Individual autonomy has become
an important value among parents of young children. Therefore, questions are
raised as to whether baptism can occur
later in life or perhaps be replaced by a rite of blessing the children.
This chapter discusses the dilemma in light of secularization and with the help
of a variety of ecumenical insights.
Many people are inclined to ask what the role of folk
churches will be when they lose their cultural and hegemonic religious status. More
specifically, do these Nordic churches have the resources needed to face a
scenario characterized by declining membership and decreasing support for baptism
as one of the church's core practices? These are issues that are being
discussed today in attempts to come to terms with the challenges that the
Nordic folk churches are facing. Alternatively, the question can be phrased
like this: how can we
interpret our contemporary existence and capture the present through its
existential and religious pulse?[1]
The term “folk church” can be understood as a
church that has a close connection to a people and a nation, which creates “cohesion
and understanding when it comes to religious identity and practice,” writes
Jan-Olav Henriksen in his article “Secularization as the folk church's
ambiguous condition.”[2] The encounter with secularization and
religious diversity otherwise means that people do not necessarily believe or
participate in those religious practices that are exclusively linked to the
prevailing thinking within a particular faith tradition, which is understood in
this article as the Nordic Lutheran folk church. Social pluralism has already
for many years produced signals that there may be other frameworks and
interpretations that shape the lives of those who formally are members but do not
necessarily share the baptismal theology expressed in liturgical formulations.
In postmodernity, the image of God has become more private and thus more speechless.
Henriksen believes that this affects the extent to
which folk churches must accept that there is only one specific way of
interpreting reality, preaching, and practice.[3] The sociologist Peter Berger is among those
who claim that modern social development implies–on an individual level–that one must turn attention away from the
world that is objectively given outside us and toward our own subjectivity and to
a more complex inner world.[4] In other words, pluralization, secularization,
and privatization have changed the relationship between religion, authority,
and the individual “in a way that opens up more ambiguities.”[5] Folk churches, as well as churches of Baptist
traditions, have experienced this transformation during the last twenty years
or so. Thus, there now exists a transition from religious heteronomy to
autonomy, which assigns a more reflexive relationship to religious forms of
understanding, according to Henriksen.
A changing picture
While the concept of “folk church”
in Norwegian theology has previously been used to refer to a church that stands
in opposition to the religious ideals of various revival movements and free
churches, this picture is about to change, according to Tron Fagermoen.”[6] Today, other
ecclesiastical and theological traditions have begun to appropriate the term, which
has generated a more ambiguous folk church ecclesiology as a result.
The changes that have arisen in people's
relationship to baptism represent a challenge that the churches need to address,
particularly on theological terms, Fagermoen argues.[7] He maintains that the increase in those who are
attending baptismal acts indicates that in recent years, baptism has become
more clearly a family event, and a celebration of the child and the family. Therefore,
in a future revision of the baptismal liturgy, a clearer focus should be placed
on the fact that the child is created in the image of God, and on the joy and
gratitude for the child who has been born. In the years to come, it will be
important that the liturgy interacts with the expectations and life experiences
of the families who come to church and ask for baptism. This means that the act
of baptism perhaps have a clear reference to creation theology. Sensitivity to the context in which people
live is a basic prerequisite for theology to be meaningful in our time.[8]
In his work, Fagermoen discusses what it means to
live in a pluralistic and multicultural society, where baptism no longer is not
a matter of course. Not only does it actualize the relationship between baptism
and salvation, but it also directs a stronger focus on the relationship between
the act of baptism itself and the need for facilitating development, growth,
and maturation if one is to live as a follower of Jesus. In other words,
baptism can never be seen in isolation from what follows the baptismal event. In this vein, the
Swedish theologian Anna Karin Hammar has stated that a baptismal theology that
wants to be credible in the context of the Church of Sweden, with its strong
focus on the integrity of the individual, “needs to deal with the question of
whether it is morally justifiable to baptize children who are too young to
answer for themselves whether they wish to be baptized or not.” In other words,
the shift in context from the traditional collective identity to the
contemporary individual focus cannot be left unprocessed.[9]
The objective, then, which in later years has
shifted toward faith education programs, should be understood as encouraging
the socialization of the baptized into the life of the church and community of
faith. The result is a greater understanding of God’s reality and what it means
to be united in the faith of Christ.[10] However, these aspects are also relevant for the
churches that practice child blessing.
