|
Christian
Baptism: An Overview and Paradigm |
||
|
This
paper serves a twofold purpose. First and foremost it is written to
fulfill a requirement for the completion of a college class. But soon into
the paper, I recognized that it could also be a vehicle for learning the
essential meaning of Christian baptism. This
subject has been an object of my speculation for many years. I have been
"baptized" three times: sprinkled as an infant (as a result of
my parents' good intentions), immersed in "believer's baptism"
as an adolescent (which required a confession of faith), and finally was
immersed once again as an adult, when I thought I had more insight into
the purpose of the rite. All
Bible quotations in this paper are from the Revised Standard Version
unless otherwise noted. My perspective on Christianity in general is
evangelical with emphasis on the need to re-discover the roots of first
century Christian practice. ORIGIN
The
concept of physical washing and purification or baptism is not unique to
Christian practice. Ceremonial, cultic washings were practiced in the Elysian
Mysteries, Greek polytheistic cults, Babylonian mystery
religions, and Judaism (Miller, p. 60). Ablution, or washing, was common
in "ancient nations" as a prelude to prayers or sacrifices,
especially in the humid climates, since physical pollution, including body
excretions, was thought to be typical of spiritual pollution (Smith, pp.
70 - 72). Leviticus
15 indicates the importance of ritualistic cleanliness, commanding those
with bodily discharges of one kind or another to wash in water, then
remain unclean for various periods of time, perhaps until the washings had
time to be efficacious. Washing with water was a prerequisite to the
animal sacrifice in the ordination of men into the Aaronic priesthood
(Exodus 29:4, 40:12, Leviticus 8:6). Gentile conversion to Judaism also
required immersion as the culmination of the circumcision ritual (Sandmel,p.
231). It
is interesting to note that the Qumran community, a first century
apocalyptic commune at Khirbet ("ruin") Qumran, practiced ritual
baths precluding a sacred meal of bread and wine (Perrin and Duling, pp.
464-465). Unlike the current practice of "Christian" baptism,
these baths were repeatable (Spivey, p. 236). Even
though immersion or washing in water is an almost universal religious
symbol for purification, the ritual and/or effectiveness of Christian
baptism should not be minimized. Rather, baptism should be seen as a most
natural and "lawful" response to inward feelings of
uncleanliness or sin-guiltiness: handed down not from religion to
religion, but from person to person, with sincere partakers of the ritual
being those desiring to "appeal to God for a clear conscience"
(I Peter 3:21). JOHN'S
BAPTISM AS THE BRIDGE John
the Baptist was a Jewish prophet, a Nazarite, who devoted his life to
fulfilling the role of the "messenger" of Malachi 3:1. He was
the forerunner and kinsman of Jesus Christ, and concerned with the
Messiah's immanent appearance on the world scene. John came
"baptizing in water, that [the Messiah] might be revealed to
Israel" (John 1:31). His message was successful, and many were
baptized for "the remission of sins," as he had adapted the
ritual purification of the Jews and made it a symbol of individual
repentance and commitment (Eller, 249-251). He did not preach that his
baptism was an end in itself, but that it was to be the beginning of a
commitment to moral conversion in anticipation of the one who would
"baptize in the Holy Spirit and with fire" (Luke 3:16, see also
Acts 19:4). John's
baptism was not Christian baptism as such. It was a transitional baptism
(Smith, pp. 70 - 72) between the priestly purification of the Jews and the
baptism practiced in the book of the Acts of the Apostles. I feel this
viewpoint is justified in the distinction made between John's baptism and
Acts' baptism "in the name of Jesus" in the cases of Apollos
(Acts 18:26,27) and the Ephesian disciples (Acts 19). But John's mission
and baptism was approved by Jesus himself in that he submitted to John's
immersion, sighting that it was necessary to "fulfill all
righteousness" (Matthew 3:15) and identified John with the prophesied
resurrection of Elijah the prophet (Mark 9:13). Can
we describe the baptism of John as "believer's baptism," a term
that is so popular today? Perhaps so, for surely "believer's
baptism" is non-sacramental, but merely an "outward sign of an
inward change" of attitude and, hopefully, works. THE
BAPTISM OF JESUS "And
when Jesus was baptized, he went up immediately from the water, and
behold, the heavens were opened to him and he saw the Spirit of God
descending like a dove, and alighting on him;..." (Matthew 3:16)
Rudolf Karl Bultmann distinguishes the sacrament from other ritualistic
acts in that "supranatural powers can be bound to natural objects of
the world and to spoken words as their vehicles and mediators" (p.
