Phil D.
ὁ βαπτιστὴς
There just hasn't been enough action or controversy lately here on the PB, so it's time for another baptism thread...
Awhile ago I was told by a friend that “you Baptists” are the only ones that insist the word baptizō always comprehends an “immersion.” When I responded that, historically, natively Greek-speaking churches have as well (as actually have some respected non-Baptist Protestants), he expressed uncertainty that even that was the case. So... over time I have in fact come across quite a few such examples, some of which I had catalogued, and then recollected and shared with this friend, and which I thought might also be of interest to some here.
(Note: EO churches are notoriously obstinate and legalistic in many things, and this attitude is very apparent in their doctrine of baptism. So for the record, I do not agree with all of the dire pronouncements and strict sentiments as expressed in some of these citations. But I do find it an interesting historical and philological matter to ponder.)
Seemingly the most ecclesiastically authoritative declaration on the meaning of baptizō is found in an official statement on baptism issued by an Orthodox synod held in Constantinople, in 1829:
Constantine Oikonomos (1780–1857), a prominent Greek Orthodox theologian, gave this brief synopsis of the philological development and traits of baptizō.
Oikonomos also gave a number of reasons why he deemed it subversive to claim that pouring conveys the concept of a burial (per Rom. 6:4) just as well as immersion does, one of which was:
Not too surprisingly, Orthodox credo also maintains that the modal trait of immersion necessarily remains an intrinsic part of the Christianized noun baptisma. This point was intensely argued by the leading Orthodox theologian of the 18th century, Eustratios Argentis (1687–1757).
The one Orthodox community that does indiscriminately use pouring is the Russian Orthodox Church. The introduction of pouring in the 16th Century in some other northern European churches also made its way into the neighboring Ukrainian region during the same period. At first there was stiff resistance to this “innovation” by the Muscovite patriarchy. But such practice became normalized in many areas after the reforming bishop Theophan (or, Feofan) Prokopovich (1681–1737), a native Kievite, staunchly defended it,* and succeeded in his efforts to have the Russian patriarchy abolished in the early 18th Century.
Needless to say, this modal evolution was strongly opposed by the southern Orthodox churches. A good example of this is seen in the writings of the Greek Orthodox scholar Theoklitos Pharmakidis (1784–1860), a professor of theology and philosophy at the University of Athens, who also authored a multi-volume textbook on the Greek language.** Pharmakidis additionally served as General Secretary of the Greek Orthodox Church, during which tenure he responded to some supporters of Theophan’s arguments and practice, and again addressed the meaning of baptizō and baptisma:
Awhile ago I was told by a friend that “you Baptists” are the only ones that insist the word baptizō always comprehends an “immersion.” When I responded that, historically, natively Greek-speaking churches have as well (as actually have some respected non-Baptist Protestants), he expressed uncertainty that even that was the case. So... over time I have in fact come across quite a few such examples, some of which I had catalogued, and then recollected and shared with this friend, and which I thought might also be of interest to some here.
(Note: EO churches are notoriously obstinate and legalistic in many things, and this attitude is very apparent in their doctrine of baptism. So for the record, I do not agree with all of the dire pronouncements and strict sentiments as expressed in some of these citations. But I do find it an interesting historical and philological matter to ponder.)
________________________________________________________
Seemingly the most ecclesiastically authoritative declaration on the meaning of baptizō is found in an official statement on baptism issued by an Orthodox synod held in Constantinople, in 1829:
‘Baptizing them,’ the Lord said, not ‘sprinkling on them’ or ‘pouring over them.’ The principle meaning and essence of the verb baptizō is established—and it signifies nothing else—hence, those who are thrust into the water are baptized; that is, in more common speech, those who are dipped, being entirely covered in the water. ...
† Agathangelos [d. 1832], by the mercy of God Archbishop of Constantinople–New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch, so declares;
† The Patriarch of Jerusalem, Athanasius [V; d. 1844], so declares.
