|
|
The Sacraments |
|
The
declaration in the Article that the Sacrament of Holy Baptism was ordained
by our Lord has sometimes been challenged on the ground that the words
in St. Matthew 29:19 represent a later tradition rather than the ipsissima
verba of Jesus.[1] But at least the passage indicates that when
the First Gospel was written (c. 85 A.D.), Christian Baptism was believed
to have the full authority of Jesus behind it.
That conviction is supported by several other considerations
of importance: (i) If Jesus did not institute this Sacrament, the very
early practice of Baptism by the Apostles after the Day of Pentecost
is inexplicable.[2] It cannot be a mere continuation of Johns
Baptism, for he did not baptize in the name of John, or
associate the Spirit with Baptism. Furthermore,
would the disciples continue a custom peculiar to John without express
instructions from our Lord? Nor
were they merely continuing the Jewish practice of baptizing Gentile
converts (called proselyte‑baptism). A Jew would have been insulted if he had been
asked to submit to proselyte‑baptism. Obviously the Jewish converts to Christianity did not equate Christian
Baptism with proselyte‑baptism, or they would not have accepted
it so readily.[3] (ii) In 1 Corinthians 10:1-4 St. Paul, referring
to the Old Testament types of the two Sacraments, shows
that he bracketed Holy Baptism and Holy Communion together as of equal
status. He then proceeds to show that the significance
of the latter is derived from its close connection with our Lord.[4] Would he have linked it so closely with Baptism
if it was not also of our Lord? (iii)
The significance of Baptism occupies an important place in the teaching
of the Apostles, and they show a unity of thought on the subject,[5]
which suggests a common authoritative source in the teaching of Jesus
himself. The cumulative effect
of all these considerations, supported by the references to Christian
Baptism in the Gospels,[6]
can only adequately be explained by accepting the tradition that the
Sacrament has, in fact, the authority of our Lord behind it. [1]Some of the main arguments
are (i) If St. Matt. 28:19 represents Christs words, why did
the early Christians baptize in the Name of the Lord Jesus
(Acts. 8:16); and (ii) the words do not occur in the parallel passages
in Mk. 16:15-18; Lk. 24:44-49; Jn. 20:21-23.
But the argument from silence is always precarious.
Is the Parable of the Prodigal Son to be rejected because it
is only mentioned by St. Luke? For arguments against St. Matt. 28:19, cf.
W. F. Flemington, The New Testament Doctrine of Baptism, pp. 105-109. [2]Acts 2:38. [3]Acts 2:41. [4]1 Cor. 10:16 ff. [5]W. F. Flemington, Op. cit.,
p. 129. [6]Jn. 3:5, 4:1 f.; Mtt. 28:19. |
|