Water baptism
Yesterday I woke up with a runny nose, sore throat, sexy hoarse voice -- why is it when that happens I'm never in a condition to enjoy it? -- and decided to scrap plans to attend Bangsar Lutheran Church (hereinafter referred to as "BLC" -- I haven't written "hereinafter" ever since I finished law school!) with Messy Christian. After all, BLC's service starts at 10am and is relatively far away, whereas my own church's service not only starts at 11am, a full hour later; it's just around the corner, so to speak. Muahahahah. Okay, okay. So I couldn't wake up in time to get to BLC. Sick people are entitled to extra sleep, you know!
Pastor Chris (hi, pastor!) (yes, he reads this blog) spoke about water baptism & baptism in the Holy Spirit. I'm much relieved that he didn't say every Christian ought to speak in tongues ;)
But what struck me was when he commented that many Christians have been Christians for a long time, yet have not undergone water baptism. A thought zinged into my head: Maybe that's because the church makes it so difficult for people to get water baptised.
You see, in the early days of Christianity, there was no long time lag between the point of faith & baptism. In all the New Testament accounts I've read, people believed and were baptised almost instantaneously. The eunuch said, "Look, here is water. Why shouldn't I be baptised?" and once he had affirmed his belief in Jesus, Philip baptised him then & there. (Acts 8:26-39)
Do churches practice this? No, they don't. Well, they do, but in a more complicated way. In my church, before you can be water baptised, you first need to go through a course called "Basic Doctrine I" (two 4-hour sessions), then spend a Saturday & Sunday at "Baptism & Membership Encounter Weekend". My church is not the only one with these kind of programmes or classes, either.
So where the eunuch in that New Testament story only needed to say, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God," which takes like 5 seconds, my church requires one to sit in for a 4-hour class on two different days, plus attend a weekend course. And these courses are only at set times during the year. See what I mean about churches making it difficult for people to get water baptised?
Now, I'm not dissing the church. I understand, of course, that the leadership wants to make sure people know what they're doing when they opt to undergo baptism. But you really can't have your cake and eat it too. If a person were to come up to you and say, "What's stopping me from getting baptised? Let's do it!" and you say, "Well, you have to wait till 11 Sept because that's when we're having Basic Doctrine I..." I tell ya, if I were that person, all my enthusiasm would probably fizzle out then and there. Is it any surprise that people step back from being baptised, when you make it all seem so complicated?
If churches don't want a time lag between the point of faith and baptism, then they should make baptism as natural an occurrence as it was during the Early Church. Look at Acts 2:41; "Then those who gladly received his word were baptised; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them." Look at that! They believed and were baptised immediately. It was an accepted practice, and totally natural. There is no way, in modern churches today, that someone can believe and be baptised in the same day -- unless the fella's on his deathbed; then the minister gladly hurries over and administers baptism by sprinkling. (As was the case with my uncle, who died of cancer when I was in high school.)
Also, churches have tied baptism up with church membership which is also part of why baptism becomes a difficult thing. You have to sit through classes to learn about the church's vision, mission statement, particular doctrine, history, etc. before getting baptised. (In my church, this is included in the Baptism & Membership Encounter Weekend.) I understand that a person is baptised into the body of believers, but it's the universal body of believers, not just that of one particular church. Why not baptise the fella first and then help him/her to find a church to belong to after that? Churches can still do "follow-up", and should not be so proprietary over people -- a "We baptised them, so they belong to us!" mentality.
I say, if church leaders want to quote the New Testament examples and reduce or eliminate the time lag between point of faith & water baptism, then follow those examples fully and baptise believers as soon as possible after conversion without making them go though classes and courses beforehand. You can't on the one hand say that in the NT there was no time lag, and then impose conditions for baptism which in themselves create a time lag. It just doesn't make sense. Do your "follow-ups" and greater foundation-building after baptism.
If churches made it less difficult and more natural for people to be water baptised, I'm sure Christians would be less intimidated by the thought and more would take the plunge, so to speak.
(In the interests of full disclosure, I was baptised at 15. I told my parents I wanted to be baptised and they, probably wondering whether I knew what I was doing, asked if I was sure. I said yes, so I went through the necessary classes and was duly baptised by the late Rev Hwa Chien in the waters of Teluk Batik.)