quote:

---

Originally posted by venbede:
IIRC, since Vatican II, incense is put on without any formula, although the priest makes the sign of the cross.

---

quote:

---

Ab illo + benedicaris in cuius honore cremaberis? Amen.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fradgan:
Try this:

http://www.missionstclare.com/

---

Thanks!

I actually had that a few days ago, but forgot what it was called. I will receive a book version in the post soon, so that'll do till now.
 

---

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by 3rdFooter:
Is there a standard, common or interesting form of words for blessing incense when charging a thurible or censor?

3F

---

quote:

---

Incense do we offer unto Thee, O Christ, as an aroma of spiritual fragrance. Accepting it upon thy most heavenly altar, do Thou send down upon us the grace of thine All-Holy Spirit.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
Could anyone recommend an online source for the Revised Common Lectionary, with all services (MP, EP and Mass)? I can only find versions with the Mass readings.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
Could anyone recommend an online source for the Revised Common Lectionary, with all services (MP, EP and Mass)? I can only find versions with the Mass readings.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trisagion:

quote:

---

Ab illo + benedicaris in cuius honore cremaberis? Amen.

---

May you be blessed by ahim in whose honour you shall be burned.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trisagion:

quote:

---

Ab illo + benedicaris in cuius honore cremaberis? Amen.

---

May you be blessed by ahim in whose honour you shall be burned.

---

Isn't that the blessing of heretics?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trisagion:

quote:

---

Ab illo + benedicaris in cuius honore cremaberis? Amen.

---

May you be blessed by ahim in whose honour you shall be burned.

---

Isn't that the blessing of heretics?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amazing Grace:
Question (which may have been more suited to the Christmas thread, but I'll ask it here): how did your churches handle the timing of the Dec 25 services, if you had one or more?

Most years we have ours at 11 am to give clergy and musicians a chance to recover a little from the big midnight wing-ding. But since Christmas was Sunday this year, we had it at 10 am, standard Sunday time slot. We did cancel our 8 am service.

So, the same time as every Sunday? Or different?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amazing Grace:
Question (which may have been more suited to the Christmas thread, but I'll ask it here): how did your churches handle the timing of the Dec 25 services, if you had one or more?

Most years we have ours at 11 am to give clergy and musicians a chance to recover a little from the big midnight wing-ding. But since Christmas was Sunday this year, we had it at 10 am, standard Sunday time slot. We did cancel our 8 am service.

So, the same time as every Sunday? Or different?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by New Yorker:
There is one verse of Adeste Fideles that I do not think has been translated into English. Why not? Here is the verse and my very rough translation. If there are any Latinists out there who can correct my translation it would be appreciated.

Aeterni Parentis splendorem aeternum
Velatum sub carne videbimus:
Deum infantem pannis involutum.
Venite adoremus, venite adoremus,
venite adoremus Dominum

From the eternal Father, splendor eternal
We now see wrapped in flesh
God as an infant wrapped and clothed.
O come ... etc

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jordan32404:
Anyone know of an online recording of an Epiphany Lessons & Carols Service?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by +Chad:
Does snyone know of an online source (free) for the Lourdes Hymn (i.e. Immaculate Mary)?

I've found one which is melody only - could do with full score.

Many thankings.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Carys:
Choral Evensong on Radio 3 was lessons and carols for epiphany on 4th Jan, but unfortunately I-player only has the most recent episode, so that's no help!

Carys

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:

quote:

---

Originally posted by +Chad:
Does snyone know of an online source (free) for the Lourdes Hymn (i.e. Immaculate Mary)?

I've found one which is melody only - could do with full score.

Many thankings.

---

Right there on YouTube

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jordan32404:
Anyone know of an online recording of an Epiphany Lessons & Carols Service?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by seasick:
I think, if you correct the words, then this may be what you need.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:

quote:

---

Originally posted by seasick:
I think, if you correct the words, then this may be what you need.

---

The same author has written an excellent processional hymn for Candlemas to the same tune. Anyone interested PM me.

---

[ 16. January 2012, 20:19: Message edited by: Michael Astley ]
 

---

Posted by +Chad (# 5645) on :
 
Many thanks.

I don't believe I forgot that Christingle song. I looked at it when planning this year's service.
 

---

Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on :
 
[PDF warning]

Here's a copy too, although I remember different words.
 

---

Posted by Leaf (# 14169) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin L:
Blonde moment: Do we light the paschal candle for confirmation? I can't remember.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
The same author has written an excellent processional hymn for Candlemas to the same tune. Anyone interested PM me.

---

It's a Candlemass hymn I want it for - I'm guessing the same one!
 

---

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
This is the one we sing (link to Oremus Hymnal) - we sing it from Common Praise - no.80.
 

---

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
And this one is fun - you can see the sheet music and sing along (but they've left off the last line when you listen - I like to think it's to check up on my sight-reading skills, but think it's probably more to do with copyright and making sure you buy the full version!).

I had a bit of fun and clicked the melody and harmony versions at different times - it sounds just like our choir when cantoris and decani get out of synch.
 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chorister:
This is the one we sing (link to Oremus Hymnal) - we sing it from Common Praise - no.80.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:
Actually, "female bishops" gets about 8 million hits on google, versus one and a half for "women bishops" so it seems to be the other way round.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Are all pyxes (for taking hosts to the housebound, not the hanging variety) the same size?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hennah:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:
Actually, "female bishops" gets about 8 million hits on google, versus one and a half for "women bishops" so it seems to be the other way round.

---

"Women bishops" just seems to be the phrase used on news reports and suchlike. I wondered if there was a specific reason, but perhaps it's just the style (in the "BBC house style" sense).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Are all pyxes (for taking hosts to the housebound, not the hanging variety) the same size?

The pyx from my home communion set has gone awol and I want to buy a new one which will fit into the compartment meant for it. (As we reserve in both kinds, I use a kit that has slots for wine as well - it would be easier if I only needed a pyx which would fit into my pocket.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zacchaeus:
If you are near an ecclesiastial supplier, best to take the kit and try out which will fit in it. We have several kits in church and not all the pyxes fit in each kit.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Thanks - I HAD thought of that but rulers/tape measures have a bit of non-measuring bits at the edge and the aperture is rather pokey but I'll try it.

---

quote:

---

How does one know which liturgical colour is appropriate for a given weekday? e.g. is 1 Feb white (Epiphany season) or gold (Candlemas on 2nd)?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zacchaeus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Thanks - I HAD thought of that but rulers/tape measures have a bit of non-measuring bits at the edge and the aperture is rather pokey but I'll try it.

---

Don't forget the width and depth of the 'hole' but you also have to think about the amount of clearance needed for the pyx lids etc when the box shuts.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cheesymarzipan:
Question posed by a friend:

quote:

---

How does one know which liturgical colour is appropriate for a given weekday? e.g. is 1 Feb white (Epiphany season) or gold (Candlemas on 2nd)?

---

I would think that it's the same season until the change day, or am I wrong?

---

quote:

---

The liturgical color appropriate for the day is indicated, when the color is green, red or purple, by the color of the numeral against a light grey background. When the liturgical color is white, the numeral is black against a white background.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cheesymarzipan:
Question posed by a friend:

quote:

---

How does one know which liturgical colour is appropriate for a given weekday? e.g. is 1 Feb white (Epiphany season) or gold (Candlemas on 2nd)?

---

I would think that it's the same season until the change day, or am I wrong?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zacchaeus:
I seriously knew somebody who had a tuppaware container with a cross glued onto it for carrying the wafers around.....

It was a poor church in a poor area and nobody ever quite had the exprobitant price needed, to buy a home communion set..

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
It is a shame that SPCK has closed. I am not due to visit London until May and can't wait until then - unless I put wafers in an envelope and prepare everything with my back to the recipient.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Carys:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
It is a shame that SPCK has closed. I am not due to visit London until May and can't wait until then - unless I put wafers in an envelope and prepare everything with my back to the recipient.

---

Come to Cardiff. Churches Together Bookshop in Windsor Place have at least some pyxes and would be very helpful if you brought the kit with you. It's only 50 mins by train and it's a nice place to visit.

Alternatively would plasticine/play dough help? Form it to a size that fits the hole and measure that.

Carys

[ETA paragraph]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cheesymarzipan:
Question posed by a friend:

quote:

---

How does one know which liturgical colour is appropriate for a given weekday? e.g. is 1 Feb white (Epiphany season) or gold (Candlemas on 2nd)?

---

I would think that it's the same season until the change day, or am I wrong?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Quick question/ alert warning (though too late for this year).

Did anybody using the Mowbray's edition of the RCL (NRSV), and using the readings for Epiphany 4 today rather than Candlemas, get tripped up as I was by the glaring typo in the Gospel? v21 says: 'John entered the synagogue and taught', when clearly Jesus is meant?

I got to that point, apologised, and started again! The mistake is in the large lectern edition of the Gospels, and also in the pew edition. It is nearly 15 years since it was published and it's surprising nobody in that church at least has noticed... maybe Epiphany 4 has cropped up less than the 5 times one might expect.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Quick question/ alert warning (though too late for this year).

Did anybody using the Mowbray's edition of the RCL (NRSV), and using the readings for Epiphany 4 today rather than Candlemas, get tripped up as I was by the glaring typo in the Gospel? v21 says: 'John entered the synagogue and taught', when clearly Jesus is meant?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:
A question to those with experience of Byzantine custom:

In Vespers of Holy Saturday with the Burial Service of the Lord (served on the afternoon of Great and Holy Friday), there is no mention of candles held by the people in any rubric that I can find for the earlier part of the service. Then, all of a sudden, when the burial shroud is carried from the altar in procession, the people are mentioned as having lighted candles in their hands. Obviously, there is an expectation that, at some point prior to this, there will be a distribution and lighting of candles but this is not mentioned.

Last year, we tried to give out lighted candles during the Aposticha, (immediately prior to the shroud being brought out) but this was messy and distracting. The logical sequence, to my way of thinking, is for people to be given candles as they arrive and for these to be lit during the Phos Hilaron by simply passing the light among the people. Is there an established practice which, while not enshrined in rubrics, is widespread and customary, or is it ok to just do what seems convenient?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by simwel:
When is it normal to “veil” the crosses in Church? For the whole of Lent i.e. after Ash Wednesday or just for holy Week after Palm Sunday

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by simwel:
When is it normal to “veil” the crosses in Church? For the whole of Lent i.e. after Ash Wednesday or just for holy Week after Palm Sunday

---

It depends on the custom followed in your church. The Roman rubrics call for veiling, I believe, from Lent V onwards while Sarum rubrics call for veiling from the beginning of Lent. Customs - even traditional ones - vary. In either tradition, my experience is that real veils are used, and not "veils".

