N
NotWorthy
Guest
One would think that the level of the Jordan river may have changed over the last 2000 years? As silt and run-off forms, things might be different.
- Status
T
teachccd
Guest
That’s great but what did that have to do with my post??
P
P10
Guest
Zach,
I know from another thread that your girlfriend is Protestant and that in studying your Catholic faith you are also in discussion with her on these questions… and that is good.
There is a question that you did not ask which needs to be raised when considering the differences between the Protestant and Catholic understanding of baptism. That is, “What is the purpose of baptism?” For most Protestants (‘high’ Anglicans excepted), baptism is merely an act of obedience to Christ’s command. For most Protestants the act of faith has already ‘saved’ them, their sins are forgiven and they are only being baptized as a public testimony and witness to Christ.
It is very different for the Catholic. The Scriptures everywhere link baptism with the washing away of sin, an inward cleansing which is effected through the sacrament of baptism. A sacrament has two parts, the form of words (“I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”) and the matter (in the case of baptism - water). When properly received in faith, baptism effects the salvation of the soul by uniting it with Christ in His death, burial and resurrection. “The one who believes and is baptized will be saved.” (Mark 16.16)
More could be written on this subject, obviously, but I thought I would take your initial questions one step further to promote a deeper understanding of baptism. I hope you don’t mind.
P
P10
Guest
The NT was written in koine Greek and the only word used for baptism is, as you said, baptidzo. It only has the meaning of immerse or submerge, and no other meaning. The fact that the early church (at least as early as the time of the Didache) allowed for other forms of baptism was a pastoral decision, born of necessity to allow for baptism where water was in short supply, or where immersion was not possible (say, on a battlefield for a dying soldier). The difference in the meaning of the Latin merely reflects the fact that by that time these other forms of baptism were in common practice.
T
teachccd
Guest
Thank you. This is what I have always been taught but, as I continue to find out, I get many different ideas that I have to discern. I have been teaching the pre-baptism classes at my parish for the past seven years and pretty much went over the CCC, Code of Canon Law, Early Church Fathers writings, and other Church documents regarding baptism. As a teacher I carry a huge responsibility to make sure that my classes receive authentic Catholic teachings. So, that is why my ears are always open for new directions. Thank you again for your informative (name removed by moderator)ut…peace…teachccd
Y
YADA
Guest
Thanks NotWorthy … I was hoping someone had brought up the Didache …
Here is a link: newadvent.org/fathers/0714.htm
Living water refers to a river or stream … Immersion
Cold water refers to a lake, pond type body of water … Immersion
Warm water refers to some contained vessal of water - like a bath or cistern … Immersion
Lacking a quantity of water, you may use a quantity found in a pitcher or bowl and …pouring
Thus all forms have been valid and used from the earliest times of the Church
T
teachccd
Guest
studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=907 This is one resource. However, I find that everywhere I look, so far, I do not find multiple meanings for the original greek word. I’m still looking. Could you provide a resource for your findings?
N
NotWorthy
Guest
From Catholic.Com
] seven times in the Jordan" (2 Kgs. 5:14, Septuagint, emphasis added).
But immersion is not the only meaning of baptizo. Sometimes it just means washing up. Thus Luke 11:38 reports that, when Jesus ate at a Pharisee’s house, “[t]he Pharisee was astonished to see that he did not first wash baptizo] before dinner.” They did not practice immersion before dinner, but, according to Mark, the Pharisees “do not eat unless they wash nipto] their hands, observing the tradition of the elders; and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they wash themselves baptizo]” (Mark 7:3–4a, emphasis added). So baptizo can mean cleansing or ritual washing as well as immersion.
P
pnewton
Guest
I won’t resource my findings as I no longer have those volumes, but the figure was sixty-something percent of the time time it was used for immersion and about a third of the time it referred to infusion of water by some other method, like pouring. The two references used were A.T. Robertson’s and Wuest’s. My two professors in my three years of Greek were both Southern Baptist.
In any case, most of the context in the Bible indicates immersion was used by John the Baptist, but that is not conclusive.
I do not know what differing denominational websites will say, but since I took my Greek in an SBC university and seminary, I do not think they would be biased toward Catholicism. Nor is it reasonable that the Didache totally missed the boat within the lifetime of the apostles. I was baptized into the Catholic Church by immersion. I just didn’t know it at the time.
T
teachccd
Guest
Fair enough. That’s why the Church recognizes infusion (pouring) as well as immersion. Thank you for the further references…teachccd
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Well, whoever made the original claim said that it was used only in an immersive (?) manner and had no other definitions. That seems to be a mistaken claim, as I’ve indicated in Mark and Luke’s Gospels.I won’t resource my findings as I no longer have those volumes, but the figure was sixty-something percent of the time time it was used for immersion and about a third of the time it referred to infusion of water by some other method, like pouring. The two references used were A.T. Robertson’s and Wuest’s. My two professors in my three years of Greek were both Southern Baptist.