135). What was lacking in John's baptism was displayed in Jesus', the
supernatural infusion of the Spirit of God, which descended on Jesus while
he was yet in the baptismal waters, signifying him as Messiah, the one who
would "baptize...with the Holy Spirit and fire" and providing
the power of deity to do just that. Mark describes an event immediately
following John's baptism of Jesus, that "The Spirit immediately drove
him (Jesus) out into the wilderness" (Mark 1:12), signifying Jesus
The Human's possession by this same Spirit and providing a foretaste of
the sacramental nature of future Christian baptism in Jesus' name: a new
baptism of repentance and superhuman power. MODE
OF CHRISTIAN BAPTISM According
to the Gospel of John, Jesus himself did not baptize with water (John 4:2)
nor did he immediately baptize with the Holy Spirit (not until Pentecost,
see Acts 1 and 2). Baptism was not among the instructions that he gave to
the twelve or seventy that he sent out (to heal the sick, cast out devils,
cleanse lepers, raise the dead), although we can only assume that they did
baptize, especially since some of Jesus' disciples were former disciples
of John the Baptist. After
the Holy Spirit was given to the few (John 20:22), then the many (Acts
2:4), water baptism took on a sacramental function. Throughout the book of
Acts, converts are immediately baptized "in the name of the Lord
Jesus." The nature of the sacrament is revealed in this notable, yet
typical passage from Acts 8: "Now
when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of
God, they sent to them Peter and John, who came down and prayed for them
that they might receive the Holy Spirit; for it had not yet fallen on any
of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit. Now
when Simon saw that the Holy Spirit was given through the laying on of the
apostles' hands...." Summed
up, the passage says that (1) the Samaritans previously
"received" the gospel, (2) they had been baptized in the name of
Jesus (in water), (3) although they had been baptized, the Holy Spirit had
not "fallen," (4) they received (were baptized in) the Holy
Spirit at the laying on of the hands of the apostles, and (5) Simon
perceived that the power came from the laying on of hands (although the
writer said "it had not fallen). In other baptism passages in Acts,
the convert is baptized in water in the name of Jesus, has hands laid on
him/her by (presumably) the baptizer, then manifests some supernatural
evidence of the sacramental nature of the rite of baptism/laying on of
hands such as speaking in tongues, testimony, boldness in witnessing, etc.
(the order is reversed in some cases - water baptism is not denied to
those who manifest Spirit baptism!). Paul
reiterates the meaning of baptism as commitment to new life and
empowerment in Romans 6:3-11, "...all
of us who have been baptized into "For
as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ"
(Galatians 3:27). As Jesus died in weakness and was raised in power, so we
die in flesh and are raised completed (to use Paul's pronoun). The
"dying and rising" theme (Spivey, p.358) is consistent with the
words of Jesus concerning his death: "I have a baptism to be baptized
with" (Luke 12:50 KJV). Dying
and rising with Christ through water-baptism-in-Jesus-name/laying-on-of-hands-renewal was indeed the
"formal signification of membership in the community" (Perrin
& Duling, p. 212). Bultmann goes a bit further: "an individual
gets into the congregation through baptism and that means that in this way
he enters into relation with the Lord." (Bultmann, p. 133) Justin's
Apology, a mid-second century work, states that the celebration of Holy
Communion was not allowed without "the washing that is for remission
of sins and unto a second birth" (Dowley, p. 127). The
importance of baptism in the early church is too easily underestimated.
