A very peculiarly-shaped ancient church’s baptismal fountain

[grandvizier1006]

Hopefully this won’t offend anybody but it could be considered shocking. I personally find it very affirming and welcoming of women, the female body, and female sexuality—a very stark contrast from later ages of the church that (at times) devalued women or assigned them only a few roles while men had more. Not only does this baptismal font speak to the reality of equality between women and men that every Christian can agree with, but also that our human bodies, when such imagery is employed in worship, isn’t necessarily pagan if it’s incorporated in a respectful way where the attention isn’t focused on the creation, but how God is using it as a metaphor. The Church Made Vagina Sculptures Long Before Nadia Bolz-Weber

 

[~Anastasia~]

Actually - I think their interpretation is off. Most baptismals I've seen from then were cross-shaped. And this one is too. Just not with very long cross-parts, but then they usually weren't. Basically a rectangular shape is needed.

 

[grandvizier1006]

Actually - I think their interpretation is off. Most baptismals I've seen from then were cross-shaped. And this one is too. Just not with very long cross-parts, but then they usually weren't. Basically a rectangular shape is needed.


View attachment 260371

I can’t see much of a cross shape to the one shown in the article. It could have been unintentional, but the implications if it was intentional, even if only done by a few churches, is remarkable. That being said, if you know of any ancient sources that suggest whether it was or wasn’t, feel free to share them. Although I doubt this sort of thing would be talked about much by most early church fathers.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Does this angle help? Of course the article will use an angle that supports their story. It may not be the most apparent cross, but it's also not an apparent vagina IMO.

You might want to google images for "ancient baptismal".

Many of them ARE very apparent crosses.

But sometimes they are more of a rectangle with only a suggestion of crossbars, often a widening circular area (also space is needed for at least two people and the dunking).

This one from the article falls between those two I would say.

By the way, Orthodox Churches are supposed to be cross-shaped as well.

But due to necessary use, what you tend to see is a long rectangle with just a small bump-out in the center for the cross bars. It's a very common architectural cross, for practical reasons, is what I mean to say.

However with all of that, I don't mean to say that the Church failed to recognize women. They held many important positions, and women were even acknowledged to be important to Jesus' own ministry while He was on earth. There are several women with the title "Equal to the Apostles" and so on. It's true that there is no female priesthood, but that doesn't demean women within an ancient Christian context. Christianity actually elevated women and bestowed upon them a dignity equal to that of men, in a society where they had been little more than property in many ways.

 

[grandvizier1006]

Does this angle help? Of course the article will use an angle that supports their story. It may not be the most apparent cross, but it's also not an apparent vagina IMO.

View attachment 260374

You might want to google images for "ancient baptismal".

Many of them ARE very apparent crosses.

View attachment 260382 View attachment 260383 View attachment 260384





But sometimes they are more of a rectangle with only a suggestion of crossbars, often a widening circular area (also space is needed for at least two people and the dunking).

View attachment 260385 View attachment 260386 View attachment 260387 View attachment 260388

This one from the article falls between those two I would say.

View attachment 260374









By the way, Orthodox Churches are supposed to be cross-shaped as well.
View attachment 260390


But due to necessary use, what you tend to see is a long rectangle with just a small bump-out in the center for the cross bars. It's a very common architectural cross, for practical reasons, is what I mean to say.

View attachment 260391





However with all of that, I don't mean to say that the Church failed to recognize women. They held many important positions, and women were even acknowledged to be important to Jesus' own ministry while He was on earth. There are several women with the title "Equal to the Apostles" and so on. It's true that there is no female priesthood, but that doesn't demean women within an ancient Christian context. Christianity actually elevated women and bestowed upon them a dignity equal to that of men, in a society where they had been little more than property in many ways.

Thanks for the pictures! It makes sense that many churches would opt for a cross-shape for a baptismal fountain, since that’s our most important symbol by far. It’s also good that the ancient ones survived centuries after the main building crumbled, likely due to being depressions in the ground rather than structures built up. As someone raised in Presbyterian churches I never saw things like you’ve shown in the pictures growing up, although I’d imagine no modern building looks quite like what they made in the 1st century or so.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I've never seen one in person either. In our parish, we have a large trough that was painted white and a gold cross mounted on it, but a real cross baptistery wasn't in the budget. I've seen a photo of a really nice one built a couple of years ago, but can't find it now. I guess they may be rare - harder to find images - but there are still some.

Most Churches have a much more modest baptistry, and sometimes I've seen they use local bodies of water instead. (Actual running water is the more "proper" form from the early Church, but many times it's convenient to have a place to baptize right at the Church of course.)

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Even if we did grant the premise that the baptistery was done in the shape of a vagina, It still seems unwarranted to compare that to a feminist who created a sculpture of a vagina and argue they are the same thing.

Granting the the idea, what would be the point in the mind of an ancient Christian? Would it be to celebrate femininity and female sexuality or would it be to draw the connection between the old natural birth from a woman and the new birth in Christ at baptism? There is a natural symbolic connection there based on Scripture and we don't have to force modern feminism into the ancient world in order to arrive at a sensible explanation.

