Were the Apostles baptized?


#1

Yesterday at Mass, my pastor was talking about the importance of Confirmation. He stated that we can assume that the Apostles were all baptized (he used the logic that if it was good enough for Jesus, it was good enough for the Apostles). He then pointed out that even though they were baptized, they still hid and and feared for their lives when Jesus was being crucified. Upon receiving the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, they then had the courage to stand up for their faith. His main point was that Christians need something more than Baptism to be willing to defend their faith.

I always believed that the Apostles didn’t have the Holy Spirit until Pentecost. If they were indeed baptized, wouldn’t it have been the “Baptism of Repentence” (as opposed to the Sacramental Baptism) that John the Baptist performed. In John 14, Jesus says:

*“And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always, the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you.”*It seems pretty clear that the Apostles don’t yet posess the Holy Spirit. Jesus is speaking of sending the Spirit in the future.

Anyone have any comments on this? I’d be interested in hearing some opinions.

God Bless,
Gary


#2

[quote=gez722]Yesterday at Mass, my pastor was talking about the importance of Confirmation. He stated that we can assume that the Apostles were all baptized (he used the logic that if it was good enough for Jesus, it was good enough for the Apostles). He then pointed out that even though they were baptized, they still hid and and feared for their lives when Jesus was being crucified. Upon receiving the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, they then had the courage to stand up for their faith. His main point was that Christians need something more than Baptism to be willing to defend their faith.

I always believed that the Apostles didn’t have the Holy Spirit until Pentecost. If they were indeed baptized, wouldn’t it have been the “Baptism of Repentence” (as opposed to the Sacramental Baptism) that John the Baptist performed. In John 14, Jesus says:

*“And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always, the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you.”*It seems pretty clear that the Apostles don’t yet posess the Holy Spirit. Jesus is speaking of sending the Spirit in the future.

Anyone have any comments on this? I’d be interested in hearing some opinions.

God Bless,
Gary
[/quote]

Gary, I’m surprised no one has answered this yet. There is no mention of the apostles being baptized which seems odd considering Jesus told them to go teach and baptize the world. I would imagine they were baptized though Scripture seems silent on the issue.

Peace…


#3

[quote=ahimsaman72]Gary, I’m surprised no one has answered this yet.
[/quote]

I agree. It’s something that I never really gave much thought to, but now that I did it’s a pretty interesting question. I did a little more research and found this in Acts 1

*1 ** In the first book, Theophilus, I dealt with all that Jesus did and taught **2 **until the day he was taken up, after giving instructions through the holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. **3 He presented himself alive to them by many proofs after he had suffered, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God. 4While meeting with them, he enjoined them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for “the promise of the Father about which you have heard me speak; **5 **for John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the holy Spirit.” * Since Jesus is saying this just prior to His ascension, it appears that the Apostles were first baptized at Pentecost. Now that I think about it more, didn’t they first receive the Holy Spirit on the day of Our Lord’s resurrection (John 20:22) ?

God Bless,
Gary


#4

The Church believes the Apostle’s were Baptized with water before the Last Supper.


#5

[quote=ahimsaman72]Gary, I’m surprised no one has answered this yet. There is no mention of the apostles being baptized which seems odd considering Jesus told them to go teach and baptize the world. I would imagine they were baptized though Scripture seems silent on the issue.

Peace…
[/quote]

“There is no mention of the apostles being baptized …” ?

Read the washing of the feet at the Last Supper, Pay specific attention to the exchange between Peter and Christ.


#6

[quote=Br. Rich SFO]“There is no mention of the apostles being baptized …” ?