Βαπτίζοντας αυτούς είπεν ο Κύριος ουχί επριραντίζοντες η επιχέοντες. Η γάρ κυρίως σημασία καιn έννοια του ρήματος Βαπτίζω ουδέν άλλον σημαίνουσα εστίν, ειμή εμβάλλειν τοίς ύδασι το βαπτιζόμενον και κοινότερον ειπείν, βουτών αυτό καλύπτειν ολόκληρον εν τοις ύδασι. …
† Αγαθάγγελος ελέω θεού Αρχιεπίσκοπος Κωνσταντινουπόλεως Νέας Ρώμης Οικουμενικός Πατριάρχης αποφαίνεται. † Ο Πατριάρχης Ιεροσολύμων Αθανάσιος αποφαίνεται.
[Σχετικά με την Τελετή του Μυστηρίου του Βαπτίσματος {Concerning the Rite of the Sacrament of Baptism]} Ioanne Baptista Martin, R. P. Ludovico Petit, eds., Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et Amplissima Collectio cuius Johannes Dominicus Mansi, (Parisiis: Expensis Huberti Welter, Bibliopolae, 1909), 40:142.]
Constantine Oikonomos (1780–1857), a prominent Greek Orthodox theologian, gave this brief synopsis of the philological development and traits of baptizō.
Here we note the following: 1) The word baptizō comes from baptō (as does búptō, and the now more common bouttō, buptō, and bupteō), and it is also related to bathos, buthos and buthizō; hence, it first and foremost indicates a sinking; plunging into water (or any liquid); dipping entirely into water; going underwater.
Πρὸς ταῦτα σημειοῦμεν τὰ ἑξής. 1) Τὸ βαπτίζω ἐκ τοῦ βάπτω (καὶ αἰολεκ. βύπτω, ἐξ οὖ καὶ τὸ τῆς συνηθείας βουττῶ, ἐκ τοῦ βυπτῶ, βυπτέω) συγγενὲς ἐστι τοῦ βάθος, βύθος, βυθίζω, καὶ πρώτην καὶ κυρίαν ἔχει σημασίαν τοῦ βυθίζειν, καταδύειν εἰς ὕδωρ (καὶ ἁπλῶς εἰς ὑγρὸν), ὅλοντι ἐμβάπτειν εἰς ὕδωρ, ὑποβρύχιον ποιεῖν.
[Κωνσταντίνος Οικονόμος, Τα σωζόμενα Εκκλησιαστικά συγγράμματα Κωνσταντίνου Πρεσβυτέρου και Οικονόμου του εξ Οικονόμων {The Extant Ecclesiastical Writings of Constantine the Elder, Overseer of the Stewards}, (Αθήνησι: Σοφοκλέους Κ. του εξ Οικονόμων,1862), 1:402.]
Oikonomos also gave a number of reasons why he deemed it subversive to claim that pouring conveys the concept of a burial (per Rom. 6:4) just as well as immersion does, one of which was:
Because doing so deceptively denies the intrinsic meaning of baptizō. It is one thing to baptize, and quite another to pour out, viz. to plunge beneath the water vs. moistening with water while standing on dry ground.
Διότι καταψεύδεται καὶ αὐτῆς τῆς κυρίας σημασίας τοῦ βαπτίζω. ʹΆλλο τὸ βαπτίζειν, καὶ ἄλλο τὸ ἐπιχέειν, ώς καὶ τὸ καταδύειν ύποβρύχιον εἰς τὸ ὔδωρ διάφορον τοῦ ὔδατι ἐπιβρεχειν τὸν ἐπ' ἐδάφους ἑστῶτα. [Ibid, 1:482 fn.]
Not too surprisingly, Orthodox credo also maintains that the modal trait of immersion necessarily remains an intrinsic part of the Christianized noun baptisma. This point was intensely argued by the leading Orthodox theologian of the 18th century, Eustratios Argentis (1687–1757).
