Liturgy and Scripture in Dialogue in the Baptismal Feasts of the Episcopal Church

Abstract

The liturgical reforms of the mid-twentieth century had major impacts on not only the forms of liturgies in the Western church but also on liturgical theology. The 1979 Book of Common Prayer of the Episcopal Church, the Anglican province in the United States, along with several dioceses across the world, represents the culmination of these developments in that jurisdiction. Among its revolutionary suggestions is the reservation of Holy Baptism for certain occasions: the Easter Vigil, Pentecost, All Saints’ Day or the Sunday following, the Feast of the Baptism of Our Lord, and the visitation of a bishop. Many liturgical guides emphasize the advantages of observing these so-called “baptismal feasts,” but none treat them in any lengthy manner. Do the different occasions for baptism have something specific to say about what baptism is? How do the appointed lectionary readings shed light on baptism, and vice versa? In this article, I will explore these feasts and especially their assigned lessons in the Revised Common Lectionary. I will show that when read with a liturgical hermeneutics, the appointed scriptures and, therefore, the baptismal feasts themselves paint a comprehensive picture of a contemporary baptismal theology.

1. Introduction

The 1979 Book of Common Prayer (BCP 1979), approved by the Episcopal Church, the Anglican body in the United States and several other countries, introduces a significantly revised liturgy for Holy Baptism. Compared with its predecessor liturgies, one of the innovations is its suggestion that “Holy Baptism is especially appropriate at the Easter Vigil, on the Day of Pentecost, on All Saints’ Day or the Sunday after All Saints’ Day, and on the Feast of the Baptism of Our Lord (the First Sunday after the Epiphany). It is recommended that, as far as possible, Baptisms be reserved for these occasions or when a bishop is present.” (BCP 1979, p. 312) Certainly, there is a practical dimension to this instruction: it encourages the inclusion of baptism at major liturgies and connects baptism to the church year. However, there is a theological dimension that deserves further exploration. In this paper, I aim to explore these feasts and the ways they, and especially their assigned lessons, contribute to the baptismal theology promoted by the 1979 Prayer Book. After exploring the liturgical hermeneutics of scripture, the importance of liturgical time to baptism, and some of the important themes of baptism, I will show how these themes become apparent when reading the scriptures and the baptismal liturgy together. I propose that a full observance of the baptismal feasts, allowing liturgy and Scripture to mutually interpret one another, contributes to a more complete picture of the multivalent theology of baptism.

2. Background

2.1. The Liturgical Hermeneutics of Scripture

The Bible has always been associated with the liturgy. The late-second-century Canon Muratori fragment reveals that whether a text is read in church is a criterion for inclusion in the canon (Hill 1995). If the liturgy has shaped the canon, then it follows that the canon is to be interpreted liturgically, in addition to other methods of biblical interpretation. The homilies of the church fathers also represent a normative method for studying Scripture throughout the history of the church. As the liturgical and biblical movements of the twentieth century came to fullness, they were intertwined. Sacrosanctum Concilium emphasizes the unity of the liturgy of word and table, and the importance of preaching in interpretation: “By means of the homily the mysteries of the faith and the guiding principles of the Christian life are expounded from the sacred text, during the course of the liturgical year; the homily, therefore, is to be highly esteemed as part of the liturgy itself” (Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy 1963, §52). Preaching, therefore, is an essential tool in the interpretation of Scripture and particularly the Scripture within its liturgical context.

For those worshipping in the Catholic tradition, as broadly understood, the primary mode of encountering Scripture is in the liturgy itself. This is not to say that Scripture is not encountered outside the liturgy, as both Roman Catholics and Protestants have worked to underscore the importance of these encounters. However, since liturgical worship is central to the Christian life in these traditions, the liturgy itself continues to hold a primary place in the encounter and interpretation of Scripture. In promoting the recovery of a “liturgical hermeneutics of Sacred Scripture” in his text of the same name, Roman Catholic priest and liturgical scholar Marco Benini argues that because of the longstanding close relationship between Scripture and liturgy, we must give close attention to “the hermeneutical consequences for the understanding the Sacred Scripture when it is employed in the Liturgy” (Benini 2023, p. 10). His work is grounded in the teachings of the Second Vatican Council, which promoted a deeper engagement with scripture within the liturgy (Benini 2023, p. 11). It acknowledges that because Scripture is so frequently encountered in the liturgy, the ‘liturgical hermeneutic’ is a necessary way to interpret Scripture.

Benini demonstrates that new theological resonances can be created even when the same Scripture is appointed for multiple different liturgies. A prime example of this is Psalm 24, which in the Roman Lectionary is appointed multiple times throughout the year. Even without a strict liturgical context, it invites a Christological interpretation: “Who is this King of glory?” (Psalm 24:8). But the particular way this interpretation is formed depends on intertextuality: the other appointed texts that surround it. On the fourth Sunday of Advent, Year A, “the King of glory shall come in” is suggestive of the entrance of Christ into the world via birth. However, on Palm Sunday, where it is also an option, it can be interpreted as referring to Christ’s triumphant entry into Jerusalem. It is also used on All Saints’ Day, which sets aside the Christological interpretation in favor of answering the question “Who can ascend the hill of the LORD?” (Psalm 24:3). Here, the focus is laid on a different set of verses entirely, which do not particularly resonate with the earlier themes but find a deep resonance when set alongside the other texts for All Saints’ Day. Reading Scripture with a liturgical hermeneutic allows for the possibility that the liturgy, both the appointed Scriptures and the liturgical texts themselves, will at times invite particular interpretations of the text or highlight particular themes. This does not take away from the central theologies of the sacraments but rather draws attention to varying aspects depending on the occasion.

