Gade writes:
This is a little off subject, but I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on the inter-relatedness of Mennonites' sense of "otherness" and non-infant baptism. I say non-infant because I hardly think I was making an adult choice at 13 years old.
Because one is either "in" or "out" depending on whether s/he "chose" baptism, there is already a barrier set between those who choose baptism and those who don't (including all the infants baptized without their consent). When you choose this baptism, it appears that you are also choosing to follow a written and unwritten set of rules that define what it is to be Mennonite.Mmm. Baptism. This is a goodie. My baptism has been always been a bit of a sore point with me. At the time, it was just wet. Not
wet wet, like, Baptist wet. If there are Mennonites who get into the whole pool-dunking thing, I haven’t met them. That’s just way too socially uncomfortable for most of us. My church made do with some discreet sprinklings of water on top of the head. However, I happened to be wearing a white top—not to symbolize rebirth or spiritual purity, but because it was the cutest thing in my closet at the time—and the pastor gave me rather more of a dousing than I think he intended, enough that the water tricked down the neck of my shirt. My first thought, upon joining officially the Body of Christ, standing before an assembled congregation of two hundred-some people, was
omigod, my bra’s gonna show. Which, at the age of thirteen (or fourteen, I can’t remember), was a kind of death and martyrdom right there. So, hey, extra points for me.
Part of my Christian education was learning all about the martyrs who died in protest of the ways of the godless papists and not-enough reformers such as Martin Luther who didn’t recognize that Jesus meant us all to be baptized as adults. Adult baptism, or believer’s baptism, is a huge deal to Mennonites, or so the theory goes. (These days everyone’s doing it, what with all this borning-again going around, so it’s hardly exotic. Mennonites who are still nursing a great sense of “otherness” based on their baptism of those old enough to string together a sentence should probably take note of current trends in Christianity. Sixteenth-century Switzerland it ain’t.)
When Eric and I were attending a small Mennonite church in East Lansing I saw a woman in her early-to-mid twenties get baptized on a Sunday morning. Even though her parents were members of the church and she had grown up there, you could tell she’d put a lot of thought into her decision, and she spoke very eloquently and deliberately about it before the baptism was performed. It was a beautiful ceremony, not alienating or dogmatic, just a simple celebration of this woman’s choice to follow the path of Jesus in the way she understood it. It was, I think, a model of what many people mean when they refer to believer’s baptism. I had never seen anything like it.
My baptism was like a puppet show compared to that. Or a sheep herding. Choose your metaphor to imply frantic conformity and lack of free thought. Look, it’s not like bad people or brutal coercion were involved. My baptism was, quite simply, Catechism Graduation Class of 1991. That’s how they do it in a lot of big Mennonite churches. Freshman in high school? Good, it’s your time. Go to catechism, where earnest folk who have been to seminary will teach you…something. You may not retain it after a year or two, but don’t worry—what matters is that we retained
you. So far as I can see, this is the thinking behind it. Eric has a pastor uncle who used to say that it is best to baptize in the early teens because, essentially, it will “get them while they’re young.” (I don’t know what his position is these days—he’s become a pretty liberal guy.) Putting aside for a moment the fact that this runs counter to the intent of believer’s baptism—that it be an adult decision, made in the face of alternatives—this is anxiety-based logic. Or just anxiety. Much though pastors and parents might wish it were so, baptism is not a binding contract. People who decide to leave the church are not going to be held back by a ritual they walked through around the same time they were taking “abstinence pledges” or swearing eternal fealty to Michael Stipe. Those who are going to stay in the church can certainly be trusted to wait until their actual adulthood and take their own initiative in the matter.
After I was baptized, I got a handful of cards and thoughtful notes from church members, welcoming me to the congregation and commending me on the monumental decision I had made. These were all kind, well-meaning people. But it wasn’t a monumental decision, and it had practically zero bearing on my future choices in regards to church. I got baptized because I noticed that the very few kids in my church who didn’t do so were on the defensive about it, and the common understanding seemed to be that they were “troubled” or perhaps “losing their way.” I was in the throes of pubescent torment and didn’t need any help feeling like a freak. I wasn’t strong enough to make any other decision.
I see this sort of baptism as a site of paradox. It is the moment when, by Mennonite understanding, you join a community of believers who cleave dearly to the idea of nonconformity. The surest way to start a fight is to start investigating what nonconformity actually means to them, but never mind that now. To impressionable teenagers, baptism is framed to make you feel like a real champ: there is this entity called “the world” trying to sink its insidious lures into you, but you’re not buying, because you have the strength of your convictions and you don’t care what “the world” thinks. Oh, and by the way, if you skip out on this, you’re probably “losing your way.” Not “doomed to hell,” because we don’t talk like that in this church. But we’re worried. Are you, by any chance, on drugs? Are you succumbing to peer pressure rather than taking the hard road to nonconformity with all the other nice freshman?
It’s quite savvy, really. What better way to play on the particular stew of mixed cultural messages bombarding the American teenager: “You can be a rugged individual, too—look, everyone’s doing it!”
I don’t know quite how Mennonites have gone from a sect that staked a large part of its identity on the principle of adult baptism to this kind of fretting over unbaptized fourteen-year-olds. It’s interesting to see how the Amish, coming from the same Anabaptist roots, insist that their teenagers go through
rumspringa, or adolescence, before joining the church officially. I’m not going to romanticize that system or pretend I understand it very well. I do think, though, that it speaks to a primary difference between the Amish and the Mennonites: namely, the Amish aren’t worried about losing members. They have a lot of babies, and besides, for all we hear about the Amish drug dealers and
rumspringa gone to seed, their kids overwhelmingly choose to join the church when they enter adulthood. Furthermore, the Amish are not trying to market themselves to America at large. Mennonites are. Mennonites want You. (If you’re straight. If you’re not, they will lovingly discern the necessity of pretending you don’t exist.) It doesn’t help their image as a church for All when their own kids are dropping off like flies.
Of course, if we do drop off, it helps to characterize us as succumbing to the narcissistic temptations of secularism and the consumerist lure of mainstream American society. Sigh.
I think I may have just violated a few of my new
principles of
ethnographic distance in the whole Mennonite arena.