FINDINGS VII By Harry T. Cook
 
Epiphany I - C - January 10, 2016
Isaiah 43: 1-7; Acts 8: 14-17; Luke 3: 15-17, 21-22
 
       
Harry T. Cook

By Harry T. Cook
1/4/16

Imagine being an intelligent extraterrestrial dropping into a Christian church during the rite of baptism and wondering what the man or woman in the long white robe meant to be doing to a baby by pouring water over its head. You would probably conclude that you were witnessing an antique ritual intended to wash away the evil spirits or some such thing. In a way, you would be right. Being of superior intelligence, you would know that an ounce or two of tepid water would not avail for any true cleansing. You would know further that the infant being so washed would experience probable discomfort. You would wonder at the furtive snapping of phone cameras and the oohing and aahing of grown-up people witnessing the event.

Depending on what kind of church you were visiting, the answer to your questions, "What's going on here and why?" could range from: "A death unto sin, and a new birth unto righteousness: for being by nature born in sin, and the children of wrath, we are hereby made the children on grace." /1 Or: "Infants are baptized so that they can share citizenship in the Covenant, membership in Christ, and redemption by God." /2 Or: "Baptism is a Sacrament which cleanses us from original sin, makes us Christians, children of God, and heirs of heaven. Actual sins and all the punishment due to them are remitted by Baptism, if the person baptized be guilty of any. Baptism is necessary to salvation, because without it we cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven." /3 Or: "Baptism is a sacrament, wherein the washing with water in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost doth signify and seal our engrafting into Christ, and partakers of the benefits of the covenant of grace, and our engagement to be the Lord's." / 4 Or: "Baptism is the first and chief sacrament of forgiveness of sins, because it unites us with Christ, who died for our sins and rose for our justification . . ." / 5

Now, O curious alien, what do you know?

You know as much as most, if not all, the humans gathered at that thing called a "font." Stick around and learn a thing or two about whence the strange rite you and they are witnessing. 
 
We are returning to John the Baptist just as Luke gets around to the persistent first century notion that the Baptist might have been "the One who was to come." Possibly this reflects a real situation as, perhaps, some significant number of mid-to-late First Century Jews and Gentiles were assessing the careers of the late John and the late Jesus as to which of the movements they should give loyalty. Luke makes John demur (v. 16) and actually debase himself ("I am not worthy to untie the thong of his sandals.") Then in less than typical Lukan sentiment, John is made to add all the business about the wheat and the chaff (v. 17) and the unmistakable hint of harsh judgment for those neither astute nor fortunate enough to be adjudged wheat.

Water baptism (v. 16) seems to be played down with John's "I baptized you with water, but . . ." The real baptism will be "with the Holy Spirit and with fire" -- fire being a symbol of judgment and purification. See Malachi 3: 2b-3: "For he is like a refiner's fire . . . and he will purify the descendants of Levi and refine them until they present offerings to the Lord in righteousness." Luke will later in "the second book" take the symbol of baptism by fire to new heights in the depiction of baptism/ordination of the apostles at Pentecost, which is obliquely referred to in the portion from the Acts of the Apostles (8: 14-17) appointed as the second reading in this proper. See also Isaiah 43:2, part of this proper's first appointed reading, and its allusion to both "fire" and "water."

As to the baptism of Jesus (the liturgical theme of Epiphany I), it has been a theological puzzlement for a long time to those who wish to perpetuate the myth of Jesus' sinlessness -- as if he had not been a human being with all the physical and psychic apparatus of so being. John's baptism was (or was depicted as being) for the forgiveness of sin. All four canonical gospels agree that Jesus was baptized. Mark's entry is: "In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan." It would be, in any event, hearsay evidence because whatever occurred would have taken place 40 or more years before Mark (the gospel) was being composed, and probably by no actual witness to the supposed event.

Matthew (in 3:13-17) has Jesus coming from Nazareth for the purpose of being baptized, but with an argument from John about who should baptize whom. Matthew's Jesus prevails, saying, in effect, "this will be a good example for others to follow." The Gospel of John suggests (1:31) that the Baptist came baptizing "that he (messiah/Jesus) might be revealed to Israel." John (the evangelist) finesses direct mention of Jesus' baptism at the hands of the Baptist, who is depicted as saying he didn't even know Jesus by sight, but allows him to witness to his own vision of the heavenly epiphany (1: 32-30).

Sometimes Jesus' baptism is referred to by theologians as an "embarrassment," in that, by common consent of four otherwise competing gospel traditions, Jesus was for a time subordinate to John, and, furthermore, considered himself needful of a baptism (washing) meant to remove the mark of sin. That the event is nevertheless included or referred to in one way or another by all four canonical evangelists tells a great many scholars that it must actually have occurred. But why should it have not occurred? John the Baptist seems to have been as prominent, if not more so, than Jesus for a time. It may well be that Jesus or a Jesus-type may have been drawn to the charismatic figure of the Baptist and later even broke with him ideologically or succeeded him after the Baptist's imprisonment and eventual execution.

J.D. Crossan has made a point now and again of contrasting the Baptist's evident apocalyptic nature with Jesus' sapiential approach - for example, not so much that the coming of the kingdom is in sight with all its portent but that the kingdom is within. The Baptist is generally depicted as renouncing the world. Jesus is depicted as embracing the world and guiding people in the development of an ethic to make it a world that could work.

Assuming that a Jesus was among those baptized by John for forgiveness, perhaps it may be said that Jesus (or those writing about him) may have evolved a different meaning of baptism than John or anyone else had intended. Maybe as the image of Jesus matured in the development of the gospels, it came to be seen that forgiveness of sin had less to do with preparation for the end of something than with a new beginning.

Whatever else the rite of baptism is, it does draw a line in time between something before and something after. The question in both directions is "What?" The catechisms quoted above say that baptism effects an ontological change in and for the baptized plus a transition from a former state of exclusion to a new one of inclusion -- inclusion in a kingdom or a covenant, whatever. Before baptism, the person in question "was" something. Now he/she "is" something different.

This is where our E.T. friend would have to shake his head in wonderment. He could easily see that the infant over whom the water of baptism was poured was the same bedewed as unbedewed. If Mr. E.T. were to voice that thought, the priest or minister at the font might tell him that what he saw was "an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace." The stranger might whisper into his sleeve, "Beam me up, Scottie."

The E.T. would probably realize that the infant in question would have no memory of the occasion. The assumption might be that those things promised by the adults who had been gathered around the font would, if delivered on, help to produce the ontological state envisioned by the rite.

What if E.T. had heard these words? (He would have to have dropped into an Episcopal Church that used the 1979 rite): QUESTION TO THE SPONSORS OR TO AN ADULT CANDIDATE: "Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?" ANSWER OF SPONSORS OR OF ADULT CANDIDATE: "I will, with God's help." /6

In that case, E.T. would understand that the strange rite he had witnessed was pointed outward to the world and had to do not with an ontological value but an ethical one. The vow asked and given was to engage the world at the points at which justice needed to be done and peace made, beginning with respecting the dignity of every person.

Now, E.T. would say to himself, "I see the point of it all." He would say, "It's all on those adults who gave the vows for the infant. If they do their job and raise the kid on peace and justice values and human dignity, all this was worth it."

   
/1 "A Catechism" Book of Common Prayer 1928, p. 581
/2 "An Outline of the Faith Commonly Called the Catechism" Book of Common Prayer 1979, p. 858
/3 "Lesson Fourteen: On Baptism" Questions 152-154, The Baltimore Catechism, p. 38
/4 "Westminster Shorter Catechism" Question 94
/5 "Catechism of the Catholic Church" 1992 # 977 On Baptism for the Forgiveness of Sins
/6 "The Baptismal Covenant" Book of Common Prayer 1979, p. 306
   


Copyright 2016 Harry T. Cook. All rights reserved. This article may not be used or reproduced without proper credit.
 

What do you think?
I'd like to hear from you. E-mail your comments to me at [email protected].