MennoNet.com

Judas Maccabeus wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 7:26 am

steve-in-kville wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 6:29 am

Judas Maccabeus wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2024 12:18 pm

I was at a River Brethren baptism about 6 months ago, one of my friends. They do it the same way.

Some groups make a big deal about it having to be "running water" as in a creek or stream. Others, not so much.

This was in a farm pond.

That actually shocks me a bit. If its gonna be outside, they want moving water.

Fancy this, my wife remembers that her mom made a special dress for baptisms for her and her sisters... it had lead weights sown into the hem to keep it under the water. It's the little things, I guess

Sudsy wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2024 12:48 pm I found this regarding the various ways water baptism was handled. It is interesting the rationalizing on practises. I was not aware of triple immersions until first mentioned in this thread. I knew that Oneness Pentecostals require people to be baptised again if they were not baptised as Peter said 'in Jesus name' but I was not aware that some Trinitarians insisted on a certain mode.
....

The original form of immersion chosen by the MB church was three times. (The first MB baptisms were not by immersion - that was an early change in practice, an influence from a Baptist pamphlet on of the main early leaders read, and then passed on to the others. As I recall, he was not present at the first baptisms, but he brought the question up to the other leaders as soon as he returned to the colony. He had been meeting with Russian officials outside the colony, to request Mennonite status for the new group under the original privilegio.)

The MB requirement for running ('living') water, unheated, became a requirement when the move to immersion was made, or perhaps soon after.

Judas Maccabeus wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 7:26 am
This was in a farm pond.

I would expect that venue from Pond Bank, but not from the River Brethren.

ohio jones wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 8:10 am

Judas Maccabeus wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 7:26 am This was in a farm pond.

I would expect that venue from Pond Bank, but not from the River Brethren.

If we're talking the same Pond Bank, they have a baptismal under their stage...

steve-in-kville wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 8:02 am

Judas Maccabeus wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 7:26 am

steve-in-kville wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 6:29 amSome groups make a big deal about it having to be "running water" as in a creek or stream. Others, not so much.

This was in a farm pond.

That actually shocks me a bit. If its gonna be outside, they want moving water.

Fancy this, my wife remembers that her mom made a special dress for baptisms for her and her sisters... it had lead weights sown into the hem to keep it under the water. It's the little things, I guess

We (being Brethren, not Menno) have historically pushed for running water at baptism if possible, though ponds have always been acceptable when a creek or river is not practical at the time. There are quite a few in ponds nowadays in the midwest (Ohio, Indiana, etc) nowadays, somewhat of a compromise between outside and availability. We have/do use pools or tubs for disabled folks, but its not very common.

Sudsy, as a couple of historical notes, "Brethren" church groups (those various groups descended from the Anabaptist/Pietist influenced Schwarzenau Brethren, such as OGBBs, Old Brethren, Church of the Brethren, Grace Brethren, etc, etc) were pretty much historically forward-dipping trine immersionists from their original organization in the early 1700s. Per baptizing outside or in rivers/ponds, though, the Church of the Brethren and other connected (and typically more progressive) groups did move towards using actual baptismals in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Also, if I'm not mistaken, the River Brethren (who were/are technically pietistic-influenced Mennonites) derived their trine-immersion practice from our folks as well when they began, having come to us for advice when they experienced revival and pulled out of the Mennonite Church way back in the day.

Steve, we don't do the weights, although that's actually not a bad idea, lol. At their baptism, our sisters still wear a white apron over their dresses which pretty well weights everything down once it gets wet.

Heirbyadoption wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 8:56 am

steve-in-kville wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 8:02 am

Judas Maccabeus wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 7:26 amThis was in a farm pond.

That actually shocks me a bit. If its gonna be outside, they want moving water.

Fancy this, my wife remembers that her mom made a special dress for baptisms for her and her sisters... it had lead weights sown into the hem to keep it under the water. It's the little things, I guess

We (being Brethren, not Menno) have historically pushed for running water at baptism if possible, though ponds have always been acceptable when a creek or river is not practical at the time. There are quite a few in ponds nowadays in the midwest (Ohio, Indiana, etc) nowadays, somewhat of a compromise between outside and availability. We have/do use pools or tubs for disabled folks, but its not very common.

