|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Eccles: Evangelicals and Liturgy
|
Hooker's Trick
Admin Emeritus and Guardian of the Gin
# 89
|
Posted
Elsewhere Angloid observed:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
I hope this isn't junior hosting, but I wanted to reply to Eliphaz's comment on the other thread, and it seems less likely to derail the discussion here than there: quote:
I wonder if the Bishop of London will be making such a fuss about those churches in his diocese which do not follow authorised Eucharistic rites at all - the advanced Evangelical ones!
I don't know about London diocese, but this is a legitimate concern. However I don't think evangelicals would refuse to use authorised rites for the eucharist, rather than be less bothered about liturgy in general. What is a more serious problem is that such churches often keep within the letter of the law because they provide 'services of the Word', albeit with a structure and content only tenuously related to Anglican rites, and relegate the Eucharist to a subsidiary slot, even omitting it altogether some weeks. I don't think you can outlaw experimental services (and maybe they should be encouraged in some circumstances), but ISTM that an Anglican church should offer recognisably Anglican worship, and especially the Eucharist, at accessible times each Sunday. Canon law states that Holy Communion should be celebrated every Sunday and holy day, and the bishops should certainly tighten up on this.
It is often said that Evangelical parishes eschew the authorised liturgies. How common is this practice? I have some friends at Langham Place so (unusually for me) I have some experience at this end of the candle. The last time I went to the (early) Communion service at All Soul's it was straight said BCP, surplice and scarf. The later services are somewhat more, shall we say adventurous?
I would imagine this is the standard even at the most advanced evangelical places (one feels that St Helen's Bishopsgate is probably the exception).
So what is the liturgical landscape in evangelical-land?
[ 28. May 2013, 14:36: Message edited by: Belisarius ]
Posts: 6735 | From: Gin Lane | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laxton's Superba
Shipmate
# 228
|
Posted
I had a thread about this last week. I was at a very low place for the celebration of Holy Communion and there was a very truncated Eucharistic prayer with acclamations that I did not recognise, even looked them up in Common Worship but to no avail. THe prevailing view of those who answered on my thread was that the church had pretty much made up the eucharistic prayer to suit their prevailing theology, and that this was outside canon law.
There is another thread about the validity of the eucharist at the moment and my comments apply to both. I did consider not receving, after the risible eucharistic prayer and the seemingly total lack of reverence in the celebration, (no vestment at all, not even a clerical collar worn by the priest who read off the prayer from his laeflet as if it was something he'd never seen before, standing with one hand in his pocket) but in the end I felt it was not a reasonable thing to do and would draw attention to myself in a way I didn't want.
When I was a student I was present at an agape where the president was drunk, I felt very awkward then as I didn't feel intoxication was an appropriate state of mind for one celebrating the most holy mysteries. But as I had not been confirmed at this point I did not need to make a decision about whether to partake.
I think evangelical churches get away with quite a lot, but no-one does anythign about it because they are also the churches with lots of money. I am sorry if that sounds cynical, but that's what it seems to me.
Posts: 187 | From: I wish I knew | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
I have to say that my experience of worshipping (and presiding) in various evangelical churches around here, that they stick to the book for the eucharist. The exception is a low, rather than evangelical, place where occasionally a stand-in priest (from a liberal catholic tradition) will use an experimental eucharistic prayer. A practice which I would have been happier with at one time than I am now, but at least the prayers he uses are theologically sound as far as I can see.
All sorts of strange things happen at 'all age' services, I have no doubt. But then they can, usually quite legally.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
justlooking
Shipmate
# 12079
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Laxton's Superba:
I think evangelical churches get away with quite a lot, but no-one does anythign about it because they are also the churches with lots of money. I am sorry if that sounds cynical, but that's what it seems to me.
I'm joining you in your cynicism because that's what it seems to me too.
One view I've heard about why these kinds of churches attract money is that ConEvo clergy are very good at getting themselves into favourable positions with funding bodies.
Posts: 2319 | From: thither and yon | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
When I used to attend a church which became more and more Evangelical (vicar saw the light), the service book was still used (ASB in those days), but random parts of the liturgy were left out, in order to add in 'times of worship' (lots of singing of choruses) or times of testimony. There were a growing number of people in the church without a CofE background, so they didn't really care whether the liturgy was there or not (and some even wanted it to disappear altogether) so there wasn't much point making a fuss.
Shortly after that, I left, so I have no idea whether the church still carries on this pattern or not.
I've no idea whether that pattern is normal or not, but I can see that Evangelicals might have 'more important' matters on their minds, and see the Liturgy as, at best, secondary.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
When I used to attend a church which became more and more Evangelical (vicar saw the light), the service book was still used (ASB in those days), but random parts of the liturgy were left out, in order to add in 'times of worship' (lots of singing of choruses) or times of testimony. There were a growing number of people in the church without a CofE background, so they didn't really care whether the liturgy was there or not (and some even wanted it to disappear altogether) so there wasn't much point making a fuss.
Shortly after that, I left, so I have no idea whether the church still carries on this pattern or not.
