Thinking allowed

baptismal texts: press comment

Updated Sunday morning

There is some press com­ment today on the draft bap­tis­mal texts pub­lished yesterday.

Reports say that “sin” removed in the ori­gin­al tri­al in Janu­ary has now been rein­stated, and that the response from par­ishes tri­al­ling the texts was pos­it­ive, with more than 90 per cent say­ing the con­greg­a­tion had been “more engaged” with the new liturgy and there was praise for its “unchurchy” language.

The Times: Sin makes return in revamped baptism
The Daily Tele­graph: ‘Sin’ is back but ‘the Dev­il’ option­al in new Church of Eng­land bap­tism service
The Guard­i­an: No dev­il in detail of Church of England’s new bap­tism ser­vice
The Daily Mail: Church puts the ‘sin’ back into tra­di­tion­al bap­tism services

Sunday update: Tim Stan­ley blogs for the Tele­graph Hey, Church of Eng­land: if you want to become a Chris­ti­an, you have to renounce the Dev­il — an art­icle that con­tains numer­ous errors of fact, but which does rep­res­ent the Church’s dilemma.

(Some of these reports are behind paywalls.)

2 Comments

Additional liturgical materials for baptism: texts

The bap­tis­mal texts to be con­sidered by the Gen­er­al Syn­od next month are now avail­able on the Church of Eng­land web­site. This mater­i­al is sched­uled to be con­sidered on the after­noon of Sunday 13 July.

Fol­low­ing the peri­od of exper­i­ment­al use, vari­ous changes were made by the Litur­gic­al Com­mis­sion and sent for con­sid­er­a­tion by the House of Bish­ops. The text agreed by the Bish­ops is now pub­lished as GS 1958 and includes an Intro­duc­tion, the pro­posed texts them­selves, and a pro­posed timetable for author­iz­a­tion. The timetable is:

2014
July — Novem­ber: Revi­sion Com­mit­tee meets

2015
Feb­ru­ary: Revi­sion stage at the Gen­er­al Synod
May: House of Bish­ops (if no fur­ther revi­sion stage)
July: Ref­er­ence to Con­voc­a­tions and House of Laity (if required)
July: Final approv­al at Gen­er­al Syn­od (if no fur­ther revi­sion stage)

0 Comments

Additional liturgical materials for baptism

The Agenda for the July meet­ing of the Gen­er­al Syn­od is now avail­able and con­tains the fol­low­ing snippet:

Update (4 June): The Agenda has been revised and the updated agenda is here but it does not yet con­tain the actu­al texts to be intro­duced at the Syn­od. The timetable for Sunday is the same as in the ori­gin­al agenda.

Sunday 13 July

EITHER
(if Art­icle 7 Ref­er­ence Meet­ings are not required)
2.30 pm – 6.15 pm
Arch­bish­ops’ Council’s Annu­al Report 2013
Litur­gic­al Business
    Addi­tion­al texts for Holy Bap­tism – First Consideration 
Churches’ Mutu­al Cred­it Uni­on (CMCU): Presentation

OR
(if Art­icle 7 Ref­er­ence Meet­ings are required)
4.00 pm – 6.15 pm
Litur­gic­al Business
    Addi­tion­al texts for Holy Bap­tism – First Consideration 
Churches’ Mutu­al Cred­it Uni­on (CMCU): Presentation

At the moment the papers per­tain­ing to this litur­gic­al busi­ness are not avail­able. We’ll add details when this is published.

3 Comments

Additional liturgical materials for baptism

As repor­ted on the main TA blog the House of Bish­ops of the Church of Eng­land met at Bish­op­thorpe Palace in York on Monday and Tuesday.

Amongst lots of oth­er busi­ness, the State­ment issued by the House con­tains this paragraph:

The House of Bish­ops received a report from the Litur­gic­al Com­mis­sion on the use of addi­tion­al texts for use in ser­vices of Bap­tism fol­low­ing the pilot­ing of new mater­i­als in par­ishes. The House heard that the feed­back from the par­ishes to the use of the texts had been largely pos­it­ive and wel­com­ing. Fol­low­ing a debate and minor amend­ments to the text the House voted for the new texts to pro­gress to being debated by Gen­er­al Synod.

This is the nor­mal route for any mater­i­al which comes under the terms of the Wor­ship and Doc­trine Meas­ure 1974, i.e., any mater­i­al which is altern­at­ive to text in the 1662 Book of Com­mon Pray­er — any draft is first reviewed by the House of Bish­ops, and only when agreed by that House is it intro­duced into the Gen­er­al Synod.

0 Comments

Y Cymun Bendigaid

A pack­age con­tain­ing a new book landed through my let­ter box a couple of days ago. It was a copy of the newly-author­ized ver­sion of the Euchar­ist of the Church in Wales, pub­lished just in time for a meet­ing of the Church’s Gov­ern­ing Body in September.

(The Arch­bish­op of Wales, the Most Revd Barry Mor­gan, can be seen at the meet­ing using what looks like a copy of the altar edi­tion of the book in this picture.)

The arrival of this book was a sig­ni­fic­ant moment for me — because I had designed and type­set it. Hav­ing laboured long and hard over the text and lay­out, over page breaks and line breaks, ver­tic­al and hori­zont­al spa­cing, typeface, kerns and lig­at­ures, page num­bers and good­ness knows what else, here at last was the fin­ished product.

This is always an excit­ing event: to hold in your hands the res­ult of your own crafts­man­ship, your own hard work, and to be able to see for the first time wheth­er it has actu­ally worked, wheth­er you have achieved the effect that you wanted — in this case clar­ity and beauty com­bin­ing tra­di­tion and modernity.

Of course, many people had con­trib­uted to this volume, in ways sig­ni­fic­antly more import­ant than I had. Litur­gists had worked on drafts, revi­sion com­mit­tees and the Gov­ern­ing Body had con­sidered it, and altered it to pro­duce the final author­ized text; oth­ers had cre­ated the cov­er (by Leigh Hur­lock) and the cal­li­graphy (by Shir­ley Nor­man); and the print­er (Biddles) had pro­duced the prin­ted and bound books. But I shall remem­ber the time spent design­ing a lay­out that works, select­ing typefaces, play­ing with type size, and dif­fer­ent com­bin­a­tions of bold and ital­ic and roman, caps and small caps, cre­at­ing cus­tom lig­at­ures (Welsh requires an ‘fh’ lig­at­ure which did not exist in the selec­ted face, so I had to design one myself in roman, ital­ic, bold and bold ital­ic), and of course proofread­ing the text over and over again. Proofread­ing, espe­cially of the par­al­lel Welsh text, was also done by people at the pro­vin­cial office of the Church in Wales. All in all, the res­ult is a book to be very pleased with, I think.

And then after all that, des­pite all the care that has gone into its pro­duc­tion, you begin to notice the mis­takes. Here and there, dot­ted around, are little glitches that have escaped the proofread­ing. It’s amaz­ing that you can proofread a text so many times, both on screen and on paper proofs, and yet the minute you pick up the fin­ished product you find a few more mistakes.

I sup­pose life is like that — you can­not pro­duce the per­fect work, there are always a few little things wrong. At least with a book there is a chance to cor­rect any errors at the next print­ing! Mis­takes in life, on the oth­er hand, very often have to be lived with.

3 Comments