First of all, the very word and name baptism must be comprehended, since words come about as a means by which the hearer may discern things through reason. It is known by all that the word baptism carries the same meaning as the now more common boutēma, particularly as the latter pertains to dyeing, as in the action performed by the dyer. Baptizō is likewise taken from baptō. Even in Latin baptō is termed tingere, meaning to color, and the Latins themselves render baptizō as immergere, therein expressing submersion and complete inundation. Accordingly, baptō and baptizō each convey plunging something into a liquid, whereby it is buried in it. Consequently, the practice of the West does not correspond with the term baptism. They speak lies concerning the import of baptizō, and in so doing falsify the name baptism. Therefore, they are justly said to be unbaptized, upon the authority of the name baptism.
Πρώτον μέν πρέπει νά στοχασθώμεν τήν λέξιν, καί τό όνομα τού βαπτίσματος, αί γάρ λέξεις διά τούτο έπενοήθησαν, ίνα ό άκοίων διακρίνη διά τού λόγού τά πράγματα. γνωςόν δέ τοίς πάσιν έςίν, ότι ή λέξις άυτη βάπτισμα, δηλοί τό ίδιωτικώς λεγόμενον βούτημα, καί μάλιςα τήν πράξιν τού βαφέως, όταν βάπτη κανένα. άπό γάρ τού βάπτω παράγεται καί τό βαπτίζο. καί τό μέν βαπτειν Λατινισtί τίνγερε λέγεται, ό σημαίνει τό χρωματίζειν, τό δέ βαπτίζειν οί Λατίνοι ίμμέργερε λέγουσι, δηλοί δέ άυτοίς τό καταβαπτίζειν, καί έναποκλύζειν. έκάτερον δέ, τό, τε βαπτειν, καί τό βαπτίζειν διά καταδύσεως είς τό ύγρόν γίνεται, καί οίονεί διά τής έν τώ ύγρώ ταφής τού πράγματος. ηδέ τών δυτικών πράξις κατ' ούδένα τρόπον δυναται τό όνομα τέ βαπτίσματος, όθεν καί ψεύδονται λέγοντες βαπτίζειν, καί ψευδώνυμον άρα έςί τό κατ' άυτούς βάπτισμα. όθεν δικαίως λέγονταί άβάπτιςοι ώς πρός τήν δυναμιν τής όνομασίας τού βαπτίσματος.
['Ευστράτιος Αργέντης, Ἐγχειριδιον περι βαπτισματος· Καλουμενον Χειραγωγια Πλανωμενων {A Handbook on Baptism; A Summons to False Guides and the Wayward}, (Κωνσταντινουπόλει: Η Βρετανική βιβλιοθήκη, 1756), 7f.]
The standard index of Orthodox Canon Law was gathered by the Greek scholar Nicodemus the Hagiorite (1749–1809). Nicodemus also added an extensive commentary to this collection, which subsequently acquired the moniker, The Pedalion (The Rudder). The Patriarch of Constantinople, Neophytos VII (d. c.1803), deemed the work to be authoritative and ordered its publication, and it remains in widespread use today. In addition to how the usual Western practice relates to the term baptism, Nicodemus was most obstinate about the implication of its perceived failure to portray a death, burial and resurrection.Their ‘baptism’ belies the very name, for it is not really a baptism at all, but only a mere sprinkling. ...The Latin’s ‘rantism’ is absent an immersion and emersion, and as such is completely bereft of a type of the three-day death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord. This being the case, we must confess that it is void of all grace, and of sanctification, and of forgiveness of sins. Should the Latins insist that their sprinkling, when accompanied by an invocation of the Holy Trinity, does bestow sanctification and grace, let them learn that baptism is not consummated by invoking the Trinity alone. Rather, it is also necessary to show forth a type of the death, and burial, and resurrection of the Lord. For a simple belief in the Trinity is not enough to save the one being baptized, but a belief in the death of the Messiah is also requisite, and it is by means of both that a person is brought within reach of salvation and bliss.
