HOW THE EARLY CHURCH BAPTIZED
Of the five existing apostolic churches, three baptize by, or prefer, immersion. The Roman Catholic and Syrian Orthodox Churches baptize by affusion. However, the Syrian Orthodox Church calls immersion an “old practice” it used to perform.[1] And so, historically, the apostolic churches prefer to perform baptism by immersion. However, what does the historical and archaeological say about this?
In the earliest Christian catacombs in Rome, where Christians hid and worshiped because of Roman persecution, archaeologists have found the remains of many baptismal fonts. These baptismal fonts are the oldest archaeological evidences to the practices of Christian baptism. One such font is in the catacomb of San Ponziano, which is 4½ feet long, 3½ feet wide, and 3½ feet deep. For baptisms in this font, a channel of water was channeled from a nearby stream to fill it. Wilfred Nelson Cote, in his book The Archaeology of Baptism, believes that those being baptized there were immersed by bending forward under the hand of the one baptizing.[2]
Early extra-biblical writings also show how baptisms were performed. The Epistle of Barnabas (80-120AD) contains this description of Christian baptism: “while we descend into the water laden with sins and dirt, we rise up bearing fruit in our heart with fear and hope in Jesus in our spirits.”[3] The Shepherd of Hermas (100-160AD) reads, “‘For before people bear the name of the Son of God,’ he said, ‘they are dead, but when they receive the seal, they lay aside their deadness and receive life. The seal, therefore, is the water; so they go down into the water dead and they come up alive.’”[4]
Such extra-biblical writings use of “go down into” and “descend into” do not prove baptism by immersion. They simply affirm that baptismal candidates went down into the water, perhaps to have water poured on their heads. Nonetheless, baptism by immersion seems the most natural explanation for the descriptions used, especially considering that all church bodies that can trace their historical lineage to apostolic times practice, or did practice, immersion baptism.
The Didache is the earliest Christian writing outside the New Testament with instructions on baptism. It reads:
Now concerning baptism, baptize as follows: after you have reviewed all these things, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in running water. But if you have no running water, then baptize in some other water; and if you are not able to baptize in cold water, then do so in warm. But if you have neither, then pour water on the head three times in the name of the Father and Son and Holy Spirit.[5]
The Didache does not mention immersion but implies it as the preferred practice and, again, is the most natural explanation considering the instructions and historical practice[6] Robert Lee Williams asserts that pouring water three times connected to repeating the three-fold formula suggests the traditional procedure may have been immersion, which the baptismal procedure used later at Carthage clearly stated.[7]
Hippolytus (160-235), a presbyter in the Roman Church, in his The Apostolic Tradition (215AD), allowed either triple immersion or affusion as the types of baptism allowed.[8] Hippolytus wrote, “The water should be flowing into the tank or be poured down into it. It should be so if there is no necessity, but if there is continuous and sudden necessity use any water you can find.”[9]
Juliette Day studied the many types of evidence on how baptisms were administered in early Byzantine Palestine from 321-451AD. She studied those who were baptized within the “cathedral cities” of Palestine, the baptism of converts, and those she considered “pilgrim” baptisms. With the cathedral baptisms, she concluded that “all were immersed”; for baptisms in more rural settings she made no conclusions.[10]
Among the five apostolic churches this paper is comparing, only the Roman Catholic Church routinely performs baptism by affusion (the Syrian Orthodox Church does as well, but it openly recognizes that immersion was its earlier, standard practice). Although baptisms through non-immersion means have always been accepted as valid by the earliest historical Christian writings, they have never been the preferred method.
What then was different enough in Roman Catholic history to bring about its current baptismal practices? In 753AD, Pope Stephen II approved baptism by affusion on the head of the one being baptized. The monks of Cressy in Brittany consulted him to find out if baptism by affusion on the head of the infant in an emergency would be lawful. Stephen replied that it would.[11] However, it was not until the Council of Ravenna in 1311AD that the Roman Catholic Church declared that baptism by affusion was theologically equivalent to baptism by immersion in all situations.[12] That is why Roman Catholic baptismal practices have for so long differed from those of the other apostolic churches.
Archaeology and early church historical documents both imply that immersion was the common–and the preferred–method of baptism. However, when early church documents plainly explain how baptisms were to be performed, several forms of baptism were all considered valid.[13] The primary concern was that water was used, not whether baptisms were administered by immersion, sprinkling, or affusion.
