The Christian Century just carried a brief news item, “Reversing baptism,” telling of Britain’s National Secular Society (NSS) that is offering “certificates of de-baptism” for people wishing to renounce the Christian faith. Part of me thought: what next?! And another part is not surprised: Christianity’s denouncers are getting louder every day.
I was curious. I went to the NSS’s website to see what they were up to and the wording on the certificate they actually sell (and claim that people have downloaded 100,000). It reads:
I __________ having been subjected to the Rite of Christian Baptism in infancy (before reaching an age of consent), hereby publicly revoke any implications of that Rite and renounce the Church that carried it out. In the name of human reason, I reject all its Creeds and all other superstition in particular, the perfidious belief that any baby needs to be cleansed by Baptism of alleged ORIGINAL SIN, and the evil power of supposed demons. I wish to be excluded henceforth from enhanced claims of church membership numbers based on past baptismal statistics used, for example, for the purpose of securing legislative privilege.
Interesting, isn’t it, and I wonder where to begin a response. Maybe we should recognize that the NSS has been around Britain for 150 years so some of its claims are nothing new. But here are a few beginning thoughts:
- Apparently baptism is reprehensible because the person did not consent to it. I wonder if they feel the same way about their citizenship in the UK? Or about being born?!
- Human reason is NSS’s final court, it appears, with authority over against such superstitions as original sin. Actually (as said by one whose name I forget), original sin is one church doctrine that can be proved by reason!
- On the NSS website, the leaders claim a sense of humor in offering a certificate of de-baptism. What they do perpetuate themselves and capitalize on, is a misformed understanding of the Christian faith, for example that faith and reason are inimical to each other, or that creeds and superstitions belong in the same category.
- They are concerned, rightly, about baptism’s use as a statistic to procure privilege or status in society, and via the certificate, a person asks to be no part of this system. I grant that there is honesty and integrity in that.
Here are more thoughts of a related nature:
- The British context is apparent, with tax support for the Church of England probably based on the inflated statistics that include many who are even hostile to it.
- The offering of the certificate shows a breakdown in the church’s life and mission – that baptism has become disconnected from Christian belief and discipleship. The church is suffering the consequences of baptizing where there has been little or no intention to raise the child in the faith.
- The question of a privileged position for the Christian church is no unique to Britain. In the early church, the Romans assured Christians they were not privileged – and individuals often paid a great price. After Constantine “christianized” his empire in the fourth century, the church occupied a position of privilege for centuries – which now in Europe and the USA is rapidly changing.
- Very likely the mission situation in which the Christian church increasingly finds itself will mean more adult baptisms. We cannot count on children coming to know and live the faith as they grow up.
- I don’t think a good response is to abandon infant baptism, but I believe it unwise, and maybe even unfaithful, to baptize indiscriminately with no attention to the faith of parents, sponsors, and others around the child.
- And in the end, I believe you cannot actually de-baptize. In baptism, even in a baptism rejected, God is still there calling one to return and to believe – about which the NSS will, I suppose, have a good, scoffing laugh.
