Holy Baptism, Confirmation, and the ACNA Formularies
Fr. John A. Roop
Assisting Priest, Apostles Anglican Church
Canon Theologian, Anglican Diocese of the South

Let the words of my mouth and the meditations of my heart be always acceptable in your sight, O Lord my Rock and my Redeemer. Amen.

For those about to be Confirmed

O GOD, who through the teaching of thy Son Jesus Christ didst prepare the disciples for the coming of the Comforter; Make ready, we beseech thee, the hearts and minds of thy servants who at this time are seeking to be strengthened by the gift of the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands, that, drawing near with penitent and faithful hearts, they may evermore be filled with the power of his divine indwelling; through the same Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen (BCP 1928, p. 43).

INTRODUCTION

It is a cliché, not least among Anglicans, that confirmation is a sacrament in search of a theology. This statement is doubly problematic for Anglicans. First, Anglicans dispute among themselves whether confirmation is, indeed, a sacrament, though, in keeping with The Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion, none equate it sacramentally with Holy Baptism and Holy Eucharist (Article XXV, BCP 2019, p. 781). It is, if sacramental, a “second order” sacrament of the Church — a means of grace, certainly, though not required for salvation. Second, among Anglicans there seems to be no lack of a theology of confirmation, but rather the presence of multiple, conflicting theologies: if not conflicting, at least multiple ambiguous and confusing theological interpretations. As a parish priest, I face these problems annually as we catechize confirmands in anticipation of the episcopal visit. What can I say about confirmation that would be acceptable to all Anglicans? Likely nothing. Then, what can I say about confirmation that accords with the formularies of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA), specifically with the Book of Common Prayer 2019 (hereafter BCP 2019) and the ACNA catechism To Be A Christian (hereafter the Catechism)? It is the latter question that this very brief paper addresses. The task and challenge that I have set for myself is clear:

To formulate, if possible, a coherent theology of confirmation based upon the BCP 2019 and the Catechism.

This is a task meet and right for a parish priest in the ACNA, but not for a historian nor for an academic theologian; this work will be of no interest to them. It leaves to one side so much that is both interesting and important: the Church Fathers, the Anglican divines, the back-and-forth theological debates of the formative years of Anglican theology, and the modern work of excellent theologians. It is myopic, focused almost solely on the BCP and the Catechism, the two formularies that govern all those in the ACNA. It is written primarily in service of parish priests, catechists, and confirmands.

BAPTISM

I start with baptism in order to address a fundamental and vexing question regarding the relationship between baptism and confirmation: Is confirmation the necessary completion of baptism?

There are statements in the BCP 2019 and its predecessors (BCP 1662 and BCP 1928) that “muddy the waters” here, that seem to imply that baptism is an incomplete sacrament of initiation which must be completed by confirmation.

The Anglican Church requires a public and personal profession of the Faith from every adult believer in Jesus Christ. Confirmation or Reception by a Bishop is its liturgical expression. Confirmation is clearly grounded in Scripture: the Apostles prayed for, and laid their hands on those who had already been baptized (2 Timothy 1:6-7; Acts 8:14-17; 19:6) (Preface To Confirmation, BCP 2019, p.174).

Why does the Anglican Church require a public and personal profession of the Faith from every adult believer in Jesus Christ? What are the consequences of not making such a profession in Confirmation or Reception? The answers to these questions are not explicit — and not even implicit — in the BCP 2019. But the matter was clear in the predecessor books:

And there shall none be admitted to the Holy Communion, until such time as he be confirmed, or be ready and desirous to be confirmed (BCP 1928, p. 299).

Confirmation was, until the liturgical revisions leading to the publication of the BCP 1979, a requirement for Holy Communion. That implies that Holy Baptism, as a rite of initiation and full inclusion in the life of the Church, was incomplete pending Confirmation in this sense: it was deemed inadequate to admit one into the full Sacramental life of the Church. The requirement of Confirmation prior to reception of Holy Communion was not included in the BCP 2019, but its specter remains in the Preface, above. Confirmation is required, but for what? And why? About this, more later.

Also problematic and confusing are the Scripture references given in the Preface as justification for Confirmation. In the first, 2 Tim 1:6-7, Paul exhorts Timothy to “fan into flames the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands.” It is less than clear that this relates to Confirmation as we know and practice it; it could as easily refer to ordination. The only clear justification for inclusion of this reference is the connection it makes between the laying on of apostolic (episcopal) hands and the gift of God, i.e., a Spiritual gift.

