BAPTISM: TRANCENDENTAL SYMBOL OF THE MASTER TEACHER A few "liberated", ultra-modern writers have come to see Jesus of Nazareth as nothing more than a particularly intelligent, rustic teacher who depended on homilies constructed of examples drawn from the simple world he was acquainted with for the parables in which he taught. Nothing could be further from the truth. Jesus was a master teacher who anticipated modern science and modern psychology by two thousand years (and probably more) in his understanding of the learning process. Learning Joan Robinson, a renowned contemporary professor at Cambridge University in England, once said, "To understand anything, one must know everything; but to learn anything, one must neglect a good deal of everything." In short, to learn, a student must be taught the basics--which at first he will not fully comprehend, until at a given moment he will perceive enough of a pattern that things will suddenly fall into place and he will understand. Additionally, the noted German philosopher Emmanuel Kant taught us that because of the limitations of the physical senses, man can never fully apprehend the "nouminal", i.e., real world. At best, he can form an impression of the phenomenal world, i.e., the world as interpreted through our five senses. What we hear is borne to us through waves of air which impinge on the ear drum, causing to vibrate tiny bones in the inner ear which cause waves in the liquid of the cochlea which, in turn, agitate tiny hairs that transmit electrochemical impressions to the brain, which, as a final step in the process, "hears", i.e., interprets these electrochemical messages as a sound message. It is by similar processes that we "see" via electrochemical messages transmitted by the biochemical "cones" which line the retina of the eyes. Symbols As anyone who has seen a graph produced by a computer printer will know, reality can be represented only imperfectly by such a process. And it depends on pre-understood conventionalized symbols. Magnification removes much of the detail of a pictorial message and distorts the symbol beyond comprehension. We end up with only a series of meaningless blocks or "pictels". Similarly, we lose sense with too much miniaturization. Only at a given level of informational detail does the "symbol" convey the desired meaning so that one can "see" or "hear" or "taste" or "feel" or "smell" what is being transmitted. In short, one can never learn by direct experience. All that we know of the real, or nouminal, world is transmitted to us by symbolic representations of reality. This is perhaps best understood when one turns to the graphic representation of sound: writing. The pictorial symbols which represent spoken words are nothing more than conventionalized representations of the objects in early languages which represented the sound the inventors of written language wished to convey. For example, the Greek letter "alpha" was derived from the Egyptian symbol for the head of an ox and the Semitic word for ox, "aleph". The modern letter "A" is nothing more than a simple drawing of an ox's head upside down. Likewise with "beta", the Greek version of the Egyptian symbol for "house" that was called "beth" in the intermediate Semitic form. Our modern "B" is a house with two windows turned on its side. Without such mechanical symbols to represent reality through sight, sound, feel, touch, smell, and the written symbols of these symbols, man could understand nothing of the world external to himself. This is why those interested in preserving the accuracy of language are disturbed by the contemporary willingness to accept common errors in usage or grammar. These amount to distortions which reduce accuracy and at times even create ambiguity. Jesus, the Master Teacher, understanding these matters, intuitively or otherwise, taught the most basic lessons of life, concentrating on the essential and putting aside the peripheral, so that those truly interested in learning the meaning of life might, at a certain point, understand the philosophy of Eternity. And he taught through unforgettable symbols--the most effective method of teaching (though not necessarily easiest for the teacher, as anyone who has tried to come up with compelling examples will know). As we have seen, learning symbols can often be replaced by symbols of symbols. Thus, while retaining essentially perfect comprehension, we can replace the spoken words "come home" with a written note or telegram which will have the same result. And we can watch a movie or television representation of a live drama with virtually identical emotional results. Church Rites and Symbolism In forming His Church and teaching His doctrines, Christ, as noted, used homilies, parables, and examples, introducing the use of powerful symbols to reinforce the learning experience. In healing the sick he introduced the practice of anointing with olive oil. Olive oil is, in Mediterranean cultures, a common food and its use was presumably intended to symbolize nourishment and good health. It was used to anoint kings and priests, and employing it in the blessing of the sick was clearly intended to concentrate the attention of the ill person on the importance of this priestly rite. Being derived from one of the longest lived trees known to man (some olive trees still found in the Garden of Gethsemane are reputed to have been alive during the lifetime of the Savior), the use of olive oil in the healing ceremony was similarly intended as a promise of long life to those who were healed of their infirmity or of eternal life to those sealed up unto death. It is a pity that this powerful teaching symbolism has been lost in the apostate world of Christianity. But then, of course, so has the Priesthood, the symbolic (and real) authority to heal in the name of the Savior and in his stead. Baptism, Transcendental Poly-Symbol Nowhere is the masterfulness of Jesus' teaching better evidenced than in his choice of immersion in water as symbol of entrance into his Kingdom. Every nation has its rite for conferring citizenship. This is always performed by legitimate representatives of the government and with the greatest care and attention to accuracy. No casual freewheeling is permitted in administering an oath of allegiance, since few matters in life are of greater importance than the question of citizenship. In those rare cases where dual nationality is involved, the claims of national governments can be fierce and uncompromising, which is why when a new citizenship is acquired as an adult, all nations carefully require that all previous allegiances be clearly and unequivocally renounced. Dual citizenship is customarily the result of conflicting national laws over claims to the allegiance of infants. For example, under American law, all children born within the national territory of the United States (this includes territories and dependencies) and "subject to the law thereof" (thus excluding children of foreign diplomats, who are not subject to U.S. law) are citizens at birth. To acquire U.S. citizenship, if born abroad, a citizen parent must prove to an American consular authority that he (or she) physically resided in the United States for a period of at least four years between the ages of sixteen and twenty-four. This is intended to assure that children not grow up abroad, acquiring no substantial knowledge of U.S. law or culture, yet transmitting essentially meaningless citizenship to another generation. Some nations are more generous. Under Swiss law, citizenship descends to the grandchildren of Swiss citizens even if the parents were born outside of Switzerland and have never lived there or taken meaningful part in Swiss life or culture. My wife's brother, the grandson of a Swiss, was confronted with being drafted into the Swiss army while serving as a missionary. He was forced to leave Switzerland overnight to avoid the responsibilities of a citizenship he never knew he had. Dual citizen members of NATO countries can avoid such conflicts simply by establishing that they have performed national service in another member country (Switzerland is not a member of NATO). It should therefore not be surprising that the Lord has established a detailed ceremony of naturalization for those seeking to enter His kingdom. What is astonishing is that with the passage of time, the many churches which claim affinity with the Kingdom of God should have so changed the act of naturalization as to have introduced needless ambiguity and loss of definition. Most have adopted infant baptism, something which clearly precludes knowledgeably renouncing any previous allegiance or voluntarily swearing new allegiance. As with the anointing with oil, baptism is multi-dimensional in its teaching significance. Consider the transcendental symbolism of the act of baptism as originally conceived and taught by the Head of the Church. Since earliest times, washing with water has been a symbol of cleansing oneself from filth, sin, and evil. Baptism is thus, first of all, a symbol of washing oneself clean from the misdeeds of one's previous life and emerging into a new life as a clean person. Second, baptism is a symbol of rebirth--coming forth anew from the watery womb as a "new person". And as a new person, a member of a new family, taking upon oneself the name of one's father--in this case becoming an adopted son or daughter of Christ and taking Christ's name, i.e., becoming a Christian. Finally, there is the matter of Christ's most important teaching, i.e., that through faithfully living according to His teachings, His followers, though buried with Him in the tomb, will come forth in the resurrection. In baptism, one is symbolically buried in the water and brought forth in the resurrection of a new life. And all this is carefully performed in the presence of witnesses to assure that the naturalization ceremony was correctly performed by authorized personnel with the conscious volition of the participant. I have for years tried to think of a more complete and transcendental ceremony, combining all of the basic Gospel essentials in one grand rite. Since the one magnificently comprehensive symbol was already adopted by the Master, it is not surprising that I have come up empty handed. Loss of Definition and Authority Through Use of Defective Symbolism It is true that most other churches teach that sprinkling or pouring are but "symbols of a symbol" and thus fully acceptable substitutes. While aspersion may be symbolic of a fresh water shower--a reasonable alternative to bathing in a tub--as a symbol of cleansing, it is notably defective in all other aspects: rebirth (and adoption), burial, and resurrection. As the transcendental symbol of all the essential teachings of the Philosophy of Heaven, anything other than baptism by immersion is unacceptable. And unless performed by authorized agents, in the presence of appointed witnesses, it is likewise as meaningless as the word-perfect administration of an oath of naturalization or pronouncement of an adoption of a child by a non-authorized person in civil government. As we have recently seen in attempts by otherwise well-intentioned individuals (including a former President) to "privatize" American foreign policy, it would be better if even well-intentioned people would avoid arrogating to themselves responsibility for setting up private Kingdoms of God or involving themselves in the adoption or naturalization of citizens thereof without the instruction and explicit authority of God to do so.