Scripture can function in many ways within the liturgy. Benini elucidates several different aspects of the liturgical hermeneutic: catechetical, anamnetic, paracletic/pastoral, meditative, performative, doxological, and finally an immediate function “to justify or interpret the liturgy” (Benini 2023, pp. 208–13). While all these functions overlap, the immediate function is most interesting for our purposes. In what ways do the Scriptures appointed for a particular day relate to the liturgical actions? Later in this essay, I will apply the ‘liturgical hermeneutic’ to the appointed readings for the baptismal feasts of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer. The lectionary appoints readings for each feast; when read in the context of the baptismal liturgy, how do they justify or interpret the liturgy? Next, we will explore some possible themes to look out for in both the Scripture and the liturgy.

2.2. Dimensions of Baptismal Theology

Baptism has always contained a multiplicity of theological themes. Different New Testament accounts of baptisms as well as writings that allude to baptism seem to stress different aspects of the purpose and meaning of baptism. Throughout liturgical history, liturgies have also incorporated different themes, or the same themes to greater or lesser extents. According to Anglican priest and liturgical scholar Bryan Spinks (2022), these themes include pneumatological, Christological, soteriological, ecclesiological, and eschatological dimensions. Spinks notes that due to the wide variety of possible themes, “no liturgy contains them all, and it is probably an overload to attempt to incorporate them all into one service” (Spinks 2022, p. 5). The liturgy itself, coupled with the appointed readings, will always point to at least some of these dimensions, regardless of day or season. If many of the themes have historical precedent and continued theological relevance, how can they be incorporated into the sacramental imagination of a Christian community? One possible solution, since baptisms generally occur at specific times of the Christian year, is to investigate whether these occasions seem to emphasize different themes. We must therefore consider the relationship between baptism and liturgical time.

2.3. Baptisms in Liturgical Time

When should baptism take place? The scriptural witness does not provide a clear answer. About three thousand people are baptized on the day of Pentecost, and baptisms are frequently associated with the visits of major apostles. This could lend some support to the idea of baptismal feasts, particularly Pentecost (since there is explicit scriptural witness) and the occasion of the bishop’s visit. On the other hand, baptism can clearly occur at any time, since the Ethiopian eunuch says, “Look, here is water! What is to prevent me from being baptized?” (Acts 8:36). The church has also debated whether infants ought to be baptized, and if so, how soon. A complete review of this question is outside the scope of this paper. Therefore, however much baptism is reserved for particular times and places, it must be said that baptism can be conducted at any time and in any place, so long as there is water and the Holy Spirit.

The early church believed as much. Tertullian (c. 160–240) specifically suggests both Easter and Pentecost as appropriate baptismal days, citing scriptural sources:

“The Passover [Pascha] provides the day of most solemnity for baptism, for then was accomplished our Lord’s passion, and into it we are baptized. With fairly good reason we could interpret it as a type, that when our Lord was about to keep his last Passover he sent his disciples to make ready, with the remark, Ye shall meet a man carrying water. By the sign of water he indicated the place for the Passover to be celebrated. After that, Pentecost is a most auspicious period for arranging baptisms, for during it our Lord’s resurrection was several times made known among the disciples, and the grace of the Holy Spirit first given, and the hope of our Lord’s coming made evident: because it was at that time, when he had been received back into heaven, that angels said to the apostles that he would so come in like manner as he had also gone up into heaven, namely, at Pentecost. … For all that, every day is a Lord’s day: any hour, any season, is suitable for baptism. If there is a difference of solemnity, it makes no difference to the grace.”

(Tertullian 2001, chap. XIX)

Tertullian’s position is clear: there is good reason to reserve baptism for certain feast days. The baptismal feasts Tertullian mentions, in addition to the others added over time, offer certain theological resonances that make them especially appropriate for baptism. Namely, Easter (Pascha) is the celebration of Jesus’ death and resurrection into which we are baptized. Tertullian also associates baptism with Pentecost, due to its connection to Easter and to the gift of the Holy Spirit. On the other hand, since “every day is the Lord’s,” there is nothing prohibiting baptism from occurring on other days. This is a matter of solemnity rather than efficacy.

Following Tertullian, the Western churches tended to emphasize Easter, and to a lesser extent Pentecost, as the primary baptismal feasts. On the other hand, it seems that in Egypt and Syria, baptism was taking place at Epiphany (Johnson 1999, pp. 58–60). After the Council of Nicaea, though, Easter becomes established as the principal baptismal feast in both East and West, and Lent is introduced as a forty-day period of preparation for baptism (Johnson 1999, p. 110). Over time in the West, however, infant baptism became predominant and was also increasingly seen as urgent, leading to a decline in paschal emphasis. This emphasis did remain, though, if only in vestigial form in the rubrics. The rubrics of the Sarum Rite of 1543 state that “solemn baptism is customarily celebrated on the Saturday before Easter and at the vigil of Pentecost: and therefore children born within eight days of Easter or within eight days of Pentecost, if conveniently and without risk they can be reserved” (Whitaker and Johnson 2003, p. 304).

In most churches of the Reformation, the significance of baptism was amplified by the reduction of the number of sacraments from seven to two. The primary image of baptism in the Reformation continued to be remission of sin. Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury at the time of England’s break with Rome, was reform-minded but also aware of historical sources. The baptismal office of the 1549 Book of Common Prayer, the first English-language baptismal liturgy, opens with an acknowledgment that baptism used to be reserved for the public liturgies of Easter and Pentecost. Cranmer immediately follows with the admission that “which custome (now beeyng growen out of use) although it cannot for many consideracions be wel resotred again, yet it is thought good to folowe the same as nere as conveniently may be,” and thus compromises by suggesting that baptism be reserved for Sundays and other holy days, except in cases of necessity (Cummings 2011, p. 46). Whether the intention of this rubric was ever followed is unclear, but the suggestion to baptize on Sundays and holy days remains (albeit without the explanatory note) in the 1662 and even the 1928 American BCP.

