Here it is. Be kind. My brain hurts. Only one more paper left to write.
Agnus dei qui tollis peccata mundi meserere nobis.
As Baptists, we have spent much theological energy proclaiming how we are not a sacramental tradition, in the process granting our congregations complete autonomy in creating and responding to theological ideas. We term it, ?responding to the Spirit.? The irony is by actively disagreeing with sacramental traditions we have lost an articulate sense of the Holy Spirit in our worship.
In the worse case, our rituals are meaningless, empty liturgies with too great a focus upon those gathered and not enough upon God. More common is a perfunctory liturgy surrounding a sermon. No matter what may be preached, no matter how inspired, we still misunderstand the point of gathering in the first place. We have not gathered to hear the preached word only. We have gathered to stand in the midst of the Word Who Died and Is Risen, the paschal mystery. This is a mystery whose language is love. This is a Mystery who desires our whole selves. What we Baptists must renew is our theology of the Holy Spirit, a Trinitarian theology of worship, in order to reclaim our worship lives.
Brad Berglund and Molly Marshall have both spoken to this particular shortcoming in Baptist theological and liturgical life. In his book, Reinventing Sunday, Berglund proposes a model of worship that highlights an incarnational theology, renewing not simply worship practices, but theological understandings of worship as well.
Molly T. Marshall in, Joining the Dance, has fashioned responses to Baptist misconceptions of the role of the Holy Spirit as an academic and pastor. Her notions cannot remain within the seminary classroom. They are pastoral in focus, continuing the reformation that began for Baptists in England centuries ago. She reminds us that it is possible to reclaim what it right and true in our theological heritage without denying our current ecclesial identity as Baptists.
Too often, baptism is interpreted in terms of imitation rather than incorporation. Because Jesus was baptized, we should be also, following his example?It would be helpful for us to remember the comprehensive character of his baptism, especially since we hope to link our baptism with his through the Spirit?Jesus? baptism is his whole existence in the form of a servant, all that is included in his being present among humanity ?not to be served but to be serve? (Mark 10:45).
Marshall?s understanding of the Spirit?s role in baptism is profound, especially within a Baptist context. Through the Spirit, we are not simply mimicking the actions of Jesus. We are instead participating in the same baptism in the Jordan. This is an anamnetical interpretation of the rite. ?The Spirit draws believers into the paschal rhythms of Christ.? This is a full embrace of the mystery. Christ has died. Christ is risen. Christ will come again. Through this interpretation, the paschal mystery then becomes our own reality as members in a corporate body. ?Organically, there is no relationship to the church apart from relationship to Christ through the Spirit.?
Here, Marshall?s use of the term ?organically? may be a good entry point for contemporary seekers and Christian apologists. We have to discover a way to speak of this union to contemporary communities. Terms like ?ontological? may have lost their value for many Baptists. ?Organically? underscores the depth of the transformation of the individual and the new humanity that is born within the community of faithful. This is a life-giving connection. This is a place to grow. This is a place of purity where one may flourish. Though not necessarily the most safe or the prettiest of places, it is nonetheless, the most true place for the ?new humanity.? Perhaps this is taking too much liberty with Marshall?s vocabulary, yet it is an interesting line of thought to explore in this day of organic diets, farms, wineries and grocery stores.
Marshall also brings to light possible criticisms of Baptist theologies. Where baptism is supposed to be the moment of unification in the church, it has become a place of schism. She specifically calls Baptists to be aware of our own place in this.
While Baptists prize their heritage of dissent, a lingering shadow falls across the tradition of the ?believers? church? ? the separatist trajectory. In recent years, scholars have become concerned that the legacies of the Enlightenment?s stress on the primacy of the individual and of the Baptist voluntary principle have conspired to truncate a robust theology of community in Christ. Baptists have seen themselves joined to a local congregation more than to Christ?s body, the new humanity.
These words have tremendous ramifications to understanding and living into Baptist ecclesial polity. It is unclear if Marshall is necessarily suggesting a return to more traditional hierarchical structure. As she is renowned for her feminist interpretations, it is doubtful that she would wish for any full return to such practices. Yet, where she leads us with her pneumatology is deeply challenging. Indeed, how can we perceive ourselves as members of one Body, a new humanity united in Christ unless we our institutional structures reflect this in some way? ?Reclaiming the Spirit?s incorporating work in baptism promises a more holistic, organic understanding of the Spirit?s embodiment in the church, whose head is Christ.? Marshall, by working through her understanding of the Holy Spirit?s place within the rite of baptism, demonstrates a sacramental understanding. This is no mere symbol. This is no simple pantomime Jesus. Rather, she has asked us to believe something entirely different.
