Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Reformed baptismal theology/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 22 April 2024 [1].

Reformed baptismal theology

[edit]
Nominator(s): Jfhutson (talk) 14:31, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about mystically uniting babies and converts with Jesus by sprinkling water on them. I wrote it a few eons ago, and I think it meets the FA criteria. I've written FAs on historical theological topics in the past, but this would be the first on a theological concept. I hope you enjoy it enough to seek baptism in your local Reformed church, if you've not been baptized already (that's a joke, sort of). Jfhutson (talk) 14:31, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Lean oppose I have not evaluated most of the article content, but the lead itself needs significant work: the history and "Mode and administration" sections are not summarized at all. Is it correct to imply in the lead that all Reformed Christians do infant baptism? My understanding is that a lot of Baptists at least in the United States follow Reformed theology. (t · c) buidhe 17:22, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
  • File:Temple_de_Lyon,_Nommé_paradis.png needs a US tag. Ditto File:Baptism_in_Scotland.jpg, File:Christ_Receiving_the_Children.jpg
Done--JFHutson (talk) 19:48, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done--JFHutson (talk) 19:48, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jfhutson, as per the FAC instructions, please do not use markup templates like {{done}} as they are known to slow down the load time of the FAC page. FrB.TG (talk) 09:38, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. You've clearly read the sources, but at risk of being the person from the outside saying "Eh, I dunno", I'm not sure I agree with the lede's summary. It's in the article body, but my impression of the General Stance (usual disclaimer goes here that lots of denominations are "Reformed" in some loose ways, not all agree with Calvin on everything, and beliefs change over centuries) was just the "it's a symbolic replacement for circumcision" explanation. Circumcision symbolized becoming a Jew and joining the covenant, and (in Reformed churches) baptism is "just" symbolic "joining the Christian team". That's it, an initiation rite. I guess the lede hints at this with "joining the visible church", but I'd be even more blunt. Notably, I don't see anything about predestination or soteriology here, which is a notable difference Reformed churches had - I get that this is an article on Reformed theology, not other theology, but given that Calvin was reacting against the 16th century Catholic church, it seems relevant to bring up. Renaissance-era Catholicism saw baptism as a cosmic act, almost like a magic spell, that changed the default trajectory of the soul - it was going to hell by default before (that's the whole controversial "unbaptized infants go to hell" thing), but goes to heaven by default afterward unless you screw it up. (The article talks about Catholic midwives performing emergency baptisms, but doesn't say that this is why emergency baptism is a thing in Catholicism, and also why there's no need for emergency baptisms in Reformed theology.) Calvin propounded predestination, that salvation was just God's choice, and more Luther-inspired Reformed groups went with salvation-by-faith, but neither of these involve baptism being a part of it. Again, this is technically in the article if the reader knows how to read church-ese (that's the "invisible church" part), but I think it could be blunter and more accessible on this, and this part is possibly worth discussion in the lede. SnowFire (talk) 00:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't feel qualified to review this on a thorough level overall, as I am of a strongly Southern Baptist spritual background (so not Reformed/Calvinist) and the hard theology is not my strong suit (again, the Southern Baptists tend to de-emphasis this stuff in favor of the fire and brimstone) but "Reformed Christians believe that immersion is not necessary for baptism to be properly performed, but that pouring or sprinkling are acceptable" seems overly broad to me. Don't, for instance, the Primitive Baptists generally require immersion baptism? Hog Farm Talk 21:18, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm going to withdraw as it turns out at the moment I'm not going to be able to address these concerns sufficiently. I appreciate the feedback and hope to circle back at some point.--JFHutson (talk) 22:05, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Reformed_baptismal_theology/archive1&oldid=1220309154"