Changes Coming to the Church of England

Two interesting changes have come out of the recent General Synod for the Church of England. The first is the consecration of women as bishops, and the second is the omission of the devil in a new simplified baptismal service.

The consecration of women to the episcopate has been on the horizon for quite some time in the Church of England. In 2012, legislation that would have allowed women to become bishops was narrowly defeated in the House of Laity. (The General Synod is composed of three legislative bodies: the House of Laity, the House of Bishops, and House of Clergy. Approval from all three houses is required before a piece of legislation comes into force.) According to CNN, Archbishop Welby expressed his “delight” that the General Synod had passed the measure this year:

Today marks the start of a great adventure of seeking mutual flourishing while still, in some cases disagreeing…The challenge for us will be for the church to model good disagreement and to continue to demonstrate love for those who disagree on theological grounds.

There appears to be a provision in place for traditionalists who cannot or will not accept women bishops. According to Newsweek:

The measure that passed on Monday contained concessions for traditionalists unwilling to serve under a woman bishop, giving them the right to ask for a male alternative and to take disputes to an independent arbitrator. Though some in favor of the change worry that this may undermine female bishops’ authority, most were willing to take that risk in order to see the legislation pass.

It has also now surfaced that positive discrimination will be used to appoint women bishops to vacant dioceses. The Telegraph reports:

The Church’s most senior official told a parliamentary committee that in vacant sees where a male and female cleric considered equally well qualified are going head to head for the same post, those making appointments will be advised to choose the female candidate.

It will be interesting to see who is appointed and where.

Another change in practice comes with the introduction of a new alternative baptismal service. John Bingham at The Telegraph reported last month on the changes that were to be proposed at the General Synod.

According to legislation introduced and passed at the General Synod, “sin” will be reinstated but the “devil” will be omitted in the new alternative baptismal service. As Bingham notes, the current baptismal service in Common Worship is as follows:

The Priest asks the parents and godparents: “Do you reject the Devil and all rebellion against God?

Parents and godparents: “I reject them.”

Priest: “Do you renounce the deceit and corruption of evil?”

Parents and godparents: “I renounce them.”

Priest: “Do you repent of the sins that separate us from God and neighbour?”

Parents and godparents: “I repent of them.”

According to Bingham,

under an alternative version trialled in more than 500 parishes earlier this year, the three questions were replaced by a pledge to reject ‘evil’ and its ‘empty promises’ But, following feedback from parishes, the wording has again been changed to two questions in which parents and godparents vow to ‘turn away from sin’ and ‘reject evil.’

The two question format was passed at the General Synod this month.

Many changes are afoot in the Church of England. It will be fascinating to see how it all unfolds.

Nathan Chase

Nathan P. Chase is Assistant Professor of Liturgical and Sacramental Theology at Aquinas Institute of Theology in St. Louis, MO. He has contributed a number of articles to the field of liturgical studies, including pieces on liturgy in the early Church, initiation, the Eucharist, inculturation, and the Western Non-Roman Rites, in particular the Hispano-Mozarabic tradition. His first book The Homiliae Toletanae and the Theology of Lent and Easter was published in 2020. His second monograph, published in 2023, is titled The Anaphoral Tradition in the ‘Barcelona Papyrus.’

Please leave a reply.

Comments

16 responses to “Changes Coming to the Church of England”

  1. John Drake

    Indeed! Fascinating as in watching a train run off the rails!

  2. Chip Stalter

    Is there such a thing as positive discrimination?

    1. Philip Sandstrom

      @Chip Stalter – comment #2:
      Look up the word ‘discrimination’ in the OED &/or a good Thesaurus. This word originally had a positive connotation connected with the choice of good over evil.

  3. Michael Slusser

    The three questions rejecting Satan, his works, and his pomps (or whatever wording the ritual used) were symmetrical with the threefold affirmation of belief in the Trinity. I cannot think of any good reason why a switch to two renunciations would be desirable. Can a Church of England liturgist explain what the advantage is supposed to be?

  4. Mark Emery

    Wow!

    No Evil One to be rescued from anymore? Thanks, C of E! What a relief!

    Is there also an alternative version of the Lord’s Prayer from which Mt. 6.13b is omitted? ‘Twill save us a bit of breath when we’re running through Mass.

  5. Perhaps symmetry and three-ness (or seven-ness or ten-ness or twelve-ness) are old and outdated, like belief in an embodiment (spiritual or corporeal) of rebellion against God called “Satan” or “the Devil”.

  6. I know some of our earliest recorded baptismal liturgies involved renouncing Satan (and certainly renouncing Satan is a good thing to do), but I don’t think any of the New Testament baptisms link them so explicitly. Baptism is clearly linked with repentance, but not so specifically with renouncing Satan. In fact, Jesus’ rejection of Satan happens after his baptism, not before it. I only looked quickly over the baptisms recounted in Acts, but none of them seem to deal specifically with renouncing Satan, rather than repentance figured more generally.