Silent Acolyte, thank you. Though I wonder whether we may have a crossed wire. I'm unfamiliar with psalm 118 at this service. We have psalm 103 at the beginning then there is no kathisma appointed. Not to worry. Having now looked properly at the service I realise that lighting the candles at the Phos Hilaron would leave too long a time until the Burial, thus detaching the two events in the minds of the people. The Song of Symeon seems a better time. Then we can get them on their knees when the Burial Shroud cones out.
 

---

Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:
In Vespers of Holy Saturday with the Burial Service of the Lord (served on the afternoon of Great and Holy Friday), there is no mention of candles held by the people in any rubric that I can find for the earlier part of the service. Then, all of a sudden, when the burial shroud is carried from the altar in procession, the people are mentioned as having lighted candles in their hands. Obviously, there is an expectation that, at some point prior to this, there will be a distribution and lighting of candles but this is not mentioned.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:
Silent Acolyte, thank you. Though I wonder whether we may have a crossed wire. I'm unfamiliar with psalm 118 at this service.

---

• A large number of Old Testament readings tracing the salvation history of mankind. Many of the readings are the same in east and west.
• A change from dark vestments and hangings to light ones during the course of the service, as in the west (ignoring the modern reforms).
• Baptism. Baptisms were performed during this Liturgy in olden days and there has been something of a return to that in some places. Even in parishes where this is not done, the Trisagion is still replaced by "As many as have been baptised into Christ have put on Christ: Allelulia!" as a remnant of former practice. Of course, baptism is still done at this point in the west.
• Culmination in the first Eucharistic celebration of the Resurrection.

quote:

---

Originally posted by simwel:
When is it normal to “veil” the crosses in Church? For the whole of Lent i.e. after Ash Wednesday or just for holy Week after Palm Sunday

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Post Vatican 2, no veiling except for anything that cannot be removed after the Maundy Thursday mass of the last supper [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by simwel:
When is it normal to “veil” the crosses in Church? For the whole of Lent i.e. after Ash Wednesday or just for holy Week after Palm Sunday

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jordan32404:
Isn't the "veiling" the so-called Lenten Array mentioned by Dearmer?

---

It's one way to do it. There is a section about halfway down this page which discusses veiling traditions. The "Sarum (English Use)" paragraph speaks to your question. My church has "Lenten Array" vestments (an off-white rough linen trimmed in deep crimson and black) but we don't veil anything. Well, there's a white/homespun drape placed on the cross that's hung over the altar. But nothing covered up.
 

---

Posted by New Yorker (# 9898) on :
 
I hope this qualifies as a liturgical question!


Background:
I saw in the news that Archbishop Dolan, as part of the process elevating him to the cardinalate will preach a sermon to the pope and other cardinals and then answer questions from them - all in Italian. I assume he speaks the langugage having lived there.

Question:
Do all new cardinals have to preach and answer questions in Italian? I would not think so.
 

---

Posted by malik3000 (# 11437) on :
 
Perhaps they would employ a translator?
 

---

Posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop (# 10745) on :
 
But it is Latin and not Italian that is the official language of the Church!

Though from a selfish point of view, I like the Italian language, but that is neither here nor there.
 

---

Posted by malik3000 (# 11437) on :
 
Nonetheless, i think that, for practical purposes, Italian is the working language of Vatican City. The main edition of L'Osservatore Romano (sp?) the official Vatican daily, is in Italian (although it also appears in other languages on a weekly basis I believe)

Official documents, of course, like encyclicals, are published in Latin.

[ 15. February 2012, 18:25: Message edited by: malik3000 ]
 

---

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :
 
What's all this business about bridal chambers?

I am just setting the Holy Saturday canon to music in preparation for the Midnight Office at the Paschal Vigil, and have been reminded of the clause (speaking of Jonah as a type of Christ) "...he burst forth from the beast as from a bridal chamber".

I know about Christ as the bridegroom and understand that a bridegroom figure from before the Incarnation may be seen to typify Christ in some way; I also see how Jonah bursting forth from the whale (yes, I know - let's not go there) is taken as a foreshadowing of Christ bursting forth from the tomb. I just don't see how someone popping out of a sea monster is analogous to a bridegroom. Is there something about the understanding of marriage ceremonies and symbolism in ancient times that is now lost?

I think there are similar analogies in other hymns. Is anybody able to shed light on this?
 

---

Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on :
 
Each day before my morning devotions I pray the beautiful Psalm XIX ('The Heavens declare the Glory of God: and the firmament showeth forth His handiwork'). It includes the line, pertaining to the sun, 'He hath come forth as a bridegroom from his chamber: and rejoiceth as a giant to run his course'. I have always taken this to mean that the exit of the newlywed man on 'the morning after' - no doubt ready for his breakfast - was considered a particularly celebratory moment!

Now, this is the kind of thing I'd get rather embarrassed about in our current culture but I suspect things might have been rather different back then. More... earthy

With respect to specific Biblical references, you could consider starting a thread in Kerygmania perhaps?
 

---

Posted by Alogon (# 5513) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
Psalm XIX...'He hath come forth as a bridegroom from his chamber: and rejoiceth as a giant to run his course'.

---

quote:

---

Come, let us drink, not miraculous water drawn forth from a barren stone, but a new drink from the fount of incorruption, springing from the tomb of Christ, in Whom we are established.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Next week is Lent and I loathe replacing the Te Deum with the Benedicite for Morning Prayer because to me, this canticle is not suitably penitential. I am fond of the Prayer of Manasseh in the US Book of Common Prayer. Is there a Cranmerian version of this Prayer? Or am I stuck using the KJV version of it?

---

Is the Benedicte to replace the Te Deum in Lent according to the 1662 BCP?
 

---

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
In answer to jordan: In the BCP, at morning prayer, the Benedicite is given as an alternative canticle to the Te Deum, as is the Jubilate Deo to the Benedictus (As is, at evening prayer, the Cantate Domino an alternative to the Magnificat and the Deus Misereatur to the Nunc Dimittis.) But it doesn't specifically say that should happen in Lent - this I think (correct me if I'm wrong) has developed as a tradition - in my old church, where we always sang Mattins as well as Evensong, the tradition was that we should sing the alternative canticles in Advent and Lent. It is certainly good to have a little variety from time to time. According to the BCP, the only written stipulation is that the Venite is replaced by an alternative anthem on Easter Day and that the alternative canticles which are versions of the psalms are not used on the days when this is already the psalm of the day.

If you don't find the Benedicite penitential enough, you could always keep the Te Deum during Lent and, instead of individual prayers, use the Litany - which is extremely 'have mercy upon us miserable sinners' penitential.
 

---

Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on :
 
The reason for this slightly odd custom seems to be that the Te Deum is used at the end of Mattins/Vigils/Office of Readings in the Roman Catholic Breviary on any day when the Gloria in Excelsis is used in the Mass. (which is where Cranmer's Morning Prayer took it from - the old Sarum Mattins, with Lauds contributing the Benedictus). Hence, it is used on most Sundays but not on the Sundays in Lent.

This led certain Anglicans to adopt the practice of dropping the Te Deum from Mattins when said or sung during Lent. As the canticle now comes in the middle of the Office rather than the end one can hardly just omit it, so as the Benedicite is provided as an alternative this is used instead. This is despite the fact that, as jordan notes, it is not particularly Lenten or penitential. It just *isn't* the Te Deum!

A curious mangling of traditions, and not one with any obvious answer, especially as the 1662 BCP doesn't drop the Gloria in Excelsis from the Holy Communion during Lent anyway!
 

---

Posted by Anglican_Brat (# 12349) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
The reason for this slightly odd custom seems to be that the Te Deum is used at the end of Mattins/Vigils/Office of Readings in the Roman Catholic Breviary on any day when the Gloria in Excelsis is used in the Mass. (which is where Cranmer's Morning Prayer took it from - the old Sarum Mattins, with Lauds contributing the Benedictus). Hence, it is used on most Sundays but not on the Sundays in Lent.

This led certain Anglicans to adopt the practice of dropping the Te Deum from Mattins when said or sung during Lent. As the canticle now comes in the middle of the Office rather than the end one can hardly just omit it, so as the Benedicite is provided as an alternative this is used instead. This is despite the fact that, as jordan notes, it is not particularly Lenten or penitential. It just *isn't* the Te Deum!

A curious mangling of traditions, and not one with any obvious answer, especially as the 1662 BCP doesn't drop the Gloria in Excelsis from the Holy Communion during Lent anyway!

---

Another alternative I have heard is to use the
Salvator Mundi

In my Vancouver parish, the Salvator Mundi is used during Passiontide. Alas neither the Salvator Mundi or the Prayer of Manasseh is in the Canadian Book of Alternative Services.

The Benedicite is IMHO suitable for use as a Processional hymn for either Harvest Thanksgiving or Francistide.
 

---

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :
 
Unless it is critical to be using a version in C16 English, this (about a third of the way down the page) is the selection from the Prayer of Manasseh that the CofE provides for daily prayer in Lent.
 

---

Posted by PD (# 12436) on :
 
Ps. 51 was given as an alternative to both the Te Deum and Benedicite in the Deposited Book. This also is the fixed psalm in Lauds II in the Pius X Breviary.

PD
 

---

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :
 
So, this came up today.

At my local, the priest toddles down the line handing out the bread, and the LEMmings follow behind with the chalice. The priest bestows blessings on kids who don't partake.

What should the LEMmings do when they get to these kidlets?
 

---

Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
A chalice bearer would breeze blissfully past; a host minister would pray for God to bless them.
 

---

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:
A chalice bearer would breeze blissfully past; a host minister would pray for God to bless them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
Each day before my morning devotions I pray the beautiful Psalm XIX ('The Heavens declare the Glory of God: and the firmament showeth forth His handiwork'). It includes the line, pertaining to the sun, 'He hath come forth as a bridegroom from his chamber: and rejoiceth as a giant to run his course'. I have always taken this to mean that the exit of the newlywed man on 'the morning after' - no doubt ready for his breakfast - was considered a particularly celebratory moment!

---

Interesting; I come across this one (psalm 18 in Catholic use) occasionally as I pray the Breviary and the imagery has always appealed to me. I had always taken it as being the bridegroom hurrying from his chamber to his betrothal, though!
 

---

Posted by Leaf (# 14169) on :
 
This question arose at my shack yesterday, after Ash Wednesday service: When is it appropriate to wipe the ashen cross off your forehead?

Quite a few people mentioned that another parishioner (who was not present) had told them that the correct thing to do is to remove the cross before you leave the church. He'd told them that the early Christians had to do so for fear of persecution. I suspect said parishioner was making sh*t up.

Wikipedia agrees with what I'd thought: one leaves the cross on until it wears off on its own. (Section Ritual, second sentence)

But does anyone here have something authoritative that's a little less Wiki and a little more GIRMy?

Thanking you in advance.
 

---

Posted by jordan32404 (# 15833) on :
 
The 1979 BCP lists Ash Wednesday and Good Friday as official fasts and then says the following:

quote:

---

The following days are observed by special acts of discipline and
self-denial:

Ash Wednesday and the other weekdays of Lent and of Holy Week,
except the feast of the Annunciation.