Berglund on the other hand, is firmly entrenched in the traditional Baptist mode of believer?s baptism. He has a Pauline understanding that baptism ?symbolizes? death and new life in Christ. Berglund perceives baptismal meaning to reside primarily in our emulation of Christ in his participation in the baptism of John.
He takes the stance that Christian baptism is a modified Jewish mikveh, a ritual cleansing symbolizing purification and an intention to live life differently. This is all well and good, and certainly not wrong. It is simply incomplete. Though his book is not a theological treatise, it would be helpful to read more of Berglund?s thinking on this.
Is it possible that, though our liturgical practice parallels the mikveh, our immersion into the Body of Christ is a sacramental action where the Holy Spirit is active in transforming the individual and the congregation through each new baptism? It is not simply a proclamation of faith. It is also beings about unity with the Body. Perhaps Berglund does entertain these notions. For example, he says, ?Celebrating [the] incarnate reality is a significant part of worship.? Yet, he does not seem to engage the fundamental necessity of incorporation into the Body of Christ through the Spirit that Marshall proclaims. I wonder if he understands the baptism of Jesus in the gospels is more than a rewriting or an incorporation of John?s ritual cleansing. In some way, we must be led to a life of discipleship through the transforming act of baptism. This is not the same thing that John did. This is more than repentance.
Professor Marshall?s understanding of the eucharist flows freely from her understanding of baptism. Questions arise about the role of the Spirit in the table liturgy because, on some level, we have to answer the question of how present the Spirit is in us after baptism and if participating in the table increases that presence or renews it in some way. For her, it is once again a place where the unity of the new humanity is brought to the foreground. This is the principle liturgical act of the church. It is an expression of unity.
The church is an organic corporate being. It must be fed. It needs sustaining. What better spiritual food can there be but the Body and Blood? Thus, the rite cannot be a simple observance of a past event. Instead, Marshall suggests we must renew our understanding of remembrance. Anamnesis is more than simple recollection. It is a repeating of the same meal, the meal in the upper room. We are present at that table. The twelve are present with us around the table. Jesus serves us. This way of remembering transforms the community. For Marshall, this is not necessarily a transformation of the elements of bread and wine.
As the issue of transubstantiation is the typical sticking point for Baptists, Marshall suggests that Baptists can engage this transforming Spirit in the eucharist in this way. We are transformed. It is we who are renewed by the work of the Holy Spirit through who we brings us to the same table that was in the upper room. We are in the presence of Christ for that reason. This is a free grace from God. There is no right or wrong liturgical structure proposed here, only a very specific interpretation of the role of the Spirit.
Marshall does, remind us, however, of the place of the epiclesis. This prayer is traditionally made to ask the Spirit to transform the bread and wine. She suggests that Baptists can appropriate this prayer by making its focus the gathered community and not the elements of wine and bread. Though, this may sound too humanist in its implications for some, it is perhaps the only way that Baptists can incorporate this theology. Perhaps when we reach Marshall?s understanding, then we Baptists can make the next necessary faith step that realizes we can be taken to Christ?s side. Is it not possible that Christ is made manifest in our midst through the elements and, perhaps, even our gathering? Certainly this is not a question for Marshall, but Baptist congregations may find ?transforming a congregation? a more palatable theology at first.
Berglund, too, has a very sacramental notion of the liturgy of the table. He states that
The Lord?s Supper, no matter how often we celebrate it, is the act of communing with Christ. As we gather around the broken body of Jesus, the risen Christ is in our midst. It is our unity with Christ that makes the Lord?s Supper more than a memorial meal. More than bringing to mind and honoring the events of the past, Communion provides an opportunity for mystery in worship. Christ, the bread of life, in a way that is beyond our reasoning, becomes our nourishment. Christ?s birth, death, and resurrection ? and ours ? come together in this act of faith.
Berglund also offers an understanding of ?symbol? that is uncommon among Baptists. ?Symbols are real, present, in front of us. But they also evoke something beyond the reality in front of us; they evoke something unique in each of us.? Though he does not go as far as proclaiming a real presence of the Risen Lord in the elements, he does go much further in his understanding than suggesting that the elements are ?mere symbol.? This seems to be a step away from his previous statement. He is not yet willing to make the great leap to real presence, but he has come beyond a common Baptist perception and has suggested a way of thinking of the real presence that may be helpful.
In the act of Communion, there is nothing we do to make Christ more present that Christ already is. But through the symbols of bread and wine, we can open our lives in new ways to that presence. That is the gift of faith we bring to the Lord?s table.
In his suggestions for worship reform, he further explores a theology of the Table. He suggests reverence for the elements. One should pray, as did the priests in the Temple, as one prepares for worship. Baking bread, filling the cups, dressing the table are all opportunities for prayer. This is a eucharistic discipline, a discipline of thanksgiving. The prayers of those preparing the meal set the tenor for all who follow to the table.
