This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Christianity: Theology / Catholicism / Eastern O. / Baptist / Latter Day Saints Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by theology work group (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy. This article is supported by Baptist work group. This article is supported by WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement (assessed as Low-importance).

I doubt that converts from Mormonism are a case for conditional baptism. There is not any positive doubt that the Baptism could have been valid also (which is required for a conditional baptism; or is there?), so, they'd have to be baptized absolutely in my view.--2001:A60:1534:9401:F51B:C55B:1F3A:EAB2 (talk) 21:03, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I'm removing this reference. The Mormon belief in a Trinity differs substantially from the Catholic belief - enough that the Catholic church has issued an official statement to that effect.User2635 (talk) 03:17, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Conditional baptism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100816040600/http://www.vatican.va:80/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/general-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_19930325_directory_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/general-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_19930325_directory_en.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:31, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article claims:

"Mainline Christian theology (including Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Church of the East, Anglican, Lutheran and most other Protestants) has traditionally held that only one baptism is valid to confer the benefits of this sacrament."

This statement is misleading. Many non-RCC Christians believe that Spirit baptism & water baptism are distinct, and call neither a "sacrament." (John baptized with water, but Christ baptized with with the Spirit, even with fire.) 1 Cor 12:13 Spirit baptism. The statement about their being "benefits of this sacrament," sounds like sacramentalism. A common POV among non-RCC theologians is that water baptism is a means of identifying publicly with the Lord Jesus, but has nothing to do with salvation. The discussion should not focus on the word "validity," but on whether or not more than one water baptism is proper. And also, there is the POV that putting water on a baby, is not baptism at all, and that water baptism may not be done without the baptized person wanting it. I think I shall revise and simplify this sentence.(PeacePeace (talk) 12:39, 29 September 2019 (UTC))[reply]

The whole article seems to conflate beliefs of various Christian churchs - as near as I can tell. I'll try to clean up the worst of it, but it certainly requires more than I know of the respective religions.User2635 (talk) 03:23, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]