There are some things I want to say about Weber but I best not say them. She is far from the ancient faith, lets put it that way.

 

[grandvizier1006]

Even if we did grant the premise that the baptistery was done in the shape of a vagina, It still seems unwarranted to compare that to a feminist who created a sculpture of a vagina and argue they are the same thing.

Granting the the idea, what would be the point in the mind of an ancient Christian? Would it be to celebrate femininity and female sexuality or would it be to draw the connection between the old natural birth from a woman and the new birth in Christ at baptism? There is a natural symbolic connection there based on Scripture and we don't have to force modern feminism into the ancient world in order to arrive at a sensible explanation.

There are some things I want to say about Weber but I best not say them. She is far from the ancient faith, lets put it that way.

I think the point of the article was to show that ancient Christianity was not the simplistically “patriarchal” religion that Weber thought of it as. Christianity sadly gets a bad reputation for this. In my opinion it is partially valid (emphasis on partially) but in comparison with the ancient world, Christianity elevated women immensely. Jesus treated women amazingly and through his mother, motherhood became elevated to an almost holy status.

I agree with what you said in the second paragraph as well. I think that’s what Christian worship should ideally do if it incorporates any symbols. The Eucharist comes to mind, but I understand that for ancient churches it’s not merely a symbol but Christ’s presence going into ordinary things. That, too, is something I can get behind, as making ordinary things extraordinary is very much within God’s character.

 

[GodLovesCats]

I don't see a cross shape unless it is two perfect intersecting rectangles. The first image is just fancy with a painted cross and irregular design. Others look like attempts to merge a cross with a circle (which is the symbol of eterinity), but if you have to think twice, I don't see it as that either. So for me, a cross-shaped baptistery is like the pictures in #5.

I was baptized in a rectanguar pool at a non-traditional church. The only other church I have seen people being baptized at was Methodist church, so most of them were infants having water put on their heads. It would be awesome if I could watch people being immersed in cross-shaped baptisteries.

 

[grandvizier1006]

I don't see a cross shape unless it is two perfect intersecting rectangles. The first image is just fancy with a painted cross and irregular design. Others look like attempts to merge a cross with a circle (which is the symbol of eterinity), but if you have to think twice, I don't see it as that either. So for me, a cross-shaped baptistery is like the pictures in #5.

I was baptized in a rectanguar pool at a non-traditional church. The only other church I have seen people being baptized at was Methodist church, so most of them were infants having water put on their heads. It would be awesome if I could watch people being immersed in cross-shaped baptisteries.

I didn’t know the circle behind some cross images represented eternity.

 

[GodLovesCats]

I didn’t know the circle behind some cross images represented eternity.

Not those circles. Just any perfect circle. The reason obviously is circles have no beginning or end.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Crosses have been portrayed many different ways in history.

Just a quick searched image - I can easily think of some it doesn't include.

That image of a cross that is the only one some Protestants recognize is - ironically - a Latin cross.

 

[GodLovesCats]

I have seen some of those. It is not that they are unfamiliar to Protestants but the fact that none of them match the cross on Calvary Hill that makes the others unacceptable.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I have seen some of those. It is not that they are unfamiliar to Protestants but the fact that none of them match the cross on Calvary Hill that makes the others unacceptable.

I don't wish to argue. Please understand this is a gentle question. But ... how do you know the Latin cross exactly matches the true Cross? Particularly when some aspects - like the upper horizontal piece - are the place where Pilate had the inscription placed?

But I mostly want to be rhetorical in my question. It's a good idea to question where our assumptions come from.

And the use of varying symbols had particular reasons behind them.

God be with you!

 

[GodLovesCats]

I just mean the shape, not the sign or text on it.

Anyway, your image does give me something to research on Google.

 

[( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)]

Some very cool pictures here. Thanks for sharing!

 

[JCFantasy23]

I'm not seeing the shape either, think they're over-analyzing, but I'm sure there have been some odd baptismal shapes up here.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Hopefully this won’t offend anybody but it could be considered shocking. I personally find it very affirming and welcoming of women, the female body, and female sexuality—a very stark contrast from later ages of the church that (at times) devalued women or assigned them only a few roles while men had more. Not only does this baptismal font speak to the reality of equality between women and men that every Christian can agree with, but also that our human bodies, when such imagery is employed in worship, isn’t necessarily pagan if it’s incorporated in a respectful way where the attention isn’t focused on the creation, but how God is using it as a metaphor. The Church Made Vagina Sculptures Long Before Nadia Bolz-Weber

Your source does not give us a picture of the font.

 

[grandvizier1006]

<staff edit>
That's a fair point, which is likely why if this even is what the author interprets it as, it's no wonder it's not in any other ancient church.

 

[prodromos]

Your source does not give us a picture of the font.

You have to click on links in the article.