|
 “Our
Lord taught the Apostles and the priests, who carry on their
work, to teach the people first and then to baptize them.
Therefore, in the Catholic Church we insist that you take a full
course of religious instructions. At the end of the course the
priest will examine you to see if you are prepared for baptism.
And if you have the right intention he will baptize you.” (Instructions
In The Catholic Faith, p. 88). While the “sacrament” of
baptism is normally administered by priests, exceptions are
recognized by the Catholic Church. However, the priesthood must
officiate or administer the other six.
The
claim for “Divine Authority” which gives the priesthood
official power to administer sacraments eventuated, supposedly,
by “Apostolic Succession.” This makes logical their
conclusions on sacraments and officials: “The power to change
bread and wine into His Body and Blood has passed down through
the centuries from the Apostles to bishops, and from bishops to
priests for the last 2000 years ... Only those validly ordained
in the priesthood of Christ have the power to change bread and
wine into the Body and Blood of Our Lord. . .“ (Ibid., pp. 94,
97).
It
is possible that some Christians have reached an “official
baptism” concept, for they believe that baptism is scriptural
obedience only if the baptizer is a “Gospel preacher” (in
the nomenclature of some, a “Church-of-Christ preacher”).
While to others a person is immersed into Christ only if it is
done by a member of the church. This would necessitate that the
baptizer be neither an alien nor a hypocrite — if a non-member
|
|
invalidates baptism, then a hypocrite
would also. And that creates another problem about those
baptized by “brothers in error.” Does the error of a brother
mean that the one correctly taught and scripturally immersed is
not a new creature in Christ?
I
am fully aware, by first-hand experience, of the difficulty
involved with one who learns that baptism is “for the
remission of sins” (Acts 2:38), then, post-dates his
understanding to the ripe-old-age of 8, when he was baptized by
a local Baptist pastor. The easiest solution might be to say,
“You were not baptized scripturally because a Baptist preacher
baptized you,” but that means one becomes committed to a
Catholic-like concept; that is, certain acts are valid only if
performed by the church. The nature of truth is such that a man
can discover it and obey it without knowledge of other
Christians. Consequently, being washed by the blood of Christ in
baptism is not dependent upon the status of the baptizer but
upon the heart and understanding of the obeyer.
I,
personally, have never met a man, who was taught denominational
doctrine, confessed denominational error, and was baptized
scripturally. But the IMMERSER was never the problem with his
baptism. I believe it logical that Christians are those
interested in and involved in scriptural teaching and immersing
— I am not advocating a different practice. It’s the
scriptural concept we must keep straight.
- - Jim R. Everett
[Previous
Article] [Next
Article]
|