I've no idea whether that pattern is normal or not, but I can see that Evangelicals might have 'more important' matters on their minds, and see the Liturgy as, at best, secondary.
A very 'Sydney'approach though they do tend to stick 'close to the book'. 'Moore and Moore where that came from'.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
There are many intelligent evangelical liturgical scholars out there who will be tearing their hair out at such things as you describe, Chorister. I suspect the problem comes down to theological training and above all the fact that more and more clergy are trained on non-residential courses so they don't experience a consistent liturgical round.
Recommended reading for evangelicals and catholics alike: Vision upon Vision by George Guiver CR. Traces how liturgy became clericalised and minimalised right through the years until the Reformation, and how the Reformers, having inherited such a tradition, simply clericalised it even further.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
When I used to attend a church which became more and more Evangelical (vicar saw the light), the service book was still used (ASB in those days), but random parts of the liturgy were left out, in order to add in 'times of worship' (lots of singing of choruses) or times of testimony. There were a growing number of people in the church without a CofE background, so they didn't really care whether the liturgy was there or not (and some even wanted it to disappear altogether) so there wasn't much point making a fuss.
Shortly after that, I left, so I have no idea whether the church still carries on this pattern or not.
I've no idea whether that pattern is normal or not, but I can see that Evangelicals might have 'more important' matters on their minds, and see the Liturgy as, at best, secondary.
I'm interested in your story Chorister. You say that the vicar saw the light, and therefore altered the liturgy to include more praise of God and testimony, but that you didn't like it and left.
What didn't you like? Was it that the familiar shape of the liturgy had been changed, that there was now no defined shape, that you disliked the worship songs or the testimonies, that the vicar talked about 'seeing the light'......?
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I ought to let Chorister tell the story, Raptor, but from what she's shared on these boards over the years it seemed that the parish became increasingly drawn towards the more extreme charismatic end of things - it depends on where you're standing, of course, as to where you draw particular lines.
My comparatively recent experience of Anglican evangelicalism is that it is increasingly embarrassed by anything remotely 'Anglican' within its own tradition. Sure, they tend to stick reasonably close to the book or to a laminated sheet with chunks of the liturgy on it - the creed, the Lord's Prayer, Prayer of Humble Access etc but not a great deal else.
I do know 'Prayer Book Evangelicals' but I don't seem to come across that many.
The New Wine crowd seem to give lip-service to Anglican formularies of any kind and appear to have set or pat answers to fend you off if you challenge them on it - they practice the art of dissembling and can claim that their practice can fit within an Anglican footprint.
I'm sure it can, to a fairly large extent. But most play fast and loose with the rules in my experience. Our vicar rarely wears a dog-collar and, ridiculously in my view, will wear it for the 9am more traditional, but still snake-belly low, service and then quickly change into a hideous striped jersey or casual shirt for the 11am New Wine-wannabe service.
I'm not sure if they have communion every week at our place - without going and looking it up. They might do - just ... because they'll have it once a month at the 11am and on two or three out of four Sundays at the 9am.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
Our place is more or less by-the-book CW for Eucharists, though often with bots left out at the whim of whoever is leading the service that day (or if a visiting priest, whoever made up the service leaflet for the day)
The difference between us and the less extreme Anglo-Catholics is not so much that we say different words as that we sit much more loosely with them. The exact service you get sort of depends on who is making the decisions and that could any one of about five clergy on the team - or me as Reader if there is a visiting priest. I think the average worshipper at our church, were they confronted with the kind of arguments that go on here, wouldn't object to a lot of what the more Anglo-Catholic posters say, but they would be surprised that anyone finds it important or interesting.
There seems to be a feeling among our clergy that the Eucharistic liturgy is too long and is confusing for newcomers and occasional visitors. So there is a tendency to leave things out. But what is in in there is probably pretty straightforward CW.
For the same reasons we tend to use Morning Prayer when there are baptisms or any other reason there might be more visitors than usual.
Personally I think I disagree with this but its not up to me except when the vicar is away. Which she was for a couple of months a while back and I was scheduling the services with visiting priests, and had Eucharists every Sunday morning for a while, and after about three or four began to get complaints. Not as many as when I chose a hymn no-one knew (that is always the worst thing you can do!) but some.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experience Gamaliel.
If it's simply a matter of preference as to whether the services are structured or not, and everyone is being catered for within different services, is there an issue?
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
There seems to be a feeling among our clergy that the Eucharistic liturgy is too long and is confusing for newcomers and occasional visitors. So there is a tendency to leave things out. But what is in in there is probably pretty straightforward CW.
What bits do they leave out, though? That is crucial. There are many parts of CW that are optional; there are also ones that are mandatory but less crucial. For example, the 'collect for purity' is optional. The Creed, on Sundays, is not (or at least some form of Affirmation of Faith); but it would be less serious to omit it than it would to omit the Eucharistic Prayer (or curtail the latter to a travesty). If the priest understands the basic principles of liturgy they can take liberties without undermining the whole thing. So often people (and I have to say evangelicals are more likely to be guilty of this) see the liturgy as peripheral, even if they are prepared to pay lip service to legality by including some texts.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
pete173
Shipmate
# 4622
|
Posted
I tend to have to call some evo places to account to ensure liturgical conformity, but that is very much the exception rather than the rule. (but it does mean that +Richard's pastoral letter is a salutary reminder to them as well as to the Roman Rite clergy)
Eucharists tend to be Prayer H, which I think is the least satisfactory of the CW prayers. When I'm confirming, I try to steer them towards one of the other prayers. In the eucharistic prayer they quite often use worship songs (as do the charismatic catholic shops) for the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei.
