In an attempt to critique water baptism being salvific, one critic of the doctrine wrote:
The Nicene Creed contains a magnificent affirmation that “we acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.” This has sometimes been misunderstood to mean that at the very moment of administration baptism cancels the sins of the person baptized and effects salvation for ever. But the two statements do not have the same meaning at all. Rightly church catholic Baptism is not something that happens to us only once to be forgotten or looked upon as a time of change in our legal status before God. (Laurence Hull Stookey, Baptism: Christ’s Act in the Church [Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1982], 73)
Firstly, no group that holds to baptismal regeneration (not just Latter-day Saints, but Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox; many Anglicans, etc) do not believe that water baptism effects salvation forever —instead, we would hold to the belief that all one’s then-past sins were remitted by God through the instrumentality of water baptism. However, one still have to repent of their then-future sins—there is no “blanket forgiveness” of all of one’s sins (that is, not just past, but then-future sins) at water baptism. I am sure there are some errant Latter-day Saints, Catholics, etc., who believe that, as they have been baptised, they have their "ticket to heaven" punched and nothing they do afterwards will have negative consequences. However, such is contrary to such theologies, as Latter-day Saints and others (correctly) believe a truly justified person can lose their salvation (see
If the Stookey accepts the importance of authorial intent, he should have disclosed the fact that the framers of the Nicene Creed accepted baptismal regeneration, as it was the unanimous consent of all Christian theologians who discussed the topic. Such is even admitted by critics of the doctrine. Note the following from William Webster:
The doctrine of baptism is one of the few teachings within Roman Catholicism for which it can be said that there is a universal consent of the Fathers . . . From the early days of the Church, baptism was universally perceived as the means of receiving four basic gifts: the remission of sins, deliverance from death, regeneration, and the bestowal of the Holy Spirit. (William Webster, The Church of Rome at the Bar of History [Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1995], 95-96, emphasis added).
For further discussions on the biblical and patristic evidence for baptismal regeneration, see, for e.g.:
Furthermore, Stookey is clearly guilty of reading into the theology of baptismal regeneration is (blasphemous) understanding of justification being forensic merely. No doubt this plays a role in his misunderstanding of baptismal regeneration. For a refutation of this doctrine, see, for e.g.:
