Further thoughts on Baptism

In meditating on The Sacrament of Baptism and on The Feast of the Baptism of the Lord recently, I confess to one glaring omission.  In the midst of observing on (and lamenting over) the various disputes that arise related to these subjects I skated right past one of the crucial facets of the day.  The second reading for Sunday contained in The New Revised Common Lectionary (NRCL) is instructive.  That reading is Acts 8:14-17:

Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them. The two went down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit (for as yet the Spirit had not come upon any of them; they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus). Then Peter and John laid their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

The reading reminds us that central to our understanding of Christian Baptism is the concept that it is at the moment of Baptism that the God confers the Holy Spirit on the person(s) being baptized.  This may not be a Pentecost-type moment for some, but it is the understanding of The United Methodist Church and others that this is the moment in which God acts. 

The reading from Acts 8 nods to some of the complexities that surround the church’s dealing with the Samaritan believers.  It is important for us to remember that these are the fledgling days of the Christian Faith.  Doctrine and practice would be worked out and refined as time went along.  But, even allowing for this, the text is careful – even precise – in its language.  Some people in Samaria had come to faith.  That profession had led to their baptisms.  But their baptism was in the name of the Lord Jesus.  Whether this is an irregularity or a misunderstanding on the part of those administering the baptisms, we cannot say.  But, the church even in that day was careful not to re-baptize these believers.

Now, one could make the argument that, since these Samaritans did not receive Triune Baptism – baptism in the name of The Father, and The Son, and The Holy Spirit – that their baptisms were not legitimate.  But Peter and John did not take that position.  Instead, they administered a kind of remedial grace in laying hands on the Samaritans.  In that act, the Holy Spirit came upon them. 

The details of early baptismal practice are a bit murky.  It is legitimate to point out that when the gift of The Holy Spirit initially came upon the church at The Day of Pentecost that baptism was not involved.  Within that context it is probably safe to say that at least some of the inhabitants of the Upper Room on that day had been baptized already.  According to John 4:2 (although it was not Jesus himself but his disciples who baptized) baptism was an early part of the ministry of Jesus and his disciples.  Yet, we would hardly expect to have a description of those baptisms as being Triune.  Nor would we anticipate that accounts of these acts would include the bestowing of the gift of the Holy Spirit, as the Spirit as a gift to believers was not a part of the narrative at that time.  This is to say that the action of baptism in Jesus’ lifetime was worked out in time and experience in the days that immediately followed Christ’s Ascension.

In our day it is the understanding of the church that, in the act of baptism, The Holy Spirit comes to abide in the heart of the individual.  There is no perfect scheme that takes into account all situations.  In John’s Gospel, the 22nd chapter for instance, Jesus imparts The Holy Spirit by breathing on the disciples who assembled in the upper room.  

But, as the church and its members rely on our common experience as an authority in working out our understanding of God, experience teaches us that it is in baptism that God commonly chooses to give this gift.

Perhaps if we accentuated this facet of baptism more, the matters of “how much water” and “when in the life of a person” would fade away, and that the matter of grace would move front-and-center in our understanding.