As a confirmed modernist, I welcome the new, indeed New Age, version of the ‘christening sacrament’ adopted by the Church of England.
Why the quotation commas? Because it’s not just the text of the ceremony but also its name that has become outdated. I think ‘initiation piss-up’ would reflect Zeitgeist much more accurately.
It would also avoid offending Muslims, Jews, Taoists, Shintoists, Buddhists, Hinduists, Zaraostrians, animists, pagans – and above all atheists, who justifiably take exception to the ‘christ’ in christening.
The New Age text does say “Do not be ashamed of Christ”, but you must agree this is so much better than the obsolete “Do not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified.”
It’s really not on to have faith in anything, other than the proposition that it’s not on to have faith in anything. And confess? To whom? This presupposes the existence of someone superior to us, which we know can’t possibly be the case.
As to Christ’s crucifixion, this is open to both historical and ecumenical debate. Who are we to claim Christ was crucified when 1.6 billion Muslims say he wasn’t?
Next thing we know, someone will claim we’re right and they’re wrong, and where will we be then? Of course such an intrepid heretic would be arrested, but the cause of multiculturalism would suffer nonetheless.
However, there’s nothing offensive about not being ashamed of Christ. In fact we shouldn’t be ashamed of anything at all, not even committing crimes. Whenever we go wrong, it’s the fault of society, so let society be ashamed, not us.
Then compare the old “Do you reject the Devil and all rebellion against God” with the new “Do you reject evil?” Even if you’re an old fogey full of moth-eaten prejudices, you’ll have to admit that the new version is much more inclusive, and less reliant on uncool superstition.
The Devil really only exists as a figure of speech, as in “What the devil d’you mean?” And even in such constructions it’s being replaced by a more progressive, contemporary and therefore laudable ‘f***’.
Believing in the Devil who’s the prince of this world is like believing in the tooth fairy, Father Christmas, ghosts and national sovereignty – no self-respecting adult would hold such childish notions. But anyone – man, woman, other – will be happy to reject evil.
In fact, I was talking to my friend Dick (Dr Richard Dawkins to you) the other day and I asked him if he rejected evil. “Course I bloody well do for chrissake,” he said, implicitly undermining all accusations of militant atheism.
“Do you repent of the sins that separate us from God and neighbour” wasn’t just replaced in the new version, it was simply dumped – and quite right too.
The word ‘God’ is by itself judgmental – it presupposes adherence to a certain belief system that has little support among scientists, such as my friend Dick.
And sin doesn’t exist as such; the concept has been superseded by the EU Convention on Human Rights. Of course any transgression against it must be repented and severely punished, but this goes without saying. So quite rightly the new version doesn’t say it.
“Do you turn to Christ as Saviour? Do you submit to Christ as Lord?” asks the old version and thank God for the new one, which eliminates most of the offensive potential: “Do you turn to Christ? And put your trust in him?”
It’s historically and logically incorrect to refer to Christ as Saviour. If he was indeed crucified, and 1.6 billion Muslims can’t be wrong when assuring us he wasn’t, then he couldn’t even save himself. You call that Lord, which is another word for manager (“Christ was born a manager,” according to that old book, or words to that effect)? You call that leading by example? Any manager of a sales department who himself couldn’t sell would be sacked faster than you can say ‘incompetence’.
Also, focus group research has shown that many parishioners, especially women, take exception to the word ‘submit’. A woman must not submit to anyone, the very idea is grossly offensive. If she submits, this means she is raped, and I don’t care who the rapist is, a stranger, her husband or God Almighty. Way to go, sisters!
“Do you come to Christ, the way, the truth and the life?” This is another empty phrase that has been justifiably eliminated. The way? The truth? Give me a break.
This comes dangerously close to fascism, racism, homophobia, misogyny, absolutism, nationalism, little-Englandism and many other imprisonable offences. There is no one way or one truth. We all decide on our own way and our own truth, that’s what modernity is all about.
As to ‘the life’, it doesn’t exist outside our own bodies. Life is given to a person when his/her/its Dad’s sperm fertilises his/her/its Mum’s ovum, and that’s all there is to it.
Well, not quite all: as my friend Dick says, an even better life may be produced in a test tube or else by cloning, and he’s of course right, but an initiation piss-up is hardly the time to comment on every possibility.
All in all, Archbishop Welby must be applauded. His business background is standing him in good stead: he knows how to maximise sales opportunities. His Grace realises that, for people to walk into Christian churches, Christ must walk out.
If you’re an Anglican, I hope you feel particularly proud today. So please join me in this little prayer: “Our parent, who may or may not be there somewhere…”