Your view of baptism is most closely akin to Sacerdotalism. This is the view of the RCC. They expand the capacity of the sacraments to include the actual conveying of the blessing signified. The seal develops into not only a certification, but an actual imparting of the things being sealed. In his systematic, C. Hodge explains, According to the Romanists, therefore, a sacrament is a divine ordinance which has the inherent or intrinsic power of conferring the grace which it signifies. For a more lengthy discussion of the error of Sacerdotalism, see B. B. Warfield's The Plan of Salvation.
Thanks for the link. Warfield discusses Lutheranism's supposed connection to Roman Sacerdotalism.
Quote
It has been the boast of Lutheranism that it represents, in distinction from Calvinism, a "conservative " (63) reformation. The boast is justified, as on other grounds, so also on this, that it has incorporated into its confessional system the essence of the sacerdotalism which characterized the teaching of the old Church. Confessional Lutheranism, like Romanism, teaches that the grace of salvation is conveyed to men in the means of grace, otherwise not. But it makes certain modifications in the sacerdotal teaching which it took over from the old Church, and these modifications are of such a far-reaching character as to transform the whole system. We do not commonly hear in Lutheran sacerdotalism much of "the Church," which is the very cor cordis of Roman sacerdotalism: what we hear of instead is "the means of grace." Among these means of grace" the main stress is not laid upon the sacraments, but on "the Word," which is defined as the chief "means of grace." And the means of grace are not represented as acting ex opere operato but it is constantly declared that they are effective only to faith. I do not say the scheme is a consistent one: in point of fact it is honeycombed with inconsistencies. But it remains sufficiently sacerdotal to confine the activities of saving grace to the means of grace, that is to say, to the Word and sacraments, and thus to interpose the means of grace between the sinner and his God.
Is Warfield seriously suggesting the unregenerate sinner can approach God without being called through the ministry of the Word? The Holy Spirit regenerates/works faith in the sinner immediately through outward Word alone not through spiritualizing, covenant relationships, the sinner's prayer, or inner character change. On the other hand, God hears the prayers of the regenerate sinner.
Quote
The central evil of sacerdotalism is therefore present in this scheme in its full manifestation, and wherever it is fully operative we find men exalting the means of grace and more or less forgetting the true agent of all gracious operations, the Holy Spirit himself, in their absorption with the instrumentalities through which alone he is supposed to work. It is in a truly religious interest, therefore, that the Reformed, as over against the Lutherans, insist with energy that, important as are the means of grace, and honored as they must be by us because honored by God the Holy Spirit as the instruments by and through which he works grace in the hearts of men, yet after all the grace which he works by and through them he works himself not out of them but immediately out of himself, extrinsecus accedens.
Has Warfied ever read the Augsburg Confession, Art. IV, V? Augsberg teaches immediate grace by the work of the Holy Spirit through instruments of word and sacrament.