He also suggests movement. He suggests a deliberate approach to the table. Though there are some who would cry out that this liturgical motion would be ?too Catholic,? he is right in that it can express our willingness to believe, to come before God and be transformed.
He suggests feasting together at the table. He suggests varying the types of bread, even bringing grapes to the table. This is a Baptist pastor writing this book. We will not yet see wine on the table, but he does well to remind us of the generosity of the Lord?s Table.
Finally, he encourages all believers to celebrate the supper at their common family meals. This practice would be difficult for other traditions to embrace as easily as some Baptists might. Nevertheless, what is most compelling is that the Liturgy of the Table is no longer a ?once a month? observance. Instead, it becomes central to our common lives together. For a Baptist, this explodes the symbol. This facilitates bringing worship into our everyday lives. And, as he says so well, ?this type of on-going celebration of Christ?s presence enriches our experience of Communion in worship by making corporate remembrance and table fellowship part of everyday life.?
?Knowing Jesus? can be understood in two ways. It can be understood in a way that asks us to think of how we know Jesus the Christ as one knows another person. It can also be a title, the Knowing Jesus. We are known by Christ. The prologue to John?s gospel speaks of the whole of creation being created through the Word. We were created through the Word. Christ knew us before we were knit in our mothers? wombs. If we make our beds in Sheol, Christ is there. As compelling as these poetic attempts are, they are but shadows of the reality, Jesus knows us in ways too profound and complete for words.
Knowing Christ is the subject of all schism in Christianity. For Baptists this is especially true. We say that we are to know Christ, to have faith, to simply ask him into our hearts and we often think of creeds and theologies as intellectual precepts and worth only what passion we care to place in them. A pastor once said, ?Theology and faith are not the same thing.? There is for us a disconnect between our heads and our hearts. We Baptists often devalue the place of theology in our faith-lives. Yet, theological thinking is faith thinking. We must entertain such a possibility.
It is ironic. We do not ascribe to creeds because we do not wish to dictate another?s thinking. Nevertheless, our thinking (our faith) is what so often leads to schism within our denomination. We are, whether we like it or not, identified by our theologies. They are our faith. Baptists do assent to something, even if it is a creed of an individual fashioning. We are already thinking about faith, creating theologies. We assent to new and old ideas daily.
So, how do we then encourage assent to these sacramental thoughts presented by two Baptist voices? Should we? Perhaps we need another way to think about knowledge and assent.
When we speak of knowing Jesus, we have to engage the person of Jesus. He is not an esoteric subject to be studied like quantum physics. He is to be known as a person. Jesus the Christ has not lost his humanity because of the Resurrection. Quite the opposite, he retains his humanity. The incarnation is a current reality.
Therefore, the first question is can one assent to a person. ?I assent that you are Mike.? is not our way of thinking of relationship, and a relationship with Christ is what we are speaking of. Jesus does not need our assent; instead, Jesus desires us. This is divine love. Through a Trinitarian theology of God, we can come to this understanding of relationship with Christ. As Marshall and Berglund both suggest, it is the work of the Spirit that makes this possible. Like Jesus, the Spirit is a person who is in relationship with us. She is the Comforter. She is the Advocate. She is met through the act of baptism. We encounter her at the Table. Like God the Father, and the Son, She is Love.
Hans Urs von Balthazar summarizes his thinking in this way:
Do we know Jesus? Only if we recognize in him the presence and the logic of absolute divine love. This love can refine whatever in us does not oppose the flame of love, but whatever refuses to bring forth love?s fruit will be let wither (Mk. 11:20 ff.), dug up and burned (Jn 15:6).
The Spirit is how we know one another as the new humanity. The Spirit is how we recognize the incarnation. The Spirit is how we recognize the presence of Christ in one another. The language of love, of the Trinity, is a language Baptists can and do speak, though some would suggest otherwise.
Marshall and Berglund remind us that worship is one place where we have forgotten this native tongue. We keep trying to make the language of worship proclaim something other than the mystery of the love of God, the paschal mystery. However, divine love is the vocabulary of the language of worship. Only by reclaiming the place of the Holy Spirit in our worship, the place of sacrament, can we reenter this conversation.
Bibliography
Berglund, Brad, Reinventing Sunday Judson Press, Valley Forge, PA 2001
Marshall, Molly T., Joining the Dance: A Theology of the Spirit Judson Press, Valley Forge, PA 2003
von Balthazar, Hans Urs, Does Jesus Know Us? Do We Know Him? Ignatius Press, San Francisco, CA 1983
Posted by tripp at December 16, 2003 11:06 AMGood job. Call me when you get your own parish - I'm betting that it'll look an awful lot like mine.
Posted by: todd at December 16, 2003 03:39 PM