|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: What puts you off from setting foot inside a church?
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Well yes, although it's a particularly 'Baptist' thing to be concerned about 'empty rituals' - hence EM's unease I suspect.
Not really - it's part of my make up. I prefer actions/words to be considered and intentional. I can't see the point - and doubt the efficacy - of just doing things because you always have.
Theology is faith seeking understanding not simply just doing stuff.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Not really - it's part of my make up. I prefer actions/words to be considered and intentional. I can't see the point - and doubt the efficacy - of just doing things because you always have.
Theology is faith seeking understanding not simply just doing stuff.
There's a whole load of assumptions in those two "justs". Doing things that you always have (and, as importantly, our forerunners in the faith did too) takes us out of the present and into the eternal. It means we spend less time thinking about what we're doing, what to do next, what to say next, and more about what the words and actions mean for us. If I make the sign of the cross it is a prayer asking for God's blessing, it is a reminder of Christ's sacrifice, it is a reminder that God created the world and values the physical along with the spiritual, it is an expression of hope that I may find a place among the great crowd of witnesses that have made that sign up and down the ages. Words specific to an occasion and made up on the spot have their place, as do words carefully considered and composed for a particular time and place, but so do the timeless expressions of faith, drawn from scripture and the practice of the church passed down through the generations.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Thing is, EM, neither you or I nor anyone else are qualified to discern or comment on whether anyone who is 'sharing the peace' is doing so with thoughtfulness and intent or simply going through the motions because that's the way it's always been done - we don't have windows into people's souls.
The same applies to anything else that goes on in a church context.
I'll meet you halfway insofar as I think there are practices that outlive their sell-by date and cease to be of practical or theological value - and there should be a both/and link between the two of course.
For all we know, the parishioners of St Botolph's In The Mire might derive great spiritual value and benefit from it.
Of course, it's a tricky thing sometimes to pin down what might be a 'valid' theological or plain commonsense objection to something and what might simply be our own subjective response to something - either positively or negatively.
Also, what might be rich and full of meaning in one place might be completely hollow and lacking in substance somewhere else. The 'peace' at St Botolph's might be pregnant with weight and meaning, but at St Oswald's In The Fen it might be the opposite.
--------------------
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
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
I'm not a great fan of The Peace per se , but will take part if it seems right to me to do so.
OTOH, if I feel I really don't want to do it, I adopt the attitude of prayer I mentioned upthread. I am very probably less comely than Mrs. ExclamationMark, so my dour expression, shaven head, and casual attire (perhaps I look like a Street Person to some?) all help to keep unwelcome attentions away.
A church not far from Our Place makes a point of prolonging The Peace so that everyone - regulars, strangers, and sojourners alike - gets greeted and welcomed (they've already been greeted and welcomed at the door when they come in, BTW). I think, personally, that this is a bit OTT, but this church is now becoming well-known for its caring, welcoming, and inclusive attitude, and the congregation is growing...
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
One person's dignified formality is someone else's empty ritualism.
One person's warm intentionality is some one else's OTT-ness.
It's all a question of context.
--------------------
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
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I'd take the level of objection when we were expected to suspend the peace as part of the precautions about swine flu, and the enthusiasm with which it was resumed when the risk was declared over, as evidence that for all the curmudgeonly grumbles one still hears and reads in some places, it is generally very popular. People get the point and it has even acquired an additional theological significance that some liturgists may claim is wrong, but is widely assumed.
I would add, though, that temporarily withdrawing the cup was an even less welcome precaution. The CofE is utraquist to its core.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I would add, though, that temporarily withdrawing the cup was an even less welcome precaution. The CofE is utraquist to its core.
Gosh, I've been ordained 50 years and it's the first time I've come across that word. I had to look it up.
Maybe you are right. Though I have nearly always administered the reserved sacrament to the sick in one kind, without any eyebrows raised or questions asked. As for 'temporarily withdrawing the cup': I wonder how widely that was practised even at the height of the infection scare. The (not-far-off-nosebleed) anglo-catholic church where I was worshipping at the time just carried on as normal administering the chalice (the vicar at the time was a qualified surgeon so he would have been competent to assess any risk).
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Evangelical charismatics I knew simply ignored the thing about withholding the cup during the Foot & Mouth scare - either they thought that God could heal people or they were simply being awkward ...
Or perhaps it was both/and ... ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
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
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
And we just kept on using our hygienic wee cuppies ... ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
We made a concerted effort to shift from Sipping to Dipping. Not only is this (sorta) more germ-free, but it saves loads on wine.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
According to any research sipping is much more hygienic than dipping. Dipping was completely banned at the height of th swine flu epidemic as a result.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zappa
Ship's Wake
# 8433
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I'm not a great fan of The Peace per se , but will take part if it seems right to me to do so.
I'll admit that one thing I love about the transition I have made in post-decanal months to Māori Anglicanism is the utter absence of the Peace. I have defended it as a symbolic gesture for years, but dear God it's a pleasure not to have to put up with it! ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
This pleasure is slightly offset by a somewhat cavalier attitude to liturgical propriety, for Tikanga Māori's origins were very 19th Century CMS.
--------------------
shameless self promotion - because I think it's worth it
and mayhap this too: http://broken-moments.blogspot.co.nz/
Posts: 18917 | From: "Central" is all they call it | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
According to any research sipping is much more hygienic than dipping. Dipping was completely banned at the height of th swine flu epidemic as a result.
I'm surprised to hear that. Is it because of the stuff on people's hands that then rubs off on the wafer and then into the wine? I wonder if it's better if the server dips then places on the tongue of the communicant? If they're wearing white gloves? Inquisitive minds want to know!
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
Clearly if you dunk that poor wafer in to the second knuckle the wine is going to pick up all the germs on your fingers. The old-lady dip in which no fingers touch the surface of the fluid surely is safe enough.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
It was to do with fingertips and nails touching the wine with far more germs than mouths. Even though they should only be dipping wafers. There was some Canadian research published when all the bans came in that I sourced at the time - and linked to the Ship, bur it was a few years back and I am not sure the Ship threads exist any more.
There was information in the report about germ transmission when the priest dipped and put on tongues, and I *think* that wasn't great either, but I am not certain so won't swear to it, and I'm not even going to attempt to search for it on a phone on a train.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
It was to do with fingertips and nails touching the wine with far more germs than mouths. Even though they should only be dipping wafers.
So it comes down to the well-known observation that human beings are, by and large, idiots.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
According to any research sipping is much more hygienic than dipping. Dipping was completely banned at the height of th swine flu epidemic as a result.
Intinction is banned in my Anglican diocese, though the level stated is "strongly discouraged". The bulletin (pew leaflet) each Sunday in our parish reprints that baptised people may receive communion and that intinction/dipping is unhygienic and don't you try it. It further states that if you don't want to take wine, communion is complete if you take only the bread (wafer).
Also, there are bottles of alcohol-based hand sanitizer attached to 6 pews, 3 a side for communicant use on the way to front for communion. Virtually everyone does now, after some 10 years. I have not watched to see if it continues, but the previous bishop required all involved with consecration to use alcohol-based hand sanitizer before beginning that activity; which I think must occur as we're doing the offertory.
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
Since we are on this tangent, the 'lavabo' of the priest's hands before the eucharistic prayer, if done properly, should help. If it also includes sanitising gel better still. However, the traditional place for this is after the priest has handled the bread to put it on the paten or in the ciborium. Has anybody been bold/sensible enough to change the traditional order?
[PS I was at a Roman Catholic mass recently where all those wishing to receive were asked to place a wafer in the ciborium at the beginning of the service, picking it up by hand as there were no tongs provided. As it is highly unlikely that anyone would receive the exact same host they had picked up, it doesn't seem like a very hygienic practice.]
[ 27. November 2016, 21:43: Message edited by: Angloid ]
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Since we are on this tangent, the 'lavabo' of the priest's hands before the eucharistic prayer, if done properly, should help. If it also includes sanitising gel better still. However, the traditional place for this is after the priest has handled the bread to put it on the paten or in the ciborium. Has anybody been bold/sensible enough to change the traditional order?
But once the bread and wine are arranged on the altar, the celebrant may cense them, the altar, and the cross/crucifix. Then comes the lavabo to cleanse the fingers of stuff from the thurible chains.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Hygiene schmygiene. Show me the evidence that receiving communion in normal circumstances is dangerous to the health- show me the cases of people who've been certainly or likely infected with anything as a result, and that it's more dangerous than simply living around people- and then I'll start to worry. But only then.
[ 28. November 2016, 05:15: Message edited by: Albertus ]
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
Hygiene wise I'm sure the risk is pretty minimal - although one of the Misses Mark is an infection control nurse and says that there is still a risk.
For some of us, the whole one cup thing is more a matter or squeamishness, I think. Even the thought of some people's lipstick/dribble/whatever in the big cup is enough to call halt and ask for the individual little cup.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Not really - it's part of my make up. I prefer actions/words to be considered and intentional. I can't see the point - and doubt the efficacy - of just doing things because you always have.
Theology is faith seeking understanding not simply just doing stuff.
There's a whole load of assumptions in those two "justs". Doing things that you always have (and, as importantly, our forerunners in the faith did too) takes us out of the present and into the eternal. It means we spend less time thinking about what we're doing, what to do next, what to say next, and more about what the words and actions mean for us. If I make the sign of the cross it is a prayer asking for God's blessing, it is a reminder of Christ's sacrifice, it is a reminder that God created the world and values the physical along with the spiritual, it is an expression of hope that I may find a place among the great crowd of witnesses that have made that sign up and down the ages. Words specific to an occasion and made up on the spot have their place, as do words carefully considered and composed for a particular time and place, but so do the timeless expressions of faith, drawn from scripture and the practice of the church passed down through the generations.
I accept all of that but I wonder how many people really think about what they're saying?
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
What Exclamation Mark said!
Re Sung Eucharist - could be that it's sung by the congregation (maybe with a cantor leading):
Re The Peace - adopt an attitude of deep prayer, with eyes closed, and hands modestly folded. The bugg...er...huggers will leave you alone.
IJ
I was going to say something similar about not sharing the peace and no-one is required to share it.
You try telling that to some people.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
I accept all of that but I wonder how many people really think about what they're saying?
Probably similar to the number of people who really think about the sermon they are listening to or are active during the extempore prayer session. Human beings are frail across a range of different practices.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, and any form of human activity becomes routinised over time ... that's simply how it is.
I was very happy as a member of a Baptist church-plant for six years, which only had monthly communion. The house-groups used to take it in turns to run it, which was fine ... only after a while it seemed that we were bending over backwards more and more in an attempt to do it 'differently' each time ... to the extent that I wondered whether we'd do it standing on our heads one Sunday ...
Eventually, the minister brought some order to the proceedings and the communion settled down to a fairly predictable pattern with bits nicked from various Anglican sources and so on.
I wouldn't make any value judgements as to which were the 'better' occasions - I used to enjoy putting the communion services together communally at times - but I'm simply making the point that however we do these things they are bound to settle into some kind of routine sooner or later - and that includes sermons, extemporary prayers, set liturgical prayers, the way we greet one another of do the 'Peace' thing if that's what we get up to - and anything else we might care to mention.
That's the way it is. We either roll with it or we keep trying to invent the wheel over and over and over again - and that can make us dizzy.
--------------------
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
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I actually think there's a happy medium to be struck here. People like a certain amount of predictability as constant innovation and uncertainty are stressful, on the other things can descend into mere routine.
An ideal is surely a relatively static framework but with some flexibility and innovation allowed within it. For instance yesterday our service include Christingles and this meant swapping around some of the elements, albeit still within a recognisable structure. That wasn't a problem at all (except that one of the sidesman didn't twig that the offering was much earlier than usual!)
Apart from anything else, people learn the "cues" as to what they do next. Even "inspirational" and "charismatic" churches settle down into a comfortable liturgy - as a Pentecostal church leader said to me many years ago, "I can tell you within 5 minutes not just who's going to speak in tongues or prophesy, but also what they're going to say". And I'm sure you (Gamaliel) remember the time when it was "de rigeur" for a loud and upbeat worship time to move into something quieter and more intense, then "singing in the Spirit" and finally quieter under-the-breath tongues speaking and prayer before subsiding into silence. Nothing wrong with that - but it's still liturgy!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
as a Pentecostal church leader said to me many years ago, "I can tell you within 5 minutes not just who's going to speak in tongues or prophesy, but also what they're going to say".
We had a lady at a church I attended long long ago in a galaxy far far away who used to come out with a message in tongues every week. I and another shipmate who shall remain nameless to protect the guilty knew her message syllable by syllable, because it was always the same.
Interpretation was different each week, interestingly.
It didn't do much to arrest my slide into considering the whole thing "mostly bollocks". There were the odd things that made you think there was something in it, but there's not much point having one genuine "word" in a bunch of a hundred if you don't know which one it is. You'll end up having to wait and see anyway.
Mass revival was always just around the corner as well. 1988 was going to be the year.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
The final straw for me (in the kind of charismatic environment discussed above) was when a good friend told me that if I disagreed with his God-given prophetic declaration* then I was disagreeing with God. Sadly I haven't spoken to him since - I refuse to be bullied in this way. From what I've heard from other sources, this pattern of behaviour continues to this day, so any reconciliation would inevitably lead to further such incidents.
*it was about something really stupid the details of which I forget.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
The final straw for me (in the kind of charismatic environment discussed above) was when a good friend told me that if I disagreed with his God-given prophetic declaration* then I was disagreeing with God. Sadly I haven't spoken to him since - I refuse to be bullied in this way. From what I've heard from other sources, this pattern of behaviour continues to this day, so any reconciliation would inevitably lead to further such incidents.
*it was about something really stupid the details of which I forget.
This is one of the two issues that really trouble me about claims that someone is 'prophetic' or prophesying.
Using the word in the charismatic sense really raises the ante. It is saying, 'This is the voice of God - believe or else'. So either I am refusing to listen to God, or they are a false prophet.
The other is the use of the word 'prophetic' in other parts of the church to mean no more than 'say something abrasive in a really loud voice'. Usually in that context, what is alleged to be prophetic is something about politics. It isn't actually speaking to power. It's addressed to people most of whom will agree. It's saying what they'd already like to say to power if they had either the guts or access to the channels to do so. And it's invariably something that requires no great insight into the counsels of God. Indeed, it is often something that would be fairly obvious, often platitudinous, if it were being said by someone who wasn't a religious person who is expected to be bland.
If prophecy is to have any meaning at all, it has to be about proclaiming insights about God, his counsel to the situation, his message to those listening, something profound which they can't work out from studying scripture or theology. It must have a supernatural element.
The first of the two uses I'm concerned about shares that view of what prophecy is, but unless really genuine - which is rare > unknown, is a serious form of spiritual abuse.
The second is a denial of what is at the core of that understanding, and of everything Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, John the Baptist and the others stand for.
I've a sort of suspicion that in our times, if anything were genuinely prophetic, one of its markers would be that it made no claim to be.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Well yes, and I'm afraid I can no longer say, 'nothing wrong with that', Baptist Trainfan as I now think there's everything wrong with it ...
At an editorial meeting for a Christian magazine I help out with - I shall not mention its name to protect the innocent and the guilty - I received some funny looks and tut-tuts recently for openly challenging the idea of 'Treasure Hunting' - you know, that form of cold-reading that has for some inexplicable reason become de-rigeur in some charismatic circles and seems to have spilled over into some settings that really ought to know better ...
I stuck to my guns and when I stressed that it was all simply a case of confirmation-bias or finding whatever it was we are looking for - such as if you bought a green car you'd suddenly notice how many other green cars there are around - I was told, 'You wouldn't say that if you met the one or two people for whom it has been deeply meaningful ...'
Well, excuse me, I bloody well would still say it.
In and amongst the stream of consciousness detritus that passes for prophetic words in such circles then I suppose you are bound to get one or two that 'fit' - or appear to fit - sooner or later.
But don't get me started ...
![[Help]](graemlins/help.gif)
Oh, dear, I see that I already have ...
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Coming back to the OP and issues of taste and so on ... yes, I'm sure that the bulk of our distaste or run away ... run away responses are largely subjective and that the vast majority of practices in each and every setting are pretty harmless.
The issue then is a question of taste and subjectivity. I can't come up with any theological objection to percussion, for instance - I just can't be bothered regularly going to services where I know they'll have a drum beat going.
But when it comes to the charismatic side of things, I fluctuate between tolerance of the mildly charismatic side to zero tolerance and wanting to debunk the whole thing ... although even on a bad day I wouldn't quite go that far.
--------------------
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
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
For me, it is the note of non-discussion and suggestion it is an unequivical final statement that grates. OK, if other people want to sit around and listen to people (and they are usually the same people) saying this kind of thing, then fine. I don't.
Thinking about this, I remembered another occasion where we were visiting a church, thinking about getting more involved. In the end we didn't, and that was largely because during the "prayer time", someone who was not in a leadership position would stand up and preach a mini-sermon in a loud voice, usually claiming to be giving a prophetic witness about some error in society. One thing if it is the minister doing that, another thing if it is someone in the congregation.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
@ Enoch: I tend to agree. However:
1. I don't think Scripture - at least the NT - gives a mandate for that kind of bullying. After all, the instructions for church order in 1 Cor. 14 say: "Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said" - hardly an uncritical reception.
2. I have often wondered how we would regard a genuine OT prophet such as Elijah or even John the Baptist? Would we give them the room to speak, or would we dismiss them as religious fanatics? (Same thing applies to Jesus).
3. Saying that "My way is God's way" is surely not confined to charismatic churches? There is allegedly the story of the RC priest and CofE Vicar having an amicable chat which ends with one of them saying, "That's fine, we'll agree to differ. You can go on worshipping God in your way and I'll go on worshipping him in his".
[ 28. November 2016, 12:08: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
3. Saying that "My way is God's way" is surely not confined to charismatic churches? There is allegedly the story of the RC priest and CofE Vicar having an amicable chat which ends with one of them saying, "That's fine, we'll agree to differ. You can go on worshipping God in your way and I'll go on worshipping him in his".
Absolutely not, this goes in all directions. Charismatics seem to have carved a space where the self-appointed prophets can pontificate, but there are versions of this behaviour in all church types.
As to the truism, I've heard that rewritten in various directions - including several times between the Baptists and others.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Indeed so - but it depends on the Baptists!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
BT, I agree with all three of your points. Thank you.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Hygiene wise I'm sure the risk is pretty minimal - although one of the Misses Mark is an infection control nurse and says that there is still a risk.
For some of us, the whole one cup thing is more a matter or squeamishness, I think. Even the thought of some people's lipstick/dribble/whatever in the big cup is enough to call halt and ask for the individual little cup.
That's honest and I can see that: 'I personally don't like the idea of it'. Fair enough: I don't have a problem with it but why should I criticise you if you do? A matter of personal taste.
It's the dressing it up into 'you must take these precautions' that really grates with me.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
@Mr Cheesy, sure, that sort of thing grates with me too.
