Confirming Faith, Week 12, Baptism and Confirmation

Hi everyone,
Here is the prep that Cynthia has assembled for Sunday. We shall be talking about Baptism and Confirmation. As always we shall respect the various traditions people are coming from.

Attached is a document on Baptism for reference only. I shall attempt to put a few references together on confirmation and post them separately.

David


Baptism and Confirmation – Dec 11th

Information

Baptism was instituted in the New Testament. It is:-
Participation in Christ’s death and resurrection (Romans 6:3-5; Col.2:12)
A washing away of sin ( 1 Cor. 6”11)
A new Birth ( John 3:5)
An enlightenment by Christ (Eph 5:14)
A reclothing in Christ (Gal 3:27)
A renewal in the Spirit (Titus 3:5)
Experience of salvation from the flood ( 1 Peter 3:20-21)
Exodus from bondage ( 1 Cor.10:1-2)
Liberation to a new humanity ( Gal.3: 27-28; 1 Cor.:12-13)
Baptism involves four basic elements:-
Repentance
Belief in the Lord Jesus
Baptism in water
Receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Confirmation means:-
Taking responsibility for your own religious faith.
Being an ambassador for Christ
Public acknowledgement of commitment to Jesus. (Acts 13:1-3)
And
Marks full membership in Christ’s Church.

Confirmation was separated from baptism in the early Church when the local priest was allowed to conduct baptisms but it required a bishop to perform the ‘laying on of hands’ which was done when he visited the parish often around Easter or at some other important festival.(Acts 8:17-18)

Acts is the Biblical book which gives us the most direct information on how unbelievers became believers and proceeded to baptism. (Acts 8, Acts 19)

Discussion Questions
1. Is baptism a one-time event or is there space for rebaptism e.g. in a different denomination?
2. What are the merits of sprinkling and immersion?
3. What do you think about baptizing children of non-believing parents? At what age can a child make his/her own decision?
4. What do you see as the pros and cons of infant baptism?
5. If we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit at baptism when do we open the gift and use it for God’s glory?
6. Is confirmation an essential step in our growth as a Christian? What is the point of a public confirmation service?
7. Can you think of ways to celebrate baptism or confirmation that would be meaningful.



Baptism – A Pastoral Approach.

Church of Our Lord (COOL) is a Christian community within the Anglican Communion. As such, we value the three streams of authentic Christianity which we have received: the catholic or sacramental stream, the evangelical or gospel-centred stream and the renewal stream which has re-vitalized the church’s appreciation for the person and work of the Holy Spirit. Christians, regardless of their background, and those curious about the Christian faith, are welcome to participate in the worship and fellowship of this community. We also enjoy good relationships with members of other denominations in the Valley. With this welcoming approach it is inevitable that questions will arise about the purpose and practice of baptism, in particular about whether infants should be baptized or whether those from nominal Christian backgrounds who may have been baptized as babies should be re-baptized when they come to a living faith in Christ.

A Personal Word:

I was raised in a Baptist family with a Baptist pastor as a father. He used to re-baptize new converts who came to our church from denominations which practiced infant baptism. I was baptized by immersion in a Baptist church at age 15. I am now an Anglican priest who after many years of reading, prayer, and study of both sides of this issue, came to the conclusion that it is right for Christian parents to bring their children to baptism. I understand the issue inside out and offer the following comments to assist sincere believers who want to honour the Scriptures come to an informed decision about their own baptism and that of their children.

What does baptism mean?
As discussed in the companion article “How Can I become a Christian” (found at http://www.coolcommentary.blogspot.com/), baptism is one of the four elements of Christian initiation, the others being repentance, faith (i.e. belief and trust) in Christ, and the reception of the Holy Spirit. It signifies washing away of sin. It is dying to self. It is the mark or badge of being a Christian, as a uniform is the mark of belonging to an army or sports team. It represents incorporation into the body of Christ and a means of his grace through which, by the Holy Spirit, we identify with his death, burial and resurrection. The Latin word applied to baptism, sacramentum, was that used by an officer receiving a commission or giving his oath of allegiance on joining the army. “Believers’ baptism” means baptizing only those who are old enough to personally choose to be baptized.

I recently read a story about an Anglican pastor in South East Asia who, as a young man, had entered a spiritist séance (something to be avoided!). The spiritist leader looked at him and exclaimed, “What are you doing here? You have a cross on your forehead!” The man recalled how, as an infant, he had been baptized and signed with the cross, marking him as Christ’s own forever. This sign was not visible but the spirit world recognized it, just as the demons discerned who Christ and his apostles were. Baptism is the objective part of Christian initiation. Our gratitude to God for the good news of salvation is the subjective element.

