274 Dimensions of Baptism
Now it is almost certainly the case that Barth's understanding of bap-
tism is popular among many Christians of Baptist persuasion; that baptism
is often referred to as an 'ordinance' rather than a 'sacrament' reflecting
the view that we have in believer's baptism as a human act of witness to a
prior act of God. But can we so readily separate water-baptism and Spirit-
baptism? John Colwell has criticized Barth precisely on this point. In
objecting to any idea that in baptism divine action occurs under the cloak
of a human action, Barth effectively 'demythologizes' baptism. This seems
a quite remarkable turn around from the general tone which pervades his
Church Dogmatics, and is found in our earlier discussion of the doctrine of
revelation, that there is a connectedness between divine and human action.
As Colwell asserts, it is perfectly possible to affirm God's action in water-
baptism without undermining it as a human response.^15 We will return to
this in our exposition shortly.
The observation we must now make concerns the relationship between
Barth's use of the concept of the hiddenness of God and his theology of
baptism. Here the two critical points already made by Jenson and Colwell
come together. The interconnectedness of divine and human action noted
by Colwell is properly, systematically located in a doctrine of the Spirit.
Yet, Barth's decision to appropriate the hiddenness of God to the Father,
noted by Jenson, leads to an inevitable reluctance to speak in general of
a hidden work of the Spirit. This is partly responsible for the oft-noted
general understatement of Barth's pneumatology. It is, therefore, not sur-
prising to find a reluctance to speak of the activity of the Spirit in the
sacraments. The separation of Spirit-baptism from water-baptism is per-
haps not so strange given Barth's prior dialectical exposition of the manner
of God's hiddenness.
In fact, it is precisely here that it might be suggested that both Luther
and Barth fail to integrate their more profound insights into the hiddenness
of God with a full-blooded doctrine of the Trinity. In Luther, this is his-
torically less surprising; in Barth it is somewhat more so. Surely it is the- John Colwell, 'Baptism, Conscience and the Resurrection: A Reappraisal of
1 Peter 3.21', in S.E. Porter and A.R. Cross (eds.), Baptism, the New Testament and the
Church: Historical and Contemporary Studies in Honour ofR.E. O. White (JSNTSup,
171; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), pp. 210-27. Here personal pastoral
practice of believers' baptism calls into question Barth's radical separation of Spirit-
and water-baptism. It is quite clear that for many who present themselves for believer's
baptism the human act is grounded in the act of God and the very act of baptism is in
itself a moment of sacramental significance as well as ethical decision.