Church of England baptism services may be re-written to remove some references to Christianity.
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’.
“Dumbing down” is a charitable description, but does it really surprise anyone considering the drift of Western Anglicanism?
Whose €&#% stupid idea was it to put this on the Synod agenda?
Could we also consider the baptism, marriage, and burial of domestic pets? It seems to me that the intolerable exclusion of such important members of so many Christian families must come to an end. And, since many (but by no means all, lest I appear insensitive to the theologically astute pets so many of us know) are theologically un-versed (as apparently are the people of Britain), we need to be sensitive about the use of merely historically conditioned use of water–especially on the canine candidates who by most accounts consider the application of water a form of torture.
The Vicar of Dibley has taken over.
But Brien, even dogs will tolerate the water better than cats and the proverbial “wet hens”. Maybe all of it could be done on an IPAD with little icons of blessed water only appearing to impact the sensitive beast?
It is the “anything goes” church. Amazingly, there are many non-historic christian bodies that exhibit more discipline and effective and unifying ecclesial authority. This stuff really makes me sick!
OK, I read the story because this IS the Daily Mail, which is quite renowned for its sensationalistic tendencies. And I found nothing concrete. What are some examples of the changes they’re making? The references are vague.
The conservative quoted said there are problems with the service so apparently something is amiss. And if they are talking about less cryptic and more meaningful language, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. It depends on how it’s done. I’m going to reserve an opinion until we know if there actually will be any changes and what they are. The Daily Mail likes to provoke and embellish.
I can understand this. Those references to dying with Christ. Ewww. Ick. They always embarrass me. And the mentions of sin and the eviction of the Evil One. Yuck. And the reading of Nicodemus and returning to his mother’s womb. I am so ashamed. Anointing as priest, prophet and king? Absurd. And the Holy Water superstition? Right out of Dracula.
#8 — Are you making those up or do you know that they are cutting these things out of the service?
This is actually a step in the right direction, as it’s been happening for many years. When James Pike called the Trinity “excess baggage” and got clean away with it, what, 45 years ago, it was obvious that this and designer trinities would move forward. The last Bishop of Utah was “baptized” Mormon, and you can’t get much less baptized than that. Clearly it meant nothing to those who received her, communed her, accepted her as a postulant, allowed her to be ordained 3 times. Old news.
At least people are saying out loud what has actually been going on. What Pike might call “christian candor”! Increasingly people who convert to Orthodox Christianity are baptized to become laymen, not chrismated as was the case for many years in the past. It’s been acknowledged for some time that almost anything or lack of anything can be assumed by a BCP formula baptism rite.