Other reflections correspond with the overarching topic for this book
project. The current issue of concern is how leaders of the Nordic Lutheran
churches are reacting to the decline in the number of children being baptized,
and what kind of self-reflection is taking place among parents and church
members as well as among church leaders. In my view, secularization, urbanization,
and ecumenism play important roles here. As a result of a general pluralism and
diversity of opinion, some parents have become unsure as to whether they as
parents–on behalf of their children–should decide to let their baptism be a
religious and social rite, or whether it is better to wait until the children
can decide for themselves. Generally,
parents want their children to choose when they get older.[11] It may also be the case that
at least one of the parents is influenced by a Baptist understanding of
baptism, according to which the conscious choice of the baptizand is of
fundamental importance.
However, since many parents who
choose not to baptize their children still want to have a relation to the
church for themselves and their families, representatives of the Nordic folk
churches often ask whether other rituals or connections could be considered fruitful.
Among the questions that emerge regarding strategies and new practices enacted in
response to the decline is whether child blessing could be an alternative
when parents choose not to baptize.
According to Hammar, modern families are
characterized by the paradox of individualization.[12] At the same time that they want the right to live
their own life, they also have a longing for greater fellowships. In such
circumstances, a church environment has the privilege of communicating that
families are not alone but rather part of a larger community that together
embodies the meaning of what is best for the children.
Some sociological and historical facts
Before I try to answer the central question of this chapter, I will continue
with some sociological and historical facts. Part of my observation is that new
questions have reached the classical churches in ways comparable to what
younger free church movements have already experienced for a long time.[13] Free churches have been forced to foster communities reflecting
their own times, wherein ideals of religious freedom and self-determination of
individuals seem to be self-evident values. The folk churches, on their side,
have enjoyed being in a privileged situation for centuries, with the result
that the great majority of Norwegian children have been baptized based on an established
church tradition. This tradition has been relatively unaffected by more modern
trends of self-determination and individual autonomy. While in earlier times,
infant baptism was mandated by law, the churches of today are now at the mercy
of an active choice of the parents of the children. To a lesser extent, this
choice leans in the favor of the folk churches.[14] Generally,
however, individual liberalism has influenced both Baptists and secularized
members of folk churches, although at different historical points in time.
When Anabaptism broke out in the 1500s, soon followed by the Baptist
movement, it was driven–among other things–not only by a conviction of having the
right understanding of what the New Testament text was saying about baptism,
but also by modern ideals of religious freedom and the demand for the
self-determination of individuals. This
development relates to the fact that baptism and salvation are close interwoven
in the New Testament. Both perspectives point in the same direction:
the individual should decide for himself or herself. Thus, the national churches hear
the same thing: “We will wait for baptism and let our children themselves
decide whether they want to be baptized or not.” In my view, this position is not necessarily a no
to baptism; it is a no to the time at which baptism may occur. Child
blessing, then, may be an opportunity to give the parents a sense of belonging
to the church while they wait.
It may be a brutal fact, but the situation for the Evangelical Lutheran
Church has radically changed compared to its proud history of tradition. About 60
years ago, nearly 100 percent of all Norwegian children were baptized. Today,
the percentage has declined to approximately 50 percent of all newborns. The
decline is greatest in the diocese of Oslo, the capital of Norway, compared to
other areas of the country (in 2018, 31 percent of all children became baptized),[15] while the number of adults being baptized has
increased. Indeed, it is a demanding task to fight against one’s own golden
past!
Another more introspective observation is that Christian churches, for a
long period of time, have been involved in ecumenical conversations about
baptism. Such conversations have given different churches a better theological
understanding of what Christian baptism is all about. The polemical tone has
been replaced in favor of a more respectful conversation, as the objective
becomes one of learning from each other’s theological traditions. Other fruits of
the increasing contact between church denominations are the existence of cross-concessional
families. The result in this case is that you cannot be sure which form of
baptism is most appropriate for these families.[16]
Filadelfiakirken in Oslo, the Pentecostal church to which I belong, has
recently decided that it will welcome as new members those who have faith or at
least are on their road to personal faith in Jesus as Savior and Lord, based
upon the Apostolic Confession, without requiring that everyone is baptized with
the same form of baptism. The reason for this change is–among other things–that
a high percentage of those who engage in this congregation as volunteers or
devoted local leaders have a Lutheran background. Therefore, it becomes
difficult to maintain any requirement for re-baptism for those who value the
baptism to which they were exposed as children. In short, many of those members
do not see any reason to be baptized again.[17]
I would suggest that the combination of the declining numbers of
baptisms, the increased focus on faith education, (in Norwegian: trosopplæringsreformen),
and a more common and ecumenical inspired understanding of the theological
content of baptism together imply that the difference between the historical
churches and the free church movements in the north has become smaller. Today, different
church bodies can understand each other in better ways than seemingly ever before.
They are, so to speak, “in the same boat” when it comes to addressing the
challenges that secularization and postmodernism represent regarding the way
Christian communities meet the spiritual needs of modern families, which
ultimately turns on questions about baptism as a transition rite.
Ecumenical observations
Baptism,
Eucharist, Ministry, the
so-called BEM document, which is one of the best-known papers from the World
Council of Churches (WCC), discusses infant baptism and adult baptism as
equivalent alternatives, in the sense that both are roads that lead to the
church. Here, also infant blessing is also mentioned:
In some
churches which unite both infant-baptist- and believer-baptist-traditions, it
has been possible to regard as equivalent alternatives for entry into the
Church both a pattern whereby baptism in infancy is followed by later
profession of faith and a pattern whereby believers’ baptism follows upon a
presentation and blessing in infancy. This example invites other churches to
decide whether they, too, could not recognize equivalent alternatives in their
reciprocal relationships and in church union negotiations.[18]
The document contains
a benevolent mention of the arrangement of child blessing: “Some of these
churches encourage infants or children to be presented and blessed in a service
which usually
involves thanksgiving for the gift of the child and the commitment of
the mother and father to Christian parenthood.”[19] This
leads to some common theological and ecumenical observations upon which
Lutherans and Baptists largely agree, observations that may reduce the tension
between child blessing and infant baptism.
In his book about baptism, Harald Hegstad is among those who clearly refer
to baptism as a “powerful sign,” and not only a punctual event.[20] In Hegstad’s view, baptism must be seen as an act of
God that includes both an event and a process. I suggest that both Baptists
and Pentecostals have an immediate understanding of this way of articulating
the acts of God in the baptismal act. Second, Hegstad
emphasizes the close connection between baptism and faith. Luther ‘s position is
well known, as he believed that without faith, “baptism is of little use, even
though in itself it is a divine, infinitely rich treasure.”[21] Perhaps we could state that there is no baptism
without faith and no faith without baptism. To be baptized is to partake in the
gift of salvation when this gift is received in faith sooner or later.
Interestingly, the New Testament varies the language when describing the
gift of salvation. Some passages indicate that it is received by faith, and others
that it is given through baptism (see Acts 2:38; 1 Cor 6:11; Gal 3:2.14.27; Eph
2:8; 1 Pet 3:21). The terms in use are generally interchangeable, which means
that both Lutherans and Baptists are “right” in their understanding of baptism.
The difference ultimately depends on which approach and theological angle of
view are in play. To put this in another way, just as repentance can take the
place of baptism, baptism can take the place of repentance. In the same way
that Lutherans fear that child blessing may become a substitute for infant
baptism, Baptists are afraid of an uncritical infant baptismal practice that may
dissolve the relationship between faith and baptism, thereby leading to “an
indiscriminate baptismal practice,” as stated in the BEM document.
In this Faith & Order document, WCC also tries to point out special
challenges inherent in the two baptismal traditions:
In order to overcome their differences, believer
Baptists and those who practice infant baptism should reconsider certain aspects
of their practices. The first may seek to express more visibly the fact that
children are placed under the protection of God’s grace. The latter must guard themselves
against the practice of apparently indiscriminate baptism and take more
seriously their responsibility for the nurture of baptized children to mature commitment
to Christ.[22]
There are reasons to problematize baptismal practices that do not take
religious education seriously. Correspondingly, there are reasons to problematize
practices that do not include baptism in the rite of initiation.[23] Historically, what constituted the church in the long
tradition was not only faith nor only baptism. Instead, it was an understanding
of baptism that led to confessed faith. This understanding required a clear
recognition that it is not enough to be baptized, as one also need to live in
the grace of baptism, as a follower of Jesus Christ.[24]
Third, a general ecumenical insight experienced by many believers in
different denominations worldwide is that God truly acts in human life, even
outside a strict sacramental framework. Salvation reaches the believer as a
powerful sign, as a promise, and even sometimes as a surprise. but it does not
preclude God from acting even before, during, and after baptism. The
consequence of this perspective would be to emphasize, in line with what Regin
Prenter states, that there is a clear basis in Lutheran thinking that it is the
Spirit who makes Christ present in the sacrament.[25] However, the Spirit can also be experienced and
expressed in other ways. What this means is that we cannot operate with too
narrow categories when discussing the work of the Spirit in the church’s
sacramental practices. Not even when we talk about baptism.
A fourth observation based on the first three is this: If infant baptism
to a greater extent than before is the result of a conscious choice on the part
of the parents–and not just a social convention or a cultural family event–then
we may ask with the patristic theologian, Oskar Skarsaune:[26] Perhaps the declining baptismal rates can be a good
thing for a folk church? His reflection is that if the church fails to teach those
who are baptized, parents’ no to baptism may be a sign of increased responsibility.
And if they feel free not to baptize their children, it may be because they
know for themselves that they are not able to lead their children into the Christian
faith. They will not make a promise they are unable to keep. A local church must
respect that, according to Skarsaune. Only then you do take the church,
baptism, and non-believing parents seriously.
A theology of the infant blessing?
I belong to a church tradition where infant blessing is a common act of
intercession and a public presentation of the child that is given to the
parents and the congregation. The logic is clear: children deserve this
starting point. Thus, they become subject to intercession and care through this
process. Then, faith education in Sunday school programs and in youth
gatherings follows. The blessing event emphasizes the great joy and the gift the
child truly is for both the family and the congregation. Within the tradition
of Baptist and Pentecostal churches, child blessing consists of a concrete
prayer that God must take care of the baby on her or his way to baptism. The
blessing is not a substitute for baptism but an expression of the parent’s
desire for God's blessing over the child's life and future in a special way.
Therefore, it should be the interest of all churches to develop a theology and
liturgy around child blessing.
What do rituals of intercession and the act of blessing actually entail?
Child blessing could very well be regarded as a covenant act that entails promises
of both God’s and the church’s blessing and care. The human involved is affirmed and embraced as a child
of God and thus a unique and beloved person. According to the Swedish theologian, Gustaf Wingren,
baptism is a victory of creative life. Baptism does not bring anything new to
man beyond God’s meaning for creation, which consists of life, freedom, and
worship.[27] It is thus possible to develop a theological understanding
of child blessing as a manifestation of both the gift of life and a lifelong
calling for discipleship. As such, it is both initiation and covenant.
One of the most beautiful stories in the Bible is when Jesus forgets all
adults surrounding him and welcomes the children. He makes them models for all
believers, takes them in his
arms, places his hands on them, and blesses them (Mark 10:13–16). In the Kingdom of God, the child has
a leading place, and the roles have changed: It is not the children that will
be like adults, but the adults who will be like children. The kingdom of God is
for the children. As a direct transmission of what happened in this remarkable
story, the text is read every time child blessing is performed in churches
around the world. A priest or a pastor takes the child in his or her hands,
prays, and blesses both the child and the family who is gathered. Moreover, it
has become increasingly common to include godparents in the blessing; as they
should have an active and conscious understanding of their role as supporters
and interceders. Thus, the external framework is not so unlike what
applies when infant baptism takes place.
The question, however, is one of determining what kind of anthropology
is behind the child blessing. This seems to be an unsettled question. Baptist
theology, from time to time, has been accused of being built on an
underdeveloped anthropology. What is common among the churches practicing child
blessing is that nobody has yet developed a full-scale systematic theology about
the status of the child. A conscious liturgy has hardly been developed, either.
The act only appears to be a beautiful part of the service, but as far as I
know, it has not been the subject of any comprehensive systematic-theological
clarifications.
A review of the faith basis for the denominations that practice child
blessing in Norway reveals that practice is hardly mentioned in official
documents. Thus, no theology or liturgy has been developed for child blessing.
However, in an earlier church service manual for the Pentecostal movement in
Norway, we can read the following connected to child blessing: Specifically,
one can engage in free prayer, or:
Dear Lord Jesus! We pray for a blessing on this child.
Thank you for the gift of life. You will preserve … NN … and protect him/her
from dangers and accidents. Let him/her grow in faith in you and reach the goal
you have set for all people: the eternal salvation of the soul. Amen.
One may also pray for the family and for the home. In this case, one can
engage in free prayer, or:
Dear Lord Jesus! You will bless and preserve this
home. You have established the family, keep your hand on these dear friends.
Thank you for this gift that you have given mother and father. You will give
the parents grace and the ability to raise the child in the Christian faith.
Amen.[28]
The closest one gets to a basic understanding of the theological
clarification is that the child–as created in God's image–is under God's
protection and, as such, already is a child of God. Baptism, as well as child blessing, reveals a miracle
of creation and proclaims the hope of liberation for humankind. A baby becomes
blessed in the name of the love of God, who created the world. Interestingly, many
of the same perspectives are included in the Swedish liturgy of infant baptism.
Here is one example of a Thanksgiving that the parents can pray:
God, we are here in wonder and gratitude for life.
Thanks for NN. Thanks for the life we get to share with each other. Thanks for
the gift you give and the confidence you show us. Give us tenderness, firmness,
and calm. Help us to give your love to her/him/the children we have been given
responsibility for. In the name of Jesus. Amen.[29]
In his book on baptism, Hegstad states that the text from Mark 10 seems
to be the basis for the Baptist view of baptism “because it says that the
kingdom of God already belongs to the children, [and] baptism is not necessary
for them.”[30] When these churches perform child blessing, one
perceives this act to be in accordance with what Jesus himself did. Obviously,
this seems to be a satisfactory scriptural basis. To put this in another way, the
practice of child blessing is based on a concrete belief that children already belong
to the kingdom of God. That’s why free church members bring them to church and
let them be exposed to the teaching and protecting program of the church.
In Filadelfiakirken in Oslo, after the blessing, extensive efforts are
made to ensure that children are really included in the various activities of
the church. Older children actively participate in worshipping groups; they partake
in the Lord’s Supper, and they are included in the comprehensive program for
faith education and inclusion.[31] The underlying idea is that when a child is brought
to the congregation through the ceremony of child blessing, the whole congregation
becomes responsible for an extensive teaching and service program, in line with
the Great Commandment (Matt 28), which covers all phases of life, from the
cradle to the grave. In this way, child blessing must be understood as something
much more than a single event. In fact, the blessing implies congregational
responsibility for the entire lifetime. Of course, this is a major challenge
for a local church, not least in terms of human resources. Today,
Filadelfiakirken in Oslo has several hundred volunteer employees who, together
with their leaders, are responsible for everything that must happen to realize
the program of MicroFila, which is the name of the children’s activity program.
The same liturgy mentioned above from the Swedish church also contains a
prayer for the child, which can be used by parents, a priest, or another
person. It should be noted that the content of this prayer is practically
identical to what can be heard during a child blessing ceremony:
Let's pray: God of life, we collect our good thoughts,
everything we want for NN, and we pray: Let her/him live in faith and grow in
security and fellowship, enclosed by the prayer of the congregation. Give
her/him hope and courage when life is difficult, the power to stand up for
others, and the feeling of being carried. In the name of Jesus. Amen.[32]
The perspective that comes out of the story of Jesus and the children
(Mark 10) is groundbreaking: in the child, the kingdom of heaven has come near.
Whoever receives the child in the name of Jesus welcomes God. Therefore, in the
child, creation and salvation are linked.[33] Child blessing underlies the notion that life is
stronger than everything that breaks down what is good. In this way, child
blessing–both within free churches and in a Lutheran context–can be developed
as a doxology, a thanks-for-life, and an expression of God's creative and
everlasting presence.
A more flexible approach?
To face our own time, a more flexible approach is needed, which means
that the churches must take seriously the fact that today, all church bodies
are faced with a more complex population. Representatives of the Nordic folk
church should not be too quick to conclude that everyone who is not baptized as
a child is lost to the church.[34] In the future, one can expect from these churches a
greater variation in the initiation rituals and practices than has been the
case so far. My advice is that Nordic churches should consider establishing a
liturgy for child blessing in line with the approach of the church of Iceland.
However, the actual position of the folk churches in both Norway and
Sweden is that child blessing, in a historical sense, is a “foreign custom.” It
is said that all aspects of child blessing are already covered by baptism.
However, documents from these churches also state that creating a liturgy may
provide an opportunity to prepare a ritual that is clearly different from the
baptismal liturgy and thus make a more definitive distinction between baptism
and child blessing. Nevertheless, none of these churches want to establish a
particular liturgy of child blessing. Indeed, they warn against actively promoting such a
ceremony, but any priest can still independently assess whether child blessing
could be applicable during the intercession part of the service. [35]
The presupposition is that such a practice is not a substitute for
baptism but an event of intercession. It
should be possible to design a rite for the blessing of children to meet those
families who are not opposed to baptism but who want to wait to make such a
decision until a later stage of the child's life. At the same time, the
churches should consider extending the education program to include parents and
godparents. Only in this way can we safeguard the interaction that must exist
between the church as both a sacramental and a teaching community, as clearly
stated in the Great Commandment (Matt 28).
Some may fear that a more flexible approach will promote further
secularization. I do not think so, based on a quick look at those places in the
world where the church is growing the fastest. Thus, I think it is an unfounded
fear. Throughout the world, churches are growing within those environments that
have a comprehensive teaching program linked to Christian initiation, regardless
of whether the rite of entry is infant baptism or child blessing.
The necessity of seeing the close link between baptism and education has
long been clearly articulated by the Church of Norway. The document Baptismal
Practice and Baptismal Education in The Norwegian Church states: “It must
be a crucial matter to see that the biblical prerequisites for a sound
baptismal practice have not failed. If the national church is to continue to
maintain its practice of baptism, it must therefore intensively upgrade its
baptismal training.” In this vein, an extensive faith education reform program
was launched in 2004. Furthermore, the new text from Faith and Order (“One
Baptism: Towards Mutual Recognition”) emphasizes that baptism is situated
within a context of lifelong growth in Christ. Even more strongly than in the
BEM, baptism is seen as part of a Christian initiation process, preceding the
act of baptism and continuing after the act of baptism through the baptism's
incorporation into the Christian community.[36]
In her article “… legger vi vårt barn i dine hender …” the Norwegian
theologian, Hege Fagermoen, discusses the fact that some members of the Church
of Norway want to mark their affiliation to the church, while at the same time seeking
something other than what is given in baptism. She acknowledges the need for a
broader theological conversation about what child blessing means for the view
of baptism, and therefore also the view of the church. According to Fagermoen, “as
a folk church, we must take it as a solid declaration of trust that parents
turn to us with their newborn children and want the church as a framework
around their children. It is a declaration of trust we should manage with
gratitude and awe.”[37]
Perhaps a more clearly designed and theologically grounded arrangement for child blessing could help ensure that the folk church does not need to compromise with the church's view of baptism and faith, either in their communication or in practice. First, though, a conversation must be held about how churches in Nordic countries should understand and meet the desire for child blessings.
Terje Hegertun
(Artikkelen er kapittel 8 i boken Baptism in Times of Change: Exploring New Patterns of Baptismal Theologies and Practices in Nordic Lutheran Churches. Redaktør er Harald Hegstad. Utgiver: Wipf & Stock Publisher, Eugene, 2025.)
References
Berger, Peter I. 1980. The Heretical Imperative.
Contemporary Possibilities of Religious
Affirmation. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press.
Dåpspraksis og dåpsopplæring i Den norske
kirke: en utredning avgitt til Bispemøtet våren
1982 med bispemøtets vedtak og studieplan for sju samvær [Baptismal Practice and Baptismal Education in the Church of Norway: A Study Submitted to the Bishops' Conference in the Spring of 1982, With the Bishops' Conference's Decision and Study Plan for Seven Gatherings]. Oslo: IKOs læremidler, 1982.
Fagermoen, Hege
E. «… legger vi vårt barn i dine hender …» [“… placing our child in your
hands…”]. In Luthersk Kirketidende [Lutheran
Church Magazine], No
19, 2019.
https://mf.no/lk/legger-vi-vart-barn-i-dine-hender
Fagermoen, Tron. «Et valg
mellom visjoner: en analyse av ulike kirkesyn i kirkevalgkampen
2015» [“A Choice Between Visions: An Analyses of Different Church Models During the Church Election Campaign of 2015”]. In Tidsskrift for praktisk teologi [Journal of practical theology], vol 33, no 1 (2016), 4–15.
Fagermoen, Tron: «Dåp og
antropologi, innledning» [“Baptism and Anthropology, An
Introduction”]. In Reformasjon nå. Luther som utfordring og ressurs for Den norske kirke. [Reformation Now. Luther as challenge and resource for the Church of Norway]. Stavanger: Eide Forlag, 2016, 91–96.
Hammar, Anna Karin. Skapelsens mysterium,
Skapelsens sakrament. Dopteologi i mötet
mellan tradition och situation [The Mystery of the Creation, The Sacrament of the Creation. Theology of baptism in the Meeting Between Tradition and Situation]. Uppsala: Uppsala universitet, 2009.
Hegertun, Terje: Nådens gaver i gjestfrihetens hus. Kirken som karismatisk og sakramentalt
fellesskap [The Gift of Grace in the House of Hospitality. The Church as Charismatic and Sacramental Fellowship]. Oslo: Lunde Forlag, 2018.
Hegstad, Dåpen, en nådens
kilde [Baptism, a Source of Grace]. Oslo: Verbum Akademisk,
2019.
Henriksen, Jan-Olav.167. «Sekularisering
som folkekirkens tvetydige betingelse»
[“Secularization as the Ambiguous Condition of the Folk Church”]. In Folkekirke nå, [Folk church now], edited by Stephanie Dietrich, Hallgeir Elstad, Beate Fagerli, and Vidar L. Haanes. Oslo: Verbum Akademisk (2015), 166–178.
McDonnell, Kilian, and George
T. Montague: Christian initiation and
baptism in the Holy
Spirit: evidence from the first eight centuries. Collegeville, Min.: The Liturgical Press, 1994.
Predikanthåndboken [The Preacher’s Manual], Oslo: Rex Forlag, 1995.
Prenter Regin. Spiritus
creator: studier i Luthers teologi [Spiritus creator: Studies in the
Theology of Luther]. København: Samlerens forlag, 1946.
Skarsaune, Oskar. Etterlyst: Bergprekenens Jesus. Har folkekirkene glemt ham? [Wanted:
Jesus of the Sermon on the Mount. Have the folk churches forgotten him?]
Oslo: Luther
forlag, 2018.
Sæther, Knut Willy and Karl Inge Tangen.
Pentekostale perspektiver [Pentecostal
Perspectives]. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget, 2015.
