CHAPTER 1
The Traditional Anglican Pattern: Baptism, Confirmation, Admission to Communion
I am what is sometimes known as a "cradle Episcopalian." The child of activeEpiscopalians, I was baptized at the rather tender age of one month, confirmedwhen I was in the ninth grade after a full school year of confirmation classes,and admitted to communion at the time of my confirmation. My experience reflectsthe traditional Anglican pattern of Christian initiation, a pattern establishedby the first Anglican prayer books at the time of the Reformation in thesixteenth century and essentially unchanged until the 1979 Book of CommonPrayer. But this pattern was the product of the rather complex evolution ofbaptism and confirmation in the life of the Church, an evolution that has beenwidely studied and discussed during the twentieth century. To understand theradical changes introduced in the 1979 Book of Common Prayer, it is necessary tobegin with a brief survey of this history.
The New Testament and the Early Church: A Single Initiatory Rite
Numerous references and allusions to baptism can be found in the New Testament,but nowhere is there a full description or text of a baptismal rite. The book ofActs includes several reports of baptisms as part of its story of the missionaryspread of the Gospel, beginning with the baptism of three thousand converts inresponse to Peter's Pentecost sermon following the descent of the Spirit on thedisciples (Acts 2). From these descriptions and from other New Testamentreferences to baptism, we can conclude that baptism followed conversion and wasadministered with water in the name of Jesus or in the name of the Father, Sonand Holy Spirit.
While in several places the New Testament associates the gift of the Holy Spiritwith baptism, there is no evidence for the regular administration of a ritebestowing the Spirit separate from baptism. Acts 8:14-17 tells of the journey ofPeter and John to Samaria in order to lay hands on converts who had beenbaptized but had not received the Spirit, and Acts 19:1-6 relates Paul'sencounter at Ephesus with disciples who had been baptized into John's baptismbut did not know of the Holy Spirit. In each of these tales, the Holy Spirit isbestowed through laying on of hands by the apostles. But in Acts 10:44-48, theSpirit descends upon a group of Gentiles while Peter is preaching to them, andin response the converts are baptized. Elsewhere in Acts, baptisms are reportedwithout any mention of the bestowal of the Spirit. The primary intent of each ofthese stories is not to provide an accurate description of the sacramentalpractice of the nascent church, but to bear witness to the missionary spread ofthe church, empowered by the Holy Spirit.
What can be learned from these reports of baptism and other New Testamentreferences to baptism is that converts were initiated into Christian life bybaptism with water in the name of Jesus or in the triune name. Baptism wasinterpreted as incorporation into the Christian community, cleansing from sin,rebirth, participation in Christ's death and resurrection, entrance into thereign of God, sealing with the Spirit, being clothed with Christ. Some of thesemetaphors suggest ritual actions, for example, anointing or putting on newgarments. However, there is no conclusive evidence that such actions werecustomarily part of the baptismal rite during the first century.
As the Church grew and ritual practices developed, the multifaceted dimensionsof baptism gradually came to be expressed symbolically through variousinterpretive gestures and actions, including anointing and the laying on ofhands. The normative candidate was an adult, although from at least as early asthe end of the second century, the children of believers, including infants,were incorporated into the Christian community by the same rite. Baptismculminated in the celebration of the eucharist, at which the newly baptized,including infants, were present and received communion for the first time. Thebishop customarily presided at the initiatory rite, and by the fourth century,baptism was usually administered at the Easter vigil. No additional rite, foradults or for children, was considered necessary to complete Christianinitiation.
The Middle Ages: Adaptation and Division of the Rite
The official recognition of the Church after the peace of Constantine (313) hada number of consequences for the Church's initiatory practice. Throughout thefourth century, large numbers of adults were initiated through an elaborateprocess that included several months or years of preparation (the"catechumenate"), culminating in the celebration of the initiatory rites at theEaster vigil. But as the empire came to be predominantly Christian, thereremained few adult converts to be baptized, and the normative candidates wereinfants. The catechumenate was shortened and adjustments made to the preliminaryrites. Baptism continued to be administered at the vigils of Easter andPentecost, with exceptions permitted for those in danger of death. However, inthe later Middle Ages, owing to concern about infants dying suddenly, withoutwarning, baptism came to be allowed to infants at any time. By the fourteenthcentury, several synods required that baptism be administered within eight daysof birth.
