"Regarding 'initiation' into such a diverse and inclusive 'table companionship,' however, it is important to underscore the fact that nowhere do the Gospels record anything specific about rites of entrance or preparation for this meal sharing with Jesus. Rather, to use our own now traditional sacramental language, the meal itself was not the
culmination of initiation but appears, rather, as the
inception, that is, the very
beginnings of initiation, the 'sacrament'
of initiation, or,
the rite of incorporation into Christ. Nothing, not even baptism and certainly nothing like confirmation, were required as preparatory steps. Entrance to the meal of God's reign, anticipated and incarnated in the very life, ministry, and meals of Jesus of Nazareth, was granted by Jesus himself and granted especially to those who were
not prepared and
not (yet) converted, to the godless and undeserving, to the impure, and the unworthy. Conversion itself, it seems, was a
consequence of, not a pre-condition for, such meal sharing." (p. 6)
The blog's about to become, well, more bloggy. Well, maybe. Sort of. In the sense of much more random. I need to take some notes to finish my second chapter of my dissertation, the part on the history of Christian initiation (and what it says about Christian identity). I decided to take them here for portability, a little feeling (probably an illusion, honestly) of
accountability, and just in case anyone's interested.
The history stuff is based on
Max Johnson's The Rites of Christian Initiation, which is a great book that I've read before. My goal is to read it and take notes in the next two weeks, then write the last part of chapter 2. I think that part should be 15-20 pages. If I run across something particularly interesting, I may make a detour through some other source material.
Chapter one of
RCI focuses on the NT material on initiation, starting out with the major point that the initiatory practice of Jesus himself, if it can be so called, seemed to be a radically inclusive table companionship that earned him the ire of his contemporaries. From this context comes my quotation above, which, it seems to me, gives significant insight into Christian initiation. Following from this view of table companionship is the idea that Christian identity is not something one seeks out, proves oneself worthy of, and comes to earn. Rather, Christian identity is offered as a gift
before one comes to seek it out. This is obvious and well-known. But looking at it further, this also implies that Christ and the Christian community recognize in the recipient of initiation
(before he or she has become purified, converted, etc.), a gift to the community. The gift of initiation, then, is actually two-fold: a gift given by the community (acting in the person of Christ) to the initiate and the initiate's gift to the Body of Christ. The church recognizes in the unworthy worthiness, and by recognizing it, begins to initiate the person; by initiating him or her, the church begins the redemptive process that eventually makes the person worthy. This view of the sacrament (and it is the Catholic view, as far as I can see, throughout the tradition) is why the Catholic church has always initiated infants.
Moving on, Max calls attention to the fact that Jesus' baptism is considered historically factual by the consensus of NT scholars. He argues for the independence of John's baptismal practice from Essene ritual washings and from proselyte baptism. He mentions the possibility (based on John) that Jesus himself was a "baptizer" in the style of John the Baptist, that footwashing constituted an early initiation practice.
Most interesting from my perspective are the comments on the primitive links between baptism and the Holy Spirit: "it is the presence and gift of the Holy Spirit that distinguish Jesus' own and subsequent Christian baptism from that of John." The synoptic accounts of Jesus' baptism "are about what happens in
Christian baptism, in general, namely, the very gift of the Holy Spirit inseparably associated with that baptism, who therein brings about the new birth of God's beloved 'sons and daughters,' in whom God is well pleased." (15) "[F]or the earliest Christians, baptism and Holy Spirit were bound together inseparably" so that when baptism was not accompanied by the gift of the Spirit or the Spirit came before baptism itself "this anomalous situation had to be remedied by the apostles themselves so that this normal relationship between baptism and Holy Spirit would be (re)connected." (26)
On baptism and the bestowal of Christian identity Max says, "to be baptized 'in' or 'into the name of Jesus' is to be baptized into Christ, to be associated as closely as possible with Christ himself as the very mediator of God's salvation." He ties this to Mt. 28 and the trinitarian shape of Christian identity, modeled on the trinitarian shape of Christ's identity as depicted in the synoptic baptismal accounts, by drawing on Aidan Kavanagh: Matthew 28:16-20 may be "a 'theological declaration' of the new relationship which baptism establishes between the baptized and God, a relationship signified in the paradigmatic story of Jesus' own baptism in the Jordan, where his identity as 'Son' in relationship to both 'Father' ('You are [This is] my Son, the Beloved') and 'Holy Spirit' is proclaimed." (28, bracketed portions original, see Kavanagh,
The Shape of Baptism, 22)
Finally, on page 30, Max refers to the fuzziness between actual liturgical practices and theological interpretations of initiation in the NT. While some of the images (e.g. anointing) may reflect actual practice, it is possible that the metaphorical use of them in the NT, guided by OT language and events (e.g. Ps. 2:7) led to the development of related ritual practices.