“The Holy Baptism,” in The
Large Catechism, https://bookofconcord.org/large-
catechism/holy-baptism/ Downloaded March 2023.
Wingren, Gustaf. Credo. Den kristne tros- og
livsanskuelse [Credo: The Christian faith
and View of Life]. Oslo: Gyldendal, 1979.
World Council of Churches. “BEM Declaration,” Faith
and Order Paper No. 111, Geneva:
1982.
World Council of Churches. “One
Baptism: Towards Mutual Recognition. A Study Text.”
Faith and Order Paper, No. 210.
Geneva: 2008/2011.
[1] Hammar, Anna Karin. Skapelsens
mysterium, 26.
[2] Henriksen,
«Sekularisering», 167, (my translation).
[3] Henriksen,
«Sekularisering», 170.
[4]
Berger, The Heretical Imperative, 22.
[5]
Henriksen, «Sekularisering», 173, (my translation).
[6] Fagermoen, «Et
valg mellom visjoner», 5.
[7] Fagermoen, «Dåp og
antropologi», 91–96.
[8]
Fagermoen, «Dåp
og antropologi», 91. This is in
accordance with the position of the Swedish theologian, Anna Karin Hammer in
her Ph.D. thesis Skapelsens mysterium, 34.
[9] Hammar, Skapelsens
mysterium, 91–92, (my translation).
[10]
Fagermoen, Reformasjon nå, s. 92, 95.
[11]
The Evangelical Lutheran Church of
Iceland has developed a liturgy for the blessings of children.
[12] Hammar, Anna
Karin. Skapelsens mysterium, 39.
[13]
For an introduction to various aspects of this issue, see the anthology
of Sæther and Tangen, Pentekostale perspektiver.
[14]
The situation for the folk church in a Norwegian context is given in
Dietrich, Elstad, Fagerli and Haanes, Folkekirke nå.
[15] “Kraftig nedgang i
antall døpte,» Statistisk Sentralbyrå (26 February 2024).
[16] Different
aspects of the baptism debate from an ecumenical perspective can be found in
Hegertun, Nådens gaver, 176–187.
[17]
The BEM
Declaration discourages churches to perform rebaptism, §13, 4.
[18]
BEM, Commentary 12, 4.
[19] BEM, Section IV, § 11,
3.
[20] Hegstad, Dåpen,
51–55.
[21]
“The Holy Baptism,” in The Large Catechism.
[22] BEM, §
16, 5.
[23]
For an extensive discussion of the relationship between baptism and faith in
the initiation process, see
McDonnell, Christian initiation.
[24]
Regarding baptism as Christian initiation, see Hegstad, Dåpen, 153–155.
[25] Prenter,
Spiritus creator, 114–180.
[26] Skarsaune: Etterlyst: Bergprekenens Jesus, 272.
[27] Wingren, Credo, 83, 197–198.
[28] Predikanthåndboken,
Oslo: Rex Forlag, 1995, (my translation).
[29]
See https://www.svenskakyrkan.se/dopsajten/gudtjenstordningen (my translation).
[30]
Hegstad, Dåpen, 119, (my translation).
[31]
For a deeper understanding of the program, see https://microfila.no/
[32]
https://www.svenskakyrkan.se/dopsajten/gudtjenstordningen (my translation).
[33] Hammar, Anna
Karin. Skapelsens mysterium, 121.
[34]
Hegstad, Dåpen, 142–143.
[35]
See https://www.kirken.no/globalassets/kirken.no/bispemotet/2018/dokumenter/bm-saksdokumenter/bm-20.18-barnevelsignelse.pdf See also https://www.svenskakyrkan.se/filer/Leva%20i%20dopet%20-%20biskopsbrev%20om%20dop%20(x).pdf
[36] Dåpspraksis og
dåpsopplæring i Den norske kirke (1982),
94–95.
[37] Hege E. Fagermoen, in Luthersk Kirketidende, https://mf.no/lk/legger-vi-vart-barn-i-dine-hender, No 19, 2019, (my translation).