Tὸ βάπτισμα αὐτῶν ψεύδεται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ. Kαὶ οὐχ ὅλως ἐστὶ βάπτισμα, ἀλλὰ ράντισμα μόνον ψιλόν. ...Tὸ λατινικὸν ράντισμα, τῶν καταδύσεων καὶ ἀναδύσεων ὂν ἔρημον, ἀκολούθως ἔρημον καὶ τοῦ τύπου τοῦ τριημερονυκτίου θανάτου καὶ τῆς ταφῆς καὶ Ἀναστάσεως τοῦ Kυρίου ὑπάρχει. Ἐκ δὲ τούτων, δῆλόν ἐστι καὶ ὁμολογούμενον, ὅτι καὶ ἔρημον πάσης χάριτός ἐστι καὶ ἁγιασμοῦ καὶ ἀφέσεως ἁμαρτιῶν. Eἰ δὲ οἱ Λατῖνοι ἀνθίστανται, ὅτι τὸ ἑαυτῶν ράντισμα διὰ τῶν ἐπικλήσεων τῆς ἁγίας Tριάδος παρεκτικόν ἐστιν ἁγιασμοῦ καὶ χάριτος, ἂς μάθωσιν, ὅτι δὲν τελειοῦται τὸ βάπτισμα διὰ μόνον τῶν τῆς Tριάδος ἐπικλήσεων, ἀλλὰ δεῖται ἀναγκαίως καὶ τοῦ τύπου τοῦ θανάτου καὶ τῆς ταφῆς καὶ ἀναστάσεως τοῦ Kυρίου. Ἐπειδὴ οὔτε μόνη ἡ εἰς τὴν Tριάδα πίστις σῴζει τὸν βαπτιζόμενον, ἀλλὰ σὺν αὐτῇ ἀναγκαία ὑπάρχει καὶ ἡ εἰς τὸν θάνατον τοῦ Mεσσίου πίστις καὶ οὕτω δι᾽ ἀμφοτέρων ἐντὸς τῆς σωτηρίας καὶ μακαριότητος γίνεται οὗτος.
[Nικοδήμου Ἁγιορείτου, Πηδαλιον της νοητης νηος, της μιας, αγιας, καθοδικης, και ἀποστολικης των Ὀρθοδοξων Ἐκκλησιας {The Rudder of the Metaphorical Ship of the One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Orthodox Church}, (Αθήναις: Κωνσταντίνου Γκαρπολά, 1841), 33.]
More recently, Dr. Georgio Metallinos (1940–2019), an Orthodox priest and Professor of Theology and Byzantine History at the University of Athens, dogmatically wrote:With particular regard to the Sacrament of Baptism, in accordance with Eph. 4:5 and the [Nicene] Creed, there exists one and only one baptism, the Baptism of the One Church—namely, the Orthodox Church. Ours’ is literally a baptism, being performed by three immersions and emersions, because the term baptism means exactly that, and nothing else.
Ειδικότερα, ως προς το Μυστήριο του Βαπτίσματος, κατά το Εφεσ. 4, 5 και το ιερό Σύμβολο, ένα και μόνο βάπτισμα υπάρχει, το Βάπτισμα της Μιας Εκκλησίας, ήτοι της Ορθοδόξου. Εκείνο δε είναι κυριολεκτικώς “βάπτισμα” που τελείται δια τριών καταδύσεων και αναδύσεων, καθ’ όσον ο όρος “βάπτισμα”, τούτο και μόνον μπορεί να σημαίνει.
[Ρ. Γεωργιου Δ. Μεταλληνου, Ομολογω Εν Βαπτισμα {I Confess One Baptism}, (Αθήνα: Εκδόσεις ΤΗΝΟΣ, 1996), 37.]
What is probably the most widely used catechetical work throughout modern Greek Orthodoxy, written by a popular priest and theologian named Athanasios Frangopoulos (1907–77), quite frankly states:At this point we should point out that the Latins and Protestants don’t baptize infants; rather, they sprinkle them with water, and this they call baptism. Baptism, however, does not mean to sprinkle. It means to put into water. He who is baptized must be placed completely into the water of the font, from head to toe. This triple immersion is the most important part of the Sacrament of Baptism. Here, then, we have a great difference with the Papists and the Protestants. And this difference consists of an innovation that separates us, because our Lord commanded that we be baptized and not sprinkled. During Holy Baptism a death and resurrection take place - a birth, or rather, a rebirth. First a death takes place, and that’s why those who are to be baptized must be totally immersed in the water of the font, because this immersion symbolizes death. What death? The death of the old sinful man.
