A devout Episcopalian attended our congregation here in Denton for years, probably in deference to his wife, who is one of our faithful members. They married later in life, after their first mates died. We became trusted friends, sharing views on various subjects. He confided in me one Lord’s day that he was going to return to the Episcopal Church, explaining that he would never be accepted as a member at our church unless he was re-baptized by immersion. He told me in heart-felt terms that if he did that he would be renouncing his heritage.

I told him I understood, and that we would continue to love and appreciate him wherever he went to church. Other things bothered him, I think -- our crass informality and the lackadaisical way we do “the Eucharist” -- but that we make immersion a test was the main thing.

That story bothers me, for there have been many -- and there are still many -- not only in Churches of Christ/Christian Churches, but in all immersionist churches, who are offended by what they see as a legalistic view of baptism. Some Baptist churches are especially guilty in that they even re-immerse the immersed, making re-baptism essential to membership in a particular congregation. And of course the Mormons. No matter how Christian you are, or how biblical your baptism, you have to be re-baptized by immersion by the Mormons to be a Mormon.

It is easy for us immersionists to quote Scripture on “buried with him in baptism” and insist that it could not be made plainer, but the fact is that the majority -- a large majority -- of Christians around the world were baptized other than by immersion, and most of them as infants. And they are as sincere, devout, and intelligent as we, and sometimes more so.

In fact many of them -- such as those I had as professors at Princeton Seminary (Presbyterian) -- have been the most exemplary Christians I have known. Only today I was reading in a Princeton publication memorial minutes to Prof. Bruce M. Metzger, who recently died at age 93. He is remembered both as a world-renowned scholar and a humble, compassionate Christian. I passed them along to Ouida -- there were pictures of him young a d old -- for we both knew him at Princeton when he was a young scholar who took special interest in us, loners from Churches of Christ in a sea of Presbyterians.

He told us one time in a private conversation that he was dissatisfied with his church’s position on infant baptism. On another occasion he passed along to us some scholarly references to arguments against instrumental music, from the church at large. On still another occasion he apologized to us for misjudging our not attending chapel. He thought it was for lack of conscience when it was because of conscience. In the meantime he had learned of our anti-instrument position. That is how straitlaced we were back then. We would not even attend an assembly that had an instrument.

It bothers me that Bruce Metzger could not have been a member of the Singing Oaks Church of Christ. Or William Barkley, or C. S. Lewis, or John Stott, or Dietrich Bonhoeffer, or Mother Teresa -- or Martin Luther, or John Calvin, or John Knox. On and on it could go. The vast majority of “the great cloud of witnesses” in the history of the church were not baptized by immersion. Some of them died as martyrs for Christ.

And yet I am a confirmed baptist, fully persuaded that the New Testament teaches believer’s baptism by immersion. If I were limited to a single text, I would make my case from Colossians 2:11-12. That baptism is here the “circumcision of Christ” upon the heart makes it clear -- to me -- that the subject is a penitent believer, not an infant incapable of believing and in no need of repentance.

Verse 12 not only names baptism as a burial with Christ, but does so in terms that makes it a kind of re-enanctment of the gospel -- the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. We die with Christ (2:20), buried with Christ (2:12), and raised with Christ (3:1). And verse 12 says that this is the work of God, both Christ’s resurrection and our resurrection (in baptism). This beautiful symbol is lost in modes other than immersion.

When William Barclay comments on this passage he concedes that baptism in New Testament times was by immersion and for believers only. He observes that the early church was not concerned about the status of their children at this point in that they expected an imminent coming of Christ. As Christ tarried a theology of children emerged, and it was seen as appropriate to baptize them as part of the community of faith -- the faith of the church and of their parents.

Alexander Campbell, who himself resolved to be immersed as an adult after being sprinkled as an infant, made a persuasive observation. All traditions recognize baptism by immersion as biblical. It is only baptism in other modes that is questioned.

Nonetheless, baptism continues to be “The Water That Divides,” as the title of one book puts it. And however persuasive our arguments appear to us, the majority of Christians do not see it as we do. So what do we do?

First, we must be true to what we believe the Scriptures teach on this subject, and continue to bear witness to it with “longsuffering and teaching.” We are never to press the issue or be judgmental, but speak with both clarity and forthrightness when the subject comes up.

Second, we must give those among us who are unimmersed time to “make the connection” for themselves, as Thomas Campbell put it.

Third, in the meantime -- until they come to see it, and they may never come to see it -- we accept them as equals in Christ, and we must not make our understanding of baptism a test of fellowship or embership.

“Membership” -- some sort of official list -- is our own idea anyway. If we make a “membership list,” let it include all those who regularly attend, or those who ask to be listed. The “members” will be those we assume to be members of Christ -- because of their faithfulness to him “in all things according to their understanding.” to quote Campbell gain.

It frequently happens -- with this approach --that unimmersed believers eventually decide to be immersed. But we are not to wait for them to do this before we accept them fully and unconditionally, which means they may serve in any ministry and hold any office. No test but Christ!

Notes

I wish I could report that Ouida is substantially improved, especially now that she’s half way through the iron injection treatment, but there is no apparent improvement in her energy level or her appetite. She insisted on going with me recently to our old home to clean windows, one of the last chores in getting the old house ready for market. She wanted to help, but after a window or two she had to lie down on the floor in a house bare of furniture. Her spirit was willing, even eager, but the flesh was weak. It was sad to see. But she still has quality of life within limits.

It is beastly hot in our part of Texas -- what they used to call the dog days. It was 103 degrees today, and I was up and down an eight-foot ladder still cleaning windows. -- half the time outside since windows unfortunately have two sides. Our house has tall ceilings and high windows. When outside in the heat I found myself hurrying so I could sooner go inside and work in air-conditioned comfort. When back at the Vintage with Ouida I told her it reminded me of growing up without air-conditioning, and usually not even a fan. I remember my parents sitting in the front yard well into the night on the dog days, waiting for it to cool enough to go to bed. In our “new” car -- we traded our two l4-year old cars in on a Toyota Camry that has only 9,600 miles -- the air is so cold that I have to turn the A/C on low. We are spoiled! That is one thing about being old old -- memory makes us grateful.