On Christmas Eve, many of us got to witness the baptism of a new believer in Christ. It was a great celebration of God’s call on the life of a young man who has had no church background. Jesse’s baptism was a great experience for him, for those of us who spent time with him while he was in jail, and, judging by the responses of those who were at the Christmas Eve service, it is apparent that everyone there was blessed by this baptism.
But this was not like a typical baptism that we witness in this church. We borrowed a tank, filled it with water (that we attempted to keep warm), decorated the tank with a white sheet, and created our own “adult-size” baptismal font. We baptized an adult by immersion, and in our Reformed tradition this is not the normal way we do baptism. Normally, we baptize infants by sprinkling water on their heads. And because what happened on Christmas Eve is a very rare occurrence, it naturally brings up some questions about what took place. Why did we choose to do baptism by immersion this time? Is it consistent with the Reformed tradition? What is communicated when we do it that way?
First of all, baptizing an adult by immersion doesn’t make us Baptist anymore than baptizing an infant by sprinkling makes us Roman Catholic. Throughout the centuries, people have argued about the “right way” to baptize. Could we have sprinkled (or poured) water on Jesse’s head? Absolutely! But we chose not to do it that way. And our reasoning was not simply because that’s how we always do it so we wanted to do something different. Nor were we attempting to undermine the accepted position on baptism in our church and in our denomination. By immersing an adult, we in no way challenge or act contrary to our theological beliefs or practices. In fact, we are well within the bounds of church order, and more importantly, Scripture!
When we look at the Scriptures to try to discover the mode of baptism, it is somewhat difficult. The word “baptize” in the Greek literally means to dip, immerse, or submerge. But people are not the only things “baptized”. Cups, utensils, and even beds are “baptized”(Mark 7:4), indicating that baptism may not always mean complete immersion. The word itself indicates that “to baptize” might mean immersion and it might not. There are also numerous descriptions of baptisms, especially by John the Baptist. Those who support baptism by immersion often appeal to the account of Philip and the Ethiopian Eunuch as evidence for their position. In Acts 8:39 it says that they “came up out of the water.” This would seem to indicate that the Ethiopian Eunuch was immersed, because he had to go under in order to “come up out of the water.” But even this baptism could have been administered by pouring. There are three steps in the baptism process: 1. “they both went down into the water” (v 38b), 2. “he baptized him” (v 38c), 3. “they came up out of the water” (v 39a). Notice that both “went into the water.” When we think about baptism by immersion we don’t often see the pastor going under with the one being baptized. More than likely Philip did not do that either. So, when it says that they “went down into the water,” more than likely it simply means they waded out into the water. This means that when they (both) “came up out of the water,” it simply means that they were both returning to dry ground. So the actual activity of the baptism and the coming up out of the water are not intricately linked. The coming up out of the water corresponds to the going into the water, not to the baptism itself. That means that we don’t know what Philip actually did when he baptized the eunuch. It could have been submerging him under water or it could have been taking a lot of water and pouring it over his head.
The mode of baptism is not the important activity in this beautiful account of the good news of Jesus Christ penetrating the heart of a seeker. What should interest us most about baptism is not how it is administered, but what it means. What does baptism represent? We often focus on the link between baptism and the “washing away of sin.” We also refer to baptism as the “entrance into the covenant community.” Both of these things are absolutely true and vital parts of what baptism is all about. But the most important thing about baptism is that it is a sign of our union with Christ. There are many wonderful things that baptism represents.
- Baptism represents “forgiveness of sins” (Acts 2:36-39, 22:16)
- Baptism represents “regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3:5)
- Baptism represents “joining the one body of Christ” (1 Corinthians 12:13)
- Baptism represents “an appeal to God for a good conscience” (1 Peter 3:21)
- Baptism represents “clothing yourselves with Christ” (Gal. 3:27)
- Baptism represents “death and resurrection with Christ” (Rom. 6:3-4, Col 2:11-12)
Our church, our denomination, and our tradition believe that these benefits are available to infants as well as adults. We emphasize the divine initiative rather than the human response. Our children are a part of the covenant community and so we baptize them as infants to demonstrate that it is God who acts first and places his call on our lives, even before we can respond. Because it is not wise to submerge infants under water, we rarely have the opportunity to witness the symbolic representation of “dying and rising with Christ.” Yet this is a vital part of our union with Christ. Romans 6:3-4 says that all of us who were baptized were baptized into his death and therefore, we were buried with him through baptism, in order that, we may live a new life. This was what we wanted to be represented when we baptized Jesse. This was the reason Jesse gave for why he wanted to be baptized. His baptism symbolized the dying of his old self, and his rising to new life in Christ.
Immersion demonstrates this aspect of baptism most visibly, and since we don’t get to witness this when infants are baptized, it is a great opportunity when we have an adult to baptize. I would advocate that when we have an adult baptism, we do it by immersion to add to what is visualized in sprinkling water on infants. Either mode of baptism is legitimate. And both modes represent the same divine activities taking place. But the visual imagery of immersion complements that of sprinkling.
The question shouldn’t be, “How should we get this person wet”; rather we should be asking, “How are we making disciples of all nations?” The reason that this may have raised some questions is that adult baptism is a rare occurrence in most Christian Reformed churches. Instead of thinking it might not be right if it is rare; we should be asking ourselves why it is so rare. Baptism of adults, according to our Reformed tradition, is exclusively granted to those who have not been baptized previously. It is only the people who have little or no church background that will be baptized this way. When adult baptism by immersion is rare that means that making disciples of all nations – particularly the unchurched – is rare as well. I am just as guilty of it as anyone, but we too often engage in theological discussions about “making disciples” at the expense of actually making disciples. May we be a church that fulfills the Great Commission and makes disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit – whether by sprinkling or dunking!
