spes clara

Reading and correctly interpreting the Bible isn’t always easy. There are complex historical, social, and theological ideas which are presented to us across an array of literary genres, from multiple authors writing in different contexts. However, there are things the Bible says which are easy to identify without much effort. For example, the Bible claims there is a supreme supernatural being called “God”. That’s easy. It’s easy to see that the Bible talks a lot about an ancient geo-political entity called “Israel”. Let’s not forget the well-known teaching that Jesus of Nazareth died by crucifixion and was raised to life. That’s easy. Whether you believe those things or not, it doesn’t take a great scholar to find certain key ideas clearly presented in the Bible.

But the more you read and try to understand everything the Bible says, the deeper the water goes. Consequently, there are many areas of ongoing debate, discussion, and strong disagreement. One such area is in relation to the practice of baptism (but you already knew that, right?). Essentially, baptism is a ritual in which water is placed on a person, or where they are submerged under water. The meaning and mode of this water rite is one of the most hotly debated topics when trying to understand what the Bible is teaching.

There are numerous key principles which, when applied consistently, offer a way of arriving at a faithful way of understanding what the Bible is saying. After all, if there is one divine mind behind the inspired texts of the Bible, then that mind is trying to tell us something. It must be possible to understand – in most cases – what that thing is. I will try to outline some of these hermeneutical principles at another time. But there is one principle which is often used when thinking about baptism which is often implied, but rarely helpful. I’m going to call it (using a fancy Latin phrase), in totidem verbis. The phrase means “in just so many words,” or, “in these very words.” Often those who oppose the legitimacy of infant baptism (known as paedobaptism) will invoke the in totidem verbis principle. The thinking goes something like this: “If you can’t show me where the words of the New Testament clearly state that infant baptism is legitimate or show me an explicit example of infant baptism being performed, then it is not a biblical doctrine or practice.” In other words, “I want to see an infant baptism, or a command to baptize infants, in just so many words.” Following this principle, we’d need to open the New Testament as see something like this: “So Peter blessed those in his household, and everyone including their babies were baptized.” Or, “I, Paul, command you to baptize those who come to faith in Christ, along with their little children – this is my practice in all the churches.”

In one sense, in totidem verbis is an excellent principle to use when interpreting the Bible. I mean, we use this principle when we determine the doctrine of the virgin birth of Jesus, the work of the Holy Spirit, and the mission of the church. We know true things about these, because we can find these truths “in just so many words.” It’s right there, plain as day. And that’s how some view baptism in the New Testament. We find numerous explicit examples of believing adults being baptized, but we don’t find explicit examples of infant baptisms. Following only the “very words” of the New Testament, the credobaptists win the day. Case closed.

But not so fast.

There are many reasons to exercise caution when using this otherwise sensible principle. In the next post I’d like to offer some areas for further reflection in relation to this. Watch this space.