For non-eucharistic, it's true that the rubrics of the Service of the Word allow more or less any of the New Wine worship structures.
Of course, many evo clergy are now running more MOR or catholic parishes, and are more likely to have liturgy in their blood stream (having been well trained in liturgical adaptivity).
--------------------
Pete
Posts: 1653 | From: Kilburn, London NW6 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
What bits do they leave out, though? That is crucial.
OK, this is a summary of an order of service I have on my PC from August. I hope it makes sense.
Hymn 466 Praise my soul the king of heaven
Praise the name of the Lord;
ascribe greatness to our God.
Lord, open our lips
and we shall praise your name.
This is the day that the Lord has made
Let us rejoice and be glad in it
Hymn 1528 Thank you for the cross, Lord
Hymn 935 My Jesus, my Saviour
Invitation to Confession
Jesus said, ‘Come to me all you who are tired and weary of carrying heavy loads and I will give you rest.’ God so loved the world that he sent his only son to be our Saviour. Let us come to him, in sorrow for our sins, seeking healing and salvation.
Confession
Almighty God, our heavenly Father, we have sinned against you...
Absolution
May the God of love and power forgive you and free you from your sins...
Amen
Collect
Lord Jesus Christ, you humbled yourself in taking the form of a servant...
Reading Exodus 1.8-2.10
This is the word of the Lord.
Thanks be to God.
Hymn 4 Alleluiah
Before the gospel:
Hear the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ according to Matthew
Glory to you, O Lord.
Gospel Reading Matthew 16.13-20
After the gospel:
This is the Gospel of the Lord.
Praise to you, O Christ.
Sermon
[A paraphrase sung as a hymn in place of the creed]}
"We believe in God the Father
God almighty, by whose plan
earth and heaven sprang into being,
all created things began."
[etc...]
Intercessions
The Peace
Offertory Hymn 519 Take my life and let it be
The Lord is here
His Spirit is with us
Lift up your hearts.
We lift them to the Lord.
Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.
It is right to give thanks and praise.
Eucharistic Prayer H
[With responses but no additional or seasonal material]
A chorus with the words "Holy, holy,holy" in it (1281 in Songs of Fellowship)
The Lord's Prayer
"Draw near with faith…"
We do not presume...
Songs during Communion
Hymn 303 Jesus stand among us
Hymn 865 Jesus Christ
Post Communion Prayer
God of our pilgrimage, you have willed that the gate of mercy should stand open for those who trust in you...
Blessing
Hymn 148 Guide me O thou great Jehovah
Let us go in peace to love and serve the Lord
In the name of Christ. Amen.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
crynwrcymraeg
Shipmate
# 13018
|
Posted
Vision upon Vision by George Guiver CR.
Traces how liturgy became clericalised and minimalised right through the yer
Tempted to get this Angloid but a bit thrown by de price on amazon ! Have wish listed for now.
Is it really inspiring ?
--------------------
I ignored the admins and now I'm Erin's bitch.
Posts: 522 | From: Ty'n Coed | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
Gamaliel has the measure of it. I don't think many people would leave a church just because the liturgy got tinkered with (or even just because they didn't like the hymns). That may well be part of a very complex picture, with many difficulties. I puzzle over why it is that the churches which play fast and loose with the liturgy are often the most strict in their attitudes to gays, cohabitees and others who do not live a pure enough lifestyle in their opinion, and also to women being priests. I'm not quite sure why that is, or what exactly is going on there.
Anyway, to get back to topic, for those who do think liturgy is important, the many hours of study which has gone into making the Anglican liturgy what it is, is hugely respected. As Angloid says, some of the liturgy allows for options and preferences, notably the eucharistic prayers, but there are other parts which shouldn't be just omitted or reworded for no apparent reason. If people are not going to respect the scholarship which has gone into preparing the liturgy then they are better going down the nonconformist route.
In the Anglican church, rather than not considering the liturgy to be important, it should be highlighted. The best churches explain their liturgy, for example, through visual aids, and children are encouraged to grow up understanding what the liturgy and symbolism used in church means.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
Ken - that's not unlike what we do here sometimes. It looks perfectly legal. It's not how I would prefer to do it (especially Prayer H!) but it is recognisably Anglican and (more importantly) recognisably the Eucharist. As +Pete says, there are a few evo places that need to be brought into line but this isn't one of them.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by crynwrcymraeg:
Vision upon Vision by George Guiver CR.
Traces how liturgy became clericalised and minimalised right through the yer
Tempted to get this Angloid but a bit thrown by de price on amazon ! Have wish listed for now.
Is it really inspiring ?
