By Gary Ray Branscome
Let me make it clear from the start that when I speak of
baptismal customs, I am not talking about anything God has commanded in regard
to baptism. While Christ has commanded us to, “Teach all nations, baptizing
them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” many
customs have arisen over the centuries (Matthew 28:19). Not only are there
differences in the way the water is applied, or the wording that is used, there
are also a number of other practices, such as stating the name of the person
being baptized, that are not commanded by Scripture, yet should be kept because
they serve a good purpose and rejecting them would cause needless controversy.
One of the customs has to do with the way the water
is applied. Regarding that, Martin Luther made the following statements.
The first thing in baptism to be considered is the divine promise, which
says: ‘He that believes and is baptized shall be saved’… The second part of
baptism is the sign, or sacrament, which is that immersion into water from this
also it derives its name. For the Greek baptizo means “I immerse,” and baptisma
means “immersion.” (From
“The Babylonian Captivity of the Church”
by Martin Luther, 1520.)
The act or rite [of baptism] consists in being placed
into the water, which flows over us, and being drawn from it again. These two
things, the placing in the water and emerging from it signify the power and
efficacy of baptism; which is simply the mortifying of the old Adam in us and
the resurrection of the new man, both of which operations continue in us as
long as we live on the earth. (“Large
Catechism”, Dr. Lenker’s translation, pages
168-169.)
Notice that Luther speaks of immersion. He even
translated an ancient baptismal liturgy that called for immersion. At the same
time, he never insisted on immersion, and stressed the fact that faith in
Christ is of primary importance, not the way the water is applied. In order to
understand his reasons, we need to understand that there is a difference
between immersion and submersion. Immersionists who understand this sometimes
use the term, “total-immersion”. Furthermore, the Greek Church, which still
baptizes by “immersion,” does so by sitting or standing a person in water while
pouring water over his or her head. For that reason (and others) Luther saw
nothing wrong with baptism by pouring.
In many American churches, a person is baptized by
laying them backward, which is based on an interpretation of the words, “We are buried with Him [Christ] through
baptism… If we have been planted together in the likeness of His death, we will
also continue together in the likeness of His resurrection” (Romans 6:4-5).
However, a more traditional approach would be to have the person being baptized
kneel in water, and have the pastor push his head down (under the water) while
saying, “I baptize you etc”. The point that I want to stress is that the efficacy
of baptism is not determined by the way the water is applied, but by faith in
Christ. Because baptism is a ceremonial proclamation of the gospel, we only
receive what is promised (the washing away of sin) through faith in Christ.
There are many other
customs that could be mentioned; such as referring to the sin of Adam, making
the sign of the cross, reading Mark 10:13-16, and praying. And, there is
nothing wrong with those customs. However, they are not necessary.
The practice of having sponsors, or God parents, dates back
to a time when the Christian church was being persecuted. Parents who could
become martyrs were eager to have their children baptized, and the Godparents
were fellow Christians who promised to see that the children received a
Christian upbringing should the parents be killed. However, sadly, many parents
today do not take the idea of Godparents seriously, and sometimes even invite
unbelieving friends and relatives to be sponsors. In such cases the pastor
cannot seriously ask them to see that the children receive a Christian
upbringing, and can only list them as witnesses, not Godparents. And, enemies
of the faith [atheists, cultists] should not even be admitted as witnesses.