Categories: just-life
Date: 18 April 2006 18:19:24
Mine was ok, stayed up and headed to Three Cliffs Bay for sunrise, which wasn't very obvious with the cloud cover, but still very cool. And with all the bird song even noiser than outside my house in the middle of the city!! I then attended the 8 O'clock Communion service and was surprised at the number of peopel there, more than double the usual attendance of seventeenish!!!! Then I braved the 9.30, them of the music-group only to discover that there was no music-group this week, all music by the organ. That was nice. Then home to listen to the Pope on tv.... during which I dozed off........zzzzzzzzzzz.........
So a good Easter then!!!
Then on Monday (yesterday) I got my hands on The Times to see what the Pope had said, as well as Dr Rowan Williams, AB of Canterbury, only to see a picture of Dr John Sentamu (AB of York) baptising someone. According to The Times (and who are we to argue with them) he was breaking CoE tradition by doing an immersion baptism in an outdoor heated pool by St Michael-le-Belfry (York).
However, it doesn't say which part is breaking tradition. There could be a number of possible points I suppose;
1) baptising someone on Easter Day (seems like a good time to do it to me)
2) an immersion baptism (though the Anglican Church does them if you want it)
3) baptising in a pool
4) using a heated pool
5) being outside the church.
Now I'm going to take a random stab in the dark and guess that the tradition that they are talking about is the immersion baptism. This is of course wrong. The Anglican Church has a long tradition of allowing either splashy baptism or immersion baptism, whatever the person being baptised would like. And while most churches might not have a dedicated baptismal tank there are (as Dr John has shown) ways around that. Such as going to a church that has got one.
This is all to do with the grand old argument that ultimatly comes down to infant baptism/believers' baptism. I personally do not see the problem with infant baptism followed by confirmation. This is the route that I took and I feel that I am just as Christian as the next person. In fact, I feel that either way is perfectly valid and anyone that says it isn't is missing the point entirely.
A bit like the guy who wrote the caption for The Times!!!! ;o)
Actually, this reminds me of a joke that I was once told by a welknown URC minister about two men, one a backer of the Believers' Baptism, and another one in favour of the Splashy-Splashy Baptism..........
SSB - So, if I was only in the water up to my ankles, would that count??
BB - No no. It was to be the whole body going under, or it doesn't count!!
SSB - Well, how about up to my waist, that's half of me, does that not count??
BB - You're not listening to me, all the body, all of it has to be under.
SSB - So, if I was up to my neck it wouldn't count as a baptism then....??
BB - That's right!!!
SSB - So it really is only the head that's important.....