A new Baptism service proposed by a Church of England liturgical group has made the initiation rite more accesible by removing the 'difficult' areas of the traditional service.
Speaking for the group, Revd. Avril Scherz said that, "Focussing more upon the actual baptism and making less fuss about the issue of faith will mean that many more people will be able to come to this service without being embarrassed or challenged. We have removed all the responsorial elements and there are no promises or acts of faux commitment to contend with. With this service, anyone can bring their child without being made to feel they must have a faith. The result is that the whole celebration is more joyful and makes everyone happier."
As might be expected there have been some criticisms in that the service deviates greatly from the now (relatively) obsolete 1662 Book of Common Prayer and the thirty-nine articles (currently under review by the liturgical commission) but this is regarded as being an echo from days gone by as the church looks towards being popular in the twenty-first century.
For those who wish to consider the issue of changes to our baptism services I suggest that they visit the Church Society's excellent paper Adapting the New baptism Service.
But supporters of liturgical advancement say that the new baptism services and the recent service combining marriage and baptism make the church more popular and accessible. People, they say, don't want to have their belief options limited by structures and making promises, they want to have church in their lives in ways that don't interfere with the daily business of living.
For those who wish to read the baptism and marriage service, details may be found here
3 comments:
"People, they say, don't want to have their belief options limited by structures and making promises"
Isn't that the whole point of religion?
"they want to have church in their lives in ways that don't interfere with the daily business of living."
Will religion soon be available at Tesco's?
BTW I note the date! Have you just caught me out? If you have, then it is because the stance you suggest is far too believable in modern society.
In the 1999 Methodist Worship Book, the then new baptism service placed the promises after the actual baptism. That point was that faith should be a response to the prior grace of God. Not that the grace of God is a response to and conditional upon a profession of faith.
Is something similar going on here?
Post a Comment