This attitude is maintained and amplified in the 1979 Prayer Book, which without restricting the occasions baptism can be celebrated, states that “Holy Baptism is appropriately administered within the Eucharist as the chief service on a Sunday or other feast” and asks (without requiring) that “Baptisms be reserved for [the four baptismal feasts] or when a bishop is present” (BCP 1979, pp. 298, 312). The intention here is not to limit when baptism can be practiced, but rather to focus baptism for the times when its theological significance is most evident in the liturgy. The inverse can create awkwardness, such as a recent baptism I attended where the Gospel reading was Jesus’ teaching on divorce in Mark 10. The preacher’s nod to baptism at the end of the sermon failed to distract from the theme of the day, which cast a rather somber note over the baptisms of two (unmarried) adults.

As has frequently been pointed out, the four baptismal feasts are spaced throughout the year, so it is quite possible for even a relatively large parish to reserve baptisms for these dates. A few parishes have so many baptisms that even four dates throughout the year are too few, in which case there is no choice but to hold baptisms on other days in addition to these, which does not diminish the significance of the festal days. The problem is rather when baptisms are held on other days instead of the recommended feast days, which limits the feasts’ ability to contribute to a baptismal theology.

Tertullian wrote in a time before infant baptism became the norm; rubrics requiring baptism within eight days of birth would have appeared nonsensical. Although cultural sensitivities take longer to adapt, the Episcopal Church does not tightly hold this teaching about the urgency of baptism, and infant mortality has significantly decreased from the medieval period. Thus, there is rarely a particular need to “rush” baptism to a closer date instead of waiting for the next feast. Obviously, emergency baptism provides an exception to this, but the rubric for emergency baptism suggests that, if the sick person recovers, they participate in the full liturgy at the next baptismal feast. (BCP 1979, p. 312). Thus, it is fair to hold as normative the reservation of baptism for the four feasts, plus the bishop’s visitation. This does not mean baptism will never happen on other dates, as both Tertullian and the Prayer Book acknowledge. However, parish clergy should make an effort to reserve baptism for the feasts, if indeed baptism is about a relationship with God more than it is a family ritual.

2.4. Baptism as a Public Ritual

The notion of baptism as a private versus public affair also merits consideration. The liturgy has always seemed to hold as normative that baptism would be celebrated at a public liturgy, whether at the Easter Vigil or another feast, or in conjunction with the Daily Office, as Thomas Cranmer envisioned in the early English Prayer Books. However, for much of Christian history and up through the twentieth century, this ideal seems to have been ignored in favor of a private concept of baptism, taking place in homes with immediate family, or perhaps in a baptistery off the main church. Liturgical theologian and Episcopal priest James Turrell describes this practice in his own ceremonial guide for baptism: “My baptism was a simple, brief matter to be dispensed with as rapidly as possible” (Turrell 2013, p. vii). He claims that the 1928 Prayer Book facilitated a quasi-private understanding of baptism “aimed primarily at washing off original sin” but that the 1979 Prayer Book has made this understanding untenable (Turrell 2013, p. vii). Indeed, as we have discussed, the rubrics of the 1979 baptismal rite expect the rite to be held within the context of a principal parish celebration of the Eucharist. Anecdotally, it seems that the concept of baptism as a public celebration has taken hold in most corners of the Episcopal Church. “Private baptism,” except in cases of true emergency, seems to be frowned upon by most clergy. The public celebration of baptism is important not only because the congregation is expected to support the newly baptized in their lives in Christ, but also because they find their own baptisms renewed and refreshed by participating in the baptism of new Christians. When connections are made between the liturgy and the feast, this sense of renewal can be strengthened.

Having established the importance of the public celebration of the baptismal feasts, we will now examine them each in turn. Which liturgical elements contribute to a baptismal theology? How do the readings, when read with the liturgical hermeneutic, contribute? How can liturgists, preachers, and musicians help these elements come to the forefront to proclaim a robust baptismal theology during these celebrations?

3. The Liturgical Hermeneutic of Scripture and the Baptismal Feasts

3.1. The Great Vigil of Easter

First on the list of feasts, and likely the most obvious, is the Great Vigil of Easter. As we have already seen, the Easter Vigil has been seen, for most of Christian history, as the primary temporal space for baptisms. For adult converts especially, it represents the culmination of the catechumenate. As the Christian community emerges from its Lenten fast and concludes Holy Week with the great proclamation that Christ is risen, it is most fitting that it also welcomes the newest members of the household of God into the celebration of this mystery. The imagery of the vigil liturgy is sumptuous: when a baptism is celebrated, it is at its most complete because the congregation participates not only in its own anamnesis of the Lord’s death and resurrection but also welcomes a new member into the great Paschal Mystery. Notably, in the 1979 Prayer Book this is the only liturgy of the year when the baptismal covenant must be said regardless of whether a baptism is taking place (BCP 1979, p. 292). Therefore, whether or not a new member is being initiated, the Vigil is a baptismal liturgy, and careful attention must be paid to the baptismal themes throughout the liturgy.

Although all Anglican liturgies are highly scriptural, the Vigil contains the highest number of readings. Even if the minimal number of Old Testament lessons (prophecies) is read, there is more Scripture than a regular liturgy. The effects of this, if executed well, are a multiplicity of images swimming in the minds and hearts of all present. Many of those images can be directly related to different dimensions of baptismal theology.

Most obvious is the theme from Romans 6, the appointed Epistle reading. I reproduce it here in its entirety because it is so central to the understanding of baptism that the Vigil creates, connecting our baptismal rebirth to the death and resurrection of Christ:

“Do you not know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we were buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be destroyed, so we might no longer be enslaved to sin. For whoever has died is freed from sin. But if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. The death he died, he died to sin once for all, but the life he lives, he lives to God. So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.”