The early church fathers did not seem too concerned with the “how” of baptism as they allowed for several different ways depending on the setting.[14] James W. Dale, who wrote five monographs on the meaning of bapti,zw, asserted much flexibility on the “how” of baptism by the early church fathers because:
Every Patrist that [sic] ever lived would reject, at a word, the notion, that a dipping into water was, or was the essence of, Christian baptism. Use it in whatever form they may, they do universally and always use it as the means, very generally in the faith, that it is filled with the influence of the Holy Ghost, and so, has power, as a means, to baptize the soul.”[15]
[1] Syrianoc, Re: Syrian Orthodox Church’s Baptismal practices, private email message to author, 11 October 2004. The e-mail reads: “1- The old practice of immersion is generally discontinued today and replaced by the pouring of consecrated water on the head of the baptised person who is seated inside the font. 2- Infants are baptised except in the case of converts who may be adults.”
[2] George E. Rice, “Baptism in the Early Church,” Bible and Spade 10, no. 3-4 (Summer-Autumn 1981): 123-124. The article cites pages 152-153 from Cote’s book.
[3] “The Epistle of Barnabas, [11:11]” in The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations, 3d ed., trans. Michael W. Holmes (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 417.
[4] “The Shepherd of Hermas, [93:3-4]” in The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations, 3d ed., trans. Michael W. Holmes (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 653.
[5] “The Didache, [7:1-3]” in The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations, 3d ed., trans. Michael W. Holmes (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 355.
[6] Do note that the early church fathers were not dogmatic that only one mode of baptism was valid, such as affusion or immersion. James W. Dale (1812-1881) wrote five lengthy volumes on the meaning of bapti,zw: Classic Baptism, 1867; Judaic Baptism, 1869, Johannic Baptism, 1871, Christic Baptism, 1874, and Patristic Baptism, 1874. To date, as far as I know, Dale’s work has not been superseded. In short, Dale, who was a Presbyterian, criticized his own church body that insisted that bapti,zw meant “sprinkle or pour.” He, likewise, criticized Baptists who insisted that bapti,zw meant “immerse.” He said that to insist on one particular meaning missed the point, for when eivj was used in conjuction with bapti,zw, the phrase meant passing into a new, but permanent state or condition. In the same way, when someone is drowned (a meaning of bapti,zw), he is in a new and permanent condition.
[7] Robert Lee Williams, “Baptism in Two Early Church Orders,” Southwestern Journal of Theology 43, no. 2 (Spring 2001): 19.
[8] Ibid., 29.
[9] Hippolytus, On the Apostolic Tradition [21:2], trans. Alistair Stewart-Sykes (Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2001), 110.
[10] Juliette Day, Baptism in Early Byzantine Palestine (Cambridge: Grove Books Limited, 1999), 44.
[11] “What the Bible Says About … Christening,” [online] Glasgow Kelvin Christadelphian Home Pages, available from <http://www.glasgowkelvin.org.uk/topics/christening.html>.
[12] “Water Baptism: Its Authority and Action,” [online] Bible Answers, available from <http://www.bibleanswer.com/baptism1.htm>. Many other web sites also supply this basic information.
[13] If bapti,zw (baptize) were to be understood that it could only mean “immerse,” then one would have to likewise contend that the meaning of coming out of the water is not contained in bapti,zw’s meaning, because it is not. It is worth noting that in the “Great Commission,” one is baptized specifically into (eivj) the name of Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Mt 28:10), not water. Water is the means.
[14] Baptism by immersion should be reexamined for use in our current context. This is not because we must use immersion, but because it hails back to the early church’s preferred practice, because the Lutheran Church is a deliberately historic Church, and that it also best symbolizes what St. Paul says in Romans 6:4: suneta,fhmen ou=n auvtw/| dia. tou/ bapti,smatoj eivj to.n qa,naton( i[na w[sper hvge,rqh Cristo.j evk nekrw/n dia. th/j do,xhj tou/ patro,j( ou[twj kai. h`mei/j evn kaino,thti zwh/j peripath,swmenÅ “Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the Father’s glory, so we too might live in newness of life.” [RKF translation]
[15] James W. Dale, Johannic Baptism bapti,zw: An Inquiry into the meaning of the Word as Determined by the Usage of the Holy Scriptures (Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Publication and Sabbath-School Work, 1898; reprint, Wauconda, Illinois; Phillipsburg, New Jersey; Toney, Alabama: Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers; P&R Publishing Company; Loewe Belfort Projects, Inc, 1993), 206 (page citations are to the reprint edition).
