I will with the help of God. . .

Every form of baptismal liturgy includes the promises or vows made either by the one being baptized or on behalf of the baptized by parents and sponsors.  They normally revolve around the devil, his works, and his ways -- renouncing them because the baptized now belongs to the Lord.  With those renunciations comes the promises of faith.  Do you believe in God the Father, do you believe in Jesus Christ His Son, and do you believe in the Holy Spirit.?  They mirror the three articles of the Apostles Creed.  Finally is the simple question of whether the candidate wishes to be baptized.  While it may have been the temptation of other ages to add to these, until more recently most have not succumbed to that desire.  At least among the Lutherans this is so.

In the Baptismal Covenant in the 1979 Book of Common Prayer, these questions were reformulated as follows:

Question    Do you renounce Satan and all the spiritual forces of wickedness that rebel against God?
Answer    I renounce them.

Question    Do you renounce the evil powers of this world  which corrupt and destroy the creatures of God?
Answer    I renounce them.

Question    Do you renounce all sinful desires that draw you from the love of God?
Answer    I renounce them.

Question    Do you turn to Jesus Christ and accept him as your Savior?
Answer    I do.

Question    Do you put your whole trust in his grace and love?
Answer    I do.

Question     Do you promise to follow and obey him as your Lord?
Answer    I do. 

I am not sure I find these an improvement.  Certainly the idea of turning to Jesus Christ and accepting Him as your Savior is borrowing too much from evangelicalism and decision theology and is an invention that harms more than helps.  I suppose the promise to put your whole trust in His grace and love is innocuous enough but it is also vague enough as to allow just about anyone to say yes.  The promise to follow and obey Him as Lord ordinarily belongs in confirmation or the promises of an adult or older child being received into membership in the congregation and even then borrow too much from evangelicalism and decision theology as to draw attention away from what God is doing here and to the candidate.

Then follows a couple more questions which, while not bad and certainly sounding Scriptural, are rather out of place:

Celebrant     Will you continue in the apostles' teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of the bread, and in the prayers?
People     I will, with God's help.
 
Celebrant     Will you persevere in resisting evil, and, whenever you fall into sin, repent and return to the Lord?
People     I will, with God's help.

The content of the questions and adding to what has traditionally been rather concise itself turns the focus away from what God is doing and what the candidate is to do or promises to do.  That is unhelpful, to say the least.  Then a couple of more questions are added to make this part of the rite longer than any other part.  That is certainly a problem.

Celebrant     Will you proclaim by word and example the Good News of God in Christ?
People     I will, with God's help.
 
Celebrant     Will you seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving your neighbor as yourself?
People     I will, with God's help.
 
Celebrant     Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?
People     I will, with God's help.

The final question has a rather profound social justice bent to it and is also rather vague.  What exactly does it mean to strive for justice and peace among all people?  For an infant or child being baptized, in particular?  What does it mean to respect the dignity of every human being?  That is perhaps the broadest of terms and no one seems to know exactly what it implies.  Roman Catholics are always talking about human dignity without really saying anything about what that means.  I rather dislike those general terms and particularly dislike them added to the very specific act of God in baptizing a child to be His own.

Even that, if you can believe it, is not enough.  Now another promise is being added by the Episcopalians.  This promise being tried in some congregations at the behest of the national church is concerned about the role of the baptized to “sustain and renew the life of the earth”.  A couple of years ago the Episcopal Church’s General Convention passed a resolution two years ago directing that the development of new language “that expresses our baptismal responsibility to care for creation”. It invited congregations to experiment with adding in a sixth promise, if their bishop gave permission.  In the diocese of Chicago, congregations can choose between two different version of a sixth promise: either “Will you strive to safeguard the integrity of God’s creation, and respect, sustain and renew the life of the Earth?” or “Will you cherish the wondrous works of God, and protect [or protect and restore] the beauty and integrity of all creation?”  While noble and certainly not wrong, do they belong in the baptismal rite?  This rite needs to focus on what God is doing and not on what we think we are called to do and certainly not upon our promises as if they have anything to do with God's action in baptism.  Our attempts to make things more relevant actually tends to make them less, tying them to specific cultural and political movements of the day while diluting the focus on what God is doing.   At least that is what I think.