Good Friday and all other Fridays of the year, in commemoration of the
Lord's crucifixion, except for Fridays in the Christmas and Easter
seasons, and any Feasts of our Lord which occur on a Friday.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jordan32404:
The 1979 BCP lists Ash Wednesday and Good Friday as official fasts and then says the following:

quote:

---

The following days are observed by special acts of discipline and
self-denial:

Ash Wednesday and the other weekdays of Lent and of Holy Week,
except the feast of the Annunciation.

Good Friday and all other Fridays of the year, in commemoration of the
Lord's crucifixion, except for Fridays in the Christmas and Easter
seasons, and any Feasts of our Lord which occur on a Friday.

---

So the weekdays of Lent and the Fridays of Lent are like Ash Wednesday and Good Friday but not necessarily fasts?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
So, this came up today.

At my local, the priest toddles down the line handing out the bread, and the LEMmings follow behind with the chalice. The priest bestows blessings on kids who don't partake.

What should the LEMmings do when they get to these kidlets?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
So, this came up today.

At my local, the priest toddles down the line handing out the bread, and the LEMmings follow behind with the chalice. The priest bestows blessings on kids who don't partake.

What should the LEMmings do when they get to these kidlets?

---

This LEMming looks 'em right in the eye and says, "The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was shed for thee preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life: drink this in remembrance that Christ's Blood was shed for thee and be thankful."

Occasionally, I'll get a child who plaintively says, "I want some, too."

To which I think to myself, "So right that you should; and, who dares put the fence between you and the Mysteries?!" It's one of those times when I feel I've done my job properly.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leaf:
This question arose at my shack yesterday, after Ash Wednesday service: When is it appropriate to wipe the ashen cross off your forehead?

Quite a few people mentioned that another parishioner (who was not present) had told them that the correct thing to do is to remove the cross before you leave the church. He'd told them that the early Christians had to do so for fear of persecution. I suspect said parishioner was making sh*t up.

Wikipedia agrees with what I'd thought: one leaves the cross on until it wears off on its own. (Section Ritual, second sentence)

But does anyone here have something authoritative that's a little less Wiki and a little more GIRMy?

Thanking you in advance.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leaf:
This question arose at my shack yesterday, after Ash Wednesday service: When is it appropriate to wipe the ashen cross off your forehead?

Quite a few people mentioned that another parishioner (who was not present) had told them that the correct thing to do is to remove the cross before you leave the church. He'd told them that the early Christians had to do so for fear of persecution. I suspect said parishioner was making sh*t up.

Thanking you in advance.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Last night, we were asked to wipe off each others' ash during the peace as a sign of reconciliation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thurible:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Last night, we were asked to wipe off each others' ash during the peace as a sign of reconciliation.

---

Sounds ghastly. What about those who didn't want potential strangers stroking their foreheads, whilst no doubt looking a combination of intense and embarrassed?

Thurible

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thurible:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Last night, we were asked to wipe off each others' ash during the peace as a sign of reconciliation.

---

Sounds ghastly. What about those who didn't want potential strangers stroking their foreheads, whilst no doubt looking a combination of intense and embarrassed?

Thurible

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:
Just be grateful that you didn't misread "ash".

---

Quotes file!
 

---

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leaf:
This question arose at my shack yesterday, after Ash Wednesday service: When is it appropriate to wipe the ashen cross off your forehead?

---

quote:

---

If you are proud that you came here today, if you think anyone is going to be impressed, go wash your forehead as soon as the service is over. Don’t worry it still counts. Consider yourself reminded and move on. If you want to make sure that people know you have fulfilled your religious duty- go wash your face.

On the other hand if you are kind of embarrassed by the thought of going out in the world with a weird dirt smudge on your face, leave it. A little humility will do you good. Its okay, not being clean won’t kill you. Your friends might ask and this is a great chance to tell the truth.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
At my local, the priest toddles down the line handing out the bread, and the LEMmings follow behind with the chalice. The priest bestows blessings on kids who don't partake.

What should the LEMmings do when they get to these kidlets?

---

This LEMming looks 'em right in the eye and says, "The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was shed for thee preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life: drink this in remembrance that Christ's Blood was shed for thee and be thankful."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by georgiaboy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leaf:
This question arose at my shack yesterday, after Ash Wednesday service: When is it appropriate to wipe the ashen cross off your forehead?

Quite a few people mentioned that another parishioner (who was not present) had told them that the correct thing to do is to remove the cross before you leave the church. He'd told them that the early Christians had to do so for fear of persecution. I suspect said parishioner was making sh*t up.

Thanking you in advance.

---

Yes, that is in fact 'made up,' as the practice of ashing the faithful dates from IIRC the 12th century, well after the times of persecution.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:
A chalice bearer would breeze blissfully past; a host minister would pray for God to bless them.

---

See, that's what I thought, but there was some concern the kids would feel 'left out' or something.

Most of 'em are doing backflips on the altar rail by that time, anyway.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by venbede:
This "going up for a blessing" thing is odd isn't it, when you think of it?

Perhaps a separate thread? 

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:
A chalice bearer would breeze blissfully past; a host minister would pray for God to bless them.

---

See, that's what I thought, but there was some concern the kids would feel 'left out' or something.

Most of 'em are doing backflips on the altar rail by that time, anyway.

---

It's funny--I've known grown-ups feel left out when their kids get a blessing and they 'only' receive the sacrament. Kids are meant to think 'I want some of that!' and prepare accordingly.

Re. the church that has people wipe off each other's ash 'as a sign of reconciliation': the ash is a sign of our mortality. Wiping each other's ash off misunderstands this--as well as being icky.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
So, this came up today.

At my local, the priest toddles down the line handing out the bread, and the LEMmings follow behind with the chalice. The priest bestows blessings on kids who don't partake.

What should the LEMmings do when they get to these kidlets?

---

This LEMming looks 'em right in the eye and says, "The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was shed for thee preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life: drink this in remembrance that Christ's Blood was shed for thee and be thankful."

Occasionally, I'll get a child who plaintively says, "I want some, too."

To which I think to myself, "So right that you should; and, who dares put the fence between you and the Mysteries?!" It's one of those times when I feel I've done my job properly.

---

quote:

---

So, you say this to the kids who haven't had the BoOLJC, and if so, why?

---

Yes, that's what I do.

They have schlepped up from the pews; they are looking right at the chalice; they are looking right at me.

It seems only hospitable to tell 'em what it is; to tell 'em what it's for. To tell 'em why they should want it.

And, it's a hook. An evangelical hook. I know I've landed a fish when one of them, no doubt stirred by the Holy Spirit, utters the plaint, "I want some, too!"

Let me repeat myself, who dares to forbid these little ones.
 

---

Posted by Amos (# 44) on :
 
Richard Giles! Figures.
 

---

Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
I'm looking for the list of Psalms and Psalm verses that are omitted in the New Zealand Prayer Book.

I've trawled every which way with google, but I'm coming up empty.

Is there anybody here who can help?

---

quote:

---

Some omissions have been made on the grounds that we are not making a new translation of the Book of Psalms, but providing psalms suitable for Christian worship. Some verse of the psalms are not suitable for use in the corporate worship of the church.

The passages omitted are:

18:38-43; 21:8-12; 24:4,5; 35:4-8; 54:5,7;
55:16; 58 in toto; 59:5,11-13; 68:21-23; 69:24-30;
79:10, 12; 83 in toto; 101:6,9; 106:34; 109:5-19;
110:5-7; 137:7-9; 139:19-22; 140:9-11; 141:7, 8;
143:13; 149:7-9

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Being that today is the Commemoration of George Herbert, Priest and Poet:

In the poem "King of Glory, King of Peace", sung as a hymn, what does "cream of my heart" refer to?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Morlader:
Annunciation is transfered to March 26th this year as 25th is a Lent Sunday. Is it "right" to sing "Glory be to God on high" at Mass on that Feast?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Being that today is the Commemoration of George Herbert, Priest and Poet:

In the poem "King of Glory, King of Peace", sung as a hymn, what does "cream of my heart" refer to?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thurible:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Last night, we were asked to wipe off each others' ash during the peace as a sign of reconciliation.

---

Sounds ghastly. What about those who didn't want potential strangers stroking their foreheads, whilst no doubt looking a combination of intense and embarrassed?

Thurible

---

Just be grateful that you didn't misread "ash".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin L:
If one does not already genuflect there regularly.
(Sorry, I got caught up in the momentum)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Basilica:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Morlader:
Annunciation is transfered to March 26th this year as 25th is a Lent Sunday. Is it "right" to sing "Glory be to God on high" at Mass on that Feast?

---

Furthermore, is it correct to say the Te Deum at morning prayer? The psalms set are 111 and 113, which include the a-word. Should that be omitted or spoken?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Morlader:
Annunciation is transfered to March 26th this year as 25th is a Lent Sunday. Is it "right" to sing "Glory be to God on high" at Mass on that Feast?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thurible:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
Last night, we were asked to wipe off each others' ash during the peace as a sign of reconciliation.

---

Sounds ghastly. What about those who didn't want potential strangers stroking their foreheads, whilst no doubt looking a combination of intense and embarrassed?

Thurible

---

Just be grateful that you didn't misread "ash".

---

And if you do misread it, then maybe we have an idea for Maundy Thursday to replace foot-washing.

---

You naughty, naughty folks!
 

---

Posted by New Yorker (# 9898) on :
 
Next week there is to be a sung Dominican Rite Mass at a parish near me. Briefly, how is a Dominican Rite Mass different from the standard Roman Rite Mass?
 

---

Posted by acton bell (# 15576) on :
 
Is the Dominican rite mass being celebrated in NYC? If so, when? I think I would like to attend, as it is only something I have ever read about.

The Wikipedia page is quite good on the subject
 

---

Posted by New Yorker (# 9898) on :
 
Dominican Rite Missa Cantata
Wednesday, 7 March 2012
6:30 p.m.
Church of St. Vincent Ferrer
Lexington Avenue at 66th Street

See here.
 

---

Posted by malik3000 (# 11437) on :
 
Is this the mass you'll be going to? Tell us how it goes.

What Wiipedia has

Candlemas in the Dominican rite
 

---

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

quote:

---

Originally posted by New Yorker:
Dominican Rite Missa Cantata
Wednesday, 7 March 2012
6:30 p.m.
Church of St. Vincent Ferrer
Lexington Avenue at 66th Street

See here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jordan32404:
I went to a local RC parish for a Mass this evening. The priest did not elevate the host or chalice at the consecration, is this normal?

---

quote:

---

The priest shows the consecrated bread to the people (OM 89, 102, 110, 119). He shows the bread; he need not lift it high in elevation. Even before the Council the priest was only instructed to show the bread, not to elevate it. But with his back to the people, the only way he could show it was to elevate it. Today the bread need not be lifted so high. By choosing a medium position for the elements, the priest reserves their elevation for the conclusion of the Eucharistic Prayer.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jordan32404:
I went to a local RC parish for a Mass this evening. The priest did not elevate the host or chalice at the consecration, is this normal?

---

To put it mildly - NO! GIRM says elevate and genuflect at the major elevations. However, a lot of priests donot seem to take GIRM seriously.



PD
 

---

Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
You're right about genuflection. I can see no basis in the texts, though, for elevating after the words of institution rather than simply showing. The time for elevating is the final doxology. Could you cite the passage in the GIRM that you were thinking of?
 

---

Posted by Oferyas (# 14031) on :
 
... but the 'lesser elevation' at the end of the Eucharistic Prayer is of the paten/ciborium, rather than of just the bread that is on/in it, surely?

[ 05. March 2012, 11:29: Message edited by: Oferyas ]
 

---

Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 
The modern rite knows no such terms as minor / major elevation. That's what's causing all of this conclusion. In the elevation during the final doxolgy, you are correct that the paten and a chalice are elevated (OM 98, 106, 114, 123; GIRM 151). Before the Council, a host was elevated at this point. Now, it is the paten.
 

---

Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by St.Silas the carter:

quote:

---

Originally posted by New Yorker:
Dominican Rite Missa Cantata
Wednesday, 7 March 2012
6:30 p.m.
Church of St. Vincent Ferrer
Lexington Avenue at 66th Street

---

I'm hoping to make the trip up to attend this.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:
The modern rite knows no such terms as minor / major elevation. That's what's causing all of this conclusion. In the elevation during the final doxolgy, you are correct that the paten and a chalice are elevated (OM 98, 106, 114, 123; GIRM 151). Before the Council, a host was elevated at this point. Now, it is the paten.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by New Yorker:
So the "Reconciliation Room" of the parish I often stop by for confession is now painted a stunning shade of red: walls and ceiling. I was startled when I went in. Formerly it was white. Any liturgical or other reason a reconciliation room would be painted red?

---

Perhaps it is painted red and white in alternate years in order to make a scriptural point.
 

---

Posted by Rosa Gallica officinalis (# 3886) on :
 
perhaps it's magic paint that changes to white when the priest pronounces absolution.
 

---

Posted by New Yorker (# 9898) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rosa Gallica officinalis:
perhaps it's magic paint that changes to white when the priest pronounces absolution.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jordan32404:
In the 1979 BCP, is it allowed to substitute another daily lectionary for the one provided in the BCP? I'm thinking of the 1662 Lectionary which I like because of the amount of Scripture covered.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jordan32404:
Two, I've heard that the 1928 BCP can be authorized for use in parish worship. How does one go about getting this done? (I'm not a priest but I do lead Morning Prayer and I'd like to see if that's a possibility).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jordan32404:
Two questions...

In the 1979 BCP, is it allowed to substitute another daily lectionary for the one provided in the BCP? I'm thinking of the 1662 Lectionary which I like because of the amount of Scripture covered.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by acton bell:
I was wondering about the Votive Office of the Dead. Would the VOD replace regular morning and evening prayer or said as an addition to? What is its current status? Is it still supposed to be said on the Mondays in Lent?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by acton bell:
I got the Mondays in Lent (and Advent) from the Wikipedia entry, under the Practice and Obligation subheading. This claim isn't supported with a citation, so I have no idea if it is correct or no.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by acton bell:
I was wondering about the Votive Office of the Dead. Would the VOD replace regular morning and evening prayer or said as an addition to? What is its current status? Is it still supposed to be said on the Mondays in Lent?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chorister:
Unless you have a bad leak in the church roof, academic hoods are worn by the choir in order to carry heavy books belonging to the person behind you in the procession. Or so I always tell the person in front of me.

---

A very good point Chorister, although hardly worth saying three times?
 

---

Posted by Manipled Mutineer (# 11514) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chorister:
Unless you have a bad leak in the church roof, academic hoods are worn by the choir in order to carry heavy books belonging to the person behind you in the procession. Or so I always tell the person in front of me.

---

A very good point Chorister, although hardly worth saying three times?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Is it acceptable to observe Lent V and the Annunciation on the same day (March 25th)?

Lent V supplants Annunciation for the Sunday morning, but if one transfers Annunciation to the Monday, then it seems acceptable to celebrate it on the Sunday evening as the Vigil.

---

NO! Lent V is a Greater Sunday and displaces Annunciation's I Vespers or I Evensong. So saith Howard Galley (A Prayer Book Office), and some others. But it depends on which authority you're bound to obey.
 

---

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oblatus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Is it acceptable to observe Lent V and the Annunciation on the same day (March 25th)?

Lent V supplants Annunciation for the Sunday morning, but if one transfers Annunciation to the Monday, then it seems acceptable to celebrate it on the Sunday evening as the Vigil.

---

NO! Lent V is a Greater Sunday and displaces Annunciation's I Vespers or I Evensong. So saith Howard Galley (A Prayer Book Office), and some others. But it depends on which authority you're bound to obey.

---

Actually, I think where you are, you would consult the Ordo for your diocese/archdiocese, which I think says the same thing and indicates 2nd Vespers of the Sunday rather than 1st Vespers of the Annunciation. But that Ordo is where the answer is.
 

---

Posted by Evangeline (# 7002) on :
 
Is it traditional that baptisms are not performed during Lent? I thought this was the case but we had a strange situation today at my (anglo-catholic) church where a priest from another diocese visited, gave the sermon and then after the mass the visiting priest baptised his grandchild. Might the fact the baptism was done after the service be because it is Lent, or another reason?
 

---

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :
 
Baptism is permissible at any time. However since Lent is (probably) in origin preparation for baptism at Easter, it is not totally appropriate during that season.


Maybe having the baptism outside mass is recognizing that aspect. Or maybe not. You'd have to ask.

[ 25. March 2012, 06:51: Message edited by: venbede ]
 

---

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :
 
Indeed. There is never a time when it is improper to bring somebody into the Church. While Easter is the most appropriate time, as the culmination of the lenten preparation, even the strictest observers of Lent will not refuse baptism if there is pastoral warrant.

My own baptism was on one of the pre-lenten Sundays, for pastoral reasons. It worked out well as it ended up being the Sunday of the Prodigal Son.
 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 
Prodigal? Toi?
Anyway it worked and it's bearing fruit!
 

---

Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evangeline:
Is it traditional that baptisms are not performed during Lent? I thought this was the case but we had a strange situation today at my (anglo-catholic) church where a priest from another diocese visited, gave the sermon and then after the mass the visiting priest baptised his grandchild. Might the fact the baptism was done after the service be because it is Lent, or another reason?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Prodigal? Toi?
Anyway it worked and it's bearing fruit!

---

You're very kind, Angloid.

Sour fruit occasionally, though.

Still looking forward to your visit.
 

---

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Re The Annunciation, we are transferring its observance to tomorrow (as per Common Worship), when I anticipate a vast crowd of the faithful at Morning Prayer.......

....but we are also celebrating The Annunciation next Saturday, having brought our monthly Mass of Our Lady of Walsingham Mass a week early,so as not to clash with Holy Saturday......we shall have our customary Solemn Low Mass with Hymns and Incense......

Ian J.
 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:
The Annunciation is the 26th this year. Mary gets to be pregnant for one less day.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:
The Annunciation is the 26th this year. Mary gets to be pregnant for one less day.

---

No - we should transfer Christmas Day to Dec 26

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jordan32404:
This might have been asked/answered before but where does Prayer II in the 1979 BCP Rite I Eucharist come from?

---

From the typewriters (then, now computers) of those liturgy committee-types--you know the kind--those who like to claim that a text with which they have tinkered is still "substantially the same," but in reality, they are never truly satisfied unless they have gone in and produced at least some alterations (just to leave their mark, one suspects).
 

---

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by jordan32404:
This might have been asked/answered before but where does Prayer II in the 1979 BCP Rite I Eucharist come from?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oblatus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Is it acceptable to observe Lent V and the Annunciation on the same day (March 25th)?

Lent V supplants Annunciation for the Sunday morning, but if one transfers Annunciation to the Monday, then it seems acceptable to celebrate it on the Sunday evening as the Vigil.

---

NO! Lent V is a Greater Sunday and displaces Annunciation's I Vespers or I Evensong. So saith Howard Galley (A Prayer Book Office), and some others. But it depends on which authority you're bound to obey.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oblatus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by jordan32404:
This might have been asked/answered before but where does Prayer II in the 1979 BCP Rite I Eucharist come from?

---

Marion Hatchett writes that Prayer II "is a revised version of Prayer I, based on a draft by the Very Rev. Dr. Robert H. Greenfield."

Commentary on the American Prayer Book

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:
The Annunciation is the 26th this year. Mary gets to be pregnant for one less day.

---

No - we should transfer Christmas Day to Dec 26

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spike:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:
The Annunciation is the 26th this year. Mary gets to be pregnant for one less day.

---

No - we should transfer Christmas Day to Dec 26

---

Surely we should have done that last year as Christmas Day fell on a Sunday!

---

Not so, my spikey friend.

In the western tradition, the Sundays of Lent are privileged in a way that that they may not be superseded even by such a feast as the Annunciation. That is, to maintain the integrity of the season, the nth Sunday in Lent never disappears, not even to make way for a major feast. The same is true of Advent. However, the Sunday on which Christmas fell last year (in the New Calendar) is not so privileged, and there is no reason not to celebrate a feast on such a Sunday.

[ 26. March 2012, 18:08: Message edited by: Michael Astley ]
 

---

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :
 
Russian Orthodox Christians (and followers of the Julian calendar generally) are going to be in the interesting position of celebrating the Annunciation and the Raising of Lazarus on the same day, this year.
 

---

Posted by Manipled Mutineer (# 11514) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oblatus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Is it acceptable to observe Lent V and the Annunciation on the same day (March 25th)?

Lent V supplants Annunciation for the Sunday morning, but if one transfers Annunciation to the Monday, then it seems acceptable to celebrate it on the Sunday evening as the Vigil.

---

NO! Lent V is a Greater Sunday and displaces Annunciation's I Vespers or I Evensong. So saith Howard Galley (A Prayer Book Office), and some others. But it depends on which authority you're bound to obey.

---

I think with the older BCP useage the bicycle chains and flick knives would have come out as there is no clear ruling in the Rubrics as to whether the second Evensong of a Greater Sunday, or the first EP of a First Class feast takes precedence.

PD

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spike:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:
The Annunciation is the 26th this year. Mary gets to be pregnant for one less day.

---

No - we should transfer Christmas Day to Dec 26

---

Surely we should have done that last year as Christmas Day fell on a Sunday!

---

Not so, my spikey friend.

In the western tradition, the Sundays of Lent are privileged in a way that that they may not be superseded even by such a feast as the Annunciation. That is, to maintain the integrity of the season, the nth Sunday in Lent never disappears, not even to make way for a major feast. The same is true of Advent. However, the Sunday on which Christmas fell last year (in the New Calendar) is not so privileged, and there is no reason not to celebrate a feast on such a Sunday.

