The Baptismal Font in the church

   

 Recently, there appeared in the Narthex of our church a new "furnishing".  It is not such a large furnishing, although it is decidedly weighty.  It appears to be constructed of stone, marble by appearance, and is a bowl-shaped form on a pedestal.  It intrigued me because as I have traveled and visited some very old places of worship (in England, so in saying old I am reaching back 1,000 years or more), I have observed a similar object.  I have learned the object is a "Baptismal Font", and it kind of intrigued me as to what is the history of the Font and why is it placed in the entrance way (or as we say, the Narthex).

In the church, baptism is one of the two sacraments we observe (along with Holy Communion),  In a sacrament, God uses common elements -- in this case water -- as a means of divine grace.  Baptism is administered by the church as the Body of Christ.  It is an act of God through the grace of Jesus Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit.

So what is this piece of furniture, this Baptismal Font and why is it here?  To discover the answer to that involves a brief journey back into Christian history.  Some of the oldest baptismal fonts to be discovered are actually in the catacombs of Rome.  When Christians were being persecuted by the government, outdoor public baptisms became dangerous.  So the early church in Rome, in order to protect its members, met in secret and these secret meetings required private practices for the rituals of the church.  Some of the baptisteries were shallow reservoirs scooped out to collect natural spring water.

Baptismal Font in Wesley's
Chapel, London

As Christianity gained wider acceptance, baptisms returned to the public eye.  Fast forward 1,000 years and baptismal fonts were moved outside the actual church itself, sometimes to separate buildings called a baptistery. In some places such as Florence, only people already baptized into the church were allowed inside a great cathedral. As a result, baptisms occurred outside or in the baptistery.  Time moves forward and we see the baptismal font begin to appear inside the church, at first in the back where baptisms still occurred before "entering the church".  We now see many churches with baptismal fonts brought to the front of the church as part of the platform area of worship.

So today at our church, we have two baptismal fonts.  The stone one at the back as we step into the

church and the one near at the front that we use when we conduct baptisms.  Recently, I took a class in leading worship.  As a part of the class. our instructor presented us with an interesting greeting.  As we stepped into the class, she had prepared a bowl of water and pointing to it said, "Remember your baptism and give thanks to God."  With that, she indicated we were to dip our fingers into the bowl.

Baptismal Font of Wesley's Chapel.  Notice the chains of
bondage broken by the cross on the inner stone.

This isn't a new practice, for I was instantly reminded of watching Roman Catholics enter the sanctuary for worship where they would dip their fingers into a baptistery font and then make the sign of the cross.  Only recently with pastor Adlene Kufarimai during that worship class, did this practice begin to make sense.

Of our two sacraments, baptism in a singular event.  Holy Communion we observe oat least monthly (in our church) and on other certain occasions.  While we may observe and in some situations have a part in the baptism ceremony for another fellow believer, baptism in the life of a Christian is s singular event.  However, much like our birth into this moral world, we would be foolish to never recall our baptism in the body of Christ.  St. Augustine of Hippo puts baptism into perspective when in an Easter address he said:

Such is the power of this sacrament: it is a sacrament of new life which begins here and now with the forgiveness of all past sins, and will be brought to completion in the resurrection of the dead. You have been buried with Christ by baptism into death in order that, as Christ has risen from the dead, you also may walk in newness of life.

Called to Relationship

I will begin by saying as a layman, I affirm the statements in the BoD concerning the expression of human sexuality. So, allow me to set up a scenario that until recently has troubled me.

A person begins attending church. They attend for a number of weeks truly appear to be seeking a restored relationship with God and demonstrate a truly penitent heart. They then have some discussions with leadership. They then introduce their partner -- a person of the same sex. By all indications they are moving in a trajectory that would typically lead to a deeper commitment within the community of faith. What is the reaction when this person requests to join the church? It seems easy to say that church membership could not be extended to a person who is living a lifestyle incompatible with Christian teaching and by extension, Christian living? It seems in this case we should encourage a person to live a life that is in agreement with the teaching of Christ in marriage being between a man and a woman and that the two will become one flesh.

What bothered me for some time in this scenario is that essentially two people who have committed to one another are being asked to put aside an element of that commitment, a relationship is being broken. This seems to be a steep price to pay in breaking one relationship to repair another. However... as those seeking to repair our relationship with our creator we are in fact setting back to the one true relationship to which we created to fulfill. All other relationships are in fact secondary to our personal relationship with God.

 But what about that other relationship we are asked? As Christians, we are told that we must deny ourselves, take up our cross and follow Jesus. This denial of self applies to each of us. For the adulterer, for the liar, for the thief, for the self absorbed, for the manipulator, for the self abuser -- each of us is called to deny ourselves. This is not a unique requirement for the homosexual, it is in fact the requirement of all who would follow Christ. Does it come with a price -- doesn't any thing of value come at some price? We were bought with a price, a price that was impossibly high for us to pay. Let us not cheapen grace by assuming that we can get by without any personal sacrifice.

 I would also argue that this applies in the case of abortion. I have heard many who would desire to live after Christ say that abortion is a personal right of women. I would only offer that if you are talking about personal rights, you are not talking about a full commitment to the call of Christ. If you think you have a right to your own body, then you are denying the full sacrifice of Christ. I read a quote recently by RC Sproul Jr. that goes, "If the lesson you get from Jesus hanging with sinners is you should hang more with sinners, you're confused on who you are in the story."  This seems to apply in this case, you can't take up the mantle of Christ as in this quote one day to hang with sinners and in the next declare your own rights.  You either love under the rule of Christ or not.  It isn't a smorgasbord where we get to pick what feels comfortable and we leave what causes discomfort.  Christ could have skipped ahead to the resurrection but he chose to submit to the fullness of sacrifice for our us.  Let's not cheapen grace by thinking we can help ourselves to the pleasure and none of the pain.

Perhaps the person in the scenario will be called to forgo a life of sexual fulfillment if they can never overcome same sex attraction. But to say that to have true love requires sexual intimacy is then to deny an intimate relationship with God. The height of love will never be demonstrated in a sexual relationship, to demand it must be is to obscure the gospel and to make our relationship with God as something other than the ultimate calling on our life.

I will close by quoting someone else, I wish I knew who it was -- "I am not called to heterosexuality, I am called to holiness."