Read the washing of the feet at the Last Supper, Pay specific attention to the exchange between Peter and Christ.
[/quote]

I looked at Matthew’s gospel account and provided a link here:
nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew26.htm

and then I looked at John’s gospel account and here’s the link and an excerpt:
nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/john/john13.htm

5 Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples’ feet and dry them with the towel around his waist.
6 He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, “Master, are you going to wash my feet?”
*7 Jesus answered and said to him, “What I am doing, you do not understand now, but you will understand later.” *
8 Peter said to him, “You will never wash my feet.” Jesus answered him, “Unless I wash you, you will have no inheritance with me.”
*9 Simon Peter said to him, “Master, then not only my feet, but my hands and head as well.” *
***10 **Jesus said to him, “Whoever has bathed has no need except to have his feet washed, for he is clean all over; so you are clean, but not all.” *

So, what is it that explicitly shows baptism? If it is baptism here that you posit, why isn’t it done in the Trinitarian formula? There’s no declaration that Christ did wash his hands and head, just Peter’s eagerness to submit to such.

I submit there is silence on the baptism of the apostles in Scripture, while one can reasonably assume they were given the one example I provided in the first post which is: since Christ sent the disciples to teach and baptize all nations, it would naturally follow that they themselves would have done so. Why would Christ ask them to do so if they hadn’t done it themselves?


#7

The Apostles received the indwelling of the Holy Spirit on Easter Sunday (except Thomas who was not in the upper room on Easter Sunday). On the evening of that first day of the week, when the doors were locked, where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and said to them, “Peace be with you.” When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. The disciples rejoiced when they saw the Lord. (Jesus) said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, **“Receive the holy Spirit.” **
John 20:19-22The Apostles first receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the upper room on Easter Sunday (where they are hiding in fear). Fifty days later, the Apostles receive the Baptism of the Holy Spirit in the upper room, which was a release of the power of the Holy Spirit who was already indwelling in their souls. After this release of power of the Holy Spirit, the Apostles are able to fearlessly proclaim the Gospel by using the charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit.… The Pentecost experience of becoming charismatic by being “baptized in the Spirit” (Acts 1:5) is something clearly distinct from and beyond the experience of becoming a Christian by being “baptized into Christ” (Rom. 6:3) by water. The two baptisms have totally different purposes. Water baptism makes one a child of God in a special way, grafting one into the body of Christ (Gal. 3:27 Rom. 6:3), while Spirit baptism gives one charismatic power to be an effective witness (evangelizer) in building the Kingdom (Acts 1:8; Luke 24:48-49).

… the resurrected Jesus had breathed upon [the Apostles], even imparting the Holy Spirit to activate a ministerial gift of forgiving sins (John 20:22-23). Yet he told them to pray for (Luke 11:13) and to wait for (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4) a subsequent (and therefore separate) grace of the baptism in the Spirit a “few days” after his Ascension (Acts 1:5)–clearly an additional experience beyond the basic Christianity they had been experiencing.

A close study of the Acts of the Apostles shows that the early Christians regarded it as normal and normative for believers to be baptized in the Holy Spirit; hence, in the early Church a pre-charismatic Christian was regarded as a kind of “sub-normal” Christian. …

What Makes a Christian Charismatic?

Rev. John H. Hampsch, C.M.F.


#8

[quote=gez722]I agree. It’s something that I never really gave much thought to, but now that I did it’s a pretty interesting question. I did a little more research and found this in Acts 1

*1 **In the first book, Theophilus, I dealt with all that Jesus did and taught **until the day he was taken up…**5 *for John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the holy Spirit." Since Jesus is saying this just prior to His ascension, it appears that the Apostles were first baptized at Pentecost. Now that I think about it more, didn’t they first receive the Holy Spirit on the day of Our Lord’s resurrection (John 20:22) ?
God Bless,
Gary
[/quote]

Neat subject, Gary… it came up last year for us during Scripture study. I took the liberty to highlight in your response what we also saw as interesting:

#1. (John 20:22) And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them "Receive the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained."
David Currie made note that there is one other place in Scripture where God breathes on something in a similar way…Gen.2:7 “God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living being”.

