The Little Friar

Today is the feast of the Baptism of Jesus.  It's a feast that holds great meaning for me, mainly due to the interpretation given to the Baptism of Jesus by St Cyril of Alexandria. Cyril is not exactly en vogue in the English speaking world, and hasn't been since the 19th century when Charles Kingsley's historical novel Hypatia, or New Foes with an Old Face laid the heinous death of the famous female philosopher, Hypatia, at the feet of Cyril of Alexandria.  Ever wonder why you don't find Cyril in the Nicene/Post Nicene Fathers collection of texts?  Many, myself included, think it is because of Kingsley's novel (an idea I picked up at Duke from David Steinmetz).  And negative depictions of Cyril continue. Cyril is also unpopular because of the perception that political concerns were primarily behind his vociferous attacks on Nestorius; a perception that, in my opinion, Henry Chadwick definitively debunked in 1951, but the perception continues unabated. The ...

Romans 6 repeatedly blows my mind. "Surely you know that when were baptized into union with Christ Jesus, we were baptized into union with his death.  By our baptism, then, we were buried with him and shared his death" (6.3-4a). Right there it is.  In the Bible.  I'm not making it up.  To be baptized with Jesus Christ is to die.  It's to die a certain kind of death -- death with Christ .  And it's to be buried a certain kind of burial -- buried with Christ .  But if that is so, it means that, appearances notwithstanding, in baptism our deaths are now behind us.  Which, in turn, means, that we are released from our obsession with death, our fear of death, our denial of death, all of which speaks of our enslavement to death -- from which baptism frees us.  For not only is death now behind us, above all life is now ahead of us.  But again, a very specific kind of life:  It is life in Christ .   For as Paul continues:...

This past weekend, I attended an event from one of those quite-popular Christian teen rallies.  The music from City Harmonic was amazing.  I'm not normally a fan of contemporary Christian music, because so much of it contains lyrics that tend to be emotional more than faithful.  But not City Harmonic. It was the preaching that left me jarred, though. There are lots of Baptists and evangelicals in east Tennessee.  Because of that, I've grown accustomed to attending religious events and listening to the standard evangelical appeal to respond to the Gospel.  Specifically, if you want to respond to Jesus, you're expected to pray for forgiveness, invite Jesus into your heart as your Lord and Savior, and prepare for a life with him in heaven.  There seems to be a nearly-obligatory question:  "If you died tonight, do you know beyond a shadow of a doubt whether you'd go to heaven?" And that question nearly always -- no, if I'm honest, it always ! -...

Because I live in an area with lots of evangelicals, I find myself hearing often that all it takes to being a Christian is "accepting Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior", and this primarily through means of praying "the sinner's prayer". I  always find this language jarring.  Especially from conservative and evangelical Christians who value the Bible so highly.   Because where, ever, in the whole of the Bible does anyone, ever, ask someone to say a prayer "accepting Jesus into your heart"?  It's just simply not there.  So why do Bible-thumping people keep saying it? I've even heard people speak of "grace alone" in the same sentence with "accepting Jesus into your heart".  To my thinking this is where the whole idea should fall apart in evangelical circles.  Is not praying a prayer and receiving Jesus a kind of a saving work?  Any "have to's" should raise the red flag of a works gospel.  Too technical?  Mayb...

I was having another dinner-table conversation about baptism and ministry the other day.  The conversation turned, in short order, to that question I dread answering, "What do you think about baptism?" I dread answering it, only because my answer is quite unpopular.  It's  always seemed to me that evangelicals have a very take-it-or-leave-it approach to baptism.  Indeed, so much so that when we preach the gospel the message is reduced to "repent and believe the gospel" and baptism doesn't so much as get a word in edge-wise.  Literally.  I suspect that the reason is that evangelicalism has always been transdenominational and evangelicals from different denoiminations have differing views on whether babies can be baptized.  We've decided to set aside such issues for the sake of evangelical unity.  As a result you will never hear the likes of Billy Graham say, in NT fashion, "Believe and be baptized". But because we've removed baptism from our...

Baptism is  a coming into the Body of Christ, in which we become members of one another and of Christ -- it is about  who  we are in Christ, and  whose we  are:  God's own.  In baptism we are gathered ... and sent forth, in the ministry that is God's own ministry of transformation, reconciliation, healing and salvation of the world.  So, baptism is not just about identity and belonging, it's also about being sent in mission and ministry.  That's why I insist that baptism, not ordination, is the foundation for speaking about ministry.  Baptism is the sign of new life in Christ.  Baptism unites Christ with his people.  That union is both individual and corporate.  Christians are, it's true, baptized one by one, but to be a Christian is to be part of a new creation which rises from the dark waters of Christ's death into the dawn of his risen life.  Christians are not just baptized individuals; they are a new humanit...

A friend (and former student) has been in the process of standing for examination of his fitness for ordination and "probationary membership" as an elder in The United Methodist Church.  We sat and talked Sunday night as he prepared to meet with his examiners, and most of our conversation was dominated by talk about sacramental theology -- especially infant baptism.    Truth be told, it's always been a close run thing what I've thought about infant baptism.  For nearly the longest time, I've had problems affirming the baptism of babies with any gusto.  It's always been through guarded and grated teeth.   Episcopalians baptize infants, of course.  But I've hardly been thoroughly convinced.  As obedience to my church and bishop, I've baptized plenty of small ones.  But if I'm honest with the world and myself, that's sometimes been a hard thing to do.  Biblically, it's notoriously difficult to justify infant baptism.  There are a few b...