Baptism — the Basis of Church Unity?: The Question of Baptism in Faith and Order

Ecumenical Review, The, Oct, 1998 by Dagmar Heller

But the Orthodox will be unable to answer this question until they have genuinely clarified the question of oikonomia,(16) which now seems almost to be an arbitrary matter, differently understood and applied in different Orthodox churches. It is important, however, that this possibility of oikonomia exists. That means that it is possible to recognize others -- in any case some others -- as members of the body of Christ through their baptism. When this happens, the boundaries of the body of Christ are no longer seen as identical with the boundaries of the Orthodox church. But what might this mean for the communion of the churches?(17)

In order to make progress on this question, as we have said, either the Orthodox must first come to clarity among themselves, or they must find different answers within the framework of the bilateral discussions.

A special -- and, I think, interesting -- case is the relation between the Roman Catholic Church and other churches which baptize infants. Here baptism is a basic bond of unity -- in theory at least. For the Catholic Church generally recognizes the baptism of other churches and vice-versa (with the exception noted above regarding the Orthodox). The problem here is that this recognition has different consequences. Obviously, the Catholic Church views the Orthodox church differently from the churches of the Reformation: the Orthodox are recognized as "sister churches", whereas the Protestant churches are not. This is why the Orthodox could in principle be accepted at the Catholic mass if their churches permitted it,(18) which is not the case for the members of the other churches. That leads the Protestants to ask: if our baptism is recognized, why can we not be accepted for holy communion? If we are baptized into the same body of Christ, why are we still divided at the Lord's table? It seems to me that these questions have a certain logic even from the Catholic point of view.

To summarize, it must be said that the problem is much more complex than one would imagine solely on the basis of a reading of BEM. And it must also be noted that there is always a certain asymmetry. In all the constellations I have described there is always one side which recognizes the other. This makes things more difficult, since the other partner can easily find itself under pressure. For example, the "historic" Protestant churches recognize the baptism of the Orthodox and also that of the Baptists. The same is true for the Catholics.

In saying all this I do not mean to deny that baptism can be considered as a "basic bond of unity". But we must be realistic about the problems that exist. As far as baptism is concerned, one can claim a certain convergence on the meaning of baptism. Here is obviously a basis for unity which should be explored, above all if all churches agree that baptism is incorporation into the body of Christ. But what does this mean? What is baptism? What is the body of Christ?

The search for a common answer to these questions leads us naturally into the area of hermeneutics. While I cannot go into detail on this subject here, I would like to underscore that the responses to BEM have revealed a certain will in the churches and also a certain possibility for seeing baptism as the basis of unity. It is now necessary to build on this foundation, and this must obviously be done in different directions according to the three "types" of churches and their relations.