So, the Church of England have voted in favour of simplifying the Baptismal Service and using language that is more in vogue.
Bear in mind that this ceremony had not been altered for more than 400 years until it was changed in 1980, and this will be the third revision in 30 years!
Three main sections of the service have been targeted: The Decision, The Prayer over Water and The Commission.
Here is a handy link to the service booklet, should you wish to explore further:
Church of England Baptism and Confirmation Booklet (PDF)
This from the Guardian:
The Church of England is to offer shorter, snappier baptisms in “BBC1 language” after its governing body voted overwhelmingly in favour of a more accessible service.
Bishops, clergy and laity attending the General Synod in London heard how the religious language of existing texts saw “the shutters come down among the unprepared guests”.
The Rev Tim Stratford, who proposed the idea, said the pictures and metaphors in the baptism service – “slavery in Egypt” or “brought to birth by water and the Spirit” – did not resonate with the experience and knowledge of lapsed Anglican parents.
He told the synod: “It sounds as if the church wants an entirely religious response – removed from our behaviour, actions and conversation.”
It was not a request for “christenings without Christianity” but making “culturally relevant references readily understood by the majority of Britons”, he explained.
The number of babies baptised fell to 83,800 in 2009, from 86,500 in the previous year. However, the number of child and adult baptisms increased to 43,500 and 11,000 in 2009 from 42,300 and 10,400 respectively in 2008.
The archbishop of Canterbury supported Stratford’s proposal, conceding how the “wordiness” of baptisms might lead to “eyes glazing over”.
Where to start?
This is of course all about unchurched – or “lapsed Anglican” – parents baptising their children.
Should non-Christians be baptising their babies? This is after all the first sacrament of the Church, and through this, it is promised that children will be raised in the faith.
If parents do not understand the language because they are theologically ignorant, then surely removing theological terminology serves to perpetuate this ignorance.
Why not prepare the parents theologically before allowing baptism, or is this simply all about declining baptismal numbers?
If eyes are ‘glazing over’ and parents are generally finding the service too boring and wordy to opt for baptism, then perhaps they shouldn’t be opting for baptism in the first place, but for a simpler thanksgiving service.
This is all based on false premises anyway.
Firstly, it’s not that theological terminology is too complex, it’s simply unfashionable to the zeitgeist mind and concepts such as rejecting the devil, sins, and evil, are absurd.
Secondly, most unchurched baptismal parents do not go through the process of reviewing the service wording, they are either going to have their child baptised, or they are not. They are more likely to be influenced by convenience and prettiness of church and such like.
Finally, most child baptisms in the Church of England are done for cultural reasons and nothing to do with spiritual reasoning, and so tinkering with the service language achieves nothing more than yet another dumbing down of our heritage.
All in all, the Church of England are taking this path in the hope this may lead families to return to the church, which is nothing more than fanciful, wishful thinking.