Yes - well worth the money. He brings the archaeological details of early liturgy alive, with plenty of humour and earthy imagery, and has some trenchant things to say about the obsession with text (maybe relevant to the Roman rite/ anglo-catholic threads here). I'm only half-way through it so I can't comment on his vision for the future.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by crynwrcymraeg:
Vision upon Vision by George Guiver CR.
Traces how liturgy became clericalised and minimalised right through the yer
Tempted to get this Angloid but a bit thrown by de price on amazon ! Have wish listed for now.
Is it really inspiring ?
Yes - I read it a couple of months ago and our AffCath book group is going to discuss it in February.
It is cheaper from the SCM Autumn sale.
[ 23. November 2011, 11:46: Message edited by: leo ]
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
It is an issue, Raptor, if, like me, you are a recovering charismatic evangelical and are concerned that others don't go down the same route and make the same mistakes ...
But then, perhaps they have to find that out for themselves ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Liturgylover
Shipmate
# 15711
|
Posted
quote:
It is often said that Evangelical parishes eschew the authorised liturgies. How common is this practice? I have some friends at Langham Place so (unusually for me) I have some experience at this end of the candle. The last time I went to the (early) Communion service at All Soul's it was straight said BCP, surplice and scarf. The later services are somewhat more, shall we say adventurous?
I would imagine this is the standard even at the most advanced evangelical places (one feels that St Helen's Bishopsgate is probably the exception).
So what is the liturgical landscape in evangelical-land?
I have attended a few open evangelical churches in North London and have found all their services were lituurgical. Many now follow the practice of having what they describe as a traditional 9am Holy Communion services which follows either BCP or CW, and where the celebrant is robed. Some maintain this pratice at their main service later in the morning - one even uses seasonally coloured service booklets.
Some now use screens, but even these generally provide Communion cards for congregations to follow during the Eucharistic prayer (the choice of which seems to vary).
As others have said, where the service is a service of the word, there is scope for this to vary, though it seeems to follow a Anglican spine.
[fixed code - preview post is your friend]
[ 23. November 2011, 16:05: Message edited by: seasick ]
Posts: 452 | From: North London | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Would that this practice would catch on in this part of the world, Liturgy-lover.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
<disclaimer>
My own churchmanship is "High and Dry" and I have a strong preference for the BCP.
</disclaimer>
I have been both comfortable and very uncomfortable in Evangelical parishes. The comfortable experiences were general back in the 1980s and 90s when you could pretty much rely on getting one of these three options:
1. Parish Communion - ASB Rite A surplice and stole/scarf lay reader assisting, with lay folks involved reading lessons, doing the intercessions, etc.. Usually you would get overdosed on the praise band before the service, and they would have another go at Communion, but anything the congregation was expected to sing 'proper hymns' and liturgy would be read/said - usually very well.
2. Morning Service - aka ASB Morning Prayer - more often than not. Everything read; music pretty much as above. The focus was very definitely the sermon which was usually preached after the second lesson.
However, just once in a while you would hit a place that still used the BCP and they would sing everything from 'O Lord open thou our lips' to the collects except for the lessons. That suited High and Dry me.
3. Family service: two variants here - the Hymn/Worship song sandwich. The other was basically shortened MP. A bit more modern(sic) music, and the minister probably in just street clothes with a clerical collar, not surplice and scarf.
More recently I have started having fairly consistently unsatisfactory experiences because I keep hitting the New Wine - Vineyard - "what's its face" type of worship. I do not much care for this as it tends to be a bit to fellowship focussed inspite of its best efforts not to be. This means that if I am in Evangelical territory I will force myself to go to the early celebration which is likely to still be straight BCP.
PD
[ 24. November 2011, 02:23: Message edited by: PD ]
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulBC
Shipmate
# 13712
|
Posted
I'm an Canadian Anglican and just 3 years in a parish where some parts of the liturgy are MIA .That was part of what made me decide to
return to my former parish where the service is Book of Alternative Service , most weeks though last week it was BCP. But almost never the Iona liturgy, a bit too celtic for my taste .
![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif) ![[Angel]](graemlins/angel.gif) ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
"He has told you O mortal,what is good;and what does the Lord require of youbut to do justice and to love kindness ,and to walk humbly with your God."Micah 6:8
Posts: 873 | From: Victoria B.C. Canada | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
There seems to be a feeling among our clergy that the Eucharistic liturgy is too long and is confusing for newcomers and occasional visitors. So there is a tendency to leave things out.
Slightly tangential, but this argument has always irked me. When in Christian history has the Eucharist not been long and confusing to newcomers? Has anybody stopped to think that perhaps the Eucharist is supposed to be difficult?
Shakespeare is difficult. Samuel Beckett is difficult. Van Gogh, Rothko, and Howard Hodgkin are difficult. Wagner is difficult. T.S.Eliot and Seamus Heaney are difficult. Is it just possible that anything that ultimately enriches your life is at first difficult?
Then why shouldn't the Eucharist be difficult? Or, in many cases, why isn't it?
