click here to tweet this post
click here to share with your friends
subscribe to this feed
click here to format for printing
Church of England baptism services may be re-written to remove some references to Christianity.
by StuartJanuary 18th, 2011
6 Comments
The plan for a new ‘baptism lite’ service designed to make christenings more interesting to non-churchgoers will be considered next month by the Church’s parliament, the General Synod.
Supporters say the baptism service should be ‘expressed in culturally appropriate and accessible language’ that is readily understood by ‘non-theologically versed Britons’.
But traditionalist clergy said the idea amounted to ‘dumbing down’.
The new service would be used at 150,000 christenings each year. If the plan is accepted, it will be the third full re-write of the baptism ceremony in around 30 years – the version in the Church’s Book of Common Prayer went virtually unaltered for more than 400 years until 1980.
Posted by Stuart James
6 Comments
Er, our vicar explains the significance of various parts of the service as he goes along, and others I know do similar. The explanations are necessarily brief but I don’t see why the service needs to be changed.
It seems that claiming the language isn’t “earthed enough” is just a PC way of saying they don’t like the spiritual aspect of the service.
I feel a slight tension in it all, though. I’m not Anglican, but I can empathize with the need to put the service in the vulgar tongue (as this is what we attempt to do with our Scripture translation efforts today), but it seems like there is a much deeper agenda that is being cloaked in the attempt to make it “accessible” to the unchurched.
I’ve been thinking about this very attitude among American Evangelicals. I’m all for expressing praise to God through the means of the culture and I think there are parts of culture that we, as Christians can and should sanctify. But there are some who seem to love their culture more than Christ, and are trying to make Jesus more “earthy” in attempts to have both.
I may be off subject here, sorry for that.
That’s not off topic Daniel, but highly relevant and you have highlighted some of the concerns I noted when I read the piece.
As Kathryn says it’s not particularly hard to offer an explanation of the proceedings, before or during.
I just read this to my wife, she replied, “that’s just stupid!”
I agree with your wife Mike.
[...] further to my recent post, the Church of England have voted in favour of simplifying the Baptismal Service and using language [...]