A BAPTISMAL REVOLUTION?

NOTES ON FREDRICA THOMPSETT: A “BAPTISMAL REVOLUTION?”

Dr. Fredrica Thompsett is a semi-retired seminary professor with a gift for accessibility and humor. She has written extensively about the crucial significance of baptism in the life of the church, both historically and in the present day. According to her, our return to a theology of baptism that more closely conforms to the norms of the early church is the most significant of all the changes that have occurred in the Episcopal Church. For this reason she uses the term “Baptismal Revolution” to describe it, and sees such developments as women’s ordination, the 1979 Book of Common Prayer,“ Total Ministry” (including the ordination of local, non-professional clergy), the eucharist as the main worship activity on Sundays, increased openness to sexual minorities, and closer relationships with Lutherans and others as, if not proceeding directly from it, at least closely related to it.

What follows is my understanding of what constitutes the “Baptismal Revolution,” as stimulated by Dr. Thompsett’s scholarly and prophetic insights.

1. In the period after World War Two period liturgical scholars were discovering and writing about the central role of baptism (and the eucharist) in the life of the early Christian church. At the same time, Christians in Europe and North America were being forced by circumstances to reclaim their vocation as members of a missionary community, sent not to heathen nations overseas, but to their own secularized and idolatrous culture. So our renewed emphasis on baptism and eucharist arose, not merely as an antiquarian desire to copy the practice of the early church, but in response to a cultural situation more like that of pre-Constantinian Christianity than of the Middle Ages, or even the 1950’s.

2. The 1979 Book of Common Prayer established a norm, new to most congregations, of baptism celebrated on Sunday, with participation from the entire parish community. This represented a return to early Christian norms, and reversed the medieval practice of treating baptism as a private matter to be transacted between families and clergy, with the emphasis upon its being a prerequisite for entrance into heaven. In the Episcopal Church,” Fredrica Thompsett says, “baptism is first of all about God acting and the community responding.” That is why we will baptize a person at any age, including infancy, because God is the initiator of the relationship, and we respond as a community, not just as individuals.

3. With baptism being celebrated often and publically, the entire parish community is reminded of its calling to partake in mission, not just maintain the institution of the church. As the western world becomes less and less nominally “Christian,” the need for a missional posture becomes more and more evident, just as it was in pre-Constantinian times. Engagement in mission inevitably brings an increased awareness of suffering, which calls for a more informed and motivated discipleship on the part of the entire church. As we are more challenged in our faith, we require a deeper and more mature spirituality, a more intimate and informed relationship with God and each other. The weekly Eucharistic meal fed this relationship in the early church, and is doing so again in the context of the “Baptismal Revolution.” Eucharistic spirituality in today’s church transcends the doctrinal disputes of the past, as the Sixteenth Century Anglican theologian Richard Hooker was attempting to achieve when he wrote, “the purpose of the eucharist is to change lives, not bread.” (Quoted by Fredrica Thompsett).

4. The Baptismal Revolution also has the effect of redefining how ministry functions within the church. While upholding the legitimate role of ordained ministry, it “flattens out” and democratizes the hierarchical structure of the church. This is not from any political motive, but because baptism confers the “highest” dignity and status that a Christian can possibly achieve. If it constitutes full membership in the Body of Christ, incorporation into the risen Lord, and sacramental participation in the death and resurrection of the once ordained to judge the living and the dead, how can one get any “higher up” in the church than that? Dr. Thompsett quotes Anglican Bishop Stephen Sykes as saying “No one (not even bishops) moves beyond baptism.” Just as Jesus’ baptism in the Jordan River was the occasion of his “call to ministry,” so every baptism empowers and authorizes the recipient for ministry. Obviously, when a recipient is only a few months old their ministry will require considerable mentoring and formation before it can be acted upon. The baptism of infants and young children places great responsibility upon a parish community that is called upon to answer with an enthusiastic “I will” when asked, in the Baptismal Liturgy, if they “will do all in [their] power to support this [newly baptized] person in their life of faith?” Are congregations really prepared to make such promises? Most of us have a long way to go in this aspect.

5. Dr. Thompsett correctly observes that our approach to baptism is greatly influenced by our beliefs about God (i.e. our “theology”). When our study of the Bible reveals how it was a community that has experienced the presence of God down through the Centuries, it puts us on a theological collision course with a culture that privatizes God and thinks of religion as an individual matter. In our practice of baptism we cannot escape the communal experience of a Sacramental God, a God who may refrain from working miracles but who is made accessible and present through the common elements of the material world. This God is not just a concept or an ideal, but a universal Creator to whom all people and things are accountable, whether they wish to be or not. Baptism does not “invent” the life of God in a person otherwise hopelessly condemned by original (or unoriginal) sin. Baptism celebrates, recognizes, and proclaims the belovedness that already exists within each person by virtue of their humanity, as well as the forgiveness that Christ has accomplished on behalf of us all. When it comes to salvation, the initiative always comes from God.

6. The question remains, “can a missional church function without becoming exclusive and “rigorist” in practice? The early church was of a divided mind about this, and so is the Episcopal Church today, as witnessed by controversy over the practice of “Open Communion”, and many other disputes over boundaries, doctrinal and disciplinary. It is evident that the existence of strict boundaries and rigorous entrance requirements helps to maintain a strong group identity and commitment, as can be observed in Amish communities, monastic orders, and fundamentalist movements. But is such exclusivity compatible with a Gospel specifically addressed to outsiders and outcasts? Jesus called his disciples to follow an extremely high set of expectations, yet coupled those expectations with a radically open, generous, and inclusive stance toward all humanity. Is this kind of “Gospel Posture” viable and sustainable? Institutional Christianity has spent 2000 years devising ways to domesticate, rationalize, and co-opt it, yet the mysterious authority of this paradoxical Good News has always found ways to assert itself somewhere, most often “under the radar,” but sometimes even through the agency of popes, prelates, and professors.

In its unique historical and social context, the Episcopal Church seems providentially (or, fatally, as the case may be) situated to experiment with and embody such a “Gospel Posture” toward the world. Are Episcopalians prepared to do “all in our power to support” such an experimental life of faith? The Baptismal Revolution, aided and abetted by humorous prophets such Fredrica Thompsett, is evidence that, for better or worse, we are.