I don't know anything
>about how holy water might have been blessed in those days or even
>whether there was any predisposition to designate some water holy for the
>purpose of baptism. But it seems entirely reasonable that missionaries
>would want to establish a church near a source of water and that they may
>have been in the habit of blessing the water when it was used for
>sacramental purposes.
>
>
Perhaps I could correct a misapprehension: baptisms are not, and never have
been, performed with "holy water". Any water may be used. The NT gives us
the example of St Paul baptising his gaoler and his family - presumably with
a bowl of whatever water was available in prison; of St Philip baptising
the Ethiopian eunuch at a convenient spring. Bede tells us of St Paulinus
baptising large numbers of converts in the River Glen at Yeavering.
The baptismal rite contains a form of blessing for the water, if it has not
already been blessed (as it will have been, for example, in the Easter
season, when the font is blessed at the Easter Vigil). There is no problem
about using any spring, well or stream for baptism. I believe a previous
contributor hit the nail on the head when he/she said that Christianity may
have found a greater "resonance" than pagan religions in sacred wells and
springs. There is a wealth of baptismal reference.
In fact, early fonts take their design from the "frigidarium" or cold
shower, used in the public bath-houses of the Roman world. But time presses
- perhaps a series on this?
Bill.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|