this applies in the eucharist, where the words of institution are not expressly and literally invoked by the Anaphora of Addai and Mari and yet the eucharist is valid because of the intention and the epiclesis involved.

[12] There are a variety of ways in which the water can be used. For example, one could be sprinkled with water or immersed in it. One can likewise sprinkled or immersed once or three times. The most expressive, and so possibly, the best form of baptism would be triple-immersion, but a one-time sprinkling or immersion in water would fulfill all that is necessary.

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!

Previous Post

February 22, 2022

Wrestling With God

Next Post

February 24, 2022 Putin’s Ukrainian War, A Defeat For Humanity

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Abortion Abraham abuse Aesthetics AI Aliens Ambrose Ancestors and Everything Andrew Angels Animals Anne Anthony Antisemitism apologetics Apophatic Apostle John Aquinas Artificial Intelligence Asanga Ascension Asceticism Assumption Atheism Attachment Augustine Authority Avarice Balthasar Baptism Beauty Biden birthright citizenship Bishops Black History Books Buddhism Bulgakov Byzantine Calendar C.S. Lewis Calcidius Catholic Catholicism Catholicism Celibacy Charity Chastity children Chrismation Christ Christmas Christology Church Climate Change Common Good Communion Confession Confirmation Conscience Constantine conventions conversion councils Covid Creation Cross Dead Death Death Penalty Debate Deception Demagogues Demons Desert Monks Desert Mothers Desire destruction development Dialogue Dignity Dionsyius Dionysius Discipline Diversity Division Doctor Who doctrine dogma Dormition Dualism Easter Easter Series Ecumenical Councils Ecumenism Education Election Empathy Environment Error Eschatology eschaton Eternity Ethics Eucharist Evangelism Eve Evil evolution Faeries Faith Fear femininity Ficino Florence Florensky Folktale Fools Forgiveness Freedom Future gender Gentile Gentiles Glory Gnostic God gods Good Samaritan Goodness Gospel Government Grace Great Fast Guns Halloween Hate healing Health Heaven Hell Hellenism Heresy Hierarchy Hildegard Hinduism History Holiness Holy Spirit Holy Week Hope Horror Human rights humanity Humility hypocrisy ICE icon icons Identification Identity Idol II Nicea Immigration incarnation Individualism Informal Reflections Inklings Intention Inter-Religious Interfaith Internet Interpretation Intrinsic evil Irenaeus Islam Israel Jacob Jerome Jesus Jews John Chrysostom John of Damascus John the Baptist Joseph Judaism justice Justification kenosis Kindnesss Kingdom of God Kingdom of Heaven Law Law of Moses Lazarus Leaf by Niggle Lent Lenten Reflection Liberation Theology Lies Life Listen Literature Liturgy locutions Logic Logos Love Marriage Martyrs Mary Mass Maximos The Confessor Meanness Meditation Mercy Middle Path Migrants Mind Miracles Miriam Morals Moses Movies Music Muslims Myths Names Nationalism Native Americans New Year Nicea Nicholas Nothing Novatian Obedience Occam's Razor Ordination Origen Original Sin Orthodox orthopraxis Pagans Palamas Palm Sunday Paradise Paschaltide Paul Peace Pentecost person Peter piety PKD Plato pluralism Plurality Poem Poetry Poiltics Politics Poor Pope Pope Francis Pope Leo XIV Post Office Prayer Pride Pro-life Prodigal Son propaganda Prophecy Prophets Providence Putin Racism Reading Reason Reflection Refugees Relationships Religion Religion Series Religious Liberty Repent Republicans Rest Resurrection Rich Rites Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation Salvian Santa Science Scripture Self-Giving Sexuality Sibyl Sick Silence Sin Singlehood Social Justice Society Sodom Solovyov Speculations Spiritual Reflection St. Cyril of Alexandria St. Justin Martyr Suffering Sunday of the Paralytic Man Sunday of the Samaritan Woman Superhero Supreme Court Teaching Technology Thanksgiving The Father the Universe Theological Reflection Theology Theosis Theotokos Thomas Timaeus Time Tolerenace Tolkien Tradition Transfiguration Trinity Trump Truth Uncategorized Unity Universities USCCB Vainglory Value Vatican II Vegetarian Vices Violence Virtue Vocations War Water Welcome Wisdom Womanhood Women Work World View Worship Writing Zacchaeus

Select a Month November 2026 October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz