What are your thoughts on baptism? No matter what your tradition, I would expect you’d agree that baptism is one of the most important rituals in Christianity. But it precisely because of this that baptism one of the most argued about rituals we have.
Having personally experienced both Catholic and Baptist approaches to baptism in my journey, and witnessed it from the sidelines in a few other traditions besides, as you’d expect I have given it some thought over the years. And you know, of everything I have read I find what the Didache has to say is most interesting. It states:
The procedure for baptism is as follows. After repeating all that has been said, immerse in running water “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit””. If no running water is available, immerse in ordinary water. This should be cold if possible; otherwise warm. If neither is practicable, then pour water three times on the head “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”. Both baptizer and baptized ought to fast before the baptism, as well as any other who can do so; but the candidate himself should be told to keep a fast for a day or two beforehand.
Did you notice, it accepts both liturgical style sprinkling and evangelical style dunking as valid, but more, affirms baptism in running water as even better than both of those. I find this intriguing for a number of reasons.
- Firstly, because it ultimately affirms all forms of baptism as valid. Instead of a Baptist style rigidity, that says people who’ve been baptized “inadequately” need to be re-baptised to be accepted as members, a more generous orthodoxy is articulated here.
- Secondly, because it nevertheless critiques all forms of building-bound baptism. As few Western churches today routinely practice baptism in running water, and don’t always have “availability” as an excuse, this teaching can potentially be taken as a soft critique of a variety of traditions, both liturgical and evangelical.
- Thirdly, because it potentially sheds light on early baptism symbolism. As the Didache was both very early (50AD-200AD) and so highly regarded that some sought its inclusion in the canon, we should probably take seriously the light the preference for running water sheds on early Christian practice. In fact I have come across numerous commentaries which suggest that when the Bible talks about “living water” as a metaphor for the Spirit it is actually talking about running water, which is symbolically quite significant.
I find this particularly compelling also because of personal experience, in having witnessed a number of lakeside and seaside baptisms. I just find that their symbolism is just all that much more potent. But in line with the Didache, while I have my preferences, I accept all as authentically Christian. What ultimately matters is the conviction behind the action.
Curious Christian 
Leave a reply to Dave Cancel reply