---

quote:

---

desirable that on some occasions ... the Angelus be solemnly recited by singing the Ave Maria, proclaiming the Gospel of the Annunciation and by the ringing of bells

---

quote:

---

The recitation of the Regina Coeli could sometimes take a solemn form by singing the antiphon and proclaiming the Gospel of the Resurrection

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
Practice varies with location, as all RC parishes are required to end the Vigil at midnight.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wm Dewy:
Do you properly stand or sit for psalms and canticles? Especially at Tenebrae and the readings at the Easter Vigil?

I know that generally, we sit for the psalm at Mass and we stand for a canticle at the Daily Office, but what about when a canticle is used as the psalm response to an OT lesson like Cantemus Domino at the Vigil? Or the Magnificat at Annunciation?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by St. Punk the Pious:
For the canticles, you stand always.

---

quote:

---

This may not be the right place to ask - maybe I should ask on random questions - but I'm curious about veiling practices. What do you veil, with what, and when? (And any other details you feel like sharing.)

What we veil seems to vary from year to year. It seems we have to re-think it every year, and by "we" I mean the vergers. We have SO many objects of statuary, art, and icons, as well as crosses and crucifixes, it's hard to find a "rule" for what to veil and what not to veil.

We veil in unbleached linen for Holy Week, and switch to black after the Maundy Thursday service (after the church has closed so we can turn the lights back on! - one year we had people keeping vigil at the Altar of Repose, so we couldn't turn on the lights, and let me tell you trying to place a slippery veil on a larger-than-life crucifix while standing on a ladder in the dark is no fun at all).

I would love to know what sorts of "rules" there are for what to veil (i.e., why). My understanding is that it goes back to some practice of denying ourselves the consolations of the images and crosses; but when you can't veil murals and stained glass images, what makes sense to veil? Especially in a cathedral where there are, for lack of a better word, museum pieces (bust of our first bishop; non-religious or abstract works of art, things to do with the cathedral's and the local history, etc.).

---

quote:

---

There is no statuary in our church. We veiled the brass processional cross, as we do not have any other processional cross to use. We used dark red cloth (matching our paraments), twine, and placed a few palm fronds in, too.

It had an effect. People actually noticed and talked about the processional cross, which typically does not happen. I daresay veiling it drew more attention to it than usual.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Forthview:
Another feature of the Triduum (not always observed nowadays) was the emptying of all the holy water stoups after the Maundy Thursday Mass.Since the faithful are accustomed to making the sign of the cross with holy water when they enter a church they are (or were) immediately reminded of the special period of the Triduum where all these 'comforts' are removed from the church. The Holy water stoups would be filled once again with the Easter water blessed at the Vigil.

One of the Catholic churches here in Edinburgh has a custom during Lent (local custom this ,certainly not liturgically mandatory as far as I know)) of removing the holy water and replacing it with ashes during Lent.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by churchgeek:
Maybe it would remove coffee too, but that's not a liturgical matter.

---

Well, in some places it might be!

In any event, coffee has a firmly established place within the MW reports.

Thank you for the tip!

[ 03. April 2012, 21:50: Message edited by: Martin L ]
 

---

Posted by Bos Loquax (# 16602) on :
 
Here's something from last year, but I've been forgetting to answer, until I looked at some writings of mine which I'd saved and realized the imminent timeliness (the Easter Vigil and Morning Prayer of Easter).

http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=021470;p=33

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bran Stark:
Yeah well that's what I'm wondering about, chiefly. Would you just say MP after the whole Vigil/Eucharist thingie is concluded?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by georgiaboy:
In the Roman rite (as revised in the days of Pius XII) after communion 1 psalm with antiphon and the canticle 'Benedictus Dominus Deus' with antiphon and 1 collect were considered to be Lauds of Easter Day, and IIRC the altar was censed as it would have been at Vespers during the Mag. Matins was entirely suppressed and clergy who had been at the Vigil were not required to say Lauds.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
If you have Compline as well, the Nunc Dimittis is redundant and could be replaced. Even if not, the Magnificat is the crucial (and incarnational) canticle of the evening office and it would be a shame to omit it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by churchgeek:
Maybe it would remove coffee too, but that's not a liturgical matter.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by St.Silas the carter:

quote:

---

Originally posted by churchgeek:
Maybe it would remove coffee too, but that's not a liturgical matter.

---

Certainly the 8th sacrament is a liturgical matter?

---

 

---

Posted by Padre Joshua (# 13100) on :
 
I find myself in need of a grey (or possibly light blue) clergy shirt. I prefer tab collar over dog collar, but either will do. I also prefer long sleeve to short.

Where may I find a quality product at a reasonable price? I'm in the US, so I would think shipping from this side of the pond would be cheaper than purchasing from sites in the UK, but I'm happy to be shown otherwise.

Thanks.
 

---

Posted by sebby (# 15147) on :
 
Do any English shipmates know why the volume of Common Worship was made unnecesarily large by the repetition of collects in both traditional and modern language? Surely only one set is necessary - they can be made old by changing 'your' to 'thy' and so on. It only takes half a brain to be able to do that.

Or were the compilers only too aware of the diminution in theological training and therefore included both to be on the safe side?
 

---

Posted by Basilica (# 16965) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by sebby:
Do any English shipmates know why the volume of Common Worship was made unnecesarily large by the repetition of collects in both traditional and modern language? Surely only one set is necessary - they can be made old by changing 'your' to 'thy' and so on. It only takes half a brain to be able to do that.

Or were the compilers only too aware of the diminution in theological training and therefore included both to be on the safe side?

---

quote:

---

God of Life,
who for our redemption gave your only-begotten Son
to the death of the cross,
and by his glorious resurrection
have delivered us from the power of our enemy:
grant us so to die daily to sin,
that we may evermore live with him
in the joy of his risen life;
through Jesus Christ our Lord.

---

quote:

---

God of Life,
who for our redemption didst give thine only-begotten Son
to the death of the cross,
and by his glorious resurrection
hast delivered us from the power of our enemy:
grant us so to die daily unto sin
that we may evermore live with him
in the joy of his risen life:
through Jesus Christ our Lord

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by New Yorker:
If communicants kneel at the altar rail for communion does it matter from which end the priest begins to administer communion? Any tradition in this?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by venbede:
Quite. And the volume isn't unwieldy in size. There was a good deal of consultation following trial use before Common Worship was finalized, (unlike some churches producing translations I could think of) and presumably this was what the punters wanted.

I thought you liked keeping in touch with the Cranmerian heritage. Why criticize CW when it is doing just that? (Apologies if I'm confusing you with someone else.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Who says it's natural to drive on the left? Most of the world doesn't seem to think so.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
I'm sure it doesn't matter. Most churches seem to go from (the priest's) left to right (i.e. south-north) : it's probably natural if you're right-handed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
One of the frustrations of using the 'traditional' version of CW is that many of the new texts, such as the often excellent extended prefaces, are only available in modern English. I've officiated in a church which uses the old version and found myself translating some of these into Cranmerian. But it's not easy and you can easily miss the odd 'thine' or 'hast'. In the end I settled for using the modern version and hoping that people either don't notice or don't care. (Nobody bats an eyelid when you sing hymns in one register in the context of a service in the other.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jordan32404:
why was the last part of the Te Deum cut off and made into "Suffrages B"?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JSwift:
Is there a tradition among German Lutherans of painting the church doors red?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:

quote:

---

Originally posted by JSwift:
Is there a tradition among German Lutherans of painting the church doors red?

---

This is a tradition in many denominations, especially Episcopal churches of a certain vintage. The red represents the blood of Christ, through which one enters heaven.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
I don't know the answer to that but I do know in the URC we paint all paintwork blue, Presbyterian blue if we are being fussy.

It goes with selling orange marmalade, having a a walking groups etc. These are things congregations think they must do.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:

quote:

---

Originally posted by JSwift:
Is there a tradition among German Lutherans of painting the church doors red?

---

This is a tradition in many denominations, especially Episcopal churches of a certain vintage. The red represents the blood of Christ, through which one enters heaven.

---

quote:

---

And they shall take of the blood, and strike it on the two side posts and on the upper door post of the house, wherein they shall eat it [the passover].

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre Joshua:
Which side is the pulpit supposed to be on? North, or south?

I'm under the impression that the north side is the Gospel side, while the south side is the Epistle side. Am I right?

I've seen it on both sides in Anglican churches, so I'm wondering if it's a case of "it doesn't matter" or if it's a case of "we don't know or care so we'll put it here."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre Joshua:
Which side is the pulpit supposed to be on? North, or south?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mamacita:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre Joshua:
Which side is the pulpit supposed to be on? North, or south?

---

Indulge me for a minute. My sense of direction inside a church is challenged. Could someone please answer Padre Joshua's question in terms of "to the congregation's left, as they are facing the altar" or "to the congo's right, as they are facing the altar"?

[If I picture someone celebrating east-facing, i.e. back to the congo, then north would be to the congregation's left, correct? The pulpit in my current church and nearly all the others I can think of have the pulpit to the congo's right. Please bear with me, this makes my brain hurt.]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin L:
However, this potentially gets a bit iffy when one pulls the altar away from the wall, and the priest now stands behind it. In the interim rite of the 1960s, did the priest move to the right (now liturgical north) side of the altar for the Epistle, and the left (now liturgical south) side of the altar for the Gospel? If so, should the corresponding lectern and pulpit be flip-flopped to opposite sides?

---

I believe Ritual Notes suggests that very thing: that the epistle/gospel sides flip around when the altar does. That might be used to explain why the credence table should be on the north side for use with a freestanding altar (but perhaps the better explanation is that it's best for the credence table to be to the celebrant's right).

In our parish, which has the celebrant face eastward at the high altar for some Masses and westward at a freestanding altar for others, I think rather than flipping the epistle/gospel side terminology, such terms become irrelevant, as we no longer read those readings from particular sides. North and south are the more useful terms.

Our pulpit, sedilia, and sacristy door are all on the south side (liturgically and geographically). At solemn Mass the epistle and Gospel are both sung from the center; at low Mass the epistle is read near the south portion of the Communion rail, which might correspond to the epistle side of the high altar we're not using at that Mass. Mainly, though, that spot is convenient to the sedilia and not chosen for being on the epistle side of anything.
 

---

Posted by Gashead (# 15296) on :
 
I remember reading that in the early churches in Rome the Gospel was read not only on the north side but actually facing North. The idea being that the Gospel was thus being proclaimed towards the various barbarian tribes of Huns, Visigoths etc beyond the Empire’s northern boundary. Anyone else come across this?
 