The latter two references are much more problematic, and much more (questionably) related to the relationship between Holy Baptism and Confirmation. Each case presents a group of baptized believers who did not receive the gift of the Holy Spirit — not the gifts of the Spirit but rather the gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit — at baptism. In the first case (Act 8:14-17) the Gospel has crossed an important ethnic boundary; the believers in question were Samaritans. Is this the reason that laying on of hands by the Apostles Peter and John was required for the reception of the Holy Spirit, as something of an apostolic approval and authorization of this expansion of the Gospel? The second text (Acts 19:6) presents a group of disciples whose baptism itself was inadequate: they had only been baptized into John’s baptism for repentance, a baptism that was not complete but rather preparatory to Jesus’ baptism in water and Spirit. In other words, they had not yet received Holy Baptism. When St. Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus and laid hands on them, they received both the gift of the Spirit and the gifts of the Spirit (tongues and prophecy).

How are we to understand these texts? What are we to make of them as justification for Confirmation? More crucially, is the Preface implying by them that one does not receive the Holy Spirit at baptism, but rather at Confirmation? If that is, indeed, the case, then certainly baptism is incomplete and must be completed by Confirmation. How do the ACNA formularies address this issue?

Let’s begin with the BCP 2019 rite of Holy Baptism. In The Exhortation, the Celebrant says:

Here we ask our heavenly Father that these Candidates, being baptized with water, may be filled with the Holy Spirit, born again, and received into the Church as living members of Christ’s body (BCP 2019, p. 162).

In the Thanksgiving Over the Water, the Celebrant continues:

We thank you, Father, for the water of Baptism. In it we are buried with Christ in his death. By it we share in his resurrection. Through it we are made regenerate by the Holy Spirit (ibid, p. 168).

Following baptism, the Celebrant makes the sign of the Cross upon the forehead of the newly baptized and may say:

N., you are sealed by the Holy Spirit in Baptism and marked as Christ’s own for ever (ibid, p. 169).

And then, when all have been baptized, the Celebrant prays:

Heavenly Father, we thank you that by water and the Holy Spirit you have bestowed upon these your servants the forgiveness of sin, received them as your own children by adoption, made them members of your holy Church, and raised them to the new life of grace. Sustain them, O Lord, in your Holy Spirit, that they may enjoy everlasting salvation through Jesus Christ our Lord (ibid).

From the repeated references to the Holy Spirit’s presence and activity in the sacrament of Holy Baptism, it is clear that, whatever the nature of baptism and Apostolic laying on of hands in the Acts’ texts might be, the ACNA recognizes the gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit in and through the Sacrament of baptism alone. With this, the Catechism agrees:

127. What is the inward and spiritual grace given in Baptism?

The inward and spiritual grace is death to sin and new birth to righteousness, through union with Christ in his death and resurrection. I am born a sinner by nature, separated from God. But in Baptism, through faith in Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit, I am made a member of Christ’s body and adopted as God’s child and heir (Catechism, p. 57).

Thus, the formularies do not consider Holy Baptism in any way incomplete with respect to the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Thomas Cranmer’s first prayer book, the BCP 1549, was perhaps even more direct on the completion and sufficiency of baptism:

And that no manne shall thynke that anye detrimente shall come to children by differryng of theyr confirmacion: he shall knowe for trueth, that it is certayn by Goddes woorde, that children beeyng Baptized (if they departe out of thys lyfe in theyr infancie) are undoubtedly saved.

Clearly, then in this sense, Confirmation is not a completion of Baptism. What then is it? More about this later, following an excursus on chrismation.

Excursus: Oil of Chrism in Holy Baptism and Confirmation

Cranmer’s first prayer book, the BCP 1549, included/required signation (signing the baptizand with the cross sans chrism) prior to the baptism and then chrismation (anointing with the Oil of Chrism) after baptism using these words:

Almighty God the father of our lorde Jesus Christ, who hath regenerate thee by water and the holy gost, and hath geven unto thee remission of all thy sinnes: he vouchsafe to annoynte thee with the unccion of his holy spirite, and bryng thee to the inheritaunce of everlasting lyfe. Amen.

The chrismation was performed by the officiating priest.

In the BCP 1549 rite, there was no chrismation at confirmation, only the episcopal laying on of hands.

Martin Bucer, the German Reformer who heavily influenced Lutheran, Calvinist, and Anglican faith and practice, was unhappy with several aspects of Cranmer’s 1549 baptismal rite and suggested significant changes to it (See Stephen Sykes et al, The Study of Anglicanism (Revised Edition), SPCK/Fortress Press (2004), p. 293 ff). Amongst other changes, Bucer wanted Cranmer to (1) abolish the use of chrism, (2) eliminate the blessing of the water, and (3) limit the use of the exorcism to demoniacs only. Consequently, in his prayer book revision of 1559, Cranmer eliminated the use of chrism and exorcism and so reduced and carefully concealed the blessing of the baptismal water as to make it practically invisible. So it became not only possible but normative for a person to be baptized and confirmed without ever being chrismated. What about our current ACNA formularies?