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Gamaliel has the measure of it. I don't think many people would leave a church just because the liturgy got tinkered with (or even just because they didn't like the hymns). That may well be part of a very complex picture, with many difficulties. I puzzle over why it is that the churches which play fast and loose with the liturgy are often the most strict in their attitudes to gays, cohabitees and others who do not live a pure enough lifestyle in their opinion, and also to women being priests. I'm not quite sure why that is, or what exactly is going on there.
Anyway, to get back to topic, for those who do think liturgy is important, the many hours of study which has gone into making the Anglican liturgy what it is, is hugely respected. As Angloid says, some of the liturgy allows for options and preferences, notably the eucharistic prayers, but there are other parts which shouldn't be just omitted or reworded for no apparent reason. If people are not going to respect the scholarship which has gone into preparing the liturgy then they are better going down the nonconformist route.
In the Anglican church, rather than not considering the liturgy to be important, it should be highlighted. The best churches explain their liturgy, for example, through visual aids, and children are encouraged to grow up understanding what the liturgy and symbolism used in church means.
You've made the observation that there seems to be a connection between becoming free and easy with liturgy and fostering a judgemental and exclusive attitude.
And yet, as you've indicated, there are 'nonconformist' churches which are virtually liturgy free and yet are far from being exclusive or judgemental.
This leaves me wondering whether there is a connection. Perhaps judgementalism is more connected with Biblical literalism? Some people seem to put their interpretation of the Bible above everything, including God. To be able to repeat the message the preacher wants to give over and again, to try to drum it into people, space must be made in the liturgy.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Tried a traditional dissenting eucharist liturgy Adeodatus.
No neither have I, but long it weren't.
According to my sources it consists solely of the reading of the institution and the sharing of bread and wine.
That's right no hymns, no prayers, no consecration, no sermon very minimalist. People were expected to attend the main Sunday service before hand. There was coffee hour between.
It disappeared largely fifty years ago.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
When in Christian history has the Eucharist not been long and confusing to newcomers? Has anybody stopped to think that perhaps the Eucharist is supposed to be difficult?
I don't honestly buy the idea that any contemporary Church of England Eucharist is difficult from the pews - okay, other than the difficulty of staying awake if the intercessions or the sermon are overdone. Seriously though, the only time I've heard of someone having problems with the texts was in an overhead projector place. The rest of us use service booklets so what's the problem?
If anything the three things newcomers and occasional visitors don't like are:
The congregational singing - they either can't sing or they've never heard the tune and don't have the rare ability to learn a melody under pressure and on the fly
2. Services at which there's no clear direction, or worse inaccurate direction from minister or booklet so they don't know if they're going to stand out like a sore thumb every time somebody deviates from the published script
3. Services are frankly boring unless and until you're committed to what they're about, with certain exceptions usually involving musical excellence.
I suspect this keeping things short is what's behind the prevalence of Prayer H because I doubt anybody would choose it on its merits. I'd point out that if time's the issue, you'd save more by using the short words of distribution than picking the shortest EP. By the way Ken, that liturgy plan is just about indistinguishable from ours. I bet the only difference is the number of robes in use.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
There seems to be a feeling among our clergy that the Eucharistic liturgy is too long and is confusing for newcomers and occasional visitors. So there is a tendency to leave things out.
Slightly tangential, but this argument has always irked me. When in Christian history has the Eucharist not been long and confusing to newcomers? Has anybody stopped to think that perhaps the Eucharist is supposed to be difficult?
Shakespeare is difficult. Samuel Beckett is difficult. Van Gogh, Rothko, and Howard Hodgkin are difficult. Wagner is difficult. T.S.Eliot and Seamus Heaney are difficult. Is it just possible that anything that ultimately enriches your life is at first difficult?
Then why shouldn't the Eucharist be difficult? Or, in many cases, why isn't it?
Imagine how difficult that first Last Supper was for a bunch of Jews being told to eat the Flesh and drink the Blood of their leader! ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
There seems to be a feeling among our clergy that the Eucharistic liturgy is too long and is confusing for newcomers and occasional visitors. So there is a tendency to leave things out.
Slightly tangential, but this argument has always irked me. When in Christian history has the Eucharist not been long and confusing to newcomers? Has anybody stopped to think that perhaps the Eucharist is supposed to be difficult?
Yes, of course. But don't tell me, tell our vicar. Whenever there is a baptism out goes the Eucharist. Or any special service: harvest, "church birthday", Remembrance, whatever. And the "All Age Family Worship" once a month. Result is the number of Sunday morning Eucharists a month has fallen to typically two a month, and sometimes only one. Ten years ago it was between three and four (there was always the occasional MP for various reasons). Of course ten years before that it was Morning Prayer every week with a short Communion afterwards once a month, which I guess is what people think of as the normal pattern. As I said, when we scheduled a Eucharist every week for a couple of months there were a few complaints. Very few, but some.
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
I don't honestly buy the idea that any contemporary Church of England Eucharist is difficult from the pews - okay, other than the difficulty of staying awake if the intercessions or the sermon are overdone.
I think its length they are worried about more than difficulty. Also some feeling that the Eucharist is "special" and that it cheapens it to do it too often. Also sometimes visitors at infant baptisms behave in ways that some regular members of the congregation find unfitting - such as taking photographs, or going out for a smoking break, or talking loudly.
