Difference between Calvinism and Lutheranism on Baptism?

[jinc1019]

The question says it all...from what I have read in the Westminster Confession, it sounds like their views are similar...could someone please explain any differences?

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

The question says it all...from what I have read in the Westminster Confession, it sounds like their views are similar...could someone please explain any differences?

The Reformed churches believe that baptism is the means by which the churches inducts us into the visible body of believes, an organization administrated by God's covenant.

The Lutheran churches believe this as well, but also believe that baptism absolutely brings us into real relationship with God by giving us true grace, and thus making us dependent (faithfully dependent) upon him.

For Calvinists/Reformed, baptism is about our relationship with the visible church. For Lutherans, there is no distinction between our relationship with the visible and the invisible church; the relationship baptist places us into is a real relationship with God.

 

[Lizabth]

Calvinists/reformed believe in baptismal efficacy, to the elect of God. Which, really, Lutherans believe too, if you follow the theological rabbit trails.

Lutherans, before you protest, think. Are the elect of God saved? Did their baptism(as infants) play a part? That's baptismal efficacy. Case closed.

Please note that Calvinists/reformed does NOT apply to modern American arminians(think broad evangelicals/ baptists, etc).

And, the visible vs invisible Church is something a Lutheran might find in, say, the Apology?

" For we grant that in this life hypocrites and wicked men have been mingled with the Church, and that they are members of the Church according to the outward fellowship of the signs of the Church, i.e., of Word, profession, and Sacraments, especially if they have not been excommunicated. 4] Neither are the Sacraments without efficacy for the reason that they are administered by wicked men; yea, we can even be right in using the Sacraments administered by wicked men. For Paul also predicts, 2 Thess. 2:4, that Antichrist will sit in the temple of God, i.e., he will rule and bear office in the Church. 5] But the Church is not only the fellowship of outward objects and rites, as other governments, but it is originally a fellowship of faith and of the Holy Ghost in hearts."

 

[ContraMundum]

The Lutheran churches believe this as well, but also believe that baptism absolutely brings us into real relationship with God by giving us true grace, and thus making us dependent (faithfully dependent) upon him.

For Calvinists/Reformed, baptism is about our relationship with the visible church. For Lutherans, there is no distinction between our relationship with the visible and the invisible church; the relationship baptist places us into is a real relationship with God.

That's almost entirely untrue. For a start, baptist theology is a deviation from/version of Reformed Theology. Baptist theology has a very different view of the sacraments than the Reformed, so the notion of lumping them togther is completely wrong (although this happens *constantly* in conservative Lutheran apologetics)

Rather than make the mistake of putting words in their mouth, perhaps this question should have also be posed at the Reformed forum as well as the Baptist one. You will get different answers, and neither will concur with your presentation of them.

The only real (formal) difference between the Reformed and the Lutheran position is about regeneration in baptism, what effects it has, what it means etc (this *includes* classical Arminians, who are Calvinist in their approach to the sacraments, but will not include the Baptists who only hold Arminian soteriology but not the rest of Arminius' beliefs). Both sects teach that baptism is the rite of initiation into the church, the covenant etc. Lutherans teach regeneration in Baptism, as do many of the Reformed, but what that means is often debated, and therein lies the difference.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

That's almost entirely untrue. For a start, baptist theology is a deviation from/version of Reformed Theology. Baptist theology has a very different view of the sacraments than the Reformed, so the notion of lumping them togther is completely wrong (although this happens *constantly* in conservative Lutheran apologetics)

Rather than make the mistake of putting words in their mouth, perhaps this question should have also be posed at the Reformed forum as well as the Baptist one. You will get different answers, and neither will concur with your presentation of them.

The only real (formal) difference between the Reformed and the Lutheran position is about regeneration in baptism, what effects it has, what it means etc (this *includes* classical Arminians, who are Calvinist in their approach to the sacraments, but will not include the Baptists who only hold Arminian soteriology but not the rest of Arminius' beliefs). Both sects teach that baptism is the rite of initiation into the church, the covenant etc. Lutherans teach regeneration in Baptism, as do many of the Reformed, but what that means is often debated, and therein lies the difference.

I'm confused. What I said is almost entirely untrue because what I said doesn't apply to... Baptists? When did I say anything about Baptists?

 

[jinc1019]

Calvinists/reformed believe in baptismal efficacy, to the elect of God. Which, really, Lutherans believe too, if you follow the theological rabbit trails.