---

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gashead:
I remember reading that in the early churches in Rome the Gospel was read not only on the north side but actually facing North. The idea being that the Gospel was thus being proclaimed towards the various barbarian tribes of Huns, Visigoths etc beyond the Empire’s northern boundary. Anyone else come across this?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Utrecht Catholic:
My Orthodox friends have told me several times that the proper word for the Eucharist in the Orthodox Church is not the western word Mass but the Holy Liturgy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gashead:
I remember reading that in the early churches in Rome the Gospel was read not only on the north side but actually facing North. The idea being that the Gospel was thus being proclaimed towards the various barbarian tribes of Huns, Visigoths etc beyond the Empire’s northern boundary. Anyone else come across this?

---

I, too, have heard this and have often seen it in photographs and video footage of the Roman Rite. I have witnessed this at an Orthodox Mass at which I was cantor. One explanation that I have been given is that the catechumens were customarily placed to the north of the church prior to their dismissal, although I have no written source for this.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I frankly think the Gospel Procession out into the midst of the congregation is more apt symbolism in the present context and is now very widespread amongst Anglicans, Lutherans and even other mainline Reformation churches.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I frankly think the Gospel Procession out into the midst of the congregation is more apt symbolism in the present context and is now very widespread amongst Anglicans, Lutherans and even other mainline Reformation churches.

---

Everybody loves a parade.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin L:
One time, when this topic came up, we got into quite the kerfluffle about right and left.

In the "Tridentine" rite, the Epistle was read on the liturgical south side of the altar. To the congregation and the priest facing the altar, this would be the right side. The Gospel was read on the liturgical north side of the altar, the left side from the congregation's and priest's standpoint.

Naturally, one would think that the Epistle should thus be read from a lectern to the liturgical south/right side of the congregation, and the Gospel from the liturgical north/left side.

However, this potentially gets a bit iffy when one pulls the altar away from the wall, and the priest now stands behind it. In the interim rite of the 1960s, did the priest move to the right (now liturgical north) side of the altar for the Epistle, and the left (now liturgical south) side of the altar for the Gospel? If so, should the corresponding lectern and pulpit be flip-flopped to opposite sides?

[Hosts, I bought one of those oversided novelty postcards that flips open to write my response on this thread...my apologies]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I frankly think the Gospel Procession out into the midst of the congregation is more apt symbolism in the present context and is now very widespread amongst Anglicans, Lutherans and even other mainline Reformation churches.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by georgiaboy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I frankly think the Gospel Procession out into the midst of the congregation is more apt symbolism in the present context and is now very widespread amongst Anglicans, Lutherans and even other mainline Reformation churches.

---

Everybody loves a parade.

---

This 'parade' into the nave has become quite a 'thing' in TEC congregations. The one which I attend has become so wedded to it that even when there are no congregants in the rear half of the nave the parade still goes exactly halfway down the aisle!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre Joshua:
That could get scary if I were making a potentially controversial remark and someone started toward the pulpit

---

"Your sermon really takes the p**s, Padre"
 

---

Posted by georgiaboy (# 11294) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by maleveque:
Oh, georgiaboy, have you ever tried to train acolytes? I'm amazed yours go exactly halfway every time! They've probably been told to go as far as a particular pew, and by golly, that's where they'll go!
- Anne L.

quote:

---

Originally posted by georgiaboy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I frankly think the Gospel Procession out into the midst of the congregation is more apt symbolism in the present context and is now very widespread amongst Anglicans, Lutherans and even other mainline Reformation churches.

---

Everybody loves a parade.

---

This 'parade' into the nave has become quite a 'thing' in TEC congregations. The one which I attend has become so wedded to it that even when there are no congregants in the rear half of the nave the parade still goes exactly halfway down the aisle!

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin L:
In the "Tridentine" rite, the Epistle was read on the liturgical south side of the altar. To the congregation and the priest facing the altar, this would be the right side. The Gospel was read on the liturgical north side of the altar, the left side from the congregation's and priest's standpoint.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin L:
In the "Tridentine" rite, the Epistle was read on the liturgical south side of the altar. To the congregation and the priest facing the altar, this would be the right side. The Gospel was read on the liturgical north side of the altar, the left side from the congregation's and priest's standpoint.

---

It is still that way in the Tridentine rite. See 18:00 of this.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by venbede:
I can't off hand think of any RC churches with an ambo on the South/right-as-you-look-at-it.

---

quote:

---

I realise the Vatican 2 insistence that all the readings take place from the same position is a fine theory, and in accordance with early Roman practice. (I have known it work impressively.)

---

quote:

---

As a result, no gospel procession and no need for a seperate pulpit. (RCs will correct me if necessary.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trisagion:
Pleased to oblige. Again, it happens at Westminster Cathedral.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by venbede:
We may be at cross purposes. I've seen a procession at Westminster Cathedral (and what a wonderful building it is) from the sanctuary to the ambo on our left, where the previous readings have taken place.

What I meant by "gospel procession" is a walk to the middle of the nave where the book is held by a server with two acolytes either side, whereas the non-gospel readings have been read from a lectern at the front.

---

quote:

---

By "Vatican 2" I meant the GIRM issued subsequently, on which I am rusty.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by venbede:
What I meant by "gospel procession" is a walk to the middle of the nave where the book is held by a server with two acolytes either side, whereas the non-gospel readings have been read from a lectern at the front.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trisagion:
That is, I think, as rare as hens teeth this side of the Tiber. What I have seen regularly at Westminster Cathedral is a procession - thurifer, acolytes, deacon - to the pulpit on the right hand side of the nave, the other readings having taken place at the Ambo on the left hand side of the sanctuary.

---

Almost correct

The Cathedral practice for Solemn occasions is for all the readings to be from the pulpit, with a Gospel Procession from the sanctuary at the appropriate moment.
 

---

Posted by Trisagion (# 5235) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Almost correct

The Cathedral practice for Solemn occasions is for all the readings to be from the pulpit, with a Gospel Procession from the sanctuary at the appropriate moment.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre Joshua:
Does anyone know anything about the Anglican Province of Christ the King? Their website is here.

Looks like they're an offshoot of TEC in 1977, and there is a congregation here in north Alabama ( St. Charles Anglican Church). They use the 1928 BCP.

That may well be more info than anyone else has, but I wanted to see what else I could learn about them. Why didn't they join one of the other offshoots, such as the UECNA? Do they have any dealings at all with other offshoot Anglican provinces?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre Joshua:
Does anyone know anything about the Anglican Province of Christ the King? Their website is here.

Looks like they're an offshoot of TEC in 1977, and there is a congregation here in north Alabama ( St. Charles Anglican Church). They use the 1928 BCP.

That may well be more info than anyone else has, but I wanted to see what else I could learn about them. Why didn't they join one of the other offshoots, such as the UECNA? Do they have any dealings at all with other offshoot Anglican provinces?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre Joshua:
Does anyone know anything about the Anglican Province of Christ the King? Their website is here.

Looks like they're an offshoot of TEC in 1977, and there is a congregation here in north Alabama ( St. Charles Anglican Church). They use the 1928 BCP.

That may well be more info than anyone else has, but I wanted to see what else I could learn about them. Why didn't they join one of the other offshoots, such as the UECNA? Do they have any dealings at all with other offshoot Anglican provinces?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:

I can say that the APCK is extremely Anglo-Catholic (not uncommon to see rosary beads hanging from their fuschias and cinctures).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oferyas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:

I can say that the APCK is extremely Anglo-Catholic (not uncommon to see rosary beads hanging from their fuschias and cinctures).

---

Sorry to double post, but I've just see this, and it has aroused my horticultural curiosity. I can imagine a rosary hanging from a cincture, but why would hanging a rosary from a late summer flowering semi-hardy bush be a sign of advanced churchmanship? Please enlighten me!

---

My guess is that Ceremoniar's post fell victim to "corrective" text, which tends not to recognise church-related terminology.

It isn't for nothing that so many of my posts end up being edited.

[ 01. May 2012, 18:26: Message edited by: Michael Astley ]
 

---

Posted by Ceremoniar (# 13596) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:
My guess is that Ceremoniar's post fell victim to "corrective" text, which tends not to recognise church-related terminology.

---

Yes, that is what happened, thanks.
 

---

Posted by PD (# 12436) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre Joshua:
Does anyone know anything about the Anglican Province of Christ the King? Their website is here.

Looks like they're an offshoot of TEC in 1977, and there is a congregation here in north Alabama ( St. Charles Anglican Church). They use the 1928 BCP.

That may well be more info than anyone else has, but I wanted to see what else I could learn about them. Why didn't they join one of the other offshoots, such as the UECNA? Do they have any dealings at all with other offshoot Anglican provinces?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:
My guess is that Ceremoniar's post fell victim to "corrective" text, which tends not to recognise church-related terminology.

---

Yes, that is what happened, thanks.

---

Tis ok. You and I have a common affliction, brother.
 

---

Posted by Triple Tiara (# 9556) on :
 
Heheh Michael, I just noticed your signature. You do know what Pope St Gregory the Great was going on about, don't you?
 

---

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

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre Joshua:
Does anyone know anything about the Anglican Province of Christ the King? Their website is here.

Looks like they're an offshoot of TEC in 1977, and there is a congregation here in north Alabama ( St. Charles Anglican Church). They use the 1928 BCP.

That may well be more info than anyone else has, but I wanted to see what else I could learn about them. Why didn't they join one of the other offshoots, such as the UECNA? Do they have any dealings at all with other offshoot Anglican provinces?

---

Huntsville was a particularly bloody mess. St Charles was a moderate parish in the old DSE under +Watterson in ACNA(E) days but was eventually Missalized with the consequence that a large group departed and started Christ Episcopal Church (UECNA) as a Low Church alternative. The ACC poked their oar in at some point, but their little group eventually merger with the UECNA parish. Twenty-five years later there is some talk of merging Christchurch with St Charles, but I am not at all sure how that will turn out.

Of the three churches that came directly out of St Louis, the Anglican Catholic Church is the largest and tends to be middle to high in churchmanship. It has what the rest of us call 'the Cons and Cans from hell' which the Diocese of Christ the King, and Bishop Doren did not, in the end, sign off on.

APCK is the old Diocese of Christ the King writ large and tends to be Anglo-catholic in churchmanship, but APCK Spikes tend to be less exotic than the ACC type. They use a modeified version of the 1964 PECUSA Cons and Cans.

The United Episcopal Church is very similar in terms of organisation to APCK but tends to be Middle to Low in Churchmanship. There is a strong Evangelical streak in UECNA which came in with +Albion Knight. +Gramley and +Rober, Presiding Bishops 1991-1996 and 1996-2010 tried to move the church up the candle. However, the present PB is a BCP and 39 Articles man.

Chances of mergers in the Continuum are pretty high, but probably will not happen along obvious historical lines.

PD

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Heheh Michael, I just noticed your signature. You do know what Pope St Gregory the Great was going on about, don't you?

---

I don't and I'd love to know, if a slight tangent could educate Michael and me.
 

