Both Anabaptist/Baptist and Reformed Christians generally argue that baptismal regeneration and justification directly contradicts the principle of sola fide. According to many Protestants, baptismal regeneration and justification makes no sense given that not everyone who is baptized is ultimately saved. To Anabaptists and Baptists, this suggests that baptism is only a symbolic gesture designed to publicly affirm regeneration and justification through other means. For the Reformed, on the other hand, baptism is a meaningful sign for the elect. The Spirit then regenerates the elect by working alongside baptism, but not through baptism as an instrument.
Baptismal Regeneration and Sola Fide
But is it true that baptismal regeneration and justification contradicts the biblical and reformational principle of sola fide? In fact, Lutherans and other Protestants conceptualize the doctrine of sola fide in a fundamentally different way. As noted in a previous chapter, Luther and the subsequent Lutheran tradition’s conceptualization of justification might be better characterized by the slogan “justification by the word” rather than “justification by faith.” In other words, most Protestants discern salvation based on a reflective faith that affirms the certainty of salvation through the certainty of saving faith. Lutherans, however, turn the individual away from inner resources and focus him on the external Word of God.
Seen in this light, baptism is a visible Word of God. The Holy Spirit works with the same power in, under, and through the Word in the water, the absolution, the preaching office, and the Supper. God in Christ directs us away from our subjective disposition, which is, of course, always tainted by sin. Instead he orients us towards his justifying promise of salvation actually present in baptism. If a person receives that baptismal promise, then he has justifying faith.
The Problem of Post-Baptismal Apostasy
What of the second charge that regeneration and justification cannot necessarily follow from baptism since baptized individuals clearly leave the faith? Again, Lutherans draw on the logic of justification by the word. Historically, most Protestants have essentially confused the highly useful Augustinian distinction between validity and efficacy. Lutherans agree that repentance and faith are part of the efficacy of baptism. However, repentance and faith are not a constitutive part of the validity of baptism. Returning to the longer ending of Mark, the verse “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned” (Mk 16:16), suggests that there is an inherent promise in baptism (“whoever believes and is baptized”), but that unbelief can block the reception of that promise (“but whoever does not believe will be condemned”).
Baptists argue essentially that repentance and faith are part of the validity of baptism. This occurs when they point to New Testament narratives of conversion (particularly in Acts) describing either repentance and faith in the person being baptized, or a command by an apostle or evangelist to repent and believe. Moreover, with the possible exception of Acts 16:15, 16:33, 18:8 when whole households are baptized (which would include children), every convert in Acts is an adult.1 Baptists infer from this that repentance and faith are part of the validity of baptism. Moreover, they argue that infants should not be baptized until what is often called the “age of accountability” since they cannot yet exercise conscious repentance and faith. However, Wayne Grudem and other modern Baptist theologians are not particularly dogmatic in identifying a specific age at which this accountability begins.2
The Objective Validity of Baptism
Lutherans make several responses to these arguments. First, merely describing the occasion of a given baptism does not explain what baptism is. Hence, pointing out that a repentant and believing adult was baptized is descriptive and not prescriptive. In other passages, the New Testament directly states the constitutive elements of baptism (validity). These are God’s action through the word, Spirit, and water (Jn. 3:5, Rom. 6:3-4, 1 Cor. 6:11, Eph. 5:26, Titus 3:5, 1 Pt. 3:21). The inspired biblical authors never mention a person’s subjective attitude and age in the passages addressing the constitutive elements of baptism. Of course, unrepentance and unbelief block the saving effect of baptism (1 Cor. 10:1-5). However, they do not invalidate the promise or “cancel out” the event of baptism.
Indeed, God has already justified the whole world in Christ by his declaration (objective justification). If we want to reject this promise revealed in the empty tomb (Rom. 4:25), or its objective sacramental manifestation (Rom. 6:5), then the promise is not canceled by our unbelief. Rather, the promise is not received or acted upon. To use an analogy, if I am promised that dinner is served, but refuse to come to the table, the dinner remains at my place even though I refuse to eat it.
Although Lutherans believe in the bondage of the will and monergism, they still argue that grace is resistible. Grace is resistible because engaging or disengaging with the means of grace is a decision within the realm of earthly freedom. One can avoid baptism or even ignore the promise of baptism. The Calvinistic belief that apostasy is impossible for true believers3 is exegetically unfounded. For example, in the Bible, many true believers fall into apostasy (i.e., Peter), and the inspired writers repeatedly warn against apostasy (1 Cor. 10:1-13). Nevertheless, in spite of human apostasy, the promise ultimately holds good since it is more ontologically real than the resistance of the human will.4
Secondly, we can address Anabaptist/Baptist objections regarding infant baptism by applying two characteristics of the Word of God noted above. Namely, the Word is objectively true irrespective of human rejection (objective justification). It is also efficacious as law and gospel in order to cause its own reception (subjective justification). The promise of regeneration and justification are so intrinsic to baptism that even if a person disbelieves the promise at the time of baptism, or apostatizes after baptism, the promise remains sure.5 Luther makes the observation that we hope children believe before or at the time of baptism. Ultimately, however, this is irrelevant to the validity of baptism. Even if faith is not kindled at the moment baptism, they can receive the promise by faith later in life.6
- Robert H. Stein, “Baptism in Luke-Acts,” in Believer’s Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2014), 38-52. ↩︎
- Grudem, Systematic Theology 2nd edition, 1212-1213. ↩︎
- Spencer, TULIP: The Five Points of Calvinism in Light of Scripture, 63-68. ↩︎
- Martin Luther, “Sermon on Holy Baptism (1535),” in Luther On the Sacraments: Or The Distinctive Doctrines of The Evang. Lutheran Church Respecting Baptism and The Lord’s Supper, trans. Joseph Salyards (Newmarket: Solomon D. Henkel & Brothers, 1853), 69-73. ↩︎
- LC IV.44; CT, 743. ↩︎
- LC IV.52; CT, 745. ↩︎
From the draft manuscript for Lutheran Dogmatics: The Evangelical-Catholic Faith for an Age of Contested Truth (Lexham Press).
Cover image from Mark Birkholz, “Luther’s Baptismal Rites,” The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod: Resources, November 11, 2017, accessed June 10, 2024, https://resources.lcms.org/history/luthers-baptismal-rites/.