Is baptism the new circumcision?

Some evil man yesterday asked me, quite offhand, if I thought that baptism was the "new circumcision," replacing circumcision as a sacrament.

At first, I said no, because I don't see circumcision or baptism as a sacrament, only to do some research on what exactly sacraments are. Then my answer was still no, because while I can accept that they're sacraments, I don't think one replaces or supercedes the other.

So: what is a sacrament? A sacrament is a sign, a symbol, of God's grace in us. Various denominations define sacraments differently; the Catholic Church defines seven (baptism, confirmation, eucharist, penance, anointing of the sick, holy orders, and matrimony), the Eastern Orthodox Church defines almost everything done by the church as a sacrament (a sentiment I can agree with, honestly, even though I'm very far from being Eastern Orthodox), and Protestants recognize many sacraments as well, with communion and baptism being common.

For Jews, examples of sacraments are a little ... more difficult (because of the nature of Judaism and the view of what sacraments are, in the first place) but one might consider circumcision, the bar mitzvah, Shabbat, and perhaps the High Holy Days as sacraments.

(If you're interested in what a specific church or denomination holds as sacramental, you really should ask the church or denomination itself; I'm a poor reference.)

So the sacraments are rites that are symbolic of God's grace upon us. They're not (normally) mandated; they're also not normally a "complete set" - for example, the Roman Catholic Church sees both holy orders and matrimony as sacramental, but one doesn't normally fulfill both. (Or such is my understanding; I'm not Roman Catholic, either.)

So what's the role of a sacrament in Christian life? They're difficult to define, although there are a few commonalities (communion and baptism of some sort are the two common sacraments); they're meant to be fulfilled somehow, but if they're not, it's okay... in general.

I say "in general" because there are some sacraments which are expected to be performed by the believer - for example, baptism. Can one go to Heaven without being baptized in water? Yes - but water baptism is expected nonetheless, and some churches require it before membership can be conferred.

I say "water baptism" because a spiritual baptism is required - it's a way to refer to redemption in Christ, a washing of the soul in the blood of His sacrifice for us. Water baptism isn't the repentance of sin; it's only a symbol of salvation.

I don't know if membership in a church is intrinsically valuable. It's nice to be able to participate in the life of a given church, and I think it's okay for a church to have some sort of litmus test for service and participation, but these are secondary issues for salvation. Membership in a church cannot lead you to God, although it may help grow you in your Christian life.

Membership is not salvific. In my humble opinion, if a church says it is in some way salvific, you should run from that church as fast as you can - it sees itself as the gatekeeper to God, and Jesus said that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life - not anyone else. You can judge for yourself whether a church that mandates interaction with a priesthood is correct or not.

I started off with the question being whether baptism replaces circumcision as a sacrament. Initially I debated whether either was a sacrament at all, only to discover that I was ignorant; they can both be considered sacramental, although for Christians, circumcision would be a very minor sacrament, if a sacrament at all.

So the question is valid: if circumcision isn't a sacrament (or isn't much of one), does baptism replace it?

Again: no. Baptism has always been a sacrament for the host culture of Christianity, Judaism; in Judaism, ritual baths are present (although they're not a "one shot" deal); the mikveh (מִקְוֶה) is used to restore ritual purity after various circumstances (conversion, menstruation or childbirth, etc.)

Something present in the parent culture can't replace something else present in the parent culture; at best, one has lost importance to Christianity (circumcision) because it symbolizes an identification with... the parent culture (Judaism) and not Christianity itself.

Is any of this important? Probably not - but we're mere human beings, sometimes thinking about these things can yield enlightenment and interest, if only by leading us to other issues. (For example: I learned about sacraments! Win for me.)

Shalom.

(As a slight postscript: the "evil man" in the first paragraph is actually a good friend of mine, and a good Christian - he's a bright guy and a good support for me. I was joking about you being evil, you stupid-head.)