Baby Dedication or Blessing Services

Am I the only person who sometimes senses a certain dryness about some baby-dedication services?

In my opinion, parents can bring their child to be blessed by a minister of the Gospel - but only the parents or guardian can dedicate their child to the Lord.

Blessing or dedication: there is a difference - and attempting to do the wrong one can give a wrong message.

The idea that a child must be brought to a minister of the Gospel to be dedicated to the Lord is, in my opinion, a carry-over from the pre-reformation days, and from Old Covenant days, in two ways:

Firstly, in pre-reformation days, the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers was obscured - the clergy was put on a pedestal above the laity. Only the priests could do certain things. But the Reformation uncovered the truth that all believers have the same access to God and to spiritual things. Parents can dedicate their own children to the Lord. It isn't necessary to bring a child to a Pastor to do so.

Secondly, in pre-reformation churches, babies were christened. Many evangelical churches now understand that was unbiblical. But it seems we have carried-over into our churches this need to perform some ritual for children. And it isn't necessary!

I think, if parents want to, they can dedicate their child to the Lord publicly at church - but it is only the parents or guardian, and not the Pastor, who can do so. A pastor has no more authority to dedicate your child to the Lord than he has to write cheques in your name. But a Pastor can bless your child. Jesus laid his hands on children and blessed them. So can a Pastor.

In fact, so can any believer - it doesn't have to be a Pastor. But if you want it to be a Pastor, or any other minister of the Gospel, that's fine, of course.

You can even have people lay hands on your children and bless them over and over again - it doesn't have to happen only once.

But that's different to ritually bringing your child to a Pastor so he can do the dedicating.

Blessing or dedicating - there is a difference.

It's better to remind ourselves that we're not under the Old Covenant anymore, when only priests had certain rights of access to the things of God. In the New Covenant, all believers do.

Under the Old Covenant, male babies were to be circumcised. But today, it isn't spiritually necessary to be circumcised. It is not necessary to replace circumcision today with a baby dedication ceremony!

A baby dedication or blessing ought to be carried out and spoken of in terms that expresses new covenant realities, not Old Covenant realities, and not pre-reformation mispractices. It will feel more anointed!

Even so, God looks at the heart.

Water Baptism

John was baptizing people in AEnon near to Salim, because there was much water there.

John baptized there, because there was adequate water. He didn't baptize there because it was a river. Or for any other special reason. It was simply a matter of whether there was enough water.

When Philip and the eunuch went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, "See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?"

It doesn't say it was a river. It just says, "A certain water". The issue was not the type of water-system - all that mattered was whether there was enough water for two people to stand in the water and for one of them to be immersed.

Philip said, "If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

They both went into the body of water, and came up out of it. That's all that matters. You only need enough water. It doesn't necessarily have to be a river. Or a baptistry. Just enough water - that's all you need.