The use of the Oil of Chrism is allowed in both the rites of Holy Baptism and Confirmation, but is mandated in neither (cf BCP, p. 169, 179). Also, neither rite makes the relationship between the use of the Oil of Chrism and the gifts of the Holy Spirit explicit. Rather, in Confirmation, it is the laying on of episcopal hands that is linked directly to the increase of the gifts of the Spirit (see BCP, p. 178, FOR CONFIRMATION). Following that episcopal act, the rite continues with the optional chrismation:

The Bishop may make the sign of the Cross with the Oil of Chrism on the forehead of any receiving the laying on of hands, and may say

N., I sign you with the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (BCP, p. 179).

The purpose of this signing is nowhere explicated.

This potential absence of anointing with the Oil of Chrism in both the rites of Holy Baptism and Confirmation and the absence of an expressed relationship between anointing and the gifts of the Holy Spirit is puzzling in light of a paper endorsed by the ACNA College of Bishops prior to the publication of the BCP 2019:

The bestowal of the Holy Spirit upon an individual for their empowerment for ministry within the Church was the foundational reason for the Oil of Chrism. The bishop blessed this oil for those who had been baptized to represent that God now bestowed upon them the gifts of the Holy Spirit. It was also used in the ordination rites for presbyters and bishops, to empower them with the spiritual gifts appropriate to their functions in the Church (The Three Blessed Oils Used in the Early Churches, East and West, http://bcp2019.anglicanchurch.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/ART-The_Three_Blessed_Oils.pdf, accessed 03/07/2024).

This paper clearly relates the use of the Oil of Chrism to “the bestowal of the Holy Spirit upon an individual for their empowerment for ministry within the Church.” That the anointing with the Oil of Chrism is optional throughout the rites of Holy Baptism and Confirmation — and also throughout the Ordinal — then prompts the question: Is there a sacramental meaning to the anointing as implied in The Three Blessed Oils (in which case it should not be optional) or is the anointing representational only (in which case it may be optional) as perhaps the BCP implies? Confusingly, after linking the Oil of Chrism to the “bestowal of the Holy Spirit,” the Three Oils paper then speaks of “representation.” The proper answer to this ambiguity — and the real need for clarification — is perhaps especially important for baptism since the bishop is typically not the officiant and there is, consequently, no laying on of episcopal hands for the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The use of the Oil of Chrism in baptism might be seen as making the bishop sacramentally “present” and conveying his epiclesis in lieu of the corporeal laying on of episcopal hands; in this interpretation, its use should certainly not be optional. Though this is perhaps only tangentially related to the purpose of this paper, it is a point of possible confusion in our formularies. Clarification would be helpful and welcomed.

Until such clarification is forthcoming, it seems prudent for the baptizing priest to chrismate the baptizand.

CONFIRMATION

If not a completion of baptism, what then is confirmation? Cranmer was clear on this matter in the BCP 1549:

…for asmuch as confirmacion is ministered to them that be Baptised, that by imposicion of handes, and praier they may receive strength and defence against all temptacions to sin, and the assautes of the worlde, and the devill: it is most mete to be ministered, when children come to that age, that partly by the frayltie of theyr owne fleshe, partly by the assautes of the world and the devil, they begin to be in daungier to fall into sinne.

This is largely the understanding expressed in the ACNA formularies. One of the clearest statements of the purpose of Confirmation in those formularies is found in the rite of Baptism for Infants and Younger Children in the Celebrant’s address to Godparents and Sponsoring Parents:

Today, on behalf of this child, you shall make vows to renounce the devil and all his works, to trust God wholeheartedly, and to serve him faithfully. It is your task to see that this child is taught, as soon as he is able to learn, the meaning of all these vows, and of the Faith that you will profess as revealed in the Holy Scriptures. He must come to put his faith in Jesus Christ, and learn the Creeds, the Lord’s Prayer, the Ten Commandments, and all other things that a Christian ought to know, believe, and do for the welfare of his soul. When he has embraced all these, he is to come to the Bishop to be confirmed, that he may publicly claim the Faith for his own and be further strengthened by the Holy Spirit to serve Christ and his kingdom, (BCP 2019, p. 163).