In any case, most of the context in the Bible indicates immersion was used by John the Baptist, but that is not conclusive.
I do not know what differing denominational websites will say, but since I took my Greek in an SBC university and seminary, I do not think they would be biased toward Catholicism. Nor is it reasonable that the Didache totally missed the boat within the lifetime of the apostles. I was baptized into the Catholic Church by immersion. I just didn’t know it at the time.
I don’t get your claim about “most of the context in the Bible indicates immersion was used by John the Baptist”, though.
BTW, Lake Jackson, eh? You guys sure lucked out with the Hurricane Ike near-miss. We didn’t fair so well over here (near Beaumont).
P
pnewton
Guest
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Also, one must consider that the jailer, Lydia, and Ananias were all very close to a pool for them (and Paul in Ananias’ case) to be baptized by immersion. Wouldn’t this be rather slim odds?
J
jcrichton
Guest
*Hi, zach!
Foremost I want to congratulate you on your quest for the Truth–Catholics are often slow to seek the Doctrine of the Church and usually end up in strange places (Faith); though you’ve received many replies only one touched on what I consider a major distinction between Catholics and non-Catholics…
From my personal experience, I believe that most non-Catholics espouse themselves with immersion only as a means to reject the Authority of the Church (protestanism means to protest the established norm); when we read the Holy Scriptures we will not find a guide that would explain the “correct” form of Baptism. Even when we read a text that seems to suggest something–it is only just that, a suggestion.
We know that Jesus met John the Baptist; we know that He went down into the river to be Baptized; we know that He came out of the water; we know that He was met by the Holy Spirit, in the form of a dove… we know nothing more! Did John pour water over Jesus’ head? Did Jesus performed and actual submersion? Did John help Jesus into the water, held Him “x” amount of time, held Him in place, pulled Him back up or was John assisted by Jesus or anyone else? Did Jesus kneel down? Did John pronounce a formula? Was Jesus dipped several times?..
What I am emphasizing is that the mechanics are not as important as the spiritual ritual–coincidentally, Jesus is called the Messiah, the Anointed One… where is that in the Holy Scriptures–could we surmise that since we cannot find a passage that speaks on Jesus’ anointment that He is not the Anointed One? I say again, it is not the mechanism but the spiritual ritual that matters.
There are non-Catholic groups that demand that any Catholics that converts to them be re-baptized (there are several reasons for this); they purposely ignore St. Paul’s adamant preaching that there is only One Baptism in One Spirit! They are ignoring God and embracing man… since it is man who, as the physical cleansing of Judaism, has determined that Christians must follow a specific physical mechanism (a visible symbolic ritual cleansing) rather than accept the Holy Spirit’s cleansing of man’s spiritual existence.
As with other arguments, we can see why non-Catholics subscribe to only Scriptures (Bible) as their norm since the Catholic Church relies on both the Holy Scriptures and the Holy Traditions to guide her.
Maran atha!
Angel*
P
P10
Guest
Thank you for the ref in Luke 11.38 (also note Mark 7.4). You cite it as an example of baptidzo not always meaning immerse or submerge. If you allow this example it would be the only known exception in all of Greek literature (Christian and non-Christian), and that would be rather unusual. Therefore, I would like you to consider that even here, the meaning of dip, immerse, submerge is not out of place.
“[The Pharisee] marvelled that He had not first ebaptisthe before the dinner.” The Jewish religious ritual referred to is that of washing the hands, not the whole body. In this context it is not unreasonable to let baptidzo retain its universal meaning as dip, plunge, immerse, submerge - since that is what is envisioned here. Not the pouring of water over the hands, but dipping both hands into a bowl of water, thus immersing them.
Then, also, note the following verse where Jesus says in response: “You Pharisees make the outside of the cup clean, but…” I believe the image here of washing dishes also implies immersing them in water - as is the common practice today.
Therefore, I am of the opinion that this sole exception is not really an exception when viewed in this context… but I agree, it is a relatively minor point because of the otherwise overwhelming and consistent use of baptidzo throughout all of Greek literature.
The fact is that the Church had the pastoral insight and authority to allow for other forms of baptism and we are content with that.
K
kevangreen
Guest
that is a lie, the earliest baptism fonts found in old roman territory’s, found that the water when up to a candidates knees. hardley enough to immerse someone.
P
patrick457
Guest
I think there is a confusion over terminology here. The early Christians did practice “immersion,” that is, the candidate’s body was submerged in the baptismal water which was poured over the remainder. Heretofore, a lot of posters in this thread seem to use the term “immersion” in the sense of “total immersion” or “submersion.”
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0a/Baptism_-Saint_Calixte.jpg/180px-Baptism-_Saint_Calixte.jpg
K
kevangreen
Guest
there is a difference between submersion and immersion
- Status