I may be being unfair here - I'm trying to report prejudices I don't share - I prefer slightly longer services myself, I have no problem with regular Communion, I don't really mind if people go in and out or don't pay attention, and if we don't think they are good enough to be present in church for Communion then what are we doing baptising them?
quote:
Seriously though, the only time I've heard of someone having problems with the texts was in an overhead projector place. The rest of us use service booklets so what's the problem?
If there is an infant baptism many visitors will have little or no experience of written liturgy at all. Even those who go to church (probably a minority) are quite likely to be used to Baptist or Pentecostal or charismatic churches with little or no written liturgy.
quote:
If anything the three things newcomers and occasional visitors don't like are:
The congregational singing - they either can't sing or they've never heard the tune and don't have the rare ability to learn a melody under pressure and on the fly
Not in my experience. Many visitors like the singing. And its not such a rare ability. Most children can do it!
quote:
2. Services at which there's no clear direction, or worse inaccurate direction from minister or booklet so they don't know if they're going to stand out like a sore thumb every time somebody deviates from the published script
Yes that confuses people. We had a classic last week:
There is an unwritten but unshakeable ritual of accepting the money offerings at the front. During the offertory hymn (and they call it that even when its not a Communion service) the publicans and tax-collectors (or whatever the job title is) gather at the back of the church and then process down together with the money to just in front of the table where someone (often me) is waiting with a bigger plate. They tip the goodies onto the plate and then wait while we say a blessing. Then the money gets handed to a churchwarden who spirits it away into the vestry safe for later counting (this last action a relative innovation of about eight years of age, but already hallowed with the sanctity of time)
However, last week there had been a baptism, and the portable font was in the front of the nave. And the vicar, without warning anyone, had decided to say that people who wanted to renew their baptismal vows (or something) could come and dip their fingers in the water which was still warm. (A typically harmless bit of Open Evangelical out-of-context liturgical blagging - no rite is safe from our scouts). Of course no-one did for a minute or two and then one person tried it and when the others saw that she was not struck dead there was a rush to join in. Well, about a dozen anyway. Who were milling around at the front at just exactly the same time as the keepers of the bag were waiting at the back to process through the very same space. So they waited and we waited and when the hymn finished and the money remained unblessed no-one was sure what we were doing at all.
quote:
3. Services are frankly boring unless and until you're committed to what they're about, with certain exceptions usually involving musical excellence.
True, but they chose to turn up to the baptism or harvest festival or Remembrance service or whatever it is. No-one forced them to.
quote:
I suspect this keeping things short is what's behind the prevalence of Prayer H because I doubt anybody would choose it on its merits.
No, they really like it. Well, some of them do, one of our clergy never uses it at all, another never willingly uses anything else.
Yes, they like that it is short, but even more they like that it is traditional Anglican language, and they like that it that doesn't commit anyone to a Catholic-style sacrificial understanding, but even more than all that they like that it is "interactive" and shared and has more parts for the congregation than just the simple responses of the others.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
georgiaboy
Shipmate
# 11294
|
Posted
Unfamiliarity with a parish liturgy (or any liturgy) is not necessarily a problem.
Case in point: I had 3 cousins visiting recently; 2 Southern Baptist and 1 Presby. So either no or little familiarity with liturgy. I presumed they would wish to go to either 1st Baptist or 1st Presby (both historic congregations in lovely buildings). But they said they would rather go with me to my quite-high-up-the-candle AC church, (also historic, BTW.) I signed out of choir for the morning so I could sit with them in case of questions (or panic!). But they followed the mass booklet without help, sang all the hymns and pronounced it 'lovely.'
The other plus factor is that we are blessed with friendly and helpful (but not pushy) greeters.
The moral of this too-long story? Don't underestimate your visitors interest or intelligence!
--------------------
You can't retire from a calling.
Posts: 1675 | From: saint meinrad, IN | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
It is an issue, Raptor, if, like me, you are a recovering charismatic evangelical and are concerned that others don't go down the same route and make the same mistakes ...
But then, perhaps they have to find that out for themselves ...
There are likely to be individuals who are ex- any denomination or style of worship who might say the same thing. The more we discuss our Christian faith openly, the easier it should be for people to use wise discernment in avoiding the mistakes and seeking out the right church for them at any one time.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
I have to admit than when we have visitors I stick rather rigidly to the liturgy as printed. It seems to help them. Gosh - there's a novel idea!
</sarcasm>
I think there has been a change in attitude in the last 20 years. Back then the usual Evangelical reaction to lots of visitors seemed to be to stick to the liturgy in the book, and give them a page number, or the assurance that it is OK to just listen, at the appropriate points. These days the tendancy is to ditch liturgy in the name of accessibility. I am not quite sure that that is the best policy as in some cases can make folks feel either excluded, or very uncomfortable, or both!
My older members of my family - occasional churchgoers at best - are absolutely hilarious (and tragic) to watch at a modern C of E service - they end up completely lost within about five minutes. However, take them to BCP Evensong and they know what they are doing and even remember the chants from way back when.
