As we noted last week, baptism is a means God uses to bring about the salvation of his church (1 Pet. 3:21), even though regeneration and the benefits of salvation are not necessarily tied to the moment of baptism. But how is baptism to be done? Is there a specific formula that must be followed in order for it to be valid? Usually when questions like this are raised the interlocutor has in mind the mode of baptism.

It is a much better approach to recognize that God is the one doing the baptizing

Historically the church has recognized immersion, sprinkling, and pouring as valid modes of baptism. Because we are Christians who recognize that the church did not start with us and at the same time value and wish to emphasize the catholicity (universal nature) of our faith, so do we. As you are probably aware, there are those who think that immersion is the only proper mode of baptism. In fact, these churches go so far as to teach that baptism is not valid if not done by immersion. The irony here is thick for several reasons. Consider a couple. Historically the churches that insist on baptism by immersion also insist that baptism doesn’t do anything except offer the person being baptized a platform to show that they have been raised to newness of life. Here is where it gets strange. Even though we are told baptism doesn’t do anything, there is something strangely sacramental in insisting that baptism needs to be done in the “right” way. More troubling, though, in insisting upon baptism by immersion as the only valid form of baptism, these churches are in effect condemning the majority of Christians and Christian churches to hell because throughout the church history and today the majority of Christians baptize by either sprinkling or pouring. I find the position of baptism by immersion and all else doesn’t count to be one of the most offensive teachings I have come across.

Part of the problem stems from the word “to baptize.” It is usually suggested the word baptizo and its related forms means to immerse. But that is not the case. It means to baptize. Sometimes that is done with washings, as was the case with the couches and other things that were baptized (English translates it wash) in Mark 7:1-5.

It is a much better approach to follow the wisdom and charity of Calvin who said,

But whether a person being baptized should be wholly immersed, and whether thrice or once, whether he should only be sprinkled with poured water—these details are of no importance, but ought to be optional to churches according to the diversity of countries.Institutes, 4.15.19

Further, it is a much better approach to recognize that God is the one doing the baptizing and that the amount of water is not what is important.

Finally, it is most important to preserve the symbolism that when someone is baptized they are being baptized into the church. Therefore, baptism should only take place when the church is gathered corporately. To that end we would say that sprinkling with the whole church present is far superior to immersion in a backyard pool with only a few. Again, it has become strangely sacrament that those who insist on immersion would do so to the neglect of the main things symbolized—baptized into the church.

Truly no amount of water could fix our problem. Our only hope is that God might make good on the promises he gave to us at our baptisms.