CHAPTER 1

Decoding the Obvious:Reflections on Baptismal Ministry inthe Episcopal Church

The Reverend William Seth Adams

I. Stating the Problem

The Episcopal Church is reawakening to the importance of Christian initiation.The texts in The Book of Common Prayer and The Book of Occasional Services arethe best signs and continuing sources of this reawakening. Clearly, the ritesfor baptism and the series of rites associated with the catechumenate, combinedwith the Prayer Book's directive regarding the public nature of initiation, thenaming of baptismal days and the heightened place given the Easter Vigil in ourritual life all work to enhance and invigorate the church's baptismal practice.

In addition to these texts and rubrical norms, there are meetings, conferencesand books which augment and interpret the liturgical texts, teaching andencouraging the church in its initiation practices. Among these are DanielStevick's Baptismal Moments; Baptismal Meanings (1987), The Baptismal Mysteryand the Catechumenate, edited by Michael Merriman (1989), and the 1991 revisededition of A. Theodore Eastman's The Baptizing Community (1982). Further, ingroups like the Associated Parishes and the Association of Diocesan Liturgy andMusic Commissions, the Episcopal Church has people of deep concern and insightoffering their gifts in pointed and programmatic forms to any and allinterested.

From these and many other quarters, both within and without the EpiscopalChurch, efforts mount to empower the rites which make Christians, to give a trueplace to the complex ritual act which bestows forgiveness of sins and raises tonewness of life, which seals by the Spirit of God and makes one Christ's ownforever. In the face of all this, one must first of all cheer about this turn ofevents, and having cheered, as surely I do, then work to assist the enterprise.

It appears that the assistance I can offer is of a peculiar sort. That is, whatI find myself able to do is to identify impediments to the process. In fact, Ifind myself convinced that the real and effectual power of Christian initiationin the Episcopal Church faces dismal prospects for true and faithful "success."This is so on two grounds, namely, spatial evidence and ritual evidence. What Iintend to do in the following remarks is to examine this physical evidence withan eye to "decoding the obvious."

In a way, what I am suggesting is that what we claim about the importance ofinitiation is not supported by the physical, observable evidence. This failureto support discredits our claims. And if evangelism is to be central to the workwe are about, then surely this rite of conversion and incorporation needs to behealthy and to tell the truth to those drawn into the fellowship of Christ.

II. Spatial Evidence

The central ritual metaphor underneath all the rites in the Prayer Book is anencounter, an encounter between the gathered community and God. This encounteris acted out and experienced in the church's public liturgy around threeliturgical centers within a common liturgical space. The three centers are theplace for Baptism, the place for the Liturgy of the Word, and the place for theLiturgy at the Altar/Table.

The ecclesiology of the Prayer Book sees the church as a community.Liturgically speaking, the work of this community is distributed among theseveral members and enacted in the gathering. The clear supposition is that thecommunity will all gather in the same room, rather than in several rooms, as inolder architectural styles. (At its most extravagant, a Gothic building hadthree rooms—one for the baptized, one for the choir [clergy] and one for theordained presider.)

In addition, because the liturgical work is distributed in a functional ratherthan hierarchical fashion, there is no need for the space to be hierarchicallyordered, though clearly one must be sensitive to the needs of hearing andseeing. This way of viewing the space requires that we abandon the older names(nave, chancel, sanctuary) and search for new ones. Interestingly enough, so faras I can tell, the search has yet to yield a really usable vocabulary.

In addition to a single room, this view of the church requires a configurationthat in a tangible way sets forth testimony to "gathering around." This leads tothe abandonment of the linear, rectangular building (the one modeled on the bus)in favor of some configuration several-sided around the central focus. Thisnotion tends to create a room that is wider than it is deep. A circularconfiguration has attracted some, though under most circumstances I would argueagainst the circle on both practical and theological grounds.

If a single chamber is most congruent with the intent of the Prayer Book, theinterrelationship of the liturgical centers within that space is our nextconcern. In Marion Hatchett's Occasional Paper, "Architectural Implications ofThe Book of Common Prayer," he says that the three liturgical centers—the placefor Baptism, the place for Liturgy of the Word and the place for the Liturgy atthe Altar/Table—"should have approximately equal dignity and prominence."

My own way of expressing this is to view the liturgical space as if it were anecosystem, an interactive community of organisms within an environment. This wayof understanding the existence and organization of space puts theinterrelationship of these centers on equal footing with their own particularand individual integrity. A sound ecosystem is dependent on mutual necessity andreciprocity. Consequently, as a metaphor for the character of a liturgicalspace, an ecosystem establishes balance as a central characteristic.

The ambo and altar/table constitute two of the three liturgical centers whichpopulate our liturgical environment. The baptismal space is the third, and theprincipal concern of this essay.

Surely there is no subject in liturgical studies more warmly or richly treatedin our time than baptismal rites and theology. Human concern for identity,membership and initiation coupled with ever greater curiosity about the activityof God's Holy Spirit have brought out of us more and more powerful convictionsabout this rite of burial, birth and bathing.

"Holy Baptism is full initiation by water and the Holy Spirit into Christ's Bodythe Church. The bond which God establishes in Baptism is indissoluble." Soreads the Prayer Book. Although debates still arise throughout the church as towhat confirmation is, the importance and centrality of the water rite are not indispute. Consequently, and in principle at least, there is also no debate aboutthe importance of the ritual object which must bear the symbolic weight of ourinitiation theology. The rubrics imagine a place, a container, a pool of suchsize as to make possible the immersion of an adult.

Efforts in evidence in the Prayer Book to restore baptism to its rightful placeand to give substance and symbolic power to the ritual object necessary forbaptism have been fostered in large measure by a deeply held conviction aboutthe calling of the baptized and the theological centrality of baptism. TheodoreEastman has spoken for many in saying, "baptism is ordination to the principalorder of ministry." In an important book, Anglicanism and the Christian Church,Paul Avis calls baptism "the fundamental sacrament of Christianity" and "theground of our unity." Further, he proposes a "baptismal paradigm" as thestarting point for the church's own self-understanding and for conversationswith other Christians. Put another way, this suggests that the faith of "theblessed company of all faithful people" should be our primary place to standrather than to require exclusively the company of "the successors of theapostles." This would provide us an ecclesiology formed on baptism, notordination.

The foregoing suggests that at one level the Episcopal Church's teaching aboutbaptism works to give the rite power, centrality, and authenticity. In practice,however, and in powerfully subtle ways, the current state of the physicalevidence among us puts the lie to what we say.

In the spring and summer of 1990, with the aid of the Episcopal Church's Boardfor Theological Education, the Conant Fund and the Episcopal TheologicalSeminary of the Southwest, I completed a six-month sabbatical leave. The timewas spent exploring the state of contemporary liturgical architecture in theEpiscopal Church. To put it minimally, I was looking to see what we are buildingfor ourselves, and in some way assessing the current work against thearchitectural and liturgical assumptions of the Prayer Book.

I made formal visits to thirty-one congregations across the United States. Ofthe total, nineteen buildings had been built or reordered since 1980. In eachvisit I observed and photographed the liturgical space and made a drawing of thefloor plan. In addition, by means of questionnaires designed for the purpose, Igathered information from the rector/vicar, musicians, members of thecongregation and the architect/designer as to how the space "works."

With specific regard to the place for baptism (and based on this sample ofthirty-one places), line drawings would suggest that typically fonts were placednear entrances, on a main aisle, in their own niche or in the "east" end nearthe altar/table and ambo. These characteristics, alone or in combination,suggest that these fonts were in "correct" places. At the same time, of theplaces visited, four had no font in evidence. Of these four, two had smalltables available on which bowls were placed when needed.

Only one of the sites visited would suggest to the observer that this room forproclamation and table fellowship is also a room for baptism. The ritual objectin this particular liturgical space would (almost) bear the theological weightour teaching would place upon it and would (almost) allow to happen what therubrics presuppose. In virtually no other instance, perhaps with one exception,did the Prayer Book's renewed emphasis on baptism stimulate a more powerfulspatial expression of our baptismal theology. Typically, I found small stone orwooden fonts, sometimes covered, sometimes not, sometimes containing a "candydish," sometimes not, typically empty of water. Occasionally, it was clear tothe observer that the most frequent role played by the font, particularly thosenear entrances, was as a place to set things, e.g., service leaflets.

During this tour across the country and the church, I was reminded again andagain how powerful a symbol the altar/table is (often protected by rails,elevated spatially, adorned with special "clothing," typically approached andtouched only by certain people, characterized by physical stability andpermanence) and how subject to disregard the font is (hidden away or absent,minimal in size, empty, trivialized in use). I was reminded again and again thatordained people attend the altar/table and that the (typically) incidental fontis allegedly the place of empowerment of the baptized. I was thereby taught thatthe theological claims made for baptism were seriously challenged, evenundermined, by the subtle and persistent disjuncture between our claims and thephysical evidence.

III. Ritual Evidence

If the spatial evidence signals an impediment to the success of our theologicalclaims about the importance of baptism and the centrality to the EpiscopalChurch of the ministry of the baptized, the second stumbling block, in my view,is the difficulty created for our baptismal theology by a comparison of thebaptismal rite and ordination. It is my opinion that claims about theempowerment for ministry associated with baptism will likely never find fullexpression so long as the rite of baptism is overshadowed by the rite ofordination. And ordination language in association with baptism will, frankly,only make things worse.

In order to make this point more clear, a "tour" of these two rites, baptism andordination, seems appropriate. (Given my life's work in a seminary, I probablyattend more ordinations than most people, certainly more than the typicalparishioner, and likely more than is good for me. At the same time, theexperience does give me a particularly good place from which to observe.) Thefollowing descriptions will necessarily lead to comparison.

Both of these are rites of passage, rites which are typically composed of threeparticular parts. The first part accomplishes the separation of the person(s)from their former status in the community; the second part accomplishes thetransition, the passage intended; and the third part accomplishes thereintegration of the person(s) into the community. The transition phase is when"something happens," as it were. It is the most dynamic in ritual terms, thedensest in meaning and, consequently, the most significant for ourconsideration. We shall therefore examine in turn the transition phase of therites for baptism and presbyteral ordination as contained in The Book of CommonPrayer.

In the baptismal liturgy, the transition phase begins with the movement of thebaptismal party to the font if they are not there already. Here the water ispoured if it has not already been poured and the water is blessed. The prayerformula begins in a way reminiscent of the Great Thanksgiving in the Eucharist."The Lord be with you./And also with you." "Let us give thanks to the Lord ourGod./It is right to give him thanks and praise." Following a reiteration of therole water plays in salvation history, the one who presides invokes the activityof God's Holy Spirit to sanctify the water. The rite assumes at this point thatthere is more than one candidate so the rubrics direct that each receive thewater in turn. The "watering" then follows. After all have received the actionof the water, the presider "in full sight of the congregation" prays for thesustaining power of the Holy Spirit and signs the forehead of each with a cross(and perhaps oil). Supplementary rubrics say the newly baptized may be given acandle. This is obviously not central. They are then welcomed by the assemblyand thus reintegrated into the community. The peace of the Lord is exchanged,and the newly baptized return to their seats in the assembly. The fact that thenewly baptized have completed their transition (the passage) is fully expressedlater in the rite by their admission to the fellowship of the altar/table.

We should notice that this rite is appropriately administered within the SundayEucharist and especially appropriate on five occasions mentioned in thesupplementary rubrics at the end of the rite. Although the bishop is(historically) the normative presider, in practice it is typically a presbyterwho presides.

Turning now to the rite for the ordination of a presbyter, we engage it at thecomparable ritual moment, the moment of transition. All present are directed tostand, except the candidate who must kneel before the bishop, the necessarypresider. The candidate is joined left and right by other presbyters. The clearsupposition here is that there is just one candidate. (The supplemental rubricsprinted at the end of the ordinal allow the possibility of more than one butthis is obviously exceptional.) A hymn calling upon the Spirit is sung followedby a prescribed silence. The bishop offers a prayer of thanks after which he orshe places both hands on the head of the candidate. The presbyters also lay onhands. The bishop then prays that God will fill the candidate with grace andpower through the gift of the Spirit. Removing all the hands, the bishopcontinues in prayer petitioning God on behalf of the newly ordained. Followingthis prayer, the people are directed to respond "Amen" in a loud voice. Thenewly ordained is given appropriate vesture and the Bible, this latter as a signof authority. The transition now accomplished, the process of reintegration isbegun by the bishop greeting the newly ordained, who in turn extends the peaceof the Lord to the assembly. The attending presbyters are directed by rubric togreet the newly ordained.

I hope I have described these rites so that their content and movement areclear. In each case, what I have described is part of a larger ritual event andeach transitional phase is followed by the liturgy of Holy Communion. Thedifferences between these rites are remarkable.

Presbyteral ordinations are typically understood to be preceded by an extendedperiod of preparation (seminary), parochial sponsorship, testing and assessment(Commissions on Ministry and the General Ordination Exams) and an apprenticeship(diaconate). Baptisms are typically not.

Ordinations take place in public at special times, with attendance byinvitation. Baptisms take place in public but typically within the conventionalSunday liturgy. Invitations are not customary. Ordinations are usually attendedby clergy who are vested, enter in procession and sit in a prominent place inthe assembly. This is not typical of baptisms. Ordinations are rites reserved tobishops, the chief liturgical officer. Baptisms may be, but in practice usuallyare not. The rite of presbyteral ordination assumes only one candidate. Baptismpresupposes more than one candidate. Ordinations are frequently filled withspecial music and festive ornaments. This is less so with baptisms.