PD
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
It's also quite poignant when you have a service taken by an elderly priest (like one I attended recently, celebrating his 50 years of being priested). You just know that, if the liturgy hadn't been changed, he'd have been able to say it off by heart. But frequent stumbles ensued, due to poor eyesight and unfamiliar Eucharistic prayers.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Lolly O'Hara
Apprentice
# 16777
|
Posted
I teach at a Roman catholic school and liturgys don't seem too Roman catholic and mass is similar to a Christian communion. they even have everything on a screen like in my Christian church!
Posts: 14 | From: Croydon | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
Admin hat on
Lolly O' Hara
You have had several friendly suggestions from other shipmates and one (to my knowledge) from a host advising you that it's not a good idea to suggest that Roman Catholics are not Christian.
Let me now make this official:
Your post above stating that the RC Mass is "similar" to a "Christian Communion" is not acceptable. Any further implications that the RC Church (or any other denomination) are not Christian will not be tolerated and your posting privileges will be revoked.
Spike
SoF Admin
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lolly O'Hara
Apprentice
# 16777
|
Posted
I am sorry. When I write Christian i mean churches that aren't Roman catholic. I don't really know what else to call them.
Most churches cannot be called protestant because they didnt come from the reformation.
I know that Roman catholics are a type of Christian because they know and love Jesus. the chaplin at the school where I work is very christian and he reads the bible and not the catecism.
I'll be sure to refer to non Roman catholic denominations as protestant so it is.
Posts: 14 | From: Croydon | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Utrecht Catholic
Shipmate
# 14285
|
Posted
The Roman-Catholic Church is certainly a Christian Church.
I do not always agree with what Pope Benedict says :
But he is a Christian, perhaps a very good one.
Furthermore many of he non Roman-Catholic Churches are certainly not Protestant, Eastern-Orthodox,Oriental Orthodox,Old-Catholic.
Many Anglicans, over the world do not like to be regarded as Protestants.
--------------------
Robert Kennedy
Posts: 220 | From: Dordrecht | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
seasick
...over the edge
# 48
|
Posted
This thread is about Evangelicals and Liturgy and is not the place to debate which labels are appropriate for which traditions.
Lolly: Thank you for your apology. Any queries about an official post by a host or an admin should be posted in the Styx and not on the original thread. I advise you to use the denominational label if in doubt. Your recent HTB thread would have been better had you referred to the Anglican Bishop of London, for example.
Perhaps we can now return to the regularly scheduled discussion.
seasick, Eccles host
--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley
Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I'm CofE and I'm happy to be described as protestant. The Reformation is as much part of my Christian history as the Middle Ages and the Oxford Movement. I get just a bit irritated by fellow Anglicans who seem to be determined to deny this.
I get just as irritated, by the way, by those that seem to assume 'real' Christianity died somewhere around 150 AD and restarted in 1558 or 1965 depending on churchmanship.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I'm CofE and I'm happy to be described as protestant. The Reformation is as much part of my Christian history as the Middle Ages and the Oxford Movement. I get just a bit irritated by fellow Anglicans who seem to be determined to deny this.
I get just as irritated, by the way, by those that seem to assume 'real' Christianity died somewhere around 150 AD and restarted in 1558 or 1965 depending on churchmanship.
Ditto and Likewise!
I have to confess that even though I am a High Churchman, I have more trouble getting into the mindset of the strident Anglo-Catholics than I do the strident Evangelicals. That said, I do wish both sides would do me the courtesy of not 'unchurching' me because I do not agree with some of their shibboleths.
I have to be honest and say that I miss the old-fashioned by the book Evangelical service. I rather liked the contrast between the objectivity of the liturgy, and the preaching, which was often aimed at eliciting an emotion/spiritual response. It was good combination, and I am not sure that the sledgehammer approach, where everything in the service is bent to the will of the preacher/theme of the day, is any improvement.
PD - who is feeling cranky
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
Gentlemen, was there something in my esteemed co-host's post that you missed?
quote:
Originally posted by seasick:
This thread is about Evangelicals and Liturgy and is not the place to debate which labels are appropriate for which traditions.
seasick, Eccles host
The third paragraph of PD's post gets us back on topic, so let's take it from there, shall we? Thank you.
Mamacita, Eccles Host
[ 27. November 2011, 03:48: Message edited by: Mamacita ]
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
DangerousDeacon
Shipmate
# 10582
|
Posted
The parish in which I serve is essentially Anglo-Catholic in tradition and practice, though tending more MOTR in two of the three churches. In the main church, we are trying to restructure the weekend service so that it is more friendly to those who are not of an Anglo-Catholic background, especially given that there are some evangelicals moving into this part of the Diocese from Sydney.
It seems to me that a traditional Anglican eucharist is hard to fit into the required format - and it should be said that the other weekend services at the other two churches are decidedly Anglo-Catholic (one top of the candle, one tending towards MOTR) so that my parishioners do have a choice. But as each church must have at least one eucharist each weekend, and each church only has one service, this leaves me with a problem.
Any workable suggestions as to an acceptable format for the Lord's Supper which is family friendly, kid-friendly, and visitor friendly? Surely our evangelical brethren must have something that fits the bill?