Sudsy, as a couple of historical notes, "Brethren" church groups (those various groups descended from the Anabaptist/Pietist influenced Schwarzenau Brethren, such as OGBBs, Old Brethren, Church of the Brethren, Grace Brethren, etc, etc) were pretty much historically forward-dipping trine immersionists from their original organization in the early 1700s. Per baptizing outside or in rivers/ponds, though, the Church of the Brethren and other connected (and typically more progressive) groups did move towards using actual baptismals in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Also, if I'm not mistaken, the River Brethren (who were/are technically pietistic-influenced Mennonites) derived their trine-immersion practice from our folks as well when they began, having come to us for advice when they experienced revival and pulled out of the Mennonite Church way back in the day.

Steve, we don't do the weights, although that's actually not a bad idea, lol. At their baptism, our sisters still wear a white apron over their dresses which pretty well weights everything down once it gets wet.

Thanks for the Brethren history. It is interesting the reasonings behind the modes. My background is with the understanding of one immersion backwards as is believed to be supported by picturing dying, being buried and then rising to new life and which they believe is scriptural supported. The three foward-dipping is interesting and I take the 3 is about believing the 3 persons of the Trinity each must be recognized separately ? What is the foward dipping supposed to represent ?

I thought the attempts to be modest by keeping the dress down was interesting as in the baptisms I have watched the gals would often wear jeans. Then there were groups in history that were water baptised naked. The symbology was the 'putting off of the old man' as they believed Christ was stripped naked on the cross. There sure are considerable differences in water baptisms some with scripture support, others not.

And then there is the Salvation Army and the Quakers who do not water baptise. The Salvation Army is not opposed to it, they just don't practise it in their ministry mainly because of it's meaning to some as being a means of salvation. Quakers too are not opposed to it, as if it were sinning, but believe the emphasis should be on inner basptism in the Holy Spirit and no need for outward rituals of sorts. I think things like water baptism and foot washing and other early church practises were regarded by some as no longer relevant. Like what many non-Charismatics believe about speaking in tongues and other spiritual gifts in operation today.

Heirbyadoption wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 8:56 am

steve-in-kville wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 8:02 am

Judas Maccabeus wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2024 7:26 amThis was in a farm pond.

That actually shocks me a bit. If its gonna be outside, they want moving water.

Fancy this, my wife remembers that her mom made a special dress for baptisms for her and her sisters... it had lead weights sown into the hem to keep it under the water. It's the little things, I guess

We (being Brethren, not Menno) have historically pushed for running water at baptism if possible, though ponds have always been acceptable when a creek or river is not practical at the time. There are quite a few in ponds nowadays in the midwest (Ohio, Indiana, etc) nowadays, somewhat of a compromise between outside and availability. We have/do use pools or tubs for disabled folks, but its not very common.

Sudsy, as a couple of historical notes, "Brethren" church groups (those various groups descended from the Anabaptist/Pietist influenced Schwarzenau Brethren, such as OGBBs, Old Brethren, Church of the Brethren, Grace Brethren, etc, etc) were pretty much historically forward-dipping trine immersionists from their original organization in the early 1700s. Per baptizing outside or in rivers/ponds, though, the Church of the Brethren and other connected (and typically more progressive) groups did move towards using actual baptismals in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Also, if I'm not mistaken, the River Brethren (who were/are technically pietistic-influenced Mennonites) derived their trine-immersion practice from our folks as well when they began, having come to us for advice when they experienced revival and pulled out of the Mennonite Church way back in the day.

Steve, we don't do the weights, although that's actually not a bad idea, lol. At their baptism, our sisters still wear a white apron over their dresses which pretty well weights everything down once it gets wet.

I was baptized by immersion by a pentecostal in a community swimming pool. Spur of the moment for a various reasons. Wife was baptized in a stream in a state park, evangelical church. Church group was on one side. Crowd gathered on other side, several of the brothers (myself included) were sent over to the other side to offer explanation and preach the gospel. Both by immersion, backwards.

In my former C&MA church, I was one of the elders, so I frequently assisted in baptisms. We had a pool in front of the church.

I have never considered forward vs. backward baptism. Is this distinction meaningful in some traditions?

barnhart wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 10:23 am I have never considered forward vs. backward baptism. Is this distinction meaningful in some traditions?

It all strikes me as superficial - all about the mechanics of it. But as I recall, when the MB group first started doing baptism by immersion (very soon after their 1860 beginning), they did it three times, forward. Then, since they were also doing it in "living water" - a river, and also sometimes had to break ice, three times was too much.

barnhart wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2024 10:23 am I have never considered forward vs. backward baptism. Is this distinction meaningful in some traditions?

It is a big deal to some, others not as much.