Third Way Thursday: Baptism Must Bring Unity in Diversity
Last week I confessed how deeply conflicted I am about baptism and nothing has changed within the week. If there is a third way on baptism it must start with the affirmation that we are all of "one baptism."
As commenter Johann put so well last week, we must always remember that baptism is an act of God, and we are the agents of baptism.
We must first hold dear to our belief that baptism is a sacred act because God bestows his grace upon it. We are told to go and baptize those who begin to follow the Way, yet we baptize in many different ways. The third way is then this: that though we baptize in different ways it is all "one baptism." For persons moving about the different sects of Christianity this can be a troubling proposition, and one that may cause an uproar. Too often we forget that baptism is sacred and is a gift from God and all too casually say that someone who is infant baptized does not count. We should be very weary of speaking about God’s actions this way, though we may disagree with the ways and means of the action.
Unfortunately a third way of recognizing the one baptism bears more weight of change upon churches that practice believer’s baptism than on those that practice infant baptism. In order to realize the third way on baptism in churches that practice believer’s baptism I think the best way to navigate the waters of accepting a Christian’s baptism as the "one baptism" is that people who were infant baptized yet return to Christ or find Christ in a community that practice believer’s baptism should not be baptized a second time but be asked to affirm their baptism, and that the grace of God has carried him or her from that time to where they are now, affirming Christ’s lordship before all the community.
The paedobaptists are not off the hook though! I have been struggling to remember a time when I saw an adult baptized within a church that practices infant baptism. It might have just been the churches I have gone to, but I think that many times adults who come to faith within churches that practice infant baptism are not guided toward baptism because they see baptism as being for infants. Communities of faith that practice infant baptism must renew the practice of adult baptism and heed the command of Christ to baptize all nations.
This is a touchy issue and it can often cause deep division, regrets, and frustration on the part of the saints, yet we must begin to look toward baptism as a sacred act that unites us and not as an act that divides us, even if it has not been done the way we would want it to be done, for God is the author of baptism, not us.
2 Comments
Submit a Comment
SUBSCRIBE:
I Support
I agree with you about much of what you have said, but I grew up Independent Baptist. And unfortunately, I think everyone who is not a mainline Protestant would disagree with your emphasis on baptism being God’s act, being a means of grace. Baptists and other non-mainline Protestants view baptism as an act of obedience by the one being baptized and the one doing the baptizing. And make no mistake about it, they feel that it is the minister doing the baptizing, and not God. This is not to criticize. I do not agree. I take a sacramental view of baptism. But, my point is this: you said “We must first hold dear to our belief that baptism is a sacred act because God bestows his grace upon it.” (Which I totally agree with.) Many in the Christian church will not agree with that beginning statement, and so the disagreement about baptism will continue because it is a disagreement about the fundamental nature of the act of baptism itself.
Non-mainline Protestants hold that baptism and communion are ORDINANCES (something I do because I am commanded to by God), NOT SACRAMENTS (means of grace), therefore agreement in these areas is not likely. I understand this because I grew up in a non-sacramental church and went to Bible college and seminary in the same tradition. People who grew up in mainline churches probably don’t see the magnitude of the gulf of disagreement in the issues.
At a Baptist/non-denominational church I used to serve, several United Methodists wanted to join. The deacon board (board of elders) insisted they ALL be baptized AGAIN by immersion in order to join the church. Unfortunately, that is probably a common practice.
Thank you so much for your thoughts Richard. My faith heritage is comprised of splitting time between a mainline church (Lutheran) and an independent Baptist church (a non-denominational Bible church, but it is really a Baptist church that doesn’t pay dues!). I went to a non-denominational dispensational Bible college, so I am definitely tracking with you.
I think we both danced around the issue, me in my post and you in your comment, of how present is God? It is a paradox that God is present where two or three are gathered but yet not present in an ordinance or sacrament. The very strict ordinance view, that baptism is ordained by God and the act itself is not holy is counterintuiative to Christian thought period: we are the royal priesthood, and what we do is holy before God through the Spirit of Jesus Christ working through us.
As I read The Lord’s Supper: Five Views (my review) it was encouraging to me to see Roger Olsen lay out the case that many baptist theoloigians are beginning to make for a sacramental view of the Lord’s Supper that is more reserved than Reformed but sacramental nonetheless, and further that many early Anabaptist theologians had a sacramental view of communion. Hopefully Baptist scholarship will begin to rethink the sacramentality of baptism as well.