(Romans 6:3–11)

In this lesson, Paul invites us deeply into the Paschal Mystery. This is the heart of the Christian faith: that by uniting ourselves with Christ in his death, we unite ourselves to his resurrection; that Christ, who destroyed the powers of death, destroys the power of death and sin that has hold over us through the waters of baptism. As the Great Three Days draw to a close, we understand anew the meaning of Christ’s passion and death. As we proclaim his glorious resurrection, we understand it as God’s victory over all the powers of evil: the same powers that we renounce in the baptismal vows. The themes of death and resurrection, victory and joy, and our own participation in the mystery should permeate the liturgy both explicitly and implicitly.

Another prominent theme is water itself. Many of the Old Testament prophecies feature water: the Creation story (Genesis 1), the Flood, and of course the Parting of the Red Sea. Much of the typological work is done for us. Both Creation and the Red Sea are mentioned in the blessing of the water: “We thank you, Almighty God, for the gift of water. Over it the Holy Spirit moved in the beginning of creation. Through it you led the children of Israel out of their bondage in Egypt into the land of promise” (BCP 1979, p. 306). A typology of the Flood is given in 1 Peter 3:18–21:

“For Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, in order to bring you to God. He was put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which also he went and made a proclamation to the spirits in prison, who in former times did not obey, when God waited patiently in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight lives, were saved through water. And baptism, which this prefigured, now saves you—not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

This set of images illustrates the beauty but also the danger of water. In the creation story, the waters of the deep are the chaos from which God creates everything. Water can be a force both of life and of death. It means death for the wicked who are not saved from the Flood, and brings death for the Egyptian army, as we proclaim triumphantly in the Song of Moses after the Red Sea reading. To connect this theme back to Romans 6, the power of water to cause death is important: in the baptismal waters, we die to sin so that we can rise to the new life in Christ.

The reading from Isaiah 55 gives a more positive view of water, beginning with an invitation to the water of life: “Hear, everyone who thirsts; come to the waters.” Its accompanying collect draws on this image as well: “Give now the water of life to those who thirst for you, that they may bring forth abundant fruit in your glorious kingdom” (BCP 1979, p. 290). Consider these images alongside the accompanying psalm:

“As the deer longs for the water-brooks,

so longs my soul for you, O God.

My soul is athirst for God, athirst for the living God; *

when shall I come to appear before the presence of God?”

(Psalm 42:1–2)

In the context of the Easter Vigil, it should be quite apparent that the living waters are the presence of God encountered in the baptismal font. The rich invitation to satiate the thirst of all those who long for this living water is soon to be answered by the appearance of the baptismal water, its blessing, and the invitation to be baptized (or recommit to one’s baptismal vows). After baptism, we continue to be nourished by Christ’s Body and Blood in the Eucharist.

Two Ezekiel readings are given as options, and both connect to the pneumatological dimension of baptism. The first, from Ezekiel 36, is God’s promise to wash clean the hearts and spirits of his people: “I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you, and I will remove from your body the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh” (Ezekiel 36:25–26). When read in the baptismal context, we see that there is a deep connection between the baptismal water (“I will sprinkle clean water upon you”) and the spiritual life (“a new spirit I will put within you”). This close link is echoed in the baptismal liturgy itself, where the washing away of sins and the new birth in the Holy Spirit are often connected within the same sentence. The connection is intensified when chrismation follows baptism with the explicit invocation of the Holy Spirit: “you are sealed by the Holy Spirit in Baptism and marked as Christ’s own for ever” (BCP 1979, p. 308).

The second reading from Ezekiel is the story of the Valley of Dry Bones. Here the multiple meaning of rûaḥ is extremely important, as God gives breath/spirit to the dry bones. The Lord promises: “I will put my spirit within you” (Ezekiel 37:14). The accompanying collect explicitly connects this story to the chrismation: “Grant to those who are sealed by your Holy Spirit the will and the power to proclaim you to all the world” (BCP 1979, p. 291). Psalm 143 emphasizes a connection between spiritual dryness and thirst: “my soul gasps to you like a thirsty land” (Psalm 143:6). The gift of the Spirit, while explicitly given in the chrismation rite, is also connected to the living water that is administered in baptism. The spiritually dry bones of our lives are given new moisture in the font so that they may live.

Clearly, there is a rich banquet of baptismal imagery within the Vigil liturgy, but particularly within its readings. Perhaps more notice should be taken of the rubric (BCP 1979, p. 292) that “a homily may be preached after any of the preceding Readings” (that is, the Old Testament prophecies). Not only does that follow the ancient practice of preaching at the vigil, but it also allows time to weave together some of the rich threads that connect these readings not only to salvation history and the story of Jesus but also to our own stories of baptism. In some parishes, it may be possible to invite parishioners to offer short testimonies after the Vigil lessons, which provide an opportunity for people to situate their own faith journeys within the broader story of God’s redeeming work. However the Word is preached at the Vigil, it must draw attention to these plentiful images and invite the congregation into a deeper contemplation of the Paschal Mystery they entered at baptism.

3.2. The Day of Pentecost

The Easter season ends with the observance of Pentecost. As we have already seen, the historical record suggests that it has long been considered a particularly appropriate time for baptism. One reason is its association with Easter: it is a fitting coda to conclude the Easter season as it began, with the celebration of baptism. The other is the association of Pentecost with the Holy Spirit, who is considered to be operative in the sacraments of initiation. The readings for Pentecost center around and interpret the pericope from Acts 2 that recounts the giving of the Holy Spirit to the apostles. The surrounding themes are prophecy, language, and the gift of the Holy Spirit. It is this final theme, which will tie most directly to the baptisms that occur in the course of the Pentecost liturgy.

Central to understanding the Pentecost liturgy is, of course, the Pentecost story itself, Acts 2:1–21. In isolation, this story does not seem to address baptism. Although baptism follows later in chapter 2, it does not appear in this pericope. In addition, the Spirit falls upon the disciples, who were already initiated: “all of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them ability” (Acts 2:4). The Spirit’s gift of other languages has an evangelical purpose: the Jews who had gathered for their Pentecost celebration heard the disciples “speaking about God’s deeds of power” (Acts 2:11) and “in the native language of each” (Acts 2:6). Peter, quoting the prophet Joel, connects the pouring out of the Spirit on the disciples to the end times. God’s Spirit, poured out “upon all flesh,” will be just one of the many signs that the Lord’s “great and glorious day” is coming (Acts 2:17, 2:20).

Is the pouring out of the Spirit at Pentecost a one-time event? The baptismal liturgy, along with the remainder of the New Testament, says no. References to the working of the Holy Spirit abound in the baptismal liturgy. One of the petitions asks that the candidates will be “fill[ed] with your holy and life-giving Spirit,” and another asks them to be taught “to love others in the power of the Spirit” (BCP 1979, p. 305). The anamnesis of the Thanksgiving over the Water links the Holy Spirit’s role in creation to the anointing of Jesus in the Jordan River to being the source of rebirth in the baptismal water. The epiclesis of that prayer also asks that the water be sanctified by the “power of [the] Holy Spirit, that those who here are cleansed from sin and born again may continue for ever in the risen life of Jesus Christ our Savior” (BCP 1979, p. 307). When chrism is consecrated by a bishop, it is connected to the anointing of Jesus by the Holy Spirit at his own baptism (BCP 1979, p. 307).

The prayer and actions following baptism also strongly invoke the Holy Spirit. They represent a significant addition to the 1979 rite. (In the earlier Anglican rites, chrism was not used, and the prayer for the gifts of the Spirit was said at confirmation, not baptism.) They are derived from the sacrament of chrismation/confirmation, which can be seen as a spiritual “sealing” of the baptism. In Orthodox theology in particular, the chrismation (which always immediately follows the water bath) is the primary location of the Spirit’s activity. Orthodox priest and theologian Alexander Schmemann refers to it as “the personal Pentecost of man, his entrance into new life in the Holy Spirit, which is the true life of the church” (Schmemann 2018, p. 92). At the same time, it is seen as inseparable from baptism: “it is not so much another sacrament as the very fulfillment of baptism, its ‘confirmation’ by the Holy Spirit. It can be distinguished from baptism only insofar as life can be distinguished from birth” (Schmemann 2018, p. 91).

This lack of distinction is perhaps a charitable way to interpret the appearance of chrism in the prayer book rite, which seeks to locate the action of the Spirit both in the baptismal water and the anointing with chrism. The prayer for the sevenfold gifts of the Spirit which follows the water bath links the new life in the Holy Spirit with the petition for sustenance and additional gifts. The formula for chrismation which follows this prayer, “you are sealed by the Holy Spirit in Baptism and marked as Christ’s own for ever” (BCP 1979, p. 308), invites questions about whether the sealing of the Holy Spirit happens in the water bath or in the sign of the Cross. These questions exceed the limits of this study. Here it shall suffice to note that the action of the Holy Spirit pervades the baptismal liturgy just as it did at Pentecost.

We must also consider the baptisms which occur later in Acts 2. They provide an important historical precedent, and the first promise of the baptismal covenant is a quotation of Acts 2:42. To draw the connection between Pentecost and baptism even closer, celebrants could use the permission to lengthen lessons (BCP 1979, p. 888) to extend the Acts reading to end at verse 42. This longer reading would demonstrate that, in response to the miracle of the tongues of fire and Peter’s preaching, over three thousand new Christians were baptized on the first Pentecost.

Some of the additional readings at Pentecost, which vary by lectionary year, may also shed additional light on the baptismal dimensions of this feast. Each year, a portion of Psalm 104 is appointed. The Spirit is explicitly mentioned: “You send forth your Spirit, and they are created; and so you renew the face of the earth” (Psalm 104:31). Also mentioned is the individual’s response of wonder at God’s creation: “I will sing to the Lord as long as I live; I will praise my God while I have my being” (Psalm 104:34). This could be identified with one of the gifts of the Spirit, “the gift of joy and wonder in all your works,” that is named in the prayer after baptism (BCP 1979, p. 307). It is in baptism, through the gift of the Holy Spirit, that we have the ability to marvel as the psalmist does at the wonderful works of God in creation as well as in our own lives.

In Years A and B, portions of Romans 8 may be read (verses 14–17 in Year A, and 22–27 in Year B). St. Paul asserts in Romans 8:15 that the Holy Spirit makes us children of God through a “spirit of adoption.” Paul goes on to describe the Spirit “bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ” (Romans 8:16). In the Year B pericope, we learn about the special relationship we have to God because of the Spirit: “we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly while we wait for adoption, the redemption of our bodies” (Romans 8:22). The believer has received the gift of the Spirit and also the promise of hope for what is not yet seen, which we hold on behalf of and alongside all creation. The familial dimension of baptism that Paul introduces here is referenced in the welcome by the congregation: “We receive you into the household of God” (BCP 1979, p. 308). Themes of adoption are less prominent in the Episcopal liturgy than they are in Reformed churches, but this reading provides a possible way to emphasize them. Likewise, there is another connection between baptism and creation in the Year B pericope.

The Gospel reading in Year A, John 14:8–17, suggests the effects of the gifts of the Holy Spirit that are bestowed in baptism (and chrismation): “If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate, to be with you forever. This is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, because he abides with you, and he will be in you” (John 14:15–17). This “Spirit of truth” could be identified with “a spirit to know and to love you” from the prayer after baptism (BCP 1979, p. 307). The Year B Gospel reading is along the same lines (John 15:26–27; 16:4b–15). Jesus tells the disciples that “when the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth” (John 16:11). Certainly, this is a foreshadowing of Pentecost, but it is also a promise for the gift of the Spirit to all believers. Whether baptized as infants or adults, all have the need to grow in the knowledge and love of God, which is accomplished only through the working of the Holy Spirit.

The Year C Epistle, 1 Corinthians 12:3b–13, makes a connection between Paul’s body politic and the Holy Spirit. The gifts of the Spirit that Paul lists here are different from the list in the post-baptismal prayer, but a comparison can still be made. We also get a strong statement of incorporation theology: “in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one body” (1 Cor. 12:13). The essential unity that is entered into in baptism, Paul explains, transcends gender, race, and social status because we all share in one Spirit. This does not eliminate or override our diversity, as the previous list of spiritual gifts makes clear, but rather unites us as one body made of many members.

The consequence of the lectionary’s insistence on reading Acts 2 each year is that either an Old Testament or Epistle reading can be used. The Old Testament readings focus on typology for Pentecost, while the Epistle readings explore the consequences of Pentecost for the Church. It may thus be more effective, when Pentecost is emphasized as a baptismal feast, to continue the tradition of reading Acts instead of the Old Testament lesson at the Eucharist. This allows the Epistle lessons to provide connections to the baptismal liturgy, particularly the spiritual gifts given in baptism and chrismation. The Gospel lessons, while demonstrating Jesus’ predictions of Pentecost, also hint at the spiritual dimensions of baptism.

3.3. The Baptism of Our Lord

The other two baptismal feasts are not related to the Easter season but have their own connections to the sacraments of initiation. The feast of the Baptism of Our Lord Jesus Christ is a surprisingly late addition to the calendar, but not because it was never observed. Rather, its observance was part of the larger unified Epiphany/Theophany observance on January 6, which commemorated both the arrival of the Magi and the Baptism of Jesus, as well as the miracle at Cana. These events are connected by their position as early stories of the manifestation of Jesus to the world, hence the terms Epiphany (“manifestation”) and Theophany (“appearance of God”). There are some records of Epiphany being viewed as a baptismal feast in places like Egypt and Spain, though it seems this did not catch on (Johnson 1999, pp. 54, 168). The separate feast dedicated to the Baptism of Jesus was not instituted until the twentieth century; in the Episcopal Church, it appears for the first time in the 1979 Book of Common Prayer. With the institution of this feast as its own day in the calendar, the Sunday following Epiphany, it was evidently seen as a good opportunity for holding baptisms due to the obvious link between Jesus’ baptism and our own baptisms.

The Gospel reading for this Sunday is always one of the Synoptic versions of the Baptism of Jesus (Matthew in Year A; Mark in Year B; Luke in Year C). While the connection to baptism is obvious on the surface, Jesus’ baptism by John invites several questions about its meaning and relationship to Christian baptism. It is not clear where John’s baptism originated or why Jesus was baptized by John. Jesus receiving a baptism of repentance seems to oppose the biblical idea that he was without sin. On the other hand, it shows Jesus fully submitting to his human nature and demonstrating a response to the preaching of his relative John. Nonetheless, Jesus’ baptism is a historical fact, despite the theological problems it creates. Maxwell Johnson has pointed out that “if Jesus’ baptism had not happened there would have been no reason whatsoever for the New Testament writers to include references to it. In fact, it would have been easier for their portrayal of Jesus had such an event not taken place” (Johnson 1999, p. 13). The Baptism of Jesus may lead to more questions than answers.

Johnson argues that the key to interpreting this story is not so much the baptism but the action of the Holy Spirit at Jesus’ baptism:

“The theological key to the synoptic accounts of Jesus’ baptism is the descent of the Holy Spirit upon him, whether ‘like a dove’ or ‘in bodily form like a dove,’ and the message of the divine voice which identifies him as the beloved Son of God. New Testament scholars such as Oscar Cullman, Joachim Jeremias, and others have long noted that the message proclaimed at this event—‘You are [this is] my Son, the Beloved; with you [with whom] I am well pleased’—is a combination of two important Old Testament texts related to the identity and coronation of kings in ancient Israel (Ps 2:7) and to the identity and vocation of that one known as the ‘Suffering Servant’ in the songs or poems of that sixth-century B.C.E. prophet called Deutero-Isaiah (Isa 42:1). Psalm 2:7 reads, ‘You are my son; today I have begotten you’; Isaiah 42:1 states, ‘Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen in whom my soul delights.’ By combining these two texts … the divine voice at Jesus’ baptism proclaims Jesus’ identity not as a glorious and powerful Messiah, who comes in wrath, fire, and judgement, as John the Baptizer had proclaimed, but, rather, as a ‘suffering Messiah,’ the ‘suffering servant,’ who will ‘give his life as a ransom for many’ (Mark 10:45). In this way, then, scholars have seen this baptismal event at the Jordan to have ‘vocational’ significance for Jesus’ own life and ministry.”

(Johnson 1999, p. 14)

The presence of the Holy Spirit is important not only for Jesus’ vocation but also for the understanding of Christian baptism. Jesus’ baptism is different from the other baptisms performed by John and also sets the paradigm for Christian baptisms, in which the gift of the Holy Spirit is conferred and brings about new birth and, indeed, a new vocation in the Christian life.

Just as Jesus was baptized in water, we are baptized in water. Repentance for sin continues to be an important theme, although it is at risk of being minimized in the modern rite. In the 1979 rite, candidates are asked to renounce Satan, forces of evil, and sinful desires (BCP 1979, p. 302). This renunciation of sin and turning to a new way of life is not dissimilar from the intentions of John’s baptism. In Jesus’ submission to this baptism, he, as Joseph Ratzinger (then Pope Benedict XVI) states, “inaugurated his public activity by stepping into the place of sinners” (Ratzinger 2007, p. 18). Jesus’ identification with us sinners in baptism allows Christian baptism to receive its full meaning.

However, the accompanying actions of baptism also find interpretation on this day. The anointing with the Holy Spirit, who descends on Jesus as a dove, is also repeated at Christian baptisms, in the sign of chrismation (or consignation, if chrism is not used). It is with this action that the newly baptized is “sealed by the Holy Spirit” and grafted into the royal priesthood which Christ first took on at his baptism. Two of the New Testament readings, Acts 8:14–17 in Year C and Acts 19:1–7 in Year B, invite more questions than they solve about the relationship of the Holy Spirit to baptism. In both cases, apostle(s) (Peter and John in Acts 8; Paul in Acts 19) discover a group of believers whose baptisms are in some way incomplete. In Acts 8:16, we hear that “the Spirit had not come upon any of them; they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” In Acts 19, they had been baptized with John’s baptism of repentance and had not known of the Holy Spirit. In both cases, they receive apostolic hand-laying and receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. This seems to suggest a separation between the waters of baptism and the seal of the Spirit, as some theologians continue to claim (Meyers 1997, pp. 71–73). However, the current Prayer Book rite prefers to see the water bath and the other postbaptismal ceremonies as all of a piece, all pointing to one reality, rather than to locate the gift of the Spirit at a particular point. Whether they impact the current baptismal rite or not, these two passages from Acts encourage us not to neglect the importance of the gift of the Spirit in baptism, as a central theological image.

There is one other problem posed by the feast of the Baptism of Our Lord. Why are new Christians baptized? To baptize at the feast where Jesus’ baptism is recalled seems to suggest a mimetic quality: we are baptized because Jesus is baptized. However, to reduce the meaning of baptism to a repetition or imitation of Jesus’ action is to miss out on significant portions of the story of salvation. Rather, baptism is an anamnesis of the whole of salvation history, culminating with Jesus’ death and resurrection, in which we are able to participate when we die and rise with him in baptism.

The concept of anamnesis is frequently mentioned with respect to the Eucharist, but it applies to baptism as well. As discussed above, the Thanksgiving over the Water includes an anamnesis of creation, the flood, and the exodus. Julia Gatta, Episcopal priest and pastoral theologian, writes, “In remembering these events, we are not just calling them to mind. By the power of the Holy Spirit, they become present to us. Our words in the Eucharist, as in all the sacraments, are effective signs. The Greek word anamnesis, usually translated as ‘remembrance,’ is the key term for this time-bending character of liturgy. It refers to the ‘making present,’ through the Holy Spirit, those events we recall and by which we are saved. … We participate in them; we are ‘there’” (Gatta 2018, p. 51).

The anamnetic quality of baptism is a remembrance of all of God’s saving work throughout history, not the single event of Jesus’ baptism. To focus too squarely on the baptism of Jesus as an example or “ordinance” would be to miss the rich theological meaning of baptism, especially that which has been recently recovered. Therefore, while baptizing on the feast of Our Lord’s Baptism is both historically and logically supported, it requires particular theological care not to be reduced to a mere repetition. Rather, our baptism follows the example of Jesus’ baptism because in it we are anointed with the Holy Spirit, called God’s own, and empowered for ministry in the world.

3.4. All Saints’ Day (Or the Sunday Following)

Curiously, All Saints’ Day is the only feast besides Easter with an octave in the 1979 calendar. All Saints’, as a Principal Feast, “may always be observed on the Sunday following November 1, in addition to its observance on the fixed date” (BCP 1979, p. 15). Thus, All Saints’ as a baptismal occasion is a rather nebulous feast that can occur across the span of several days. It has the least precedence for association with baptism: it was only made a churchwide festival (in the West) in the ninth century and given an octave in the fifteenth. It is focused more on the dead than the living, originally intended as a way to commemorate the too-long-to-list collection of martyrs that had accumulated over the centuries. It is no wonder that the current Episcopal liturgical manuals do not say much more about it than to acknowledge it as “a convenient occasion for autumn baptism” and an allusion to the communion of saints (Mitchell and Meyers 2016, p. 103; Turrell 2013, p. 10). However, there is much more to be said. All Saints’ Day provides a rich opportunity for constructive theology via the liturgical hermeneutic.

When encountering the lections for All Saints’ Day, we are faced with yet another problem: the adoption of the Revised Common Lectionary. The 1979 lectionary offers two cycles of readings (perhaps intending one for use on the day and one on the Sunday within the octave), but the RCL, adopted in 2014, offers readings on a three-year cycle, which take a different turn. Many of the RCL readings are also listed in the burial office: Revelation 7 and 21, 1 John 3, Wisdom 3, Isaiah 25, and John 11. Viewed together, these might promote the idea of All Saints’ Day as a sort of group funeral. However, the tradition suggests that this is the purpose of All Faithful Departed, the optional commemoration on November 2, not All Saints’ Day. For this study, then, I will focus on readings that are found both in the original 1979 lectionary and the RCL and not in the burial office: the two accounts of the Beatitudes.

Matthew 5:1–12 is appointed in RCL Year A (and in the first set of BCP readings), and Luke 6:20–31 is appointed in RCL Year C (and may be extended to verse 36 in the second set of BCP readings). Their connection to All Saints’ Day, and to martyrs in particular, is obvious and beautiful: those who were meek and humble of heart, persecuted and even killed for their faith on this earth, receive their reward in heaven. Their connection to baptism is perhaps somewhat less clear. However, I find that it links quite well with an element of the baptismal liturgy that has not yet found many connections: the Baptismal Covenant.