The Preface To Confirmation likewise emphasizes the strengthening by the Holy Spirit:

In Confirmation, through the Bishop’s laying on of hands and prayer for daily increase in the Holy Spirit, God strengthens the believer for Christian life in the service of Christ and his kingdom (ibid, p. 174).

Even more explicit are the Bishop’s words in The Presentation, Exhortation, and Examination of the confirmands:

Dearly beloved, it is essential that those who wish to be Confirmed or Received in this Church publicly confess Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior; become his disciples; know and affirm the Nicene Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, and the Ten Commandments; and have received instruction in the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments and the Catechism of the Church. God’s grace is imparted in Baptism, through which we are made God’s children by adoption and given the Holy Spirit. By the power of the Spirit, manifested in gifts and fruit, we are enabled to be God’s people for the sake of the world.

Now, these Candidates desire publicly to confess their faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and their commitment to follow him as Lord. They also desire the strengthening of grace through the laying on of hands, that the Holy Spirit may fill them more and more for their ministry in the Church and in the world (ibid, p. 176).

Lastly, following The Examination, the Bishop prays:

Almighty and everlasting God, we beseech you to strengthen these your servants for witness and ministry through the power of your Holy Spirit. Daily increase in them your manifold virtues of grace: the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and true godliness, and the spirit of holy fear, now and for ever (ibid, p. 178).

In these texts the purposes of confirmation are made explicit: to establish/verify the faith of the confirmand and to strengthen the confirmand through the increase of Spiritual gifts requisite for mature ministry in the Church and in the world.

The bishop is to establish/verify the faith of each confirmand by ascertaining — either by direct examination or by assurance of the sponsors — that each has been adequately instructed in the Creeds, the Lord’s Prayer, the Ten Commandments, and the Old and New Testaments, and by receiving from each an expression of his/her faith in and commitment to the Lord Jesus Christ. Then the Bishop is to impart strengthening grace to each confirmand through prayer with the laying on of hands, specifically imploring God that each confirmand will receive daily increase of the sevenfold gifts of the Holy Spirit (wisdom, understanding, counsel, might, knowledge, godliness, and holy fear) to empower each for mature ministry in the Church and in the world.

Thus, Confirmation is not a completion of Holy Baptism, but a movement beyond baptism (new birth) toward spiritual maturity and service, a sacramental rite administered by the Bishop as the successor of the Apostles.

Pentecost presents a reasonable and helpful spiritual analogy for Confirmation, one which is not infrequently encountered in sacramental thought and commentary. Prior to Pentecost, the Apostles were not absent the Spirit; Jesus had breathed his Spirit upon them on the day of Resurrection (see John 20:21-23). Yet, they were not yet sufficiently empowered for the commission he was to give them:

Acts 1:6–8 (ESV): 6 So when they had come together, they asked him, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” 7 He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”

Ten days later, on Pentecost, the Apostles, and other disciples, received the empowering gift of the Holy Spirit, a confirmation of sorts. It is a reasonable and powerful image to present Confirmation as a personal Pentecost empowering the confirmand for the commission that Christ has given to all members of his Body, and for the unique work to which he has called each member of it.

Excursus. A Rite For Admission Of Catechumens (Catechism, pp. 123-125)

The rubric for the subject rite notes:

This form is to be used for adults, or older children who are able to answer for themselves, at the beginning of a course of instruction in the teachings of the Church. It is to be used in preparation for Holy Baptism or, if those seeking admission were baptized as infants, for Confirmation.

It is the latter use — for those adult confirmands baptized as infants — that is puzzling. The rite begins with the Catechumens sequestered by the principal door until the Gospel has been proclaimed; in other words it begins with baptized Christians being temporarily and symbolically “denied” their rightful place among the community of the faithful. Of what is that a symbol? What is it intended to communicate? Then the Celebrant poses a series of questions, beginning with the following. Note particularly the Catechumens’ answer:

Celebrant What is your hope?

Catechumens New life in Christ.

But “new life in Christ” is precisely what the baptized Catechumens have already received in their baptism (see BCP, pp. 188-189), unless, of course we wish to postulate a difference between infant baptism and “adult believers” baptism, a difference that finds no support elsewhere in the BCP or Catechism.

Then follows the Enrollment And Exorcism. For the unbaptized coming to the church from pagan (early centuries) or neo-pagan (current) cultures, the need for exorcism is relatively clear. But, in the absence of robust teaching on evil spirits and exorcism (which neither the BCP nor the Catechism provides) the exorcism of a baptized Christian is confusing and might imply that the earlier infant baptism — with attendant exorcism — was somehow deficient, perhaps specifically that the baptized Christian had not received the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. That false implication is especially problematic.

