THE fact that Baptism has been an ordinance of the Christian Church from its inception is almost universally accepted by the Church today. The further fact that it was definitely instituted by our Lord Himself is accepted by the majority of New Testament scholars. It is true that some deny the validity of Matthew xxviii. 19-20, and a larger number that of Mark xvi. 9-20¹; but the question as to whether our Lord gave direct command for the institution of Baptism does not in the main depend upon such textual criticism, but upon the impossibility of the subsequent history of the Christian Church, as given in the Acts, with its emphasis on Baptism, apart from any specific injunction from Christ commanding the Apostles to baptise. It is, then, taken for granted by the majority of the Christian world that our Lord gave Baptism to His Church. The opposition which Baptism meets to-day--and, in fact, which all institutionalism has to meet--comes not from a denial of the fact that Christ gave it, but from questioning its permanent validity. What is its use? Does it meet a need of humanity? Wherein lies its reasonableness? [183] These are question which are being asked, and which will have to be answered if Baptism is to make its appeal to a large number of people. To some it is sufficient that Christ commanded Baptism, and to those who are fully prepared to "walk by faith, and not by sight," there should be no need to show the reasonableness of Christian Baptism in order to convince them of the necessity of obedience; but on the other hand, there will always be those who will question the permanent validity of this or any other institution, and in seeking to satisfy their desire we may at the same time show to those who need no such satisfaction something more of the beauty of this catholic sacrament which lies at the root of all true evangelicalism, and saves it on the one side from pure intellectualism and on the other from mere sentimentalism.

      We shall have succeeded in establishing the permanence of Baptism as an ordinance in the Christian Church, having associated with it certain objective realities which have their subjective counterparts, but which are none the less real, if we can show that Baptism meets an expressed need of humanity. Dr. Orchard has recently said some very pointed words on this subject. "The drift away from sacraments and Church consciousness has left the Free Churches hopelessly vague. The ancient forms of Free Church piety have decayed beyond revival. It is useless for any arrogant modernists to say all this is an advantage. It is not only leaving Christianity without any definite meaning or message; the void it has created has been filled, and from strange sources. Here rush in [184] Theosophy, with its fantastic schematology; Christian Science and Spiritualism, with their crude supernaturalisms; New Thought and kindred systems, with their perverted and self-deifying devotions. And now the ever-increasing cases of nervous breakdown, which have called forth the methods of psycho-analysis, but are still seeking reliable and permanent cure, indicate the vengeance which is overtaking our neglect of personal religion."²

      That Baptism has met, and still does meet, a need of human nature has been, and is, the experience of countless thousands. I remember well the case of a young man who, during his University career, was saved from pure intellectualism, which he confessed would have resulted in absolute scepticism, by the real value to him of his Baptism and the constant satisfaction to his soul's need of the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ. Thus he triumphed, and was led to a sane orthodoxy. There could be no question of these things meeting his need.

      Still, those who seek proof other than that which is experimental will say, "How does Baptism meet the need of the human soul?" The answer can be given in at least three ways.

      Man is a creature of both body and spirit. The greatest problem of philosophy has been the relationship of the body to the spirit. At various [185] times men have denied the spirit and others have denied the body. There have been varying forms of Monism. But among Christian peoples at least there is a firm belief in this dual nature of man, and most remarkable confirmation has come from the scientific world in recent years.³ That the body is able to influence the spirit and that the spirit is able to influence the body, are axioms which need no proof. And yet men say, "Baptism is a mere bodily act." "How can we cleanse the inside by cleansing the outside?" Let us beware how we speak of mere bodily acts. When the world was gazing with expectancy and pride upon the heavens awaiting the revelation of its Supernatural King, God came upon it with crushing humility in the form of a Little Child in a common shepherd's shelter outside the kingly city. The Incarnation was a bodily act--the whole story of our religion is founded on bodily acts; and a religion which failed to provide for the bodily side of man's nature, as well as the spiritual, would be sadly incomplete and unsuited to the human race. Not once, but ever and again, has the Gnostic heresy lived, and taught that that which is bodily, if not sinful, is at least useless. The sacraments, and the very Church herself, are but extensions of the Incarnation, and will ever be essential so long as man is what he is.⁴

      Philosophy has not yet solved the problem of the nature or the extent of the influence of the body upon the spirit, and the denial of any possible [186] influence because we do not understand it can only spring from arrogance and failure to take account of the constant daily experience of every human being.

      It is common now to speak of three states of the mind--cognitive or knowing states, feeling states, willing states. But man can never exist in a pure state of knowing, or a pure state of feeling, or a pure state of willing. These three states are ever present at one time, though one may be predominant over the other two. Moreover, action is the completion of all the operations of the mind. It is significant that the process of initial conversion on which the Christian religion is founded, is fitted to this three-fold form of man's spiritual side.⁵ The process in the early Christian Church consisted of faith, repentance, and Baptism. In the exercise of faith man's knowing states are certainly predominant; in being brought to real repentance the emotional states must be uppermost; and in Baptism the willing states gain control, and the man at this critical stage is at once brought to definite action.⁶ The sole control by cognition would lead to intellectualism, by feeling to sentimentalism; but in the scheme as outlined in the early Church we see a real balance, destined to meet the needs of man's spiritual nature.

      That the period of conversion is dominated by a strong desire on the part of the man convicted of sin to do something has been proved too often to be disputed; and if any further proof were needed it [187] would be found in the fact that those who have placed Baptism in the unconscious period have felt the strength of this, and have provided for the satisfaction of the need in confirmation, right hand of fellowship, and like ceremonies. There can surely be no ceremony which so beautifully meets the need of the human spirit to express itself in action as the ceremony of Christian Baptism when rightly administered. "We are buried with Him by baptism."⁷

      Psychology has taught us that if salvation means anything, it means unity. There can be no salvation where there is antagonism and doubt in the mind. The greatest anarchist is doubt. Above all things the mind needs assurance. If this assurance were to, be given by visions, revelations, and the constant wrestlings associated with revivalism, it could be the possession of but few.⁸ Here it is that Baptism meets a permanent need of the human soul. It is thus that Baptism is for the remission of sins, and that St. Peter could say, "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us--not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God."⁹

      There is faith leading to a most real repentance [188] which is a state of unhappy division and conflict in the spirit. There is the desire to act, and the action followed by the consequent assurance of acceptance with God. Finally, there is the whole life of service--of action--founded upon the constant practice of the presence of God through confession, prayer, and communion, and sharing the fellowship of His Body, the Church. Thus is the "unity of spirit," both individually and in the corporate community, provided for, by a system which has its foundations in true Divinity and true Humanity.¹⁰ [189]

[EOCU 183-189]