Lutherans, before you protest, think. Are the elect of God saved? Did their baptism(as infants) play a part? That's baptismal efficacy. Case closed.

Please note that Calvinists/reformed does NOT apply to modern American arminians(think broad evangelicals/ baptists, etc).

And, the visible vs invisible Church is something a Lutheran might find in, say, the Apology?

" For we grant that in this life hypocrites and wicked men have been mingled with the Church, and that they are members of the Church according to the outward fellowship of the signs of the Church, i.e., of Word, profession, and Sacraments, especially if they have not been excommunicated. 4] Neither are the Sacraments without efficacy for the reason that they are administered by wicked men; yea, we can even be right in using the Sacraments administered by wicked men. For Paul also predicts, 2 Thess. 2:4, that Antichrist will sit in the temple of God, i.e., he will rule and bear office in the Church. 5] But the Church is not only the fellowship of outward objects and rites, as other governments, but it is originally a fellowship of faith and of the Holy Ghost in hearts."

So Calvinists believe that baptism does play a part, but only when its a baptism for the elect? Or are you saying that Calvinists believe baptism only symbolizes the faith of the elect? I just want to be clear because it's very confusing the way all of these terms are used differently by different groups!

 

[Mediaeval]

In the Presbyterian church where my child was baptized years ago, the pastor said that 'baptism does not save'. By contrast, in Lutheran churches when there is a baptism, something salvific is always affirmed.

 

[twin.spin]

For the most part, the reformed views baptism as something we do for God which is why they "dedicate" .. they do not teach that baptism saves ... they view it as something that is done because it's commanded ...

The Lutheran Church (WELS, ELS, LCMS) teaches what scriptures teach about baptism:
Through Baptism we receive:

• the gift of the Holy Spirit Acts 2:38
• the forgiveness of your sins. Acts 2:38
• It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ 1 Peter 3:20-21
• you were sanctified, you were justified 1 Corinthians 6:11

"just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless." Ephesians 5:25:27

 

[jinc1019]

In the Presbyterian church where my child was baptized years ago, the pastor said that 'baptism does not save'. By contrast, in Lutheran churches when there is a baptism, something salvific is always affirmed.

I am not sure that is entirely true...Lutherans (correct me if I am wrong) definitely teach that one who is baptized isn't necessarily saved.

 

[jinc1019]

For the most part, the reformed views baptism as something we do for God which is why they "dedicate" .. they do not teach that baptism saves ... they view it as something that is done because it's commanded ...

The Lutheran Church (WELS, ELS, LCMS) teaches what scriptures teach about baptism:
Through Baptism we receive:

• the gift of the Holy Spirit Acts 2:38
• the forgiveness of your sins. Acts 2:38
• It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ 1 Peter 3:20-21
• you were sanctified, you were justified 1 Corinthians 6:11

"just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless." Ephesians 5:25:27

With all due respect, the reformed individuals I recently spoke with disagree with you...they would say that baptism is intricately linked with the working of the Holy Spirit and that when one is baptized (and is part of the elect), they receive grace from the Holy Spirit working with them through the baptism. This is what I was told and it is not exactly in line with your comments above...

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

I am not sure that is entirely true...Lutherans (correct me if I am wrong) definitely teach that one who is baptized isn't necessarily saved.

A person who is baptized isn't necessarily going to persevere in the faith, but baptism really does have objective power to save. That objectivity is always effective where it meets no resistance, as in an infant or in someone voluntarily undergoing it.

With all due respect, the reformed individuals I recently spoke with disagree with you...they would say that baptism is intricately linked with the working of the Holy Spirit and that when one is baptized (and is part of the elect), they receive grace from the Holy Spirit working with them through the baptism. This is what I was told and it is not exactly in line with your comments above...

It really depends on which Reformed person you're asking. John Calvin would give the answer you have provided. Ulrich Zwingli would give the answer provided by twin.spin.

 

[jinc1019]

A person who is baptized isn't necessarily going to persevere in the faith, but baptism really does have objective power to save. That objectivity is always effective where it meets no resistance, as in an infant or in someone voluntarily undergoing it.



It really depends on which Reformed person you're asking. John Calvin would give the answer you have provided. Ulrich Zwingli would give the answer provided by twin.spin.

Good post, thanks for this.

 

[ContraMundum]

I'm confused. What I said is almost entirely untrue because what I said doesn't apply to... Baptists? When did I say anything about Baptists?

You were representing Baptist theology, while labelling it Reformed.

 

[Lizabth]

You were representing Baptist theology, while labelling it Reformed.