Εδώ πρέπει να πούμε πως οι Λατίνοι και οι προτεστάντες δεν βαπτίζουν τα παιδιά, αλλά τα ραντίζουν με νερό και αυτό το λένε βάπτισμα. Βάπτισμα όμως δεν θα πει ράντισμα. Θα πει βούτηγμα μέσα στο νερό, ώστε ο βαπτιζόμενος να χωθεί όλος μέσα στο νερό της κολυμβήθρας, από το κεφάλι μέχρι τα πόδια. Αυτή η τριττή κατάδυση, όπως επίσημα λέγεται, είναι το σπουδαιότερο μέρος του μυστηρίου του βαπτίσματος. Εδώ λοιπόν έχουμε διαφορά μεγάλη με τους παπικούς και προτεστάντες. Και η διαφορά μας αυτή αποτελεί καινοτομία που μας χωρίζει, διότι ο Κύριος είπε να βαπτιζόμαστε και όχι να ραντιζόμαστε. Στο άγιο Βάπτισμα λαμβάνει χώρα ένας θάνατος και μία ανάσταση, μία γέννηση, αναγέννηση. Θάνατος πρώτα, γι’ αυτό και πρέπει να βουτιέται όλος ο βαπτιζόμενος στο νερό της κολυμβήθρας, διότι το βούτηγμα αυτό συμβολίζει το θάνατο. Ποιο θάνατο; Το θάνατο του παλαιού ανθρώπου της αμαρτίας.
[Αθανάσιος Φραγκόπουλος, Η Ορθόδοξη Χριστιανική Πίστη μας {Our Orthodox Christian Faith}, (Αθήναι: Αδελφότης Θεολόγων “Ο Σωτηρ”, 2006), 128.]
The one Orthodox community that does indiscriminately use pouring is the Russian Orthodox Church. The introduction of pouring in the 16th Century in some other northern European churches also made its way into the neighboring Ukrainian region during the same period. At first there was stiff resistance to this “innovation” by the Muscovite patriarchy. But such practice became normalized in many areas after the reforming bishop Theophan (or, Feofan) Prokopovich (1681–1737), a native Kievite, staunchly defended it,* and succeeded in his efforts to have the Russian patriarchy abolished in the early 18th Century.
Needless to say, this modal evolution was strongly opposed by the southern Orthodox churches. A good example of this is seen in the writings of the Greek Orthodox scholar Theoklitos Pharmakidis (1784–1860), a professor of theology and philosophy at the University of Athens, who also authored a multi-volume textbook on the Greek language.** Pharmakidis additionally served as General Secretary of the Greek Orthodox Church, during which tenure he responded to some supporters of Theophan’s arguments and practice, and again addressed the meaning of baptizō and baptisma:
But we ask the most venerable Russian divines, wherein did you find these two ways of baptizing? In the New Testament? The baptizō in the command of our Lord Jesus Christ to perform baptism, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” (Matt. 28:19), indicates nothing other than what this Greek verb properly means. This is made evident from the baptism of our Lord, who, when he was baptized, went up out of the water (Matt. 3:16). And he that comes up out of the water must of course first go down into the water, whereupon all of him is baptized in it. We are thereby taught a single manner of baptizing from the New Testament, namely, immersion; and, of course, immersion in water results in nothing other than a complete covering with or in the water.
But to baptize also means to launder, wash, wash away—so what then? While it may be capable of possessing these additional meanings, in the sacrament of baptism it has only one meaning: a complete covering in water—that is, an immersion. Moreover, the Russians were taught Christianity by us, and from their teachers they learned one and only one way of baptizing, namely, the threefold immersion and emersion of the entire person being baptized in the water. And this is baptism according to the principle and Scriptural meaning of the word. And do not the Russian theologians know how great a difference there is, and how much strife there is between us and those who accept sprinkling or pouring instead of baptism? Then again, washing is quite different than either sprinkling or pouring, so why is the former term used [by them] instead of the latter?
