Baptism not by immersion?

[meaprilrain]

Do you recognize that the Church has the authority to determine how Baptisms are done, as long as they don’t contradict what Scripture has instructed? Does the Church have the authority to determine at one time that “option a” is best and then at a later time that “option b” is best?

Of course, out of best options or necessities, not simply because they don’t want to get wet ? I think they were aware that baptisms were a part of the calling when they considered it ?

 

[meaprilrain]

Who is “they”?

I assume your grandson was an infant - we typically don’t immerse infants, for safety reasons and also reasons of comfort for the infant. Pouring the water over their foreheads is much safer and more comfortable for the infant, and just as valid.

“They” is the RCC. And yes he was an infant.

 

[jmcrae]

“They” is the RCC.

Okay, yeah - I guess what I meant to ask is, who is making these lists against the RCC?

And yes he was an infant.

So, you can see how it would make sense that they would have used pouring, in his case.

 

[clmowry]

Um the blue lettering is my notes thats why its in parenthesis… the black and red is the actual wording. :doh2:

It still denotes a list of preference…

Well, yeah, I knew that, which was the point of the post.

It is the text in blue you should reconsider.

Why do you insist that the list would convey either inferiority or invalidity.

What if the listing was reversed. Would you still read it the same way?

Chuck

 

[clmowry]

Hmm…I’m looking through the 2,125 times that baptism is referenced in my Church fathers CD.

A common early practice for the baptism of adult converts seems to be a 2 day fast.

Anybody know if this fast still observed today?

Chuck

 

[jmcrae]

Hmm…I’m looking through the 2,125 times that baptism is referenced in my Church fathers CD.

A common early practice for the baptism of adult converts seems to be a 2 day fast.

Anybody know if this fast still observed today?

Chuck

In theory, yes. It’s in the official Rite.

I’ve never actually met any Baptismal candidates who knew about it, though - they also didn’t know they were supposed to abstain from meat on Good Friday.

 

[clmowry]

Well I’ve found many an argument about the necessity of water but nothing about the preference for it to be running water or full immersion.

I did find one quote about the immersion Baptism of Infants by Pope St. Gregory the Great but it is a statement about not immersing the infant 3 times because this was the practice of a heretcial group. (Not that he felt this invalidated the Baptism, but simply to avoid and leading others to believe that the Church was endorsing the heresy.)

But I’ll keep looking for either a positive or negative statement on the subject.

Chuck

 

[NotWorthy]

I seem to recall recent archeological digs unearthing 1st and 2nd century Greek Baptismal Fonts that were only 18" tall. This would pretty much necessitate Baptism by pouring.

 

[meaprilrain]

Okay, yeah - I guess what I meant to ask is, who is making these lists against the RCC?

my current church:wink:

So, you can see how it would make sense that they would have used pouring, in his case.

um no, babies learn to swim every day, immersion would just be dunking in your arms ? Someone mentioned and old heretical practice of immersion by babies 3 times and I can see how that could be a problem with choking !

 

[clmowry]

This is from Augustine…I’m looking for what Cyprian orginally had to say now.

“And so also in the epistle which he [Cyprian] wrote to Magnus, when he was asked whether there was any difference in the efficacy of baptism by sprinkling "or by immersion, “In this matter,” he says, “I am too modest and diffident to prevent any one by my judgment from thinking as he deems right, and acting as he thinks.” (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 6:7-10 [A.D. 400])

It seems to be about wheter or not a Sick bed sprinkling is as valid as an in church “immersion” but I don’t see any thing actually describing the ceremony yet. The Cyprian info (if I find anyting useful would be ~250 AD.)

Chuck

 

[fellowChristian]

**2 Kings 5:14 **

So he went down and dipped himself seven times in the Jordan, according to the word of the man of God; and his flesh was restored like the flesh of a little child and he was clean.

Numbers 19:18 **
'A clean person shall take hyssop and dip it in the water, and sprinkle** it on the tent and on all the furnishings and on the persons who were there, and on the one who touched the bone or the one slain or the one dying naturally or the grave.

**
Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16 **-John the Baptist prophesied that Jesus will baptize (“baptisei”) with the Holy Spirit and fire. In this case, “baptisei” refers to a “pouring” out over the head. This is confirmed by Matt. 3:16 where the Holy Spirit descends upon Jesus’ head like a dove and Acts 2:3-4 where the Holy Spirit descended upon Mary and the apostles’ heads in the form of tongues of fire. In each case, in fulfilling John the Baptist’s prophecy, the Lord baptized (“baptizo”) in the form of pouring out His Spirit upon the head, not immersing the person.

Matt. 20:22-23; Mark 10:38-39; Luke 12:50 - Jesus also talks about His baptism (from “baptizo”) of blood, which was shed and sprinkled in His passion. But this baptism does not (and cannot) mean immersion.

Acts 9:18; 22:16 - Paul is baptized while standing up in the house of Judas. There is no hot tub or swimming pool for immersion. This demonstrates that Paul was sprinkled.

**Acts 10:47-48 **- Peter baptized in the house of Cornelius, even though hot tubs and swimming pools were not part of homes. Those in the house had to be sprinkled.

Acts 16:33 - the baptism of the jailer and his household appears to be in the house, so immersion is not possible.

**Acts 2:17,18,33 **- the pouring of water is like the “pouring” out of the Holy Spirit. Pouring is also called “infusion” (of grace).

**Isaiah 44:3 **

3'For I will **pour** out water on the thirsty land
     And streams on the dry ground;
     I will **pour out My Spirit **on your offspring
     And My blessing on your descendants;

From
Scripture Catholic
scripturecatholic.com/baptism.html#baptism-IV

 

[clmowry]

Well, here is what Cyprian had to say.

He doesn’t talk about “immersion” however. He talks instead about “washing.” Whatever that means.

What I find more interesting is He uses the verse from Ezeikel and provides us with some other verses to support the validity of sprinkling as well.

Same question, same answer 1800 or so years later.

Chuck

1. You have asked also, dearest son, what I thought of those who obtain God’s grace in sickness and weakness**, whether they are to be accounted legitimate Christians, for that they are not to be washed, but sprinkled, with the saving water**. In this point, my diffidence and modesty prejudges none, so as to prevent any from feeling what he thinks right, and from doing what he feels to be right.(5) As far as my poor understanding conceives it, I think that the divine benefits can in no respect be mutilated and weakened; nor can anything less occur in that case, where, with full and entire faith both of the giver and receiver, is accepted what is drawn from the divine gifts. For in the sacrament of salvation the contagion of sins is not in such wise washed away, as the filth of the skin and of the body is washed away in the carnal and ordinary washing, as that there should be need of saltpetre and other appliances also, and a bath and a basin wherewith this vile body must be washed and purified. Otherwise is the breast of the believer washed; otherwise is the mind of man purified by the merit of faith. In the sacraments of salvation, when necessity compels, and God bestows His mercy, the divine methods confer the whole benefit on believers; nor ought it to trouble any one that sick people seem to be sprinkled or affused, when they obtain the Lord’s grace, when Holy Scripture speaks by the mouth of the prophet Ezekiel, and says, “Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from alI your filthiness and from all your idols will I cleanse you. And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit will I put within you.”(1) Also in Numbers: “And the man that shall be unclean until the evening shall be purified on the third day, and on the seventh day shall be clean: but if he shall not be purified on the third day, on the seventh day he shall not be clean. And that soul shall be cut off from Israel: because the water of sprinkling hath not been sprinkled upon him.”(2) And again: “And the Lord spake unto Moses saying, Take the Levites from among the children of Israel, and cleanse them. And thus shalt thou do unto them, to cleanse them: thou shall sprinkle them with the water of purification.”(3) And again: “The water of sprinkling is a purification.”(4) Whence it appears that the sprinkling also of water prevails equally with the washing of salvation; and that when this is done in the Church, where the faith both of receiver and giver is sound, all things hold and may be con- summated and perfected by the majesty of the Lord and by the truth of faith.

 

[meaprilrain]

“Now about baptism, baptize this way: after first uttering all of these things, baptize “into the name of the Father and of the son and of the holy Spirit” in running water. ( this would denote a river as the 1st choice of baptism) But if you do not have running water, baptize in other water. ( Next a pond or lake as a standing water. Still the choice is enough water to immerse. ) Now if you are not able to do so in cold water, ( I would say this is a pond or river which is naturally cold water)do it in warm water. Now if you don’t have either, pour water three times on the head, ( and as a last resort by means of no other way less water is acceptable )“into the name of the Father, and of the son, and of the holy Spirit.”

It is the text in blue you should reconsider

the first is running water which is a river or waterfall etc. somekind of live water ? the second is an assumption that if not running water then standing water ? which is a pond or lake which shuld be cold water ! agreeably a pond COULD be small enough to not immerse in. and the third as a last resort because it says " If you don’t have either" !!! then do this, denoting it last choice?

Why do you insist that the list would convey either inferiority or invalidity

Not invalidity but perhaps inferiority, it states “in running water” ,“BUT IF YOU DO NOT” ,“then in other water” AND THEN “If you dont have either” pour 3 times.

what if the listing was reversed. Would you still read it the same way

I would read it the same way but pouring would be the first choice, then a pond or standing water, and then running water as a last choice ?

 

[clmowry]

Well here is one that actually talks about immersion, but doesn’t differentiate it from any other form:

Gregory of Nyssa (Died 385 or 386 AD)

“BUT the descent into the water, and the trine immersion of the person in it, involves another mystery.” (The Great Catechism 35)

He doesn’t go into any more detail about the procedure.

Chuck

 

[jmcrae]

my current church:wink:

And, they are experts, because …

um no, babies learn to swim every day, immersion would just be dunking in your arms ?

No, immersion is the whole body, fully under the water - three times - once for each of the three Persons of the Trinity.

Someone mentioned and old heretical practice of immersion by babies 3 times and I can see how that could be a problem with choking!

Which is why we don’t normally do immersion baptism for babies.

 

[Truthstalker]

Our (Presbyterian) church has a font for sprinkling; the local Catholic parish has a holy water/baptismal font, where the priest goes down in the water with the one being baptized. I’ve seen this happen. We (E.-Presbyterians) dedicate, dunk, sprinkle, and whatever else. We leave it up to the parents, as long as their motives are right.

I like what someone (Notworthy?) said: it is not the form that is so important as the grace of God. The act of obedience is more important than the outward form. I think there is a lot more range in the church for form than some are willing to give. Throughout the ages all forms have been used at various times.

On this subject I admire the Catholic Church for its care in avoiding the extremes of legalism and excessive freedom.

 

[NotWorthy]

On this subject I admire the Catholic Church for its care in avoiding the extremes of legalism and excessive freedom.

That’s a very insightful thing to say! Most people think of the Catholic Church as being to legalistic. I think we try to avoid this mentality, but have been forced to resort to it to combat heresies.

For instance, you think the Church came up with the Doctrine of Transubstantiation simply because She was bored?!?!?

 

[NotWorthy]

As a reminder, can anyone tell me what Ezekiel was talking about if it wasn’t Baptism?

 

[sodak]

Almost all of the Baptisms that I’ve attended have been pouring, I’ve only been to one full immersion. It was during an Easter Vigil, and there were over a dozen people being baptized. It almost turned into a party atmosphere, lots of laughing and distractions. Then there was a trail of Holy Water on the floor to the bathroom where everyone had to go and towel off and change.

Given how that went, I think the pouring is much more dignified and “sacramental”, in the sense of reverence for what was taking place.

Based on that, I much prefer pouring, I’m not a jumping up and down in the pew kind of guy.

 

[clmowry]

St. Jerome** – (340-420 AD) **

1. L. Thirsty men in their dreams eagerly gulp down the water of the stream, and the more they drink the thirstier they are. In the same way you appear to me to have searched everywhere for arguments against the point I raised, and yet to be as far as ever from being satisfied. Don’t you know that the laying on of hands after baptism and then the invocation of the Holy Spirit is a custom of the Churches? Do you demand Scripture proof? You may find it in the Acts of the Apostles. And even if it did not rest on the authority of Scripture the consensus of the whole world in this respect would have the force of a command. For many other observances of the Churches, which are due to tradition, have acquired the authority of the written law, as for instance(1) the practice of dipping the head three times in the layer, and then, after leaving the water, of(2) tasting mingled milk and honey in representation of infancy;(3) and, again, the practices of standing up in worship on the Lord’s day, and ceasing from fasting every Pentecost; and there are many other unwritten practices which have won their place through reason and custom. So you see we follow the practice of the Church, although it may be clear that a person was baptized before the Spirit was invoked. (Dialogue against the Luciferians)

What ever that means?

Chuck