So Jesus breathed on those first Apostles, and the Church became a living being, as we now understand Her as the Body of Christ. (Not yet ready for “battle” as at Pentecost, but a living being none the less.)
I know this doesn’t sit with what we have all learned as the Church’s birthday (Pentecost). But I cannot imagine that Jesus breathes on the Apostles, commands that the Holy Spirit be received by them, and then “nothing happens”. Something had to happen here!

The action of Jesus breathing does seem more “collective” than “individual”, which supports John 20:22 as the “Church” receiving the Holy Spirit, rather than just the individuals involved.

Pentecost, on the other hand, involved individuals, as recorded in Acts 2:4 “…tongues of fire came to rest on each one of them”.

God Bless Us All!


#9

From what I understand, some of the Apostles were disciples of John, and were baptised by him. When Jesus started preaching, John was still baptising - in fact, John baptised Jesus.

Now, you might wonder what Jesus needed baptism for. Well, consider this: not that He needed it, but that we needed Him. For when He was baptised, He sanctified the water, and not the other way around. I have read from private revelation (ACE) that this water He was baptised in was mixed with other water in other places for baptisms.

After Jesus was baptised, He had his disciples baptise also, in parallel with John, if I remember correctly. In fact, we read where people are asking Him which baptism they should get, and whether they needed to be baptised again, etc.

The two baptisms were in fact different. John only baptised under certain conditions, namely proof of repentance. Those baptised by the disciples of Jesus were those who were becoming disciples themselves. They both only baptised males, from what I understand. After the resurrection, the Christian community baptised women also.

In conclusion, I believe that all the Apostles were baptised, and I have reason to believe that those who were first baptised by John were later baptised again.

Acts 19:3 And he said: In what then were you baptized? Who said: In John’s baptism. 4 Then Paul said: John baptized the people with the baptism of penance, saying: That they should believe in him who was to come after him, that is to say, in Jesus. 5 Having heard these things, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

hurst


#10

[quote=ahimsaman72]I looked at Matthew’s gospel account and provided a link here:
nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew26.htm

and then I looked at John’s gospel account and here’s the link and an excerpt:
nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/john/john13.htm

5 Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples’ feet and dry them with the towel around his waist.
6 He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, "Master, are you going to wash my feet?"
7 Jesus answered and said to him, "What I am doing, you do not understand now, but you will understand later."
8 Peter said to him, “You will never wash my feet.” Jesus answered him, "Unless I wash you, you will have no inheritance with me."
9 Simon Peter said to him, “Master, then not only my feet, but my hands and head as well.”
***10 ***Jesus said to him, “Whoever has bathed has no need except to have his feet washed, for he is clean all over; so you are clean, but not all.”

So, what is it that explicitly shows baptism? If it is baptism here that you posit, why isn’t it done in the Trinitarian formula? There’s no declaration that Christ did wash his hands and head, just Peter’s eagerness to submit to such.

I submit there is silence on the baptism of the apostles in Scripture, while one can reasonably assume they were given the one example I provided in the first post which is: since Christ sent the disciples to teach and baptize all nations, it would naturally follow that they themselves would have done so. Why would Christ ask them to do so if they hadn’t done it themselves?
[/quote]

For me the presentation of Baptism is clearly present in Johns Gospel account. "Jesus answered him, Unless I wash you, you will have no inheritance with me."


#11

[quote=Br. Rich SFO]For me the presentation of Baptism is clearly present in Johns Gospel account. "Jesus answered him, Unless I wash you, you will have no inheritance with me."
[/quote]

And for me it is clear *from the context *that when Christ says, “Unless I wash you, you will have no inheritance with me”, He is referring to the previous and immediate subject of “You will never wash my feet”.

And again, I ask the question as before:

So, what is it that explicitly shows baptism? If it is baptism here that you posit, why isn’t it done in the Trinitarian formula? There’s no declaration that Christ did wash his hands and head, just Peter’s eagerness to submit to such.


