If someone is baptized by someone who is unworthy, the baptism is still valid correct?

[lizzy16]

And, where does it say this in the scriptures? or modern day text?

I was talking to a friend and his thought was

cuz if someone isn't worthy to baptize then why couldn't people baptize without having the priesthood? 4:13 PM

someone who isn't worthy DOES NOT have the priesthood and therefore the ordinance is not valid. 4:13 PM

and i can tell you where that is right here and now 4:13 PM

which still makes sense to me...

[skippy740]

For all living ordinances, they must be administered by one who has the keys to administer those ordinances.

That, in most cases, is the Bishop. For missionaries, it's the mission president. For temple ordinances, it's your Bishop and Stake President.

For baptism to be "valid", it must be done by one who holds the Aaronic Priesthood AND authorized to perform the ordinance by the proper priesthood leader - such as a Bishop.

If the Bishop (or other priesthood leader) allows the ordinance to be performed by one who holds the priesthood, it is valid.

Does that make sense?

Note that this is different than performing blessings for the sick and other such ordinances. I'm only talking about the "saving" ordinances - baptism, gift of the holy ghost, sacrament, priesthood ordinations and temple ordinances.

[lizzy16]

So, if someone baptizes someone unworthily should the baptism be repeated?

[RipplecutBuddha]

If the person performing the baptism is authorized to do so, it is valid. The worthiness of the priesthood holder is examined each time, but if an unworthy priesthood holder is allowed to perform the ordinance, it counts. No ill effects fall upon the new member due to the unworthiness of the priesthood holder.

For example, Alma likely got his priesthood from King Noah, as King Noah selected his own high priests. Even though King Noah was wicked, Alma's authority was valid when he later baptized people.

and for the male, recieving the priesthood is a saving ordinance.

[john doe]

If the priesthood leader authorizes the baptism, it is valid, even if the one who performed the ordinance is unworthy in any way. It is not the fault of the recipient that the person performing the ordinance passed himself off as being worthy. Similarly, if a priest blesses the sacrament unworthily, it is still valid. However, someone who knowingly performs ordinances unworthily will be under condemnation.

[Guest saintish]

[However, someone who knowingly performs ordinances unworthily will be under condemnation.

just curious, is there a scripture that states this?

[SQUARE]

The bishop is responsible to ensure that the person performing the Baptism is worthy. The Bishop holds the keys to be a Judge over us. That would be a shame to baptise someone not being worthy. I hope that they repent sooner than later. IF you are inactive, or not worthy of exercising your Priesthood, your Priesthood authority is considered void. If there is a situation out there that is known, I would consult with your Bishop. This is a good one??.

[Vort]

The apostle Paul called the then-current high priest "thou whited wall" for his blatant hypocrisy. Paul was right, but he recanted when he learned the high priest's station. Paul recognized the high priest's authority, despite his open hypocrisy and obvious unworthiness.

Common sense tells us that if perfection were required to officiate in Priesthood ordinances, precious few such ordinances would ever be performed. God allows us to officiate in the Priesthood even when we are not completely worthy of that privilege.