---

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :
 
If you put "precursor to the Antichrist" into a Google search the main candidates seem to be Barack Obama, Adolf Hitler, and Ophrah Winfrey.

Add in "Gregory the Great" and most of the high-ranking references are to this Ship.
 

---

Posted by Triple Tiara (# 9556) on :
 
"Universal Bishop" is a translation into English of the Latin Patriarcha universalis, which in turn was a translation of the Greek o‘ikoumenikòs patriárches. We now usually render that into English as Ecumenical Patriarch. Pope Gregory was taking issue with the Bishop of Constantinople, John the Faster, for assuming for himself such a title.

Pope Gregory went on to say: "As regards the Church of Constantinople, who can doubt that it is subject to the Apostolic See? Why, both our most religious Lord the Emperor and our brother the Bishop of Constantinople continually acknowledge it" and "I know of no bishop who is not subject to the Apostolic See". One of the issue that sparked this was the Bishop of Constantinople convening a Synod to discuss charges against the Patriarch of Antioch. Pope Gregory was reminding the Bishop of Constantinople that he had no right to judge another bishop, for that was the prerogative of Rome.

The quote in Michael's signature has often been employed by Protestant and Orthodox polemicists as a way of suggesting the Bishop of Rome has false pretensions to universal jurisdiction and "Look! even a saintly pope said that was akin to being the Antichrist!" The full story says something quite the opposite, however.
 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
the Bishop of Constantinople, John the Faster

---

As opposed to John the Extremely Slow, or John the Glutton?
 

---

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Heheh Michael, I just noticed your signature. You do know what Pope St Gregory the Great was going on about, don't you?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
The quote in Michael's signature has often been employed by Protestant and Orthodox polemicists as a way of suggesting the Bishop of Rome has false pretensions to universal jurisdiction and "Look! even a saintly pope said that was akin to being the Antichrist!" The full story says something quite the opposite, however.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Pope Gregory went on to say: "As regards the Church of Constantinople, who can doubt that it is subject to the Apostolic See? Why, both our most religious Lord the Emperor and our brother the Bishop of Constantinople continually acknowledge it" and "I know of no bishop who is not subject to the Apostolic See".

---

quote:

---

If any fault is found among bishops, I know not any one who is not subject to it (the Apostolic See); but when no fault requires otherwise, all are equal according to the estimation of humility.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oferyas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:

I can say that the APCK is extremely Anglo-Catholic (not uncommon to see rosary beads hanging from their fuschias and cinctures).

---

Sorry to double post, but I've just see this, and it has aroused my horticultural curiosity. I can imagine a rosary hanging from a cincture, but why would hanging a rosary from a late summer flowering semi-hardy bush be a sign of advanced churchmanship? Please enlighten me!

---

Not only is predictive text crap at ecclisiology, it is rubbish at horticulture, too. That semi-hardy, late flowering bush that gives its name to a reddish-pinkish colour is called a fuchsia
Edited to ask - what was the original term supposed to be; cinctures and ... ?

[ 04. May 2012, 07:43: Message edited by: crunt ]
 

---

Posted by seasick (# 48) on :
 
Fascias was what it was meant to say, I would imagine.

[ 04. May 2012, 08:34: Message edited by: seasick ]
 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 
But according to that link, if you're a Patriarch, Archbishop, Bishop, protonotary apostolic, honorary prelate, or chaplain of his holiness you can have a fuchsia fascia.
 

---

Posted by seasick (# 48) on :
 
I'll make a note!
 

---

Posted by Oferyas (# 14031) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by crunt:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oferyas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:

I can say that the APCK is extremely Anglo-Catholic (not uncommon to see rosary beads hanging from their fuschias and cinctures).

---

Sorry to double post, but I've just see this, and it has aroused my horticultural curiosity. I can imagine a rosary hanging from a cincture, but why would hanging a rosary from a late summer flowering semi-hardy bush be a sign of advanced churchmanship? Please enlighten me!

---

Not only is predictive text crap at ecclisiology, it is rubbish at horticulture, too. That semi-hardy, late flowering bush that gives its name to a reddish-pinkish colour is called a fuchsia
Edited to ask - what was the original term supposed to be; cinctures and ... ?

---

I stand corrected on the spelling, can only point readers to my sig, and beg to ask 'what is "ecclisiology"?'

 

---

Posted by crunt (# 1321) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oferyas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by crunt:
Edited to ask - what was the original term supposed to be; cinctures and ... ?

---

I stand corrected on the spelling, can only point readers to my sig, and beg to ask 'what is "ecclisiology"?'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fabula rasa:
I know that Eccles is more about tat/GIRM than alternative liturgy(!), but hope that someone here might have suggestions about incinerating one's sins. (A cliche, I know, but my congregations's never done it...). So, what is the best way of doing this indoors? What kind of paper will burn quickly, without flying up in a flaming mass, and without producing black smoke? If I'd like a big, quick, dramatic whoosh of flame (the Christmas pudding effect), how can I do this in a way that's spectacular but safe?

All suggestions gratefully received!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
I can say that the APCK is extremely Anglo-Catholic (not uncommon to see rosary beads hanging from their fuschias and cinctures). They were originally the Diocese of Christ the King, one of the dioceses originally set up after TEC began ordaining women in 1977, but then they ultimately did not ratify the constitution of the newly-formed group, and went off on their own. Part of their group joined the Anglican Catholic Church, another high continuing jurisdiction.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by churchgeek:
I thought of 3 questions I wanted to ask here, but right now I can only remember 2. (Typical me.) So here goes:

1. Do you cross yourself at the beginning of the Gloria in Excelsis? I've seen it done (and it fits the rule of crossing yourself at canticles etc. drawn from Gospel text, such as the Benedictus, Magnificat, and Nunc Dimittis), but there are already lots of gestures in that particular hymn. I'm just curious if anyone here has seen it done, or can give a good reason one way or the other.

2. Recently, I was at a weekday Mass where there were a total of 5 of us present (including the presider). The presider had really bad allergies, and was coughing and blowing his nose all through the service. In a situation like that, should/could the presider slip in some mention of it to the congregation (e.g., at the Peace somewhere, or even before his homily) so they know he's not contagious? If so, when? I know it seems tacky, but the weekday services are kinda informal. To all you priests out there: what would you do, especially if you couldn't get another clergy person to cover for you? Luckily, in this instance, no one refrained from receiving Communion, but it's conceivable someone might.

I'll ask the third question later if I think of it!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
I can say that the APCK is extremely Anglo-Catholic (not uncommon to see rosary beads hanging from their fuschias and cinctures). They were originally the Diocese of Christ the King, one of the dioceses originally set up after TEC began ordaining women in 1977, but then they ultimately did not ratify the constitution of the newly-formed group, and went off on their own. Part of their group joined the Anglican Catholic Church, another high continuing jurisdiction.

---

I have never found the APCK to be that extreme. They are Missal orientated for the most part, but they are not "crazy high." In a way I cannot imagine +Morse allowing anyone to get that way, though, as we (Fr Weber and I) were discussing after their Western Diocese's Synod yesterday, they did have more than their share of sanctuary swans in times past (i.e. 1977 until they retired/shuffled off this mortal coil). In my experience, sound Anglo-Catholic theology tends to militate against being "crazy high" because of the pressure to do things correctly - i.e. that the liturgy is the Church's not yours. It is the half trained; half formed types that tend to do the crazy stuff. I have general seen more OTT stuff in upper slopes of middle of the road places than I ever have in "full Faith" parishes.

PD

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by churchgeek:
I thought of 3 questions I wanted to ask here, but right now I can only remember 2. (Typical me.) So here goes:

1. Do you cross yourself at the beginning of the Gloria in Excelsis? I've seen it done (and it fits the rule of crossing yourself at canticles etc. drawn from Gospel text, such as the Benedictus, Magnificat, and Nunc Dimittis), but there are already lots of gestures in that particular hymn. I'm just curious if anyone here has seen it done, or can give a good reason one way or the other.

2. Recently, I was at a weekday Mass where there were a total of 5 of us present (including the presider). The presider had really bad allergies, and was coughing and blowing his nose all through the service. In a situation like that, should/could the presider slip in some mention of it to the congregation (e.g., at the Peace somewhere, or even before his homily) so they know he's not contagious? If so, when? I know it seems tacky, but the weekday services are kinda informal. To all you priests out there: what would you do, especially if you couldn't get another clergy person to cover for you? Luckily, in this instance, no one refrained from receiving Communion, but it's conceivable someone might.

I'll ask the third question later if I think of it!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
I can say that the APCK is extremely Anglo-Catholic (not uncommon to see rosary beads hanging from their fuschias and cinctures). They were originally the Diocese of Christ the King, one of the dioceses originally set up after TEC began ordaining women in 1977, but then they ultimately did not ratify the constitution of the newly-formed group, and went off on their own. Part of their group joined the Anglican Catholic Church, another high continuing jurisdiction.

---

I have never found the APCK to be that extreme. They are Missal orientated for the most part, but they are not "crazy high." In a way I cannot imagine +Morse allowing anyone to get that way, though, as we (Fr Weber and I) were discussing after their Western Diocese's Synod yesterday, they did have more than their share of sanctuary swans in times past (i.e. 1977 until they retired/shuffled off this mortal coil). In my experience, sound Anglo-Catholic theology tends to militate against being "crazy high" because of the pressure to do things correctly - i.e. that the liturgy is the Church's not yours. It is the half trained; half formed types that tend to do the crazy stuff. I have general seen more OTT stuff in upper slopes of middle of the road places than I ever have in "full Faith" parishes.

PD

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by churchgeek:
Thanks, guys!

I'm used to crossing oneself at the end of the Gloria Patri, because when the Spirit is mentioned, it's now a reference to the Holy Trinity. At least that's what I've always been told - nothing to do with the first lines coming from the Gospels. I'm also used to bowing at "receive our prayer" and of course at the Name of Jesus; I've also seen bowing at "we worship you" - and now that you mention it, I've seen bowing at the beginning.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by churchgeek:
Why is the deacon sometimes blessed by the...um, celebrant before s/he goes to proclaim the Gospel? Doesn't her or his ordination give him/her everything s/he needs to proclaim the Gospel? No other participant in the service gets the celebrant's blessing before doing their thing. The only reason I can think of is the importance of the Gospel proclamation in the liturgy - and the only other participants in the service doing something so important are Communion administrators, who will have just received the Sacrament - blessing enough.

---

You could just as easily ask why we receive a blessing at the end of Mass when we've all received the gifts of the Holy Ghost through Confirmation.

Traditionally, in a Solemn High Mass, the subdeacon is blessed after reading/singing the Epistle; the deacon is blessed before reading/singing the Gospel. Why the diaconal blessing has hung on through changes of rites, while the subdiaconal one has withered away, I'm not sure. I imagine it's a function of the Gospel being the core of the faith. The words which are said over the deacon by the celebrant are : "The LORD be in thy heart and upon thy lips, that thou mayest worthily and fitly proclaim His Gospel: in the Name of the FATHER, and of the SON and + of the HOLY GHOST."