#12

Baptism for the Apostles was the experience of going through the Passion and Death of Our Lord and His breathing the Holy Spirit on them on the Resurrection Sunday Evening. Thomas was specifically reconciled to Christ the week after by faith in the experience of meeting the Risen Lord. At Pentecost the completion of this occurred for the Twelve gathered in prayer. Garrigou-Lagrange’s little book, The Three Ways of the Spiritual Life, TAN, summarizes a whole tradition of understanding the development of the Twelve’s spirituality from beginners (during the earthly life), the purification of the senses (in the event of the Passion and Death), the infusion of contemplative prayer (in the 40 days of the Resurrection), the purification of the spirit (in the awaiting of the Counselor in the presence of the Blessed Mother drawing down the Holy Spirit), and Pentecost Day (the grace of union or the mystical life) that propels them to preach and incorporate new members from among the Jews through baptism and confirmation.

There is no hint that the Twelve – or the 120 disciples, for that matter – were baptized by the Sacrament.


#13

And were not all the apostles but one martyred? Wouldn’t this have been a baptism by blood? Jesus, knowing their fate, saw this as superior to water baptism because it was pointless considering they received the Spirit so directly on Pentacost, would experience death and rebirth vicariously through their unique closeness to his own, and would have died a martyr’s death. Just a theory, but I have no proof.


#14

[quote=ahimsaman72]And for me it is clear *from the context *that when Christ says, “Unless I wash you, you will have no inheritance with me”, He is referring to the previous and immediate subject of “You will never wash my feet”.

And again, I ask the question as before:

So, what is it that explicitly shows baptism? If it is baptism here that you posit, why isn’t it done in the Trinitarian formula? There’s no declaration that Christ did wash his hands and head, just Peter’s eagerness to submit to such.
[/quote]

The washing with water to be incorporated into Christ. Was Christ expected to say I Baptize you in the name of the Father, and Myself, and the Holy Spirit? It was not necessary to invoke the Trinity for Christ Himself was physically present. His act of washing with water was an Act of the Trinity, So there was no need to invoke the Tirnity. “There’s no declaration that Christ did wash his hands and head, just Peter’s eagerness to submit to such.” As John says not everything Christ did and said is recorded either.


#15

It is very reasonable to conclude the Apostles were Baptized.

John1:
28 This took place in Bethany beyond the Jordan, where John was baptizing. 29 The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! 30 This is he of whom I said, ‘After me comes a man who ranks before me, for he was before me.’ 31 I myself did not know him; but for this I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel.” 32 And John bore witness, “I saw the Spirit descend as a dove from heaven, and it remained on him. 33 I myself did not know him; but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, 'He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’ 34 And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God.” 35 The next day again John was standing with two of his disciples; 36 and he looked at Jesus as he walked, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God!” 37 The two disciples heard him say this, and they followed Jesus. 38 Jesus turned, and saw them following, and said to them, “What do you seek?” And they said to him, “Rabbi” (which means Teacher), “where are you staying?” 39 He said to them, “Come and see.” They came and saw where he was staying; and they stayed with him that day, for it was about the tenth hour. 40 One of the two who heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. 41 He first found his brother Simon, and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which means Christ). 42 He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him, and said, “So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas” (which means Peter).
This is clearly a shorthand of what happened during this time, it is reasonable to conclude they were Baptized during this time, also as we see in the 3rd Chapter:
3 Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” 4 Nicode’mus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” 5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. … 22 After this Jesus and his disciples went into the land of Judea; there he remained with them and baptized. 23 John also was baptizing at Ae’non near Salim, because there was much water there; and people came and were baptized. 24 For John had not yet been put in prison. 25 Now a discussion arose between John’s disciples and a Jew over purifying. 26 And they came to John, and said to him, “Rabbi, he who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you bore witness, here he is, baptizing, and all are going to him.” 27 John answered, "No one can receive anything except what is given him from heaven. 28 You yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but I have been sent before him. Its does make sense to conclude they were Baptized, else why would the Apostles be Baptizing others? We know that Jesus was Baptized, why not the Apostles?

Later in Acts2:
38 And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Would he have said this if him and the Apostles were not Baptized?

Later in Acts 9:
17 So Anani’as departed and entered the house. And laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus who appeared to you on the road by which you came, has sent me that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” 18 And immediately something like scales fell from his eyes and he regained his sight. Then he rose and was baptized, 19 and took food and was strengthened.
The first thing Paul did as a Christian was get Baptized.

Next Peter says in 1Pt3:
21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.


#16

Well, remember, CD, that the baptisms performed by John were not Christian baptisms. So while it may be that some of the Apostles received John’s baptism, there is no evidence that the Apostles received Sacramental baptism, but there is evidence that they were baptized through their being “immersed” in the Life, Death and Resurrection of the Lord with the completion of this in their Pentecost experience.

The baptism performed by John is that it is “a unique baptism in the desert in view of the repentance and pardon (Mk 1:4p). . .The baptism of John set up only a provisional economy: it is a baptism of water which is preparatory to the Messianic baptism in the Holy Spirit and fire,” Xavier Leon-Dufour, Dictionary of Biblical Theology. It was an external ritual signifying an effort of conversion of the baptized (much as many Protestant denominations look upon baptism today).

The baptism of John was the mikveh, a ritualistic bath which was a common “rite” in Jewish worship. However, in the case of the baptism of John, he was applying the mikveh in a particular sense: a sense of conversion to Judaism. What do I mean by this? Quite simply, when one becomes a Jew (even today, in Orthodox Judaism), one has his head shaved and his fingernails and toenails closely cut - as if one is a baby again; and one is immersed into the mikveh (the ritualistic bath) so as to emerge and be “reborn” as a Jew. This is exactly what John was doing as the precursor to the Messiah.

For 2000 years God had asked the people of Israel to keep faith with His Commandments, yet they often failed miserably to do this. Now St. John comes along preaching a baptism of repentance to prepare for the Messiah. Here, what St. John is saying is: “Okay, everybody! Come on back! Become REAL Jews and truly commit yourself to the Jewish Covenant to which you have been unfaithful. This is what is mean by the “baptism of John” – a baptism into Judaism, into the Jewish Covenant – in preparation for the Messiah’s coming.

However, Jesus’ Baptism will do something greater. It will be the Baptism into a NEW Covenant – a Baptism into His Church. Here, we must remember that the Greek work for “Church” (Ekklesia) means “those who are called out” – that is, out of Judaism, out of the old Covenant of law and into the New Covenant of love. Thus the church will be that remnant of Israel which, along with the Gentiles, will accept Jesus as their Messiah and King.

And so, John’s baptism was not enough to accomplish this. While John’s baptism made one fit to be a Jew (one faithful to the Covenant), it did not make one “born again” into the new Covenant in Christ – just as Christ tells Nicodemus in John 3. So a new baptism was necessary.

John’s baptism, therefore, was not for the removal of Original Sin and being born into the New Covenant; rather it was a preparation for the pouring out of the Holy Spirit through the Death and Resurrection of Our Savior. It is the Christian baptism by water and the Spirit into His Death and Resurrection that accomplishes in the soul (1 Cor. 1:13; Romans 6:3 & 9) what it signifies – a rebirth into Christ, the Sinless One, who signs us with His Cross and the power of His Resurrection. It is the new and greater “circumcision” that now joins together Jew and Gentile, male and female, adult and babe into the Familial Covenant of Christ.

The first thing Paul did as a Christian was get Baptized.

Since he did not have the lived experience of the Twelve, this would have been necessary for him. Remember, that St. Paul himself speaks of Baptism being baptized into Christ’s Death and Resurrection; this the Twelve already underwent without the sacramental, i.e., outward sign, employed after Christ’s Ascension.


#17

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.