252. Baptists vs. Catholics on immersion
252. BAPTISTS VS. CATHOLICS ON IMMERSION
Why do Baptists insist on total immersion as the only valid form of Baptism and why do Catholics and most other Christians disagree?
Whether immersion in water is necessary for Baptism?
On the contrary, It is written (Heb 10:22): Let us draw near with a true heart in fullness of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with clean water.
I answer that, In the sacrament of Baptism water is put to the use of a washing of the body, whereby to signify the inward washing away of sins. Now washing may be done with water not only by immersion but also by sprinkling or pouring. And therefore, although it is safer to baptize by immersion because this is the more ordinary fashion, yet Baptism can be conferred by sprinkling or also by pouring, according to Ezechial 36:25: I will pour upon you clean water, as also Blessed Lawrence is related to have baptized. And this especially in cases of urgency, either because there is a great number to be baptized, as was clearly the case in Acts 2 and 4, where we read that on one day three thousand believed and on another five thousand; or through there being but a small supply of water, or through feebleness of the minister, who cannot hold up the candidate for Baptism; or through feebleness of the candidate, whose life might be endangered by immersion. We must therefore conclude that immersion is not necessary for Baptism (III,66,7).
One answer to the question is that Baptists concentrate merely on the symbolic sign of Baptism and do not believe that it communicates actual sacramental grace—in other words, to them it is only a symbol—and therefore they are more sensitive to and “picky about” the symbol, since it is all they’ve got. (This is, of course, an answer St. Thomas could not have given simply because there were no Baptists in his day, nor any other kind of Protestant.) It’s the same reason why most Protestants know the Bible better than most Catholics do and have better sermons: it’s pretty much all they’ve got, so they concentrate on it and do it really well. (God loves them and gives them great gifts through the relatively few doors they leave open to Him.) Above all, they concentrate on one’s individual, subjective “personal relationship with Jesus” because they suspect or minimize the objective and visible Church. Too bad they tend to think it’s either / or rather than both / and, but there is much there, in what is positive rather than negative in them, for Catholics to admire and emulate.
Even St. Thomas admits that the “Baptist” way of baptizing, total immersion, is “safer,” i.e., more perfect. It was also “more ordinary” even in his day, at least for adult converts. But Mother Church, like any practical and compassionate human mother, is as “liberal” and “tolerant” and “pluralistic” and “practical” as she can be with her children, without sacrificing anything substantial or necessary; and therefore she allows sprinkling or pouring, since it signifies the same thing: the washing away of sin.
Her rule has always been the one said to have been formulated by St. Augustine: “In essentials, unity; in inessentials, diversity; in all things, charity.” This is also a good principle for parents, rulers in government, and leaders in business, especially if no one of its three principles is sacrificed for the sake of maintaining either of the other two.