Arguments for the exclusive use of Believers’ Baptism.
Scripture teaches that faith and repentance are necessary for salvation. Small infants cannot exercise either, therefore they cannot be baptized. Conversion is a conscious choice to turn from sin and turn to God.
There are no accounts of infant baptism per se in the New Testament.
Infant baptism causes nominal Christianity by falsely reassuring people that they are Christians when they have no active faith. This is true and is a good argument against indiscriminate baptism of children whose parents have no intention of raising them in the faith.
What is the use of baptizing those who may never come to faith or who fall away from the faith of their parents? This occurs among those baptized as adults too. Simon the Magician is one such example. (Acts 8:9-24)
Believers’ baptism emphasizes the individual’s faith and choice. It illustrates the need for individuals to respond in repentance and to die to the old sinful life and rise with Christ. As such it is fully consistent with the New Testament emphasis on repentance, faith, and becoming a “new creation.”

However, there is a risk of placing too much emphasis on the individual and not enough on God and on the community of faith. It is no coincidence that denominations which practice believers’ baptism thrive best in cultures which exalt individual autonomy above belonging to the family or the church. Infant baptism arose in the Hebrew and Middle Eastern cultures which place a high premium on family and community.


Arguments in favour of Baptising Infants of Believing Parents.

1. Baptism is the New Covenant equivalent of circumcision (Col 2:11-12). Just as circumcision was received by infants (boys) as a mark of the covenant, so too baptism includes children of Christian families in the Covenant of Grace until they reach the age where they can choose for themselves. Nowhere does the New Testament forbid infant baptism.
2. Jesus’ attitude to children. Jesus said that we are to become like little children for to such belongs the Kingdom of God. He commended child-like faith and blessed infants, chiding his disciples for trying to prevent them from being brought to him (Matthew 19:13-15). If Jesus welcomes infants into his kingdom, who are we to keep them out?
3. Household baptisms were the norm in the early church. A number of instances where whole families were baptized are mentioned in the New Testament. It is inconceivable that none of those households had any children. It was normal for the whole family to adopt the religion of the head of the family. Gentile converts to Judaism underwent proselyte baptism as a family (children included). This served as a model for the early church. Infant baptism places a high value on the Christian family just as Peter (1 Peter 3:20-22) did when he compared baptism to the fact that Noah’s family were saved with him through the flood.
4. The universal practice of the church, from (at the latest) the second century up until the Reformation, (not to mention most of the Reformers too) was to baptize the infants of Christian parents. Tertullian was the only Church Father to object to infant baptism (and then only temporarily) because he thought it placed too great a responsibility on the godparents, not because it was contrary to apostolic teaching. The same early church which gave us the doctrine of the Trinity, that clarified that Jesus had two natures (divine and human) in one Person, and which defined the Canon of Scripture (which was not finalized until the fourth century), also practiced infant baptism. This was not just the practice of the medieval Roman Catholic Church with its later additions to apostolic teaching. Even those sects, such as the Waldensians, who re-baptized Catholics, baptized their own children.
5. It emphasizes the prevenient and sovereign work of God in choosing and saving us before we were capable of responding to his grace. Salvation begins and ends with God, not with us. We love him because he first loved us. He chose us, we did not choose him.
It honours the role of the church as the community of faith which one joins through baptism.

That denominations which exclusively practice believers’ baptism instinctively recognize the benefits of raising their children in the faith, and wish to publicly commit to doing so, is illustrated by the widespread use of Infant Dedication ceremonies, a kind of dry christening. There is no express scriptural warrant for this practice. All the arguments for doing so are equally arguments for baptizing infants. On the other hand, the Anglican and Roman Catholic Churches (as well as some other denominations) provide for an opportunity for adolescent or adult believers to publicly reaffirm their baptisms in the rite of confirmation. When one compares these two scenarios: infant dedication plus believers’ baptism versus infant baptism plus confirmation, it is evident that the only real difference between them is the timing of the application of the water. Surely sincere Christians can learn to live with these differences?

How much water is necessary?
This is a bit like asking how long is a piece of string (long enough to do the job) or how long should your legs be (long enough to reach the ground). The New Testament does not tell us how much water was used at baptisms or that full immersion was always done. We do read about people going down into the water. The word “baptize” does mean to immerse, to sink, to become waterlogged or soaked. Furthermore, the rich imagery of full immersion and rising out of the water vividly captures the symbolism of dying to self and rising to new life in Christ. Early church documents outside of the New Testament indicate that the preference was full immersion in running water. If that was not available, immersion in still water was used. If that was not practicable then pouring water on the candidate was still considered valid baptism. The volume of water is less important than what it signifies.


What about re-baptism?
There is no question about it: God is blessing the work of many denominations - Baptist, Pentecostal, Charismatic or various free churches and missionary movements which practice believer’s baptism. Many of these churches are lively and exciting places where the Spirit seems to be very active; by contrast liturgical churches may appear dull. Often people come to a personal life-transforming faith in Christ after a nominal or dry and ritualistic up-bringing in one of the historic churches. It is natural that, when one has been blessed by contact or involvement with one of these new denominations one may feel called or pressurized to be re-baptized, especially if that is made a precondition to a leadership role in such a congregation. I can understand this need to submit to Godly authority exercised in one’s denomination as I had to submit to adult confirmation (even though I had been baptized as a believer, been baptized in the Spirit and could not see what more confirmation could do for me), in order to be licensed as a lay-reader and subsequently be ordained in the Anglican Church.

Often new Christians feel somehow cheated that they cannot remember their infant baptism and therefore have no “experience” to recall, or that there was not a great deal of faith exercised by their parents and therefore that their baptism was somehow deficient. This is elevating the subjective over the objective.

On the other hand, it can be painful to faithful parents to see their mature children get re-baptized as if their sincere efforts at raising them in the faith were worthless. Michael Green, an evangelical Anglican author and priest, has suggested a pragmatic and generous approach to these situations. Where an adult feels he or she must be re-baptized they should consider this second application of water to be a re-affirmation of their original baptism, a vivid anamnesis (a Greek word for remembering in such a way as to make the memory a present reality) appropriating what God has already objectively offered in baptism.* Expressed this way, one honours one’s parents and their faith and avoids calling the original baptism a sham, for it is a serious thing to devalue what God has done. God’s Word says, “There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.” Ephesians 4:4-6. We can no more have two baptisms than two faiths, two Lords, two heavenly fathers. Whether Baptists recognize it or not, we have been baptized into the same faith regardless of our age at the time it occurred. That is an objective reality whether or not we remember it, or felt it. Salvation is not dependent on our feelings; it is dependent on what God has already done once and for all in Christ. We can debate the wisdom of applying baptism at various ages but we must not disregard what God has promised and achieved in incorporating us into the one Body of Christ.


Points of Agreement:
Christians agree that new Christians who have not been baptized before should obey Christ’s command to be baptized. We can agree that immersion is a powerful image. We can also agree that the indiscriminate baptism of children of non-believing parents is a scandal. We can agree that a ceremony by itself does not guarantee salvation; what is required is personal repentance and faith. Where we may differ is on whether baptism of children from Christian homes is valid or not.

Conclusion: the pastoral approach

At COOL,
1. New Christians who come to faith should be encouraged to be baptized (preferably by immersion) as soon as possible after instruction in basic Christian faith, if they have never been baptized before.
2. If they were baptized previously (eg as infants) then they should be given an opportunity to publicly renew those baptismal vows made on their behalf by their parents and sponsors. Confirmation is one possible opportunity to do this.
3. We will not re-baptize those who have previously been baptized in water, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, in a denomination which adheres to the Nicene Creed.
4. Infants with at least one believing parent, whose parent(s) and godparents are willing to receive instruction in Christian faith, and understand the promises they are making on the infants’ behalf, will be offered baptism under the understanding that the children will need to subsequently make those promises their own.
5.Infants will not be baptized if neither parent is a committed Christian active in the local church.
6. We shall respect parents who, after careful consideration, wish to postpone baptism of their children until they are old enough to decide for themselves. They may opt for a simple “Thanksgiving” ceremony to thank God for the birth of their children.

I believe this approach is consistent with Scripture and is genuinely welcoming to all faithful Christians.


David Bowler, Church of Our Lord, Comox Valley. BC.
Advent 2005.

*Green, M. Baptism P. 125 (Hodder Christian Paperbacks 1987)

Suggested Reading:

Packer, J.I. I Want to be a Christian (Kingsway Publications 1977)
Packer is and Anglican theologian of the Reformed persuasion.

Bridge, D. and Phypers, D. The Water that Divides (Intervarsity Press 1977)
Bridge is a Baptist pastor; Phypers an Anglican.

Pawson, D. The Normal Christian Birth
Pawson is a Baptist of an Arminian persuasion.

Green, M. Baptism (Hodder Christian Paperbacks 1987)
Green is an evangelical Anglican priest.