Non-Trinitarian Baptism?

[thephilosopher6]

As we know, baptisms are valid as long as they are done with water in the name of the “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,” otherwise known as the Trinitarian formula. This even includes baptisms preformed by heretical groups and schismatics like Protestants and Eastern Orthodox Christians. If baptism is not done in this form, but done in another such as baptism in the name of Jesus only like Oneness Pentecostals and Jehovah Witness do, it is not valid. It has to be in the Trinitarian formula. As long as it’s in the Trinitarian formula the baptism is valid.

There are, however, some groups who do baptize in the Trinitarian formula yet their baptisms are not consider valid. The most notable group that comes to mind is the “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints,” a.k.a the Mormons. Though they do baptize in a valid formula, their belifes about the Trinity are much distorted, teaching that the Trinity is more like three different gods rather than one almighty eternal everlasting God. Of course, Mormons would say that they are indeed three different beings but their “purpose” unites them as one God. This does not cut it in orthodox Christianity. Three beings = three gods. One being = one God. It’s as simple as that. Thus, due to Mormon belifes about the Trinity their baptisms are considered invalid and so we do not believe them to be Christians.

During the First Council of Constantinople (381 A.D) the Council declared Arian baptisms to be valid:

"Those heretics who come over to orthodoxy and to the society of those who are saved we receive according to the prescribed rite and custom: we receive Arians, Macedonians, Novatianists who call themselves ‘pure and better,’ Quatrodecimans, otherwise known as Tetradites, as well as Appolinarians on condition that they offer libelli (i.e., recantations in writing) and anathematize every heresy that does not hold the same beliefs as the holy, Catholic and apostolic Church of God, and then they should be marked with the seal, that is, anointed with chrism on the forehead, eyes, nostrils, mouth and ears. And as they are marked with the seal, we say, ‘seal of the gift of the Holy Spirit.’

• First Council of Constantinople (381 A.D)

Arians, as well as some other other heretical groups mentioned, despite their rejection of the Trinity, were not to be received by baptism but by confirmation. So, my question is, how distorted does a particular groups view of the Trinity have to be before their baptisms (even if done in the Trinity) is considered invalid? Also, if say Jehovah Witness, who practically believe in the same things as the Arians did, suddenly started baptizing in the Trinity, would their baptisms be considered valid? Same for Oneness Pentecostals if they began baptizing in the Trinitarian formula. What does the Church have to say on this matter?

 

[FrDavid96]

As we know, baptisms are valid as long as they are done with water in the name of the “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,” otherwise known as the Trinitarian formula. This even includes baptisms preformed by heretical groups and schismatics like Protestants and Eastern Orthodox Christians. If baptism is not done in this form, but done in another such as baptism in the name of Jesus only like Oneness Pentecostals and Jehovah Witness do, it is not valid. It has to be in the Trinitarian formula. As long as it’s in the Trinitarian formula the baptism is valid.

There are, however, some groups who do baptize in the Trinitarian formula yet their baptisms are not consider valid. The most notable group that comes to mind is the “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints,” a.k.a the Mormons. Though they do baptize in a valid formula, their belifes about the Trinity are much distorted, teaching that the Trinity is more like three different gods rather than one almighty eternal everlasting God. Of course, Mormons would say that they are indeed three different beings but their “purpose” unites them as one God. This does not cut it in orthodox Christianity. Three beings = three gods. One being = one God. It’s as simple as that. Thus, due to Mormon belifes about the Trinity their baptisms are considered invalid and so we do not believe them to be Christians.

During the First Council of Constantinople (381 A.D) the Council declared Arian baptisms to be valid:

• First Council of Constantinople (381 A.D)

Arians, as well as some other other heretical groups mentioned, despite their rejection of the Trinity, were not to be received by baptism but by confirmation. So, my question is, how distorted does a particular groups view of the Trinity have to be before their baptisms (even if done in the Trinity) is considered invalid? Also, if say Jehovah Witness, who practically believe in the same things as the Arians did, suddenly started baptizing in the Trinity, would their baptisms be considered valid? Same for Oneness Pentecostals if they began baptizing in the Trinitarian formula. What does the Church have to say on this matter?

This sort of thing cannot be measured or quantified.

The Holy See evaluates each religious group separately and decides for each one.

As far as JWs are concerned, their beliefs are at such odds with Christianity that even if they were to change the words they use, it would still not be valid baptism.

Here’s a paragraph from the Archdiocese of Baltimore
JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES: Invalid
An affirmative decision* was granted in such a case because of lack of proper form and intention on the part of the ministers. It appears that the Jehovah’s Witnesses are fundamentalists, Unitarians. The Divinity of Christ is explicitly denied, as is the existence of the Holy Spirit as a person. In the ceremony of baptism there is a discourse. It is really a symbol of dedication rather than baptism. The person enters the water, but his name is not called out. No words or formula are pronounced while the person is submerged or immersed in the water. If matter and form are valid, the intention of the minister is to baptize the person into the Jehovah’s Witness sect, thereby not intending that the person be baptized in the name of the triune God. This is evident since the Divinity of Christ and the personality of the Holy Spirit are denied. These latter refer simply to a power exerted by Jehovah, who alone is God.
dob-tribunal.com/uploads/4/4/8/1/44818299/validity-of-baptisms-and-confirmation.pdf

---

• An “affirmative decision” here means that the Holy See responded by saying “Yes, do the baptism” in contrast to responding “yes, the baptism was valid.” When a paragraph gets taken out of its original context, a sentence like that can sometimes be easily mis-read.

 

[thistle]

As we know, baptisms are valid as long as they are done with water in the name of the “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,” otherwise known as the Trinitarian formula. This even includes baptisms preformed by heretical groups and schismatics like Protestants and Eastern Orthodox Christians. If baptism is not done in this form, but done in another such as baptism in the name of Jesus only like Oneness Pentecostals and Jehovah Witness do, it is not valid. It has to be in the Trinitarian formula. As long as it’s in the Trinitarian formula the baptism is valid.

There are, however, some groups who do baptize in the Trinitarian formula yet their baptisms are not consider valid. The most notable group that comes to mind is the “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints,” a.k.a the Mormons. Though they do baptize in a valid formula, their belifes about the Trinity are much distorted, teaching that the Trinity is more like three different gods rather than one almighty eternal everlasting God. Of course, Mormons would say that they are indeed three different beings but their “purpose” unites them as one God. This does not cut it in orthodox Christianity. Three beings = three gods. One being = one God. It’s as simple as that. Thus, due to Mormon belifes about the Trinity their baptisms are considered invalid and so we do not believe them to be Christians.

During the First Council of Constantinople (381 A.D) the Council declared Arian baptisms to be valid:

• First Council of Constantinople (381 A.D)

Arians, as well as some other other heretical groups mentioned, despite their rejection of the Trinity, were not to be received by baptism but by confirmation. So, my question is, how distorted does a particular groups view of the Trinity have to be before their baptisms (even if done in the Trinity) is considered invalid? Also, if say Jehovah Witness, who practically believe in the same things as the Arians did, suddenly started baptizing in the Trinity, would their baptisms be considered valid? Same for Oneness Pentecostals if they began baptizing in the Trinitarian formula. What does the Church have to say on this matter?

colsdioc.org/Portals/0/Departments/DIVW/Valid%20Baptisms%20Reference%20List.pdf

 

[thephilosopher6]

It has also just come to my understanding that the canon I cited is not accepted by Rome. Although, both the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches accept the canon as apart of First Council of Constantinople.