Άλλ’ έρωτώμεν τούς εύσεβεστάτους Ρώσσους θεολόγους, Πού εύρηκαν τόν διττόν τούτον τρόπον τού βαπτίζειν; Εν τή καινή Διαθήκης; ἁλλ’ έν αυτή τὸ ΒΑΠΤΙΖΩ εν τη περί του βαπτίςματος διαταγή τοῦ Κυρίον ήμών Ιησοῦ Χριστού «πορευθέντες μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, βαπτίζοντες αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πατρὸς, καί τοῦ υίού, καί τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος» Ματθ. ΚΗ, 19. άλλο δέν σημαίνει είμή ό, τι κυρίως σημαίνει τό έλληνικόν αύτό ρήμα, καί τούτο δήλον καί έκ τού βαπτίσματος αύτον τού Κυρίον ήμών, όστις βαπτισθείς άνεβη εύθύς άπό τού ϋδατος. Ματθ. Γ’, 16. άλλ’ όστις άναβαίνει άπό τού ϋδατος, καταβαίνει πρότερον έν τώ ϋδατι, ό έςι βαπτίζεται όλος έν αύτώ. ’Ενα λοιπόν τρόπον τού βαπτίζειν μανθάνομεν έκ τής καινής διαθήκης, τόν διά τής καταδύσεως, καί κατάδυσις άλλο δέν είναι είμή όλική δί ϋδατος ή έν τώ ϋδατι κάλυφις.
Άλλά τό Βαπτίζω σημαίνει καί τό Πλύνω, Λούω, Άπολούω. καί τί έκ τούτου; δύναται νά έχη καί άλλας άκόμη σημασίας, καί όμως είς τό μυστήριον τού βαπτίσματος μίαν καί μόνην σημασίαν νά έχη, τήν όλικήν έν τώ ύδατι κάλυψιν ήτοι τήν κατάδυσιν. Έπειτα οί Ρώσσοι εδιδάχθησαν παρ’ ήμών τόν χριστιανισμόν, καί παρά τών διδασκάλων ΈΝΑ ΚΑΊ ΜΌΝΟΝ τρόπον τού βαπτίζειν έμαθον, τόν διά τής τριττής καταδύσεως καί άναδύσεως τού βαπτιζομένου ΌΛΟΥ έν τώ ύδατι, καί τούτο είναι βάπτισμα κατά τήν κυριωτάτην καί γραφικήν έννοιαν τού όνόματος. Καί δέν ήξεύρoυσιν οί Ρώσσοι θεολόγοι, πόση διαφορά ύπάρχει, καί πόση έρις γίνεται μεταξύ ήμών καί τών δεχομένων τόν ῥαντισμόν ή τήν έπίχυσιν άντί βαπτίσματος; καί διαφέρει τάχα πολύ τό ablutio τού adspersio ή superfusio, καί διά τούτο μεταχειρίζονται τό πρώτον καί όχι τό δεύτερον όνομα;
[Θεοκλήτου Φαρμακίδου, Ο Ψευδώνυμος Γερμανός {To Pseudonymous Germanos}, (Αθηναι: Τυπογραφιας Α. Αγγεδιδου, 1838), 36.]
*Феофан Прокопович, Истинное оправдание правоверных христиан крещением поливательным во Христа крещаемых {The true Justification of Orthodox Christians that are Baptized into Christ with Pouring}, (Санкт-Петербург: Синодальная типография, 1724).
*Theophanis Procopowicz, Synodicus Libellus de Duplici Modo Baptizandi: qui in Ecclesia Orthodoxa Graeco-Rossica obtinet, ex Lingva Rossica nunc primo Latine redditus et editus; {Synodical Document on the Two Modes of Baptizing which prevail in the Greek-Russian Orthodox Church, now first rendered and Published in Latin from the Russian Language}, (Mosqv.: Impensis Christiani Rudigeri, 1779).
**Θεοκλητου Φαρμακιδου, Στοιχεία της Ελληνικής Γλώσσης εις χρήσιν των Σχολείων της Ελλάδος {Elements of the Greek Language for Use in the Schools of Greece}, (Αθήναις: Αγγέλου Αγγελίδου, 1815–18), 4 vols.