In the early Middle Ages, outside of Rome and central Italy, where dioceses werelarge and travel difficult, bishops could not be present at most celebrations ofbaptism. Instead, a priest administered the entire rite, including a singlepostbaptismal anointing and the concluding eucharist, and this was viewed asfull Christian initiation. This continues to be the initiatory pattern ofEastern Orthodox churches today. But in Rome and the dioceses of central Italy,in addition to a postbaptismal anointing on the head by a priest, the bishopadministered a second anointing on the forehead. In cases where a bishop wasunable to be present for the rite, this final anointing could be readilysupplied within a short period of time, effectively preserving a role for thebishop in Christian initiation.
When in the eighth century the rites of Rome were imposed by the emperorCharlemagne throughout the West, the Roman initiatory rite with its secondpostbaptismal anointing administered by a bishop gradually became the standardrite of western Christianity. However, due to the difficulty of travel and thenegligence of bishops and parents, the rite did not function nearly as welloutside of Rome. Often several years lapsed between baptism and the bishop'sanointing, a rite which came to be called "confirmation." Local ecclesiasticalcouncils began to adopt legislation setting maximum ages by which childrenshould be confirmed and providing penalties for parents who did not comply.Eventually these maximum age limits came to be seen as minimum ages forconfirmation.
As confirmation emerged as a separate rite administered several years afterbaptism, a theological rationale developed. Confirmation came to be understoodas a strengthening of the Spirit, equipping the person for the spiritual battlesof this world. Thomas Aquinas offered a biological analogy: baptism is to humanbirth as confirmation is to growth.
While confirmation gradually came to be administered several years afterbaptism, up until the twelfth century infants continued to be communicated atthe time of their baptism, and the reception of communion was considerednecessary to their salvation. However, in the ninth century a doctrine ofsacramental realism began to emerge, emphasizing that in the eucharist the breadand wine actually become the body and blood of Jesus. Eventually doubts arose asto the propriety of communicating infants, lest they desecrate the sacrament byspitting up the host. Infants began to be communicated with wine only, and bythe thirteenth century, as the same sacramental realism resulted in thewithdrawal of laity from receiving the chalice, infants ceased to becommunicated at all. Legislation then restricted communion to those who hadreached the age of discretion. In England, a Council of Lambeth, held underArchbishop John Peckham in 1281, decreed that no one should be admitted tocommunion until confirmed. The intent, however, was not to discourage communion,but rather to encourage parents to bring their children for confirmation.
The Reformation: Confirmation as a Profession of Faith
The reformers of the sixteenth century inherited a process of initiation thatincluded infant baptism and, usually at the age of discretion (age seven orten), an anointing by the bishop called "confirmation," followed by admission tocommunion. To this the reformers added their concern to provide members of theChurch with a firmer foundation in the essentials of the faith.
Martin Luther and John Calvin denounced the medieval practice of confirmation asan idle and superstitious ceremony but saw great value in catechesis prior toadmission to communion. While Luther and Calvin did not themselves introducerites to replace confirmation, churches in the Lutheran and Reformed traditionsgradually began to produce rites for adolescents to profess their faith and beadmitted to communion.
In the Church of England, a rite of confirmation similar to the medieval ritewas retained, but with imposition of hands by the bishop instead of anointing.However, in the prayer book the confirmation rite was prefaced by "a catechismfor children," and children were required to learn the responses to thiscatechism as well as the Creed, the Lord's Prayer and the Ten Commandments priorto their confirmation. Moreover, the "confirmation rubric" requiringconfirmation before admission to communion was retained, making admission tocommunion as well as confirmation contingent upon catechesis. An explicitprofession of faith was added to the Anglican confirmation rite in 1662.
The more radical reformers abolished infant baptism altogether and introducedinstead a practice of believers' baptism. This eliminated a separate rite ofconfirmation or profession of faith for those baptized in infancy. Yet in thefollowing centuries, as churches in these traditions became more firmlyestablished, rites of infant "dedication" became increasingly common.Furthermore, although conversion was requisite for baptism, the appropriateexperience tended to occur at about the expected age. In short, althoughchurches in believers' baptist traditions interpreted baptism quite differentlyfrom those in the Anglican, Lutheran and Reformed traditions, the initiatorypatterns came to be quite similar. A rite in infancy was followed by catechesisthroughout childhood, leading to a public ritual that included a profession offaith and granted admission to full communicant membership.
In the Roman Catholic tradition, the initiatory pattern was much the same. TheCouncil of Trent in the sixteenth century issued several decrees thatinstitutionalized the late medieval separation of baptism, confirmation andadmission to communion. Up until that time, though rare in practice, it waspossible for infants to be confirmed and admitted to communion. Well knownexamples include Prince Arthur and Princess Elizabeth in England. But theCouncil of Trent, while affirming the necessity of confirmation, directed thatconfirmation be postponed to the age of seven, if not age twelve, and likewisedeclared that children under the age of reason were under no obligation toreceive the eucharist.
