Sprinkling from above

I found Jeff Meyers' blog a few months back via the Presbyteer's blogroll, and I've found his writing to be rather thought provoking. In the last three weeks, Jeff has written about everything from Harry Potter to the Fall of Satan to Jonathan Edwards' "trinitarian speculation" on why the world was created.

As usual, his latest post got me thinking. Jeff maintains that infant baptism is "scandalous" among us Americans because of our one-man, one-vote mentality and our celebration of our individualistic freedoms. When we baptize our babies, God puts his mark on helpless, incapable creatures and claims them as his, without even a hint of consent from them or any respect for their rights as individuals. Jeff writes, "It is not a confession of what man has done or of the faith someone possess or of the experience that someone may have had. Infant Baptism is all about God in his Sovereign freedom acting upon a passive infant…. [Salvation] comes from above, like the sprinkling."

That last line caught my attention. Does the method of baptism matter? I would say that, at the very least, the method has a great influence on the message that is communicated through baptism. Or, who it is that is doing the speaking.

The believer baptist camp depends on the method (i.e. immersion) of baptism for much of its derivative meaning. Baptism becomes an outward symbol of an inward experience that has already taken place, initiated by the convert. He descends into the water as a sign of being buried with Christ, and then is brought out of the water as a symbol of being raised to newness of life with Jesus. By performing this ritual, the convert confirms publicly that he has agreed to be saved. There may be a conversation here between him and God, but the convert is the one speaking the loudest, declaring "I belong to God" because of what I've already brought to the table (i.e. faith).

When water is sprinkled on the head of an infant, the child is passive. The water is poured from above, onto the child's head. The baby goes nowhere and does nothing. He contributes nothing to the ritual, nor does he even consent to it. It is God who speaks, saying "This one is mine" as he places his mark on the child. For years to come we will hope and expect to see the child exhibit real and vibrant faith, but it is very clear who has initiated this relationship, and it isn't the baby.

As I've said before, infant baptism isn't just about baptism. There are several foundational questions we have to get right before we can get the right answer about who to baptize. The question, then, is this; do we initiate our own salvation by producing saving faith, which makes Christ's death efficacious in our lives, that we would be raised with him? If so, baptism by immersion makes perfect sense. Or, do we receive the grace of God even when we are unable to choose to accept it for ourselves, bringing nothing to the table from within ourselves? If this is the case, then sprinkling from above makes perfect sense and gives God the glory as the one who speaks through baptism.