During the examination of candidates for baptism, after the renunciations and promises, the entire congregation is invited to “join with those who are committing themselves to Christ and renew our own baptismal covenant” (BCP 1979, p. 303). What follows is a question-and-answer dialogue that takes essentially two movements, entitled the Baptismal Covenant. The first movement is the Apostles’ Creed, the symbol of faith that has long been a staple of the baptismal rite. The second movement is more novel, consisting of five questions and answers that are focused on outward actions:

Celebrant	Will you continue in the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of the bread, and in the prayers?
People	I will, with God’s help.
Celebrant	Will you persevere in resisting evil, and, whenever you fall into sin, repent and return to the Lord?
People	I will, with God’s help.
Celebrant	Will you proclaim by word and example the Good News of God in Christ?
People	I will, with God’s help.
Celebrant	Will you seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving your neighbor as yourself?
People	I will, with God’s help.
Celebrant	Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?
People	I will, with God’s help. (BCP 1979, pp. 304–5)

These promises are integral to the baptismal rite. Their current placement puts them on par with the affirmation of the Creed, but they are fundamentally a response to the Creed. Because of the gift of God’s grace, the baptized respond by gathering as the Christian community, resisting evil, proclaiming the Gospel, and caring for the rich and the poor alike. These actions are essentially the actions that Jesus promotes in the Beatitudes: blessed are the poor in spirit, the meek, those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, the peacemakers, and those who are persecuted for the sake of the Gospel.

What we find on All Saints’ Day, then, is a new dimension of baptism: a moral dimension. It suggests that because of our baptisms, which in themselves are a response to God’s initiative and invitation, we become part of a body that takes particular actions: those outlined in the Beatitudes and in the second half of the Baptismal Covenant. All Saints’ Day, particularly in a baptismal context, thus invites us to consider how our own baptisms prepare us to follow the examples of the saints, to live out our faith in the world, to witness to God’s deeds of power and to work for peace and justice. It is through baptism that we have the gifts to become like the saints, and as the All Saints’ Day hymn by Lesbia Scott: “I sing a song of the saints of God” says, “there’s not any reason—no, not the least, why I shouldn’t be one too.”

4. Conclusions

The liturgical hermeneutic of Scripture allows us to read the Bible and the liturgy together, allowing them to reflect off one another—just as they do in the lived experience of all Christians who attend liturgical worship. In this chapter, we have investigated the “baptismal feasts” outlined in the 1979 Book of Common Prayer using the appointed Scripture readings to probe the contributions each feast makes to the total baptismal theology promoted in the liturgy. We find that each feast invites new questions, new perspectives, and new theological dimensions into the larger picture of baptism. To hold baptisms, or even simply to reaffirm the Baptismal Covenant, on these occasions, invites each feast to make its contribution to the sacramental imagination of the people of God. Their spacing throughout the year holds both practical and theological significance: it is possible to reserve nearly all baptisms for one of these feasts, and they provide touchstones throughout the year to reflect on baptism.

The Great Vigil of Easter, for centuries the foremost of baptismal feasts, invites us into contemplation of the great Paschal Mystery, particularly as explored in St. Paul’s letter to the Romans. We are buried into Christ’s death and resurrection, dying and rising with him into a new life that is free from eternal sin and death. However, as we have seen, the Old Testament lessons at the Vigil also have quite a bit to say about baptism. We are invited to contemplate the gift and mystery of water: its power, its life-giving and death-dealing forces, and its use as the water in which we die to sin and rise to the new life of grace. There are also glimpses of the pneumatological dimension of baptism, especially in the readings from Ezekiel.

At Pentecost, the gift of the Holy Spirit is the central theme. We see that even on the day of Pentecost, baptisms were performed as a result of people witnessing the power of God and hearing the good news of Jesus Christ. We also hear of some of the gifts of the Spirit that are prayed for in the course of the baptismal liturgy: the Spirit of truth (John 15), which allows us to know God, and the Spirit of wonder (Psalm 104), which allows us to marvel at God’s work in creation. The postbaptismal ceremony of chrismation is referenced here as the newly baptized receive the seal of the Spirit.

The Baptism of Our Lord, a feast that has also been associated with baptism throughout the history of the Church, presents some challenges to our baptismal theology. Is baptism simply a repetition of Jesus’ baptism? What is the relationship between the water of baptism and the gift of the Holy Spirit? The Scriptures appointed for this feast at the beginning of the Epiphany season invite us to contemplate these questions and to seek rich answers. Although we know Jesus was baptized, our baptism is not merely an empty mimicry of his; rather, it is our own experience of God’s power and love, and our own opportunity to be sealed with the Holy Spirit, just as Jesus was and as the unnamed believers in Acts were.

All Saints’ Day also presented some challenges, as a late addition to the baptismal calendar, and possibly for practical rather than theological reasons. However, an imaginative reading of the Beatitudes, long associated with All Saints’ Day, reveals that in addition to describing the communion of saints, they may also describe us. The Beatitudes interpret the baptismal covenant not as a simple to-do list but as an invitation to share in the communion of saints as a response to the gifts we receive in baptism. This “moral dimension” of baptism shows us what we are made capable of by becoming members of Christ’s body, the Church.

It is difficult to make a statement of what baptism is. It is simply too much to be contained in a short statement. Rather, baptism is experienced, and preferably not as a one-time event but as a baptismal reality that the faithful encounter each time they participate in the liturgy. The baptismal feasts offer a regular opportunity to focus on different dimensions of baptismal theology. The Scriptures appointed frequently allow for connections to be made that may or may not be obvious. Liturgists, musicians, and preachers should be attentive to these possibilities, seeking to draw them out and reinforce them when possible. In so doing, they make it possible for the people of God to have their understanding of baptism both challenged and deepened as they welcome new members into Christ’s body, the Church, witnessing together to his death and resurrection and sharing together in his eternal priesthood.