The power of the dispensation of grace was a reality; a privilege to be
coveted and cherished. THE
NAME "No
other name under heaven given among men by which we may be saved"
(Acts 4:12). In the book of Acts, the Name is not separated from the
Being. Every good work is done in the Name: "...in the name of Jesus
Christ of Nazareth, walk...," "...they ordered them to give up
speaking in the name of Jesus...," "they had been found worthy
to suffer indignity for the sake of the Name...," "... good news
about the kingdom of God and the Name of Jesus..." (all NEB). James
attests to the speaking of the name in baptism, "the honorable name
which has been spoken over you" must not be blasphemed (James 2:7).
Numerous passages throughout the New Testament and other early Christian
literature witness to the power and personification of the Name. The
Didache and Hermas say that nobody enters the "Reign of God"
unless they have received the Name of the Son of God. Bultmann equates
this "receiving of the Name" as a part of the baptism ritual (p.
135). The
traditional and most often used formula for baptism is found in Matthew
28:19b: "...in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy
Spirit." If the Paul and the writer of Acts knew this commandment of
Jesus, they interpreted the "name" of the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit to be "Jesus Christ." Jesus told his disciples in John
14:13 that "Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it, that the
Father may be glorified in the Son...." Can we not suppose that Jesus
meant that his name be applied to baptism as well? Bultmann
suspects the triune formula of Matthew 28:19b to be a later interpolation
from Didache 7:1 or Justin's Apology 61:3,11,13, but I do not find a
contradiction in terms nor feel a need to call the triune formula a later
addition. Rather, I prefer to accept the Apostlic interpretation of the
"name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" to be
the name of Jesus Christ (Yahshua the Messiah). The
very essence of the baptism formula is that Name, in that only the power
of Deity could possibly erase the distinction between Jew and Greek, slave
and free, male and female (Galatians 3:28). If humankind had the innate
power to do it, the thing would already be done. Baptism must be more than
"an outward sign," a mere token of repentance. Baptism without
the dispensation of grace destroys the complete viability of any
consequent Christian experience. IN
PRACTICE Optimally,
baptism/laying-on-of-hands was performed by immersing the novitiate
"in living [flowing] water" (Miller, p. 60, from Walker, p. 23).
Flowing water was probably not always available or advisable. In the
instance of the 3000 baptized by Peter and associates in Acts 2 and the
baptizing of Cornelius and his household of Acts 10, pouring may have been
the method. The sprinkling method used so often today may be derived from
the allusion to baptism in Ezekiel 36:25 and 26: "I
will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your
uncleannesses.... A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put
within you...." There
is no direct evidence in the Bible for infant baptism. Mark 10:14 has oft
been sighted in favor of it: "Let the children come to me, do not
hinder them...." Another passage cited is the fore-mention baptism of
the household of Cornelius, the centurion. Still, nothing is specifically
mentioned. But it seems logical, even necessary, that those eligible for
the rite would be able to make the confession of "Jesus is
Lord." In
about the middle of the 3rd century, infant baptism began to be practiced
(Dowley, p. 10). In the generations following, pressure was exerted to
baptize as near to birth as possible, perhaps due to the high birth
mortality rate, but also due to the belief that the act of infant baptism
was simply a method of dispensing saving grace to the subject, despite
that one's will or ability to comprehend. This doctrine was later
confirmed by Lombard, then Aquinas (Dowley, p.257). By the 5th century,
"believer's baptism" (which would include youth and adult
converts) almost entirely died out (Dowley, p. 10,149). As
a member of an infant-baptizing Christian denomination (United Methodist),
I may cite The Book Of Discipline paragraph 221 to get a modern
church commandment on the subject: "...the
pastor of each charge shall earnestly exhort all Christian parents Why
the early age? "...Because Jesus explicitly included the children in
his kingdom." This is not a specific theological reason, but merely a
reference to Mark 10. One teacher of theology in the denominational
licensing school responded to my inquiry about child baptism with the
"irresistible dispensation of grace" (my term) doctrine
mentioned above as confirmed by Aquinas and now standard Catholic dogma. Of