--------------------
'All the same, it may be that I am wrong; what I take for gold and diamonds may be only a little copper and glass.'
Posts: 506 | From: Top End | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. Rob
Shipmate
# 5823
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DangerousDeacon:
... we are trying to restructure the weekend service so that it is more friendly to those who are not of an Anglo-Catholic background, especially given that there are some evangelicals moving into this part of the Diocese from Sydney.
It seems to me that a traditional Anglican eucharist is hard to fit into the required format ... Any workable suggestions as to an acceptable format for the Lord's Supper which is family friendly, kid-friendly, and visitor friendly? Surely our evangelical brethren must have something that fits the bill?
It's been my sad observation that what your Evangelical brethren have to contribute to your problem is a general dumbing down of the worship experience. We've seen the results of that among Anglicans in Sydney.
Instead, let me hasten to advise that your problem can best be solved by the use of sound teaching about the church and her liturgy. Take this as an opportunity to raise parish practice and standards in liturgy not lower them. Conversely, I very much doubt that they will put candles out on Sydney holy tables or wear surplices and colored stoles there just because Newcastle people have recently moved into their neighborhood. So don't make the mistake of bending over backwards to accommodate Sydney Anglicans of all people. Stand your ground and teach them.
You can tell that I'm not an Evangelical Anglican, can't you? Actually, I'm not an Evangelical Episcopalian. We don't haven't real Evangelical Episcopalians since most of them flew the coop with the formation of the Reformed Episcopal Church in 1873. Then more more recently there was AMIA and ACNA to bleed off any remaining, usually pretended, Episcopalian Evangelicals.
Posts: 862 | From: USA | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Rob:
It's been my sad observation that what your Evangelical brethren have to contribute to your problem is a general dumbing down of the worship experience.
I have to say, Mr. Rob, that I am nowhere near an evangelical anything, and what I know of Sydney Anglicanism is only from these boards (enough to know I wouldn't like it), but -- are you really accusing evangelicals of dumbing down their worship? As opposed to, say, making considered changes, albeit ones with which you and I would disagree? Because if you are, I find that a pretty offensive statement. (And the Wiki link you provided isn't helping much in the offensiveness department.)
quote:
Instead, let me hasten to advise that your problem can best be solved by the use of sound teaching about the church and her liturgy. Take this as an opportunity to raise parish practice and standards in liturgy not lower them.
Teaching about the church and her liturgy -- to adults, youth and children in age-appropriate ways -- is always a good thing. With children, experience is the better teacher, so a didactic approach can be made more effective if coupled with finding ways to bring children actively into the liturgy in roles such as acolytes, choristers, even lectors or leaders of the prayers of the people (for older children). But I have to take issue with the notion that changing liturgical style/practices is tantamount to lowering standards.
quote:
We don't haven't real Evangelical Episcopalians since most of them flew the coop with the formation of the Reformed Episcopal Church in 1873. Then more more recently there was AMIA and ACNA to bleed off any remaining, usually pretended, Episcopalian Evangelicals.
"Pretended" evangelicals? Again, is it necessary to impugn the sincerity of people with whom you do not agree?
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. Rob
Shipmate
# 5823
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mamacita:
" ... I find that a pretty offensive statement. (And the Wiki link you provided isn't helping much in the offensiveness department.)"
My apologies for any offense to you with my reply to the gentleman in Australia.
Posts: 862 | From: USA | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
@Lolly - it might be worth having a chat to Jengie Jon as she's up on all things 'Reformed'. The term Reformed might be a useful one for you to use in reference to those churches which derived directly from the Reformation. Even though this might be contested on historical/theological grounds by some posters - and probably needs to be modified to some extent (I make a distinction between 'reformed' and 'Reformed' as it were, small 'r' and Big R) it's unlikely to cause as much offence as referring to all non-Catholic Christians as simply 'Christians' as it implies that RCs are something else again.
I think the best rule of thumb is use the term Christian for all Trinitarian churches and denominations and to use various subsets - such as Orthodox, Reformed, Wesleyan, Anglo-Catholic etc etc within that over-arching term.
I apologise if I've strayed into Hostly territory here, I'm not presuming to do that but I am hoping to spare your blushes a bit when you post in future.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hooker's Trick
Admin Emeritus and Guardian of the Gin
# 89
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
OK, this is a summary of an order of service I have on my PC from August. I hope it makes sense.
Even to this BCP-clutching traditionalist High Churchman, the service you describe does not remotely frighten the horses.
The "All Age Family Worship" you mention further down thread does rather give one pause, though...
Posts: 6735 | From: Gin Lane | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
Hostly Blue Scarf ON
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I apologise if I've strayed into Hostly territory here, I'm not presuming to do that but I am hoping to spare your blushes a bit when you post in future.
Not only are you straying into Hostly territory, you are continuing the debate about what label applies to which tradition, which seasick issued a ruling on in this post and which I repeated here.
Everyone, please, stick to the discussion of evangelicals and liturgy.
Mamacita, Eccles Host
Hostly Blue Scarf OFF
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