By the early twentieth century, in some places in the Roman Catholic Church, thecustomary age for first reception of communion had risen to age ten or twelve,or even fourteen or older. The decree Quam singulari issued in 1910 by theSacred Congregation of the Sacraments under Pope Pius X, affirmed that the agefor first communion was the age of reason, understood to be age seven andfurther defined as the age at which a child could discern eucharistic bread fromordinary bread. While the decree did not discuss confirmation, it had the effectof reversing the sequence of sacraments: first reception of communion began toprecede confirmation in many congregations of the Roman Catholic Church.Eventually this practice encouraged Episcopalians to reconsider their pattern ofChristian initiation, but in the early twentieth century, the inheritedReformation pattern remained firmly in place.
This Reformation pattern, evident in most American churches at the beginning ofthe twentieth century, reflected the era of Christendom, in which the entiresociety is presumed to be Christian, or at least to be based upon Christianvalues. Baptism (or, in believers' baptist traditions, a rite of infantdedication) was administered as a matter of course and was primarily a rite ofpassage marking physical birth, a social occasion significant in the lives ofthe immediate family and friends of the child. There was an assumption thatChristian formation and nurture would occur through daily living as well asregular participation in Sunday School, because the values of Church, family andsociety were closely intertwined. At an appropriate age, usually at some pointin adolescence, children made a public profession of faith (baptism, forbelievers' baptists), a rite marking growth and acceptance of "adult"responsibilities. Following this rite, young people were considered fullcommunicant members of the Church. Glimpses of this process in the EpiscopalChurch can be found in pastoral manuals which helped clergy interpret the prayerbook rubrics.
Baptism as a Private Rite
The 1892 Book of Common Prayer provided three versions of the rite of baptism:"The Ministration of Public Baptism of Infants, to be used in the church," "TheMinistration of Private Baptism of Children, in houses," and "The Ministrationof Baptism to such as are of Riper Years, and able to answer for themselves."While the baptismal rites in the sixteenth-century prayer books of the Church ofEngland had assumed infant candidates, in the seventeenth century a rite foradults became necessary because of the neglect of the sacraments during theperiod of the Commonwealth, the growth of the Anabaptist movement (whichpracticed believers' baptism), and the desire to convert and baptize nativepeople and slaves in the developing British colonies. Hence the 1662 Englishprayer book introduced a rite for adult baptism, modeled on that for the baptismof infants, and the American Episcopalian books of 1789 and 1892 followed suit.Nonetheless, in the early twentieth century, infant baptism continued to be thenorm and adult baptism the exception.
In the 1892 Book of Common Prayer, the opening rubric of the service of publicbaptism of infants directed that "Baptism should not be administered but uponSundays and other Holy-Days, or Prayer-Days." The English rite furtherspecified that baptism was to be administered
when the most number of people come together; as well as for that theCongregation there present may testify the receiving of them that be newlybaptized in the number of Christ's Church; as also because in the Baptism ofInfants every man present may be put in remembrance of his own profession madeto God in his Baptism.
This rationale for the administration of baptism on Sundays and holy days hadbeen omitted from the first (1789) American prayer book, perhaps because mostbaptisms were being performed privately. Certainly by the early twentiethcentury, most baptisms were administered privately, in the presence of familyand close friends but apart from the regularly scheduled worship of mostparishes. Moreover, although the prayer book also directed that baptism beadministered after the last lesson at Morning or Evening Prayer, this rubricwas widely ignored. Authors of pastoral manuals made some attempts to stress thesignificance of public baptism, but their writings suggest that the prevailingcustom was private, not public baptism.
In a text for use in his pastoral theology classes, William DeWitt, Dean ofWestern Theological Seminary in Chicago, acknowledged the significance of apublic rite of baptism but allowed numerous exceptions to public baptism at themain Sunday service. In large parishes where it was likely that baptisms wouldoccur nearly every Sunday, it was appropriate to limit to one or two Sundayseach month the times at which children might be brought to be baptized.Alternatively, "a special congregation can usually be secured, by a littleeffort, for a Sunday afternoon baptismal service." Moreover, while the rubricsprefacing the rite of private baptism stipulated that children should not bebaptized at home without "great cause and necessity," DeWitt opined that amother's "pious reason that she wants no delay in making [the child] a member ofChrist and the child of God" was sufficient cause. Although a child privatelybaptized should be brought to the church to be received by the congregation,DeWitt acknowledged that "it is usually difficult to get parents" to do so.
