The blessed self forgetfulness of joining the church

On the Think Biblically podcast Scott Rae and Sean McDowell were answering listener questions, and one of them had to do with communion and baptism. Basically do you need to be baptized in order to take communion? Dr Rae is a great philosopher, excellent teacher and an even better man. In some ways his classes at Biola and Talbot were the most important ones I took. But I felt myself becoming embarrassed by some of what he said in this discussion.

Sean and Scott both agreed that to fence the table based on whether or not someone was baptized was a red flag for a church, unless it was done in a very “hey we’re just doing this because” kind of way. In other words if you hold to the traditional view that the lords supper is reserved for the baptized, a view held to by Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, basically everybody, that’s a red flag. And Scott said, with no apologies, that he was not baptized until he was a pastoral intern. And then asked a rhetorical question “so I was a Christian for 8 years before I was baptized? Are you saying I shouldn’t have received the lords supper that whole time?”

No I’m saying, along with the saints that came before me, you should’ve been baptized when you came to faith, then been received at Jesus’ table. That’s been a fundamental part of the faith for a long time. I understand it hasn’t always been enforced, but my guess is that lack of enforcement is a relatively recent phenomenon. Follow the Ethiopian Eunuch and get baptized ASAP. Baptism matters and the table of Our Lord matters. Why would you approach it without taking the first step of obedience in the Christian life? Why would you delay baptism? The great commission is a mission that explicitly involves baptism.

This discussion seemed utterly absurd to me. I realized that the reason this discussion seemed so silly was that I have changed a lot in the last fifteen or so years. Going from low church Baptist roots to high church, basically Anglo Catholic is quite a change. And I don’t have one specific Bible verse that backs up my position about baptism prior to communion, but I don’t feel the need to proof text this position, because it isn’t my position, it’s the church’s position. I have given up private judgment. Not entirely, I’m Catholic and Protestant, we Anglicans are very free to come to all kinds of theological conclusions, but some things are also pretty straightforward and this is one of them.

I would hesitate to say it with absolute certainty but to me this seems to be a part of Mere Christianity. It’s one of those things the church pretty much agrees on and as far as I can tell always has (I could be wrong, I’m no expert) and to disagree with this there needs to be an argument. Dissenting from this view needs scriptural warrant. I think that’s how Anglicans should generally treat being reformed and Catholic, there’s nothing wrong with traditions that come from the church unless the scripture contradicts them. It’s pruning a healthy tree as opposed to planting a new one.

This method of theology seems to be much more humble and pre modern than what happens in the typical bapticostal church where the faith pretty much has to be reconstructed with every generation. That has made the church more modern not more biblical. The scriptures themselves present the church as an active source of knowledge, life, and authority. A church without the possibility of reform is dangerous, but probably not as dangerous as a church that is constantly reforming. In some sense that is a church less church, because how could you ever identify it? How could you find it? How could you know it was the church if everything was constantly a private judgement negotiation with Scripture? It is not an accident that transgender ideology has come about in our time. The dominant forms of American Christianity are essentially trans church because they are constantly seeking to be above the church as it has existed on an endless quest for perfect Bible interpretation.

There was a real joy that I felt welling up inside me as I came to understand that my mind was being submitted to the activity of the Holy Spirit in the traditions of the church. Because giving up a measure of private judgment actually leads to freedom. I don’t have to create my own theology, I submit to what came before me. Scripture is part of that tradition as well and so is wrestling with scripture, that is how we reform, but practices like emphasizing the salvific and sacramental nature of baptism and restricting the holy Eucharist to those who have entered the body of Christ through water and the Spirit, these are holy and glorious traditions.

Giving up our need to form private opinions is a path to wonderful freedom. To delicious self forgetfulness. Resting on the Spirit and the church is such a great blessing. Fully embracing Anglicanism has been a continual process of coming home for me. Every Sunday I feel like I’m following Aslan further up and further in, and escaping this post modern theological wasteland.

I deeply respect Dr Rae and Sean and appreciate the work they do, but I think they’re utterly wrong about this and they need a better argument. Don’t delay! Run to the waters of baptism and declare your allegiance to Jesus and against the powers of darkness! Then run to the Eucharist to feast upon the flesh and blood of our Lord as members of the new covenant.