# Morton Smith's reference to PCUS 1965 declaration on immersion



## SRoper (Mar 20, 2011)

In Morton Smith's How is the Gold Become Dim!, he says, "the Assembly further declared that immersion was proper, contrary to the Confession of Faith (1965)." I found it interesting that he lists this among the erroneous declarations that the PCUS had made. What exactly was decided, and why was this controversial?

I should clarify that I am referring to the message by Dr. Smith that I linked to and not the book by the same name.


----------



## jwithnell (Mar 20, 2011)

It's been years since I've read Gold, but here's a plausible answer: the PCUS was largely surrounded by credo-baptists and some churches may have been following a more Baptistic practice?


----------



## Wayne (Mar 20, 2011)

In 1894 the PCUS recognized baptisms by immersion as valid, but that wasn't the issue.

Rather, it was the recognition of immersion as a valid mode.

I'll put up some original sources tomorrow. More than I can type on my wife's little netbook tonight.


----------



## Wayne (Mar 21, 2011)

Scott: 

Here is a summary of PCUS action on that topic, from 1872 top 1965 [citing from _The Assembly's Digest_ (1966):



> *2. May a Presbyterian Minister baptize by immersion?*
> 
> *1872, p. 167. *[In answer to an overture the following was adopted:]
> 
> ...


----------



## SRoper (Mar 21, 2011)

Thanks, Wayne! This raises a lot of questions in my mind. I've always wondered what exactly was meant by "Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but baptism is rightly administered by pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person." I see I'm not the only one. You have provided some of the history behind the interpretation of this section. I'm curious what the original intention of the Assembly was.


----------

