How would you justify placing baptism so late in this process, in light of (1) the fact that we baptize infants, and (2) scripture's model of immediately baptizing those who profess faith?
It seems quite perplexing to me that we should expect disciples to be able to move through the stages of growing in grace as seekers, and especially apprentices, while denying to them the very means of grace!
I have baptism as rite number one. I get there’s a tradition of delaying for the Easter Vigil, but I’m not there for the same reasons you mentioned. I’m mainly just working off Webber here.
I’m thinking through the other two though. I see the value in it, but think they’ve got some orders messed up.
I know this is more typically associated with medieval/kings and knights cultures and not as much with the early church, but where would you say the idea of a quest or a great adventure as a certain rite of passage would fit into this model? Would there be any need for it? I have been thinking a lot about young men having specific missions in their church - and reading medieval Christian fantasy - so quests seemed like a good jumping off point for thinking through it.
Excellent article! Thank you. I have too been burdened by the “discipleship” topic of late, and am currently nearing the end of reading The Disciple Dilemma, which I commend to you and your readers.
I fully agree you’re on to something with the power and necessity of rite/ritual, and it is something our western culture writ large has seemed to abandoned—to our own peril.
Robert Webber missed the fourth element - the tangible, felt, accessible gift of the Holy Spirit from the get go. This tangible gift is an assumed here and now presence in the New Testament - “stir up the gift which is within” “do not quench the Spirit’s fire” “pray in the Spirit” I could add many more.
How would you justify placing baptism so late in this process, in light of (1) the fact that we baptize infants, and (2) scripture's model of immediately baptizing those who profess faith?
It seems quite perplexing to me that we should expect disciples to be able to move through the stages of growing in grace as seekers, and especially apprentices, while denying to them the very means of grace!
I have baptism as rite number one. I get there’s a tradition of delaying for the Easter Vigil, but I’m not there for the same reasons you mentioned. I’m mainly just working off Webber here.
I’m thinking through the other two though. I see the value in it, but think they’ve got some orders messed up.
I know this is more typically associated with medieval/kings and knights cultures and not as much with the early church, but where would you say the idea of a quest or a great adventure as a certain rite of passage would fit into this model? Would there be any need for it? I have been thinking a lot about young men having specific missions in their church - and reading medieval Christian fantasy - so quests seemed like a good jumping off point for thinking through it.
Thanks for another great piece!
Thanks for a great article!
Thank you.
Excellent article! Thank you. I have too been burdened by the “discipleship” topic of late, and am currently nearing the end of reading The Disciple Dilemma, which I commend to you and your readers.
I fully agree you’re on to something with the power and necessity of rite/ritual, and it is something our western culture writ large has seemed to abandoned—to our own peril.
Robert Webber missed the fourth element - the tangible, felt, accessible gift of the Holy Spirit from the get go. This tangible gift is an assumed here and now presence in the New Testament - “stir up the gift which is within” “do not quench the Spirit’s fire” “pray in the Spirit” I could add many more.