Baptism and Once Saved

Scripture points to Baptism as “saving”. Catholic Teaching defines baptism as having that action of “saving”.

Do ONce Saved, Always Saved people argue that once baptized individuals are always saved? Or is baptism unnecessary as long as Faith exists?

1 Like

What they argue depends on the OSAS folks.

Some deny the efficacy of the sacraments altogether; in this view, it is a faith that precedes Baptism that saves.

Others believe that Baptism mystically brings one into the church universal but is not salvific.

But none of them would believe that Baptism ensures that one is saved.

1 Like

Since the European rebellion, the Sacraments have been discarded, one-by-one. Now, maybe matrimony is all that’s left, but that can be done over and over.

Simply put, what saves is obedience to each and every thing which our Lord taught. Disciple = discipline.

1 Like

It’s going to vary from one denomination to another. In my former Independent Baptist Church, we were taught once saved - always saved, and that Baptism does not save and is not necessary for salvation.

In the evangelical churches I was once in; baptism was “an outward sign, of an inward change.” Not necessary for salvation. Or on the other hand you could get baptized multiple times and you would still just be “a wet sinner.” You were once saved, always saved, as long as you prayed the sinners prayer. Until you weren’t sure if you were saved,
then you just prayed it again and “rededicated” your life to the lord. Which the prayer ironically is similar to an act of contrition.


Typically, the types of Christian beliefs labeled “once saved, always saved” are associated with Baptist-type churches. Baptists believe that baptism is an ordinance that signifies dying to sin and rising to life in Christ. It is believed to be symbolic as Baptists don’'t believe in baptismal regeneration.

What regenerates, from the Baptist point of view, would be faith in Christ and repentance from sin. Often, churches might encourage new converts to pray a “sinner’s prayer” which is a prayer expressing one’s faith in Christ and repentance. Baptists may consider this moment the time when they were born again or in common speech “saved.”

Now, another type of church group that might be included within the “once saved, always saved” teachings are certain Presbyterian/Reformed churches. These do practice infant baptism, but they believe in the doctrine of unconditional election. The baptism is a “sign and seal” of the covenant, but that person would still need to come to faith in Christ later in life. If someone is not one of the elect and was baptized, then they would still remain one of the non-elect. In the Reformed view, baptism is only beneficial for the elect.


There are some denominations that believe in baptismal regeneration; that baptism is necessary for salvation. They don’t necessarily agree on this critical point- so much for Sola Scriptura.

1 Like

My goodness people, it seems that everything said on this site has to do with what the Evangelicals think or believe. Does the CC have its face in the rear view mirror?

Why is everybody so fixated and energized on what the, quote, protestants, do?.. we have a world of secularism robbing our sons and daughters at every major university. they produce atheist and naturalist all day long. We now have 70 percent of young people leaving the church by the time they graduate high school, and they don’t return. We have whole generations of people who have never darkened the doors of any Church, protestant or catholic. The Church as a whole is in a nose dive because we haven’t been able to make the necessary inroads to the culture. The culture is now hostile to Christianity of every flavor, and we are concerned with the once saved always saved issues?.. Lord help us!


Well, unity on beliefs regarding Gods nature and will always helps. And the OP asked the question.


Hey, if you want a thread to talk about how you don’t think Catholics should talk about what others believe, go for it. In this thread, let folks discuss it.

Also, when you’re typing, you don’t need to say “quote, protestants.” Saying the word “quote” is a verbal tool because you can’t see the quotation marks. Just put the word “protestants” in quotation marks.


That is the problem with Christianity. The disunity! If it weren’t for the disunity there would be no excuses for young people leaving the church. There would be more people coming to the church to see what it is that unifies us. In my opinion, our disunity is the biggest factor for these issues you bring up.


On this site? No, on this particular forum which is frequented mainly by protestants, yes.

You do realize there are protestants on here, lurking or otherwise, who are straddling the fence, right? Coming here to this forum helps them answer whatever questions they have. So eccumenism is a necessity here.


Depends on which branch of Protestantism you are speaking of. Unfortunately, that’s the issue with us being so splintered.

I’m a Lutheran, I do believe Holy Baptism saves. But I also believe that any one of us could walk away from our baptism. OSAS isn’t something the church taught for 1,000+ years and I don’t even think it’s Biblical.


You realize Your founder didn’t believe what you believe?

Whom are you addressing?

I was addressing TNman

Source for Luther’s not believing that Baptism saves?

No. Not that Luther disagreed with baptism.

Which bit, then?

No it doesn’t. The problem arises with the distorted understanding of what the apostles meant when they used the word “saved” as opposed to the present understanding. Please read the Book of Acts independently. Saved meant to receive the holy ghost. First comes baptism for repentance, 19:3 and then the laying on of hands for receiving the HG. (Something the Mormons got right)

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit