Who can Perform Baptisms?

Throughout Christian history, the question of who can baptize others has been answered in different ways depending on theology, tradition, and pastoral practice. While most traditions agree that baptism is important, they vary in who they recognize as qualified to perform baptisms. The main positions are outlined below from most restrictive to least restrictive.

1. Clergy Only

This position believes that baptism must be performed by someone with a formal leadership role within the church, typically a pastor or a priest. The authority to baptize is seen as something that belongs to the recognized leadership of the church rather than to individual believers acting on their own.

The reasons behind this position often center on order, clarity, and protection. Limiting baptism to clergy is thought to preserve a clear connection between the sacrament, sound teaching, and accountable leadership. If recognized leaders are responsible for baptizing, it becomes easier to ensure that the meaning of baptism is explained well, that people are prepared appropriately, and that the practice remains consistent across the church. It is also seen as a safeguard against confusion or misuse, such as baptisms done flippantly, in isolation from any church community, or in ways that distort what baptism is meant to represent.

Practically, this means that baptisms carried out by laypeople may be viewed as invalid. A church with this view might ask someone who was baptized in a private or informal setting to be baptized again under recognized church leadership. For those who hold this position, that requirement honors the seriousness of baptism, reinforces the importance of the local church, and keeps the act tied to a clear line of spiritual oversight. Others worry that it can place too much emphasis on institutional status rather than on the faith of the person being baptized, and can make baptism feel like a tightly controlled procedure rather than a shared act of obedience within the wider body of Christ.

2. Clergy Preferred, Exceptions in Emergencies

This view shares much in common with the clergy only position, but allows for more flexibility in unusual circumstances. Ordained leaders or recognized pastors are still seen as the normal and preferred people to perform baptisms, and most baptisms are expected to happen in the gathered church under their oversight. Baptism is still treated as a formal act of the church, not a private initiative. However, this position also recognizes that there are situations where waiting for a clergy member is not realistic or wise, especially when a person is near death or faces severe persecution.

In urgent cases, such as when someone wants to be baptized but is in immediate danger of dying, this view allows for exceptions. A trusted Christian friend, another believer present at the scene, or in some versions even any person who intends to perform a Christian baptism may carry out the act. Later, the church may formally recognize or record what happened, but the emergency baptism itself is regarded as valid. The key idea is that God’s grace is not blocked by lack of access to official leadership when the desire to respond to Christ is sincere and the situation is pressing.

Supporters of this position believe it honors both order and mercy. Under normal circumstances, baptism remains closely tied to church leadership, clear teaching, and accountable community life. In exceptional circumstances, the door is not closed to someone who longs to be baptized but simply cannot reach a pastor in time. Those who hold a stricter clergy only view see these exceptions as potentially confusing, as a loosening of the clergy role, or as producing invalid baptisms. Others on the less restrictive side think that prioritizing clergy still places too much of the authority in formal office and does not fully trust God to work through the wider body of believers in ordinary situations, not just emergencies.

3. Any Believing Christian

This position holds that any follower of Jesus may baptize another believer. Instead of locating baptismal authority in church office or ordination, it emphasizes the shared spiritual calling of all Christians, sometimes described as the “priesthood of all believers.” The right and responsibility to baptize is understood as flowing directly from Christ’s command to make disciples, which is given to the whole church rather than to a select group of leaders. Institutional appointment or formal recognition may still be valued for other purposes, but they are not seen as necessary for a baptism to be valid.

In practice, this often leads to a more relational and flexible approach. Baptisms might happen in church services, homes, lakes, or pools, and the person performing the baptism is frequently someone who has walked closely with the one being baptized, such as a mentor, small group leader, or close friend. Many believe this keeps baptism tied to real discipleship and personal investment, rather than feeling like a distant institutional ritual. Critics, however, worry that if any believer can baptize without clear church oversight, it may be harder to maintain consistent teaching, ensure people are prepared well, or guard against confusion about what baptism means and how it should be practiced.

Conclusion

These three views answer the same basic question in different ways. One keeps baptism firmly in the hands of clergy, one prefers that pattern but leaves room for rare exceptions, and one treats every believer as someone who can baptize. Each approach reflects a different balance of order, accessibility, and shared responsibility in the life of the church.

Who do you think can baptize? Take the survey to find out!