Until this confusion is addressed in the ACNA formularies, it seems prudent to use A Rite For Admission For Catechumens only for those adults preparing for Holy Baptism and not for those preparing for Confirmation.

FURTHER COMMENTS

This section goes beyond the original purpose of this paper to note a source of confusion regarding Holy Baptism and Confirmation found in the Catechism. It is particularly significant since it relates to the ordo salutis and the Anglican understanding of Sacraments and salvation.

While it is possible to articulate a coherent theology of Confirmation based on and conforming to the BCP 2019 and the Catechism, there are portions of these formularies which are problematic and which breed ambiguity (at best) and confusion (at worst). A case in point is the opening section of the Catechism, The Gospel. In its laudable effort to be evangelistic, the Catechism muddies the water with its inclusion of the “Sinner’s Prayer” and its description of the “process” of turning to Christ, the ordo salutis:

A clear way to make this commitment of faith and repentance is to offer to God a prayer in which you

• confess your sins to God, being as specific as possible, and repent by turning from them;

• thank God for his mercy and forgiveness given to you in Jesus Christ;

• promise to follow and obey Jesus as your Lord;

• ask the Holy Spirit to help you be faithful to Jesus as you grow into spiritual maturity.

One example of such a prayer is the following:

Almighty Father, I confess that I have sinned against you in my thoughts, words, and actions (especially _______________). I am truly sorry and humbly repent. Thank you for forgiving my sins through the death of your Son, Jesus. I turn to you and give you my life. Fill and strengthen me with your Holy Spirit to love you, to follow Jesus as my Lord in the fellowship of his Church, and to become more like him each day. Amen (The Catechism, pp. 21-22).

The manifest problem with this process is the arrogation of the graces of Holy Baptism and Confirmation unto the Sinner’s Prayer, specifically the forgiveness of sin, the filling with the Holy Sprit, and the strengthening by the Holy Spirit. The Sinner’s Prayer seems to have become a Sacrament rendering the need for Holy Baptism questionable. Unfortunate also is the strong implication that by offering this prayer one has become part of the fellowship of Christ’s Church. And, confusing matters further, the Catechism continues:

14. What should you do as the sign of your repentance and faith?

After receiving instruction in the faith, I should be baptized into the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, thus joining his Body, the Church (ibid, p. 26).

Here baptism is reduced to a mere sign of repentance and faith rather than a Sacrament through which one receives forgiveness of sin, new life, and the gift of the Holy Spirit — something one “should” do but not presented as something one must do as generally necessary for salvation (see BCP 2019, p. 169).

A careful revision of the Catechism could eliminate such confusing passages that do not conform to the theology of Holy Baptism and Confirmation expressed throughout the formularies.

CONCLUSION

New homes, those designed by thoughtful architects and constructed by skillful contractors, cohere in a way that remodeled older homes never quite do. In the remodels there are always telltale signs of things that almost perfectly fit, but not quite: rooflines that are a bit off and lead to guttering problems, siding or brick or stone that is ever so close but not quite matching, a mix of copper pipes and PVC. Anglicanism is most definitely a remodel, and thanks be to God for it. Only by virtue of being a remodel, of being reformed (remodeled) Catholicism and not a new construction entirely, does it exercise a full and valid claim to be part of the one holy catholic and Apostolic Church. But that means it also has some theological rooflines that don’t quite align. That is the case with Baptism, Confirmation, and the ACNA formularies. The formularies are largely consistent, but not perfectly so. If there are no internal contradictions, there are internal ambiguities and real “head scratchers.” Some of these are likely intentional. The optional use of the Oil of Chrism in baptism and Confirmation is a possible case in point. Truly Reformed Anglicans are dismayed that chrism may be used and Anglo-Catholics are equally dismayed that it may not be used. Provisions are made for each group rendering each equally unhappy. That sometimes seems to be the nature of Anglicanism: a compromise that leaves everyone equally uncomfortable but still at home enough to stay. Some other of the ambiguities — and, dare I say, inconsistencies — are likely due to committee work and perhaps a failure to communicate clearly enough to ensure consistency within and among the formularies. The inclusion of the “Sinner’s Prayer” in the Catechism is almost certainly a case in point. It pulls the Anglican sacramental understanding and ordo salutis out of shape.

These are not insurmountable problems: the gutters leak a bit, but the roof is not about to cave in. Still, I think, it would be prudent to fix things before the next storm hits. Until the next renovation, I pray this very modest paper will aid catechists as they prepare their parishioners for either Holy Baptism or Confirmation.