  7. Michael Slusser

    Michael Slusser : The three questions rejecting Satan, his works, and his pomps (or whatever wording the ritual used) were symmetrical with the threefold affirmation of belief in the Trinity. I cannot think of any good reason why a switch to two renunciations would be desirable. Can a Church of England liturgist explain what the advantage is supposed to be?

    Let me answer myself, that Ambrose, De sacramentis 1.2, speaks of two renunciations. “Abrenuntias diabolo et operibus eius, quid respondisti? Abrenuntio. Abrenuntias saeculo et voluptatibus eius, quid respondisti? Abrenuntio.” If it’s good enough for Ambrose, I place my hand over my mouth.

  8. Mark Emery

    However remote it seems from our world view, isn’t there anything enlightening and efficacious about the Lord’s understanding of evil as being instantiated in [a] spiritual person[s]? With names[s], title[s]? And our renouncing it/them (James 4.7) and praying to be rescued from it/them (Matt 6.13) as such? That would seem to be a major consideration in such a liturgical change.

  9. Rob Stoltz

    This is not a replacement for the two authorized services (Book of Common Prayer/Common Worship). The background is useful in considering a response.

    “From the Acting Secretary to the Liturgical Commission.
    The alternative texts offered here for experimental use have been created in response to practical and pastoral difficulties encountered by clergy who regularly use the Order for Holy Baptism provided in Common Worship Initiation Services.
    Most of the objections to the Common Worship Initiation texts in their present authorised form are that they are not accessible to those who are unused to attending church. Clergy frequently find themselves conducting baptisms for families who have little contact with the Church, and sometimes on occasions separate from the main Sunday morning act of worship. In some instances there are few people present who have any real understanding of the Church‟s language and symbolism. For the majority of those attending on such occasions, the existing provision can seem complex and inaccessible.”

    As a pastoral response, it appears that the Church of England has acted appropriately.

  10. Brian Palmer

    A dressing down of the clergy to civies was also approved at the recent General Synod. This could be far more divisive in the CofE than either women admitted to the episcopate, or whether Satan is mentioned in the baptismal rite.

    1. Jordan Zarembo

      @Brian Palmer – comment #11

      The permission to allow priests to celebrate services “in civvies” probably refers to the tendency for the clergy in many Reformed churches to preside over services in business attire rather than a geneva gown with tabs. In the Presbyterian parish I am familiar with, the pastor presides over non-communion Sundays in a business suit. He begins communion Sundays in a business suit, and switches to a geneva gown for the communion.

      Maybe some evangelical Anglican clergy wish to follow suit and preside over services in business attire, at least for more contemporary worship services. I do no foresee Anglo-Catholic celebrants shunning vestments for a T-shirt, shorts, and Tevas.

      1. Brian Palmer

        @Jordan Zarembo – comment #13:
        I don’t foresee Anglo-Catholics giving up the chasuable and other vestments. Rome will probably relax the use of traditional Mass vestments long before the Anglo Catholics do.

        The General Synod’s decision could reflect a deeper intent. A move by the CofE away from high church ritual trappings(copes over chimeres, miters, medieval Mass vestments, other aspects of smells and bells ). There may be a growing sense the Oxford Movement is over and done with and should be jettisoned. Now that Anglicanism is moving out of the ecumenical orbit with Rome and the Orthodox on so many fronts?

        A rebirth of anti-ritualism may be taking hold in the face of a growing loss of high church members to Rome, the Anglican Ordinariate, or to Eastern Orthodoxy. If so, I don’t see how more casual rules for the CofE’s clerical attire appeals to the totally disaffected, the fallen away Anglican, or manages to shore up what’s left of the CofE; namely, those who don’t embrace the high church or Anglo Catholicsm.

  11. Jared Ostermann

    The lack of ordination of women is something that many currently lament in the Catholic Church. Likewise old fashioned and icky (dare I say Medieval) mentions of a Devil. It will be genuinely interesting to see what fruits follow these choices in the Church of England. Will these changes bring about better parish life and liturgical spirituality, or bring a new wave of people back to the church or into the church for the first time? Will there be clearly measurable benefits? I don’t believe that popularity or renewed enthusiasm necessarily proves the truth of any particular church policy or discipline. However, it will be interesting to see if there are marked benefits from these decisions even on the surface level.

  12. Brian Duffy

    One sweltering July Sunday at S. John’s, Newport I do remember a priest celebrating an evening mass attired in his clericals with only a stole as a vestment. He even used the proposed Rite II which was even more surprising. But that was during the mid-seventies!

  13. Bryon Gordon

    I think the Anglican liturgists need to dust off C.S. Lewis’s “The Screwtape Letters” before removing any mention of Satan from its baptismal question.


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Discover more from Home

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading