Ship of Fools: The Parson's Handbook, and other liturgical resources

Thread: The Parson's Handbook, and other liturgical resources Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=022688

Posted by Padre Joshua (# 13100) on :

I was going to post this in "Random Liturgical Questions not Requiring Discussion" thread, but I decided it probably has a lot more life to it than that.

What are your thoughts on Dearmer in general, and The Parson's Handbook in particular?

Are there any other, similar, resources that would be a better choice? Why?

Posted by Fr Weber (# 13472) on :

It depends on your taste, I'd say. Dearmer has basically attempted to reconstruct a native English Catholic ceremonial based on Sarum precedents and scaled to the requirements of a parish church. A lot of what Percy suggests is pretty close to what you'd find in the Alcuin Club's tracts, which are worth picking up if you ever see them.

If you like a more Continental approach, you might want Ritual Notes instead, which applies Tridentine ceremonial to the BCP; or Adrian Fortescue's The Ceremonies of the Roman Rite Described , which is unadulterated and unadapted Trid.

There are more contemporary resources with which I"m not familiar, as well. Personally, I prefer ceremonial which leans more toward Ritual Notes, but I've also found a lot in the Alcuin tracts very helpful.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

I am in the Dearmer group, though i fully accept the criticism that he invented a lot and that his work smacks of 'museum religion'. He comes across as generous whereas R Notes seems to be a stickler for rules.

Dearmer has an English feel to it whereas Notes is rather exotic and foreign (Italian Mission Religion might be the reply to 'English Museum Religion')

One good example of Dearmer's Englishness is in his liturgical colour scheme. Lenten array fits English temperament whereas purple is celebratory rather than penitential.

Dearmer was also a socialist and supporter of women's ministry - for that, he wins for me.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

One of the reasons for Dearmer's legalism* is that he wanted to present the case for Catholic ceremonial that could not be accused of disloyalty to Anglican tradition or the Book of Common Prayer. He was careful to appeal to precedent and to the rubrics and canons, unlike the Ritual Notes people who simply adopted wholesale the practices of another rite.

The tribal battles that were fought on these issues seem utterly trivial, and irrelevant, in the light of post-Vatican 2 RC practice, which discarded much that Ritual Notes held dear and was indifferent about some of the petty details that distinguished the two traditions. Servers in albs for instance are pretty common in RC and anglo-catholic churches today, when at one time they would have been the sign of a 'Sarum', Dearmer-influenced church.

If it hadn't been for St Percy and PH, I doubt if the majority of English cathedrals today would be celebrating the liturgy in a way that reflects both Anglican tradition and the wider Catholic one.

But while it is interesting to read (at least for most Ecclesiantophiles) it is no longer a very practical handbook for those tasked with presenting parish liturgy today. Nor of course is RN.

*Just realised that leo implies the opposite! I think Dearmer's common sense shows through, but he is nonetheless forced into legalistic defences of his proposals sometimes.

[ 27. April 2012, 17:55: Message edited by: Angloid ]

Posted by sebby (# 15147) on :

That seems a particularly concise and accurate description of St P and PH.

I once attended a church where the 90-odd year old incumbent (very boyish and energetic despite his years) told me that PD had been his tutor at King's, London where the the said vicar had been a late ordinand in the early 1920s.

Posted by Sarum Sleuth (# 162) on :

The principles in the Parsons Handbook are as sound as they were on the day it was first printed. The actual ceremonial directions can be easily adapted to Common Worship and westward facing celebration by anyone with a little sense. I have just been to a requiem at Primrose Hill, and everything there was 100% Dearmer compliant still. Most English Cathedrals are still very much out of the Dearmer stable as is Westminster Abbey and Derby Cathedral, my current workplace.

SS

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :

I'm in a parish where the BCP 1979 Rite II has been adapted to Fortescue in a general way (and Fortescue is consulted to help decide some issues). But I have a lot of respect for Blessed Percy and his work and think that would have been another good way to go.

As it is, I very much appreciate all the work and thought that went into our parish ceremonial during the transition to the 1979 BCP under (and by) the previous rector and the fact that this ceremonial is maintained, not without change but with careful thought by our current rector to any needed change, informed by his considerable knowledge and experience. He's our worship committee, and highly qualified.

It's interesting to read Dearmer's book while imagining what differences there would be in our ceremonial if we had adopted that approach.

Posted by georgiaboy (# 11294) on :

(Climbing onto my favorite hobby-horse)
Whatever one's preference, PH, RN, or CRRD, there is a great advantage to choosing one and STICKING TO IT!!

I have been afflicted by the liturgy in far too many places that just do 'what we've always done' or 'but it's so pretty' or what the priest saw on his last vacation. Always a mess!

I must confess that I'm a Fortescue snob; no other book seems so precise and complete, and he manages most everything from the splendours of pontifical rites to low mass in the smallest parish. (The version I have is that from shortly after Holy Week was reformed by Pio XII; it fits my present A-C very traddy place quite well. Though I wish we paid more attention to it!)

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :

As long as the services are conducted 'properly' Cathedral-style, I'm not too worried about which exact details are followed. As a Chorister, though, my handbook of choice is 'The Chorister's Companion', an updated version of a guide for Choristers first written in 1934. But now the illustrations are in (shock! horror!) colour.

Posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras (# 11274) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sarum Sleuth:
The principles in the Parsons Handbook are as sound as they were on the day it was first printed. The actual ceremonial directions can be easily adapted to Common Worship and westward facing celebration by anyone with a little sense. I have just been to a requiem at Primrose Hill, and everything there was 100% Dearmer compliant still. Most English Cathedrals are still very much out of the Dearmer stable as is Westminster Abbey and Derby Cathedral, my current workplace.
SS

Oh would that Dearmer's way had prevailed and we had been delivered from Romish laciness and diminutive little cottas!

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

As I am not an Anglican, I am tempted to write my own "Notes for Worship" book and publish it as a website. Most United Church congregations own a set of seasonal paraments; a runner for the Communion Table and a hanging for the pulpit.

I've been in two churches in recent years who liked seeing them used, it was "proper church" in their eyes, but didn't know how the system worked or where to get the information.

The UCCan published a denominational calendar in which the dates are printed in the colour appropriate to the day. Similarly many people are under the impression that scripture readings magically appear from the minister's head (often true) but the full Lectionary is printed in the back of the hymn book.

My only hesitation about Ritual Notes or the Parson's Handbook is that in some Methodist places some of their practices would scare the horses. Just have an ear if you use these materials.

I have already taken fire as Worship Committee Chair for telling the Minister what to do (he likes that, it lets him look good while concentrating on pastoral visits and writing the sermon) or "taking the magic out of it".

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :

Has anyone written a customary for, say, USA Rite II a la Dearmer? Or for Canada, BAS p. 185 a la Percy?

Or, can it be dreamt of, videos of same? Probably not. There's lots of video work to be done on all the various possibilities, I'm sure.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Oblatus:
Has anyone written a customary for, say, USA Rite II a la Dearmer? Or for Canada, BAS p. 185 a la Percy?

Not that I know of, although some Dearmerisms-for-TEC can be found in Derek the Aenglican's blog. I think that it would be a useful as much of it can apply to practical parish life, and it is more adaptable to local circumstances than an initial glance would suggest. I can mention this idea to one or two of my friends....

Posted by St.Silas the carter (# 12867) on :

I've always been very partial to The Parson's Handbook. One of my dream places would be a Dearmerite RC parish, but as far as I know, only one such beast exists in the world (St Aloysius Church, Melbourne.) The customary for our parish is Fortescue's choreography layered onto the modern Roman missal, which works for us.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by St.Silas the carter:
One of my dream places would be a Dearmerite RC parish, but as far as I know, only one such beast exists in the world (St Aloysius Church, Melbourne.)

There are a few that look the part. There's a wonderful Arts and Crafts era RC church near here that seems designed for Parsons Handbook worship. I don't suppose it gets it, but I'm sure their style is closer to it than their Anglican neighbours which is FinF 'nosebleed high'.

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :

Haw! I've been reading the Parson's handbook 'cause it sure beats writing a 20-page paper on Pseudo-Dionysius.

"The Choir Vestry should be as large as possible, and very long for its breadth; so that the choir can form up in a double row. A card with the word ‘Silence’ may advantageously be hung on the wall."

Saint Percy sounds like a real peach. [Yipee]

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Haw! I've been reading the Parson's handbook 'cause it sure beats writing a 20-page paper on Pseudo-Dionysius.

"The Choir Vestry should be as large as possible, and very long for its breadth; so that the choir can form up in a double row. A card with the word ‘Silence’ may advantageously be hung on the wall."

Saint Percy sounds like a real peach.

Oh, he's great fun!

Wait till you get to his invocation of German soldier helmets and his tirade on "the natural tendency of tasteless people".

Posted by JSwift (# 5502) on :

I have been wondering for some time now how do you take liturgy from another tradition and import it into your own without disrupting the flow of the worship service? Is that even possible? In my own rather limited experience of using the BCP evening prayers in a congregational setting, minus a few portions that the congregation would likely have had issues,the service came out clunky and stilted.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:

quote:
Originally posted by Sarum Sleuth:
The principles in the Parsons Handbook are as sound as they were on the day it was first printed. The actual ceremonial directions can be easily adapted to Common Worship and westward facing celebration by anyone with a little sense. I have just been to a requiem at Primrose Hill, and everything there was 100% Dearmer compliant still. Most English Cathedrals are still very much out of the Dearmer stable as is Westminster Abbey and Derby Cathedral, my current workplace.
SS
Oh would that Dearmer's way had prevailed and we had been delivered from Romish laciness and diminutive little cottas!

Indeed - horrible, little garments which lack generosity.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
As long as the services are conducted 'properly' Cathedral-style, I'm not too worried about which exact details are followed. As a Chorister, though, my handbook of choice is 'The Chorister's Companion', an updated version of a guide for Choristers first written in 1934. But now the illustrations are in (shock! horror!) colour.

But The Chorister's Companion doesn't say anything about incense!

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by JSwift:
I have been wondering for some time now how do you take liturgy from another tradition and import it into your own without disrupting the flow of the worship service?

You can't. Which is why Ritual Notes and its ilk were doomed to failure, unless a church went the whole hog and (Illegally) used the Roman Rite.

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :

I have been trying to learn a little about what priests and deacons get up to from this rather good guide.

Having tried to learn as a new server from some of the existing books and having realised from that experience and witnessing others serve just how inadequate these things are, I wrote my own. Another edition is planned to take care of some of the deficiencies in the current version.

[fixed code]

[ 28. April 2012, 23:55: Message edited by: seasick ]

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
But The Chorister's Companion doesn't say anything about incense!

The general rule about incense is that you cough on the beat.

Posted by Adrian1 (# 3994) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sarum Sleuth:
The principles in the Parsons Handbook are as sound as they were on the day it was first printed. The actual ceremonial directions can be easily adapted to Common Worship and westward facing celebration by anyone with a little sense. I have just been to a requiem at Primrose Hill, and everything there was 100% Dearmer compliant still. Most English Cathedrals are still very much out of the Dearmer stable as is Westminster Abbey and Derby Cathedral, my current workplace.

SS

I agree wholeheartedly, being very much in the Dearmer camp. Although Dearmer was very much an Anglo Catholic to the core, he saw first hand the havoc wrought by inappropriate adaption of another rite's ceremonial to the Prayer Book, and strove for something better which at least had some kind of medieval English authority behind it.

I did have a copy one of the early editions of Ritual Notes but, to my shame, sold it on. I think part of the reason I got rid of it was that I felt it was over fussy and prescriptive, whereas Dearmer does at least acknowledge that there are more ways of doing things well than one, even if some are better than others.

For what it's worth, I think an expanded and updated version of the Parson's Handbook which took account of modern day pastoral and liturgical realities whilst remaining true to the principles and ideals of the original, would be a great gift to the church.

Posted by Wm Dewy (# 16712) on :

I’m rather more accustomed to Ritual Notes than Parson’s Handbook. When our usual Sunday celebration was high mass, we did the best we could to use full Catholic ceremony without being fussy. If there was any question, Ritual Notes was consulted. It was like consulting Emily Post or Judith Martin’s Miss Manners. We didn’t retreat into Ritual Notes incessantly, but it was wonderful to answer questions about Holy Week and Easter Week and the like.

My current rector (different parish) seems to like Dennis Michno’s A Priest’s Handbook, which I’ve seen, but not read. Anybody on the Ship know of that work? I have read Howard Galley’s Ceremonies of the Eucharist, but I don’t find it particularly helpful. It’s been some time since I’ve read my copy, but I recall little or nothing about proper liturgies for special days, and of course, the Daily Office isn’t discussed.

There is the old joke that the authority for a Roman Catholic is the Pope, the authority for a Baptist is Scripture, and the authority for an Episcopalian is the former rector.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Wm Dewy:

There is the old joke that the authority for a Roman Catholic is the Pope, the authority for a Baptist is Scripture, and the authority for an Episcopalian is the former rector.

In the C of E it's the last rector/vicar but one.

Posted by Padre Joshua (# 13100) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Wm Dewy:
My current rector (different parish) seems to like Dennis Michno’s A Priest’s Handbook, which I’ve seen, but not read. Anybody on the Ship know of that work?

I own a copy. There are a few things which I dislike about it, namely, the suggestion that the stole can be worn outside of (on top of) the chasuble or dalmatic.

I've found it most helpful in learning what to do with my hands during the Eucharistic prayer. While the UM Book of Worship has a few hints, it leaves me with more questions than answers. A Priest's Handbook answers them. It has also been helpful for body language throughout the rest of the service. These are things that seem obvious, but I don't automatically know them, and I appreciate the opportunity to learn. Little details like that can make a big difference.

I'm working my way through Dearmer now. I'm in chapter 2, about altars, and so far I can see he's rather opinionated. [Biased]

But it's a good read so far.

[deleted duplicate post]

[ 29. April 2012, 15:22: Message edited by: seasick ]

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Adrian1:
I did have a copy one of the early editions of Ritual Notes but, to my shame, sold it on..

Not so much to your shame but to your financial loss. There are quite a few liturgy geeks who scour Ebay and pay loads of money for these.

I have several different editions of both Notes and Dearmer and am hanging on to them, partly out of interest and partly as an investment for the future.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Padre Joshua:
There are a few things which I dislike about it, namely, the suggestion that the stole can be worn outside of (on top of) the chasuble or dalmatic.

That largely depends on their design. Most sets of vestments are designed to be worn in the traditional way, but a totally plain chasuble can look good with a contrasting stole over it. Though it might give some shipmates a touch of the vapours.
[tangent but not one to provoke much discussion, surely? ...Ahem....]

Posted by seasick (# 48) on :

If I'm in doubt, I generally use The Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite - Elliott (or its companion volume Ceremonies of the Liturgical Year) which makes sense to me as most of our liturgies owe a debt to the modern Roman Rite. That said, I look what he says and then do what I wanted anyway... [Big Grin]

Posted by Adrian1 (# 3994) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by Adrian1:
I did have a copy one of the early editions of Ritual Notes but, to my shame, sold it on..
Not so much to your shame but to your financial loss. There are quite a few liturgy geeks who scour Ebay and pay loads of money for these.

I have several different editions of both Notes and Dearmer and am hanging on to them, partly out of interest and partly as an investment for the future.

Possibly, but at the time I got a good price for by the standards of the secondhand book market at the time. I know values have changed a lot in recent years though. Around 1988 I paid £10 (or possibly £12) for a secondhand altar edition of the English Missal. If I were to sell it again, say on ebay, which I don't intend doing anytime soon, I'd ask £150 with a view to getting £100-£120 because I know that's where the market now is. One of my regrets in life, and I have a few, is passing up on the chance to buy a Tridentine altar missal from the old uphill SPCK shop in Lincoln when they had one for £10.00. That must be 20 years ago now. I have since acquired a set of two but together they cost £80.00 and aren't in quite the condition I'd have expected for that money.

Posted by St.Silas the carter (# 12867) on :

quote:
Originally posted by JSwift:
I have been wondering for some time now how do you take liturgy from another tradition and import it into your own without disrupting the flow of the worship service? Is that even possible? In my own rather limited experience of using the BCP evening prayers in a congregational setting, minus a few portions that the congregation would likely have had issues,the service came out clunky and stilted.

For what it's worth, the Brothers of the Little Oratory have wholeheartedly imported the ceremonial of the old Latin missal onto the novus ordo, and they seem to have done it successfully. My parish does the same. With careful planning, it works.

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

JSwift -

By BCP Evensong in a congregational setting, do you mean in a parish church without a choir, and the psalms and canticles to Anglican chant, as opposed to sung in a cathedral? That was standard practice in any C of E place with an evening service in my youth.

I don't see the problem in importing from one tradition to another. Some Anglicans would do Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament, some would do revivalist choruses.

[ 29. April 2012, 17:18: Message edited by: venbede ]

Posted by CL (# 16145) on :

quote:
Originally posted by St.Silas the carter:

quote:
Originally posted by JSwift:
I have been wondering for some time now how do you take liturgy from another tradition and import it into your own without disrupting the flow of the worship service? Is that even possible? In my own rather limited experience of using the BCP evening prayers in a congregational setting, minus a few portions that the congregation would likely have had issues,the service came out clunky and stilted.
For what it's worth, the Brothers of the Little Oratory have wholeheartedly imported the ceremonial of the old Latin missal onto the novus ordo, and they seem to have done it successfully. My parish does the same. With careful planning, it works.

The Canons Regular of St. John Cantius do the same I believe and indeed it does seem to be becoming more common. The approach being taken seems to be to assume, given the rather sparse rubrical instruction in the Novus Ordo, that where the modern Missal is silent or does not contradict then Vetus Ordo rubrics and ceremonial still apply/may be used (notwithstanding that certain things have been legislatively abrogated with regard to the Novus Ordo). Cardinal Ranjith certainly took that approach when he was Secretary of the CDW, still does.

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Padre Joshua:

quote:
Originally posted by Wm Dewy:
My current rector (different parish) seems to like Dennis Michno’s A Priest’s Handbook, which I’ve seen, but not read. Anybody on the Ship know of that work?
I own a copy. There are a few things which I dislike about it, namely, the suggestion that the stole can be worn outside of (on top of) the chasuble or dalmatic.

I can see the concern where the chasuble is concerned but I can't understand the objection to the stole being worn over the dalmatic. That is, after all, how it was anciently worn in the Roman rite and how it is still worn in the Ambrosian, Gallican, and Byzantine rites. The modern Roman rite and its late predecessors may prescribe the diaconal stole to be worn under the dalmatic but that shouldn't preclude the suggestion of the former custom for those not subject to that authority.

Posted by JSwift (# 5502) on :

quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
JSwift -

By BCP Evensong in a congregational setting, do you mean in a parish church without a choir, and the psalms and canticles to Anglican chant, as opposed to sung in a cathedral? That was standard practice in any C of E place with an evening service in my youth.

I don't see the problem in importing from one tradition to another. Some Anglicans would do Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament, some would do revivalist choruses.

Even more extreme than that. I'm not an Anglican in any way, shape or form. In the past I've had to put together a service at the last minute due to a preacher becoming ill and unable to attend. I've taken the readings from the appropriate date, interspersed hymns and "time slots" for extemporary prayers and tacked on time at the end for me to give a short homily. I would like to think that in some small way God was glorified despite the service being clunky and slited.

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :

You'd do a lot worse than to find someone in the area who is well known for taking a good service (Eucarist or Evensong) and turning up to one of the services, observing closely. He or she may permit you to assist in a future service, through which they will guide you, so you can learn through doing. I can't help thinking this can be a much more meaningful way than merely reading a manual. [Cool]

Posted by jordan32404 (# 15833) on :

Pardon the ignorance but what are the distinctives of Dearmer's "English Use"? How would it differ from the Roman Rite?

Posted by Padre Joshua (# 13100) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
You'd do a lot worse than to find someone in the area who is well known for taking a good service (Eucarist or Evensong) and turning up to one of the services, observing closely. He or she may permit you to assist in a future service, through which they will guide you, so you can learn through doing. I can't help thinking this can be a much more meaningful way than merely reading a manual.

That's certainly true. The book does have some advantages (you can look things up at odd hours of the day or night, for instance), but there is something special about being taught by a mentor.

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :

quote:
Originally posted by jordan32404:
Pardon the ignorance but what are the distinctives of Dearmer's "English Use"? How would it differ from the Roman Rite?

I'd say the main thing is that it sticks to the BCP (1662 or 1928 Proposed) texts, eschewing interpolations from the Roman Missal. That would be the main difference it would make in my parish (and I do NOT advocate our parish going Dearmer; it's just interesting to think about what would be different, and it helps me grasp Dearmer's ideas to imagine it).

Also, more bowing instead of genuflecting, fewer manual acts, elevations, and bells during the Eucharistic Prayer. Perhaps an English altar with curtains and riddel posts; apparelled amices; some slight ceremonial differences.

Dearmer wasn't writing about today's BCPs and alternative rites, though, so if a parish wanted to "go Dearmer," a lot would need to be thought through to implement the spirit of what he wrote without necessarily stepping back to earlier practices just because he was working with an earlier BCP. Our current Tridentine-ish adaptation of the BCP 1979 Rite II, for instance, has the sacred ministers at the sedilia, not the altar, from the collect of the day until the offertory. I would think that would be kept that way under a hypothetical Dearmerization.

Our ceremonial was designed for our current BCP rite and will likely remain much as it is until there's a new BCP, and I think that's fine.

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :

And of course the point of Dearmer's Parson's Handbook is set out in the long title:

The Parson's Handbook, Containing Practical Directions both for Parsons and others as to the Management of the Parish Church and its Services according to the English use, as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer, With an Introductory Essay on Conformity to the Church of England.

He was putting forward an English use for Anglican parishes, as opposed to borrowing from the Roman use. Many times in the book, he aims to correct things that had become sloppy or wrong in many parishes (such as the manner of introducing a lesson at Evensong, various matters of vestments and furnishings, and the ordering of the chancel) and pointed readers to the BCP rubrics for the correct thing to do.

"The object of this Handbook is to help, in however humble a way, towards remedying the lamentable confusion, lawlessness, and vulgarity with are conspicuous in the Church at this time." -- First sentence in the 10th edition, 1921

Posted by Episcoterian (# 13185) on :

Like SPK, I sometimes feel tempted to write my own guide to the liturgy.

In fact, I'm already "writing" "my own" liturgy* (in fact, a compilation), and thinking whether the guidelines should be offered as extended General Rubrics before each Rite (current format) or as a separate book.

Posted by the Ænglican (# 12496) on :

Experience-wise, I've served in a Ritual Notes parish, a "Novus Ordo"-Elliott parish, and currently in a Fortescue parish. Never served in a Dearmer but the closest to it in the region is quite nearby and I've attended it often and love speaking liturgy with the rector.

Dearmer's greatest strength and weakness is that he is advocating a sensible re-appropriation of historic practices into a modern context and liturgy.

This is a strength because it recognizes the historical, cultural, and evangelistic situation. You can't just plop historic ceremonial into a modern church with a different liturgy. Rather, you've got to understand how the ceremonial and liturgy make theology together, then carefully adapt the ceremonial with the current culture and liturgy to try and express the same theology in the new space and time.

This is a weakness because you're making it up as you go most of the time and you usually don't have a living tradition to appeal to. As a result, "Dearmerite" can often devolve into the ceremonial grab-bag of whatever the rector's whim is this week because of a new ceremonial insight.

The closest thing to an American adaptation of the PH to the American 79 BCP is the work American Sarum which describes the history and ceremonial of Christ Church Bronxville. I note with sadness that its author, the Rev. Cody Unterseher--a PhD student in liturgy at Notre Dame and an acquaintance of mine--passed away just recently.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

I have a rather tattered copy of the Parson's Handbook, and have found it to be eminently sensible in its approach to liturgy and church management etc., even though it may not be entirely suitable for modern conditions!

I think Dearmer was spot-on when he tried to ensure that an Anglican Use, loyal to the BCP, was established rather than Roman Use. The parish in which I am privileged to serve was being forced towards Rome by a former churchwarden (who tried in 2010 to get everyone to join the Ordinariate.....he failed), and it is partly by returning to the use of approved Anglican forms of worship etc. that we have managed to survive closure. We have certainly improved our street-cred among our neighbouring parishes by so doing, and I have heard of other UK parishes similarly situated which are now also eschewing the Roman Rite and obeying Canon Law!

Dearmer would have approved, I think.

Ian J.

Posted by Comper's Child (# 10580) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I have a rather tattered copy of the Parson's Handbook, and have found it to be eminently sensible in its approach to liturgy and church management etc., even though it may not be entirely suitable for modern conditions!

Yes I recall being most amused many years back by the space allotted for bicycles behind the sacristy - in that regard he was ahead of his time!

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Our priest-in-charge sometimes comes to church on his Harley-Davidson - I wonder if the Blessed Percy would have approved of that? [Ultra confused]

Ian J.

Posted by Sarum Sleuth (# 162) on :

I see no reason why riding a motorcycle is incompatible with Dearmerite views. I shall be using mine to get to the cathedral as usual tomorrow.

SS

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Our priest-in-charge sometimes comes to church on his Harley-Davidson - I wonder if the Blessed Percy would have approved of that?

Ian J.

As long as it came from a union shop, yes.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Our priest-in-charge sometimes comes to church on his Harley-Davidson - I wonder if the Blessed Percy would have approved of that?

Ian J.

Not sure about a Harley-Davidson though. I feel sure the the BP would have preferred a Triumph; he may have been happier with such an English idiosyncrasy as a 3 wheeler Morgan.

Posted by sebby (# 15147) on :

and then there's that aid to clerical organisation (and maybe liturgy) The Parson's Pocket Book.

Posted by PD (# 12436) on :

When I am training curates and acolytes I make use of a useful little book called Readiness and Decency by Fr Roland Palmer SSJE. This is a bit Romish, but gives some wiggle room so that if the celebrant is MOTR in churchmanship he can celebrate Mass and the Offices with moderate ceremonial, if he is Prayer Book Catholic he can do so with fuller ceremonial.

The advantage to R&D form my point of view is that it adapts "Western" Ceremonial to the Book of Common Prayer, not the BCP to Western Ceremonial. The latter is the tendancy of Ritual Notes I am sorry to say.

If they are really interested in the subject I do send them to read the standard works. However, most seminarians and recently ordained clergy are simply interested - at least in the jurisidiction I belong to - of not making asses of themselves at the altar and reading desk. Good liturgical formation seems to be the one thing that seems to have gone by the wayside in most seminaries.

PD

[ 06. May 2012, 14:04: Message edited by: PD ]

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0