This sort of thing isn't restricted to charismatic set-ups, of course. All traditions have their equivalents.
On the wee cuppie vs chalice thing, I don't see that as a deal breaker in terms of darkening the doors of any church but it's a long time since I've been to a communion service where they've done the wee cuppie stuff.
--------------------
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
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
It was to do with fingertips and nails touching the wine with far more germs than mouths. Even though they should only be dipping wafers. There was some Canadian research published when all the bans came in that I sourced at the time - and linked to the Ship, bur it was a few years back and I am not sure the Ship threads exist any more.
There was information in the report about germ transmission when the priest dipped and put on tongues, and I *think* that wasn't great either, but I am not certain so won't swear to it, and I'm not even going to attempt to search for it on a phone on a train.
There are also 'folk practices' like the case I had to deal with where the communicant received the wafer, took a bite out of it and then intincted the bitten host.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
I think I've mentioned before the funeral where I was administering the Chalice. Like at many funerals, many of those attending were not accustomed to the Episcopal way of receiving. One whole rail-full watched as the first person to receive took the Host, intincted, and consumed it. So they all received that way, but not being used to it, most of them slobbered all over my fingers despite my best efforts. This was in the height of flu season. After Communion when I took my chalice back to the Sacristy, I washed my hands thoroughly with much soap and water.
Of course, the most famous story (at least in the U.S.) of someone imitating what the person before him did is that of Ronald Reagan, watching Nancy receive ahead of him. She inadvertently dropped her bread into the chalice. The President had been told to do as she did -- for he followed suit.
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Since we are on this tangent, the 'lavabo' of the priest's hands before the eucharistic prayer, if done properly, should help. If it also includes sanitising gel better still. However, the traditional place for this is after the priest has handled the bread to put it on the paten or in the ciborium. Has anybody been bold/sensible enough to change the traditional order?
Yes, one of priests always does it in that order.
--------------------
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
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I would add, though, that temporarily withdrawing the cup was an even less welcome precaution. The CofE is utraquist to its core.
Gosh, I've been ordained 50 years and it's the first time I've come across that word. I had to look it up.
And by a strange coincidence I encountered that word for the first time that morning when reading a book about church histiory written from a Plymouth Brethren perspective.
--------------------
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
Hmmm ... I've never been to a funeral service where communion was offered ...
--------------------
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
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Hmmm ... I've never been to a funeral service where communion was offered ...
Interesting; close to 100% of those that take place in our parish do include Communion, as they're either a Requiem Mass (black vestments, traditional Requiem propers) or a Mass of the Resurrection (white vestments, simpler propers).
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Most of my time has been spent in non-conformist, 'non-denominational' or low-church Anglican circled, Oblatus.
I have 'higher' tendencies but tend only to visit higher up the candle places now and then.
--------------------
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
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oblatus:
Interesting; close to 100% of those that take place in our parish do include Communion, as they're either a Requiem Mass (black vestments, traditional Requiem propers) or a Mass of the Resurrection (white vestments, simpler propers).
Same here (almost exclusively white/Resurrection), and we're nowhere near as high up the candle as your Parish.
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
Am I right in thinking that Oblatus and Pigwidgeon are in America? And TEC? Hence that most funerals would be of church members.
In the C of E things are quite different. The average C of E parish will deal with many - until recently, the majority, but even now a great number - funerals of those with absolutely no connection with the church. Hence necessarily most of these will be non-eucharistic.
Add to this the fact that many practising C of E members (and their parishes) are not as sacramentally focussed as the average TEC church.
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Graven Image
Shipmate
# 8755
|
Posted
Found my off put Sunday. The first Sunday of Advent not even mentioned and entire church decked out for Christmas. Pastor, "announced thanks to all who had worked so hard getting our church ready for the Christmas season."
Posts: 2641 | From: Third planet from the sun. USA | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