course, at the present time there is as great a diversity in opinion on
the subject as there are denominations and sects. Two opinions are at the
forefront of disputation in the ranks of the main denominations: the
"irresistible dispensation of grace" and the non-sacramental
"believer's baptism." In my research, I have found evidence for
both, but not one without the other. A
MODERN PARADIGM The
threefold nature of baptism may be accommodated from Acts 2: 38, which is
reported to be the words of Peter: "Repent, and be baptized every one
of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and
you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." To enumerate the
factors: (1) repent, (2) be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, (3)
receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The
candidate for baptism must be made aware of the meaning of the ritual, and
expect two supernatural workings of divine grace: that past sins would be
forgiven and that the Holy Spirit might be received (the "baptism of
the Holy Spirit"). Repentance is the act of the will, whereas
forgiveness is by divine decree. It is not merely confession, but
confession with resolve to action. Grace is imparted through the act, but
it is not irresistible. The
formula might be: "(candidate's name), I baptize you in the name of
Jesus Christ." The water should then be applied, and the candidate
should respond to "dying and rising" with a confession of faith,
such as "Jesus is Lord" (I Corinthians 12:3). The baptizer
should then lay hands on the candidate and impart Holy Spirit baptism with
words such as "Receive the Holy Spirit" (John 20:22b). Some
immediate manifestation of infilling should be expected and encouraged,
but not required. Finally, an act of love is called for, such as hugging,
applause, etc. (see Acts 19:1-8). A
few particulars should be considered in conjunction with this paradigm.
The act of water baptism is not complete without the act of Spirit baptism
and vice-versa (Acts 8:16-17). Both acts are necessary for complete
Christian baptism. The Acts model does provide for the possibility that a
candidate that had not received one or the other parts might receive that
missing part later. Rebaptism might also be a fitting response to a
candidate's better understanding of the sacrament. The
laying on of hands, or "confirmation," was deemed unnecessary by
Aquinas (Dowley, p. 257), but Acts 8:14-17, 10:44-48, 19:6, and several
other passages confirm the practice in regards to receiving the Holy
Spirit. It is clear that the spiritual baptism does not happen in and of
itself, or as a regular course of events in water baptism as it has been
purported, but rather as a separate act of grace within the framework of
Christian baptism (water-baptism-in-Jesus-name/laying-on-of-hands-renewal). Rebaptism
should not be discouraged in cases where a candidate feels unforgiven or
unfilled and the baptizer concurs with those feelings (Acts 19:3-5). And
Christian baptism need not be a congregational event in that the
"performance" of the ritual might well inhibit the candidate's
attitude of repentance and acceptance of grace. Rather than have baptisms
in the course of the church service, it might be better to present the new
Christian to the congregation soon after. CONCLUSION The
New Testament gives us solid models of Christian baptism that have been
modified, traditionalized, extra- and un-spiritualized down through time
and church history. The importance of the rite is self-evident in
scripture and must not be underestimated. Dismissing the sacramental
nature of Christian baptism may cause the exclusion of the Christian from
the power derived from Deity. Expecting the grace of God in the sacrament
to be "irresistible" may completely nullify the act at worst,
cause false security at best. The best elements of both viewpoint are
found in the Acts paradigm and my paradigm above. Using the New Testament
as a guide to practice is perhaps the key to receiving the promise of God,
as the writer of Colossians aptly penned (1:11-14): "May
you be strengthened with all power, according to his glorious might, for
all endurance with patience and joy, giving thanks to the Father, who has
qualified us to share in the inheritance of the saints of light. He has
delivered us from the dominion of darkness and transferred us to the
kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of
sins." BIBLIOGRAPHY Bultmann,
Rudolf Karl. Dowley,
Tim. Eller,
Meredith. Miller,
Madeline S. and J. Lane. Perrin,
Norman, Dennis C. Duling. Sandmel,
Samuel. Smith,
William. Spivey,
Robert A. and D. Moody Smith. 1984
The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church. Nashville:
The United Methodist Publishing House. Walker,
Williston, Richard Norris, David Lotz, Robert Handy. |