Note the similarity to a similar form of words used in Confession...
 

---

Posted by Fr Weber (# 13472) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre Joshua:
I don't know if this makes any difference, but I happened by the church in Huntsville today, and I noticed that on the sign board the principle Sunday morning service is billed as "Holy Communion". I seem to have seen around here that HC = low to MOTR, Eucharist = MOTR to high, and Mass = AC.

I may have to just break down and go check them out this week.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:
The two Anglican parishes in Huntsville are St Charles (APCK), which was MOTR-High the last I heard, and supplements the 1928 BCP from the Missal. The other is Christ Episcopal Church (UECNA), which is MOTR-Low, though the supply priest there might be trying to move things higher (again!)

PD

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Basilica:

quote:

---

Originally posted by churchgeek:
Thanks, guys!

I'm used to crossing oneself at the end of the Gloria Patri, because when the Spirit is mentioned, it's now a reference to the Holy Trinity. At least that's what I've always been told - nothing to do with the first lines coming from the Gospels. I'm also used to bowing at "receive our prayer" and of course at the Name of Jesus; I've also seen bowing at "we worship you" - and now that you mention it, I've seen bowing at the beginning.

---

I think you're talking about the Gloria in Excelsis, rather than the Gloria Patri ("Glory to God in the highest"/"Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit").

Traditional practice is to bow at the Gloria Patri ("Glory to the Father") and to stand at the Sicut Erat ("as it was in the beginning") at the end of canticles and psalms. The Gloria Patri is generally used at offices, rather than at the Eucharist.

In the Gloria in Excelsis (generally used at the Eucharist), traditional (and now somewhat old-fashioned) practice would indeed have you crossing yourself at the trinitarian invocation at the end, along with a bow at the name of Jesus and "receive our prayer". I have seen bowing at "we worship you", but I think it's probably an incorrect assumption that we should mirror the bow during the creed ("who with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified").

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Basilica:
I think you're talking about the Gloria in Excelsis, rather than the Gloria Patri ("Glory to God in the highest"/"Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit").

---

Yes, of course; I had a minor brain fart.
 

---

Posted by Oferyas (# 14031) on :
 
Traditional practice is to bow at the Gloria Patri ("Glory to the Father") and to stand at the Sicut Erat ("as it was in the beginning") at the end of canticles and psalms.

(Please excuse the lack of ascription, I get so confused with the coding on multiple quotes on quotes!)

Standing at 'Sicut erat' in the older practice was nothing to do with the Gloria Patri per se. This was about standing for the Chapter (brief reading) that followed the psalms in Lauds and Vespers.

One was, of course, standing in any case for a Gospel canticle, so there would be no change of posture after the bow during 'Glory (be) to the Father..Holy Spirit'.
 

---

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by churchgeek:
1. Do you cross yourself at the beginning of the Gloria in Excelsis? I've seen it done (and it fits the rule of crossing yourself at canticles etc. drawn from Gospel text, such as the Benedictus, Magnificat, and Nunc Dimittis),

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oferyas:
Standing at 'Sicut erat' in the older practice was nothing to do with the Gloria Patri per se. This was about standing for the Chapter (brief reading) that followed the psalms in Lauds and Vespers.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Weber:
Not an incorrect assumption at all. It's straight from the Tridentine rubrics : inclinatio (bow of the head, not a bow from the waist) at "Adoramus te" and at "Gratias agimus tibi".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Complete tangent, Fr Weber, but apropos your sig: don't you agree that Fr Chantry-Pigg should be the patron saint of Ecclesiantics?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:
I'm looking to buy a hassock. I'll be spending a lot of time next year in a chapel where the regulars (all college students) like to kneel on the wooden floor, which severely limits by ability to concentrate on what's going on. Can anyone recommend a good place to buy one? Watra's doesn't have them.

---

Embroider one yourself, why not?
 

---

Posted by Padre Joshua (# 13100) on :
 
I've taken old couch pillows and recovered them, or made a simple slip cover for them. They're usually stuffed firmer than a bed pillow, so they're about perfect for kneeling when there are no kneelers. I bet you could find one in a thrift store, or perhaps a deep discount retail store. Or even your granny, or someone else's granny.
 

---

Posted by Qoheleth. (# 9265) on :
 
A prayer stool takes a lot of the weight from the knees onto the purpose-designed body part.
 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Qoheleth.:
A prayer stool takes a lot of the weight from the knees onto the purpose-designed body part.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Qoheleth.:
A prayer stool takes a lot of the weight from the knees onto the purpose-designed body part.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Maybe it depends on the size of your feet. Large ones would tend to push your ankles uncomfortably high. IYSWIM.

---

The height of the ankles itself isn't uncomfortable. Normal kneeling without a kneeling stool allows for this and there is no discomfort, (unless people have bad knees, but that's a different matter). The problem, at least with the kneeling stools that I have encountered, is that the seat is just too low to allow the feet to stand upright (with the toes to the floor and heel in the air, if you follow). So in order to fit your feet under the bum-rest, you have to stretch them out ballerina style. Holding that position with weight on the feet for anything more than a short length of time is painful.
 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 
Just what I said. You must have big feet!
 

---

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
Just what I said. You must have big feet!

---

I'll have you know that my feet are quite proportionate to my height.
 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 
So are everybody's. It depends what proportion.
 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
So are everybody's. It depends what proportion.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by venbede:
I wouldn't be without my prayer stool. How do they put weight on the ankles?

---

quote:

---

They raise your bum just high enough to clear them.

---

quote:

---

(I've never thought about it, but I suppose I lay my feet sideways.)

---

I think I'd have the same problem doing that. You're clearly fitter and more flexible than I am.
 

---

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :
 
I've used my stool a few times since posting. Actually I leave my ankles in the air and my feet face forward (if you see what I mean) on the floor. But it's for private prayer and that's what I find helpful. Others may not.

(I always take it on Maundy Thursday to use for the vigil.)

PS. It supports all the weight of my upper body.

[ 13. May 2012, 19:41: Message edited by: venbede ]
 

---

Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by venbede:
I've used my stool a few times since posting. Actually I leave my ankles in the air and my feet face forward (if you see what I mean) on the floor.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by venbede:
Actually I leave my ankles in the air and my feet face forward (if you see what I mean) on the floor.

---

I'm finding that difficult to picture or to test.

 

---

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Qoheleth.:

quote:

---

Originally posted by venbede:
Actually I leave my ankles in the air and my feet face forward (if you see what I mean) on the floor.

---

I'm finding that difficult to picture or to test.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:
noamrl positioon of the feet

---

Is this an Orthodox term with which I am unfamiliar?
 

---

Posted by +Chad (# 5645) on :
 
Was it noamrl in 19th Century Russia?

No! Is "ecumenical" position.

Is outrage!
 

---

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Qoheleth.:

quote:

---

Originally posted by venbede:
Actually I leave my ankles in the air and my feet face forward (if you see what I mean) on the floor.

---

I'm finding that difficult to picture or to test.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by seasick:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:
noamrl positioon of the feet

---

Is this an Orthodox term with which I am unfamiliar?

---

quote:

---

Forasmuch as the description of positions of the feet during the supplication of the Almighty has in sundry places been subject to the passing times and seasons, it seems good to us, for the avoidance of confusion and that all things may be in all places the same, that during these fifty days of Pentecost, the placing of the feet while standing upon the knees shall henceforth be referred to as the "noamrl positioon". If any, having adopted any other phrase or description up until this first day of May in the year of our Lord two thousand and twelve, repent of his mistake, let him retain his position and come to communion as one of the brethren. If any reach such a state of mindlessness as to adopt such phrase after this first day of May and dare to call it canonical, if he be among the clergy, he shall be deposed, but if he be a layman, let him be anathema.

---

(Much more edifying than, 'Sorry: it was a typo', don't you think?)
 

---

Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Padre Joshua (# 13100) on :
 
Is it customary to have the congregation stand for a reading from the Gospel at Morning or Evening Prayer? What about at Eucharistic services with really long pericopes? (Palm Sunday comes to mind.)
 

---

Posted by ElaineC (# 12244) on :
 
Until our new Vicar arrived I had never stood for the Gospel in Morning or Evening Prayer(in 50ish years of churchgoing). We now stand for the Gospel in all services both the formal and informal.

Palm Sunday was the exception.
 

---

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre Joshua:
Is it customary to have the congregation stand for a reading from the Gospel at Morning or Evening Prayer? What about at Eucharistic services with really long pericopes? (Palm Sunday comes to mind.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Padre Joshua:
Is it customary to have the congregation stand for a reading from the Gospel at Morning or Evening Prayer? What about at Eucharistic services with really long pericopes? (Palm Sunday comes to mind.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:
I have never seen the point of prayer stools. You might as well just sit down properly and get rid of that intolerable and distracting pain in the ankles. Or am I built differently to other folks?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
At High Mass for Ascension Day at St Gabriel's Pimlico this evening the prayers of intercession were omitted.

I don't think I've ever been to mass/eucharist/holy communion at any anglican church whether high, MOTR or low and found the intercessions omitted. Is this usual practice? If so, when?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:
Did the Eucharistic Prayer contain some intercessory material? If so, it would not be unheard of to omit the intercession on a weekday, but in my experience, it is pretty uncommon. The danger with the Eucharistic Prayers which have some intercessory material in them is that you end up doing the same thing twice.

PD

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:
Common Worship omits the Intercessions on various occasions - or rather substitutes some other material such as the Thanksgiving for Baptism on the Feast of the Baptism (page 170)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by seasick:
Transferred from the closed Prayers of Intercession thread:

quote:

---

Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
At High Mass for Ascension Day at St Gabriel's Pimlico this evening the prayers of intercession were omitted.

I don't think I've ever been to mass/eucharist/holy communion at any anglican church whether high, MOTR or low and found the intercessions omitted. Is this usual practice? If so, when?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:
Did the Eucharistic Prayer contain some intercessory material? If so, it would not be unheard of to omit the intercession on a weekday, but in my experience, it is pretty uncommon. The danger with the Eucharistic Prayers which have some intercessory material in them is that you end up doing the same thing twice.

PD

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:
Common Worship omits the Intercessions on various occasions - or rather substitutes some other material such as the Thanksgiving for Baptism on the Feast of the Baptism (page 170)

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SFG:
Is it online?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by venbede:
So hang on, this lot were in the C of E and using the (very sensible) title of the Roman Rite.

Now they've become Roman Catholics, they are reverting to the usage of the Book of Common Prayer and Common Worship.

---

Evelyn Waugh's Advice Applies.

[ 21. May 2012, 12:47: Message edited by: ken ]
 

---

Posted by SFG (# 17081) on :
 
Please tell me! What is his advice

The office lessons given in the ordinariate Ordo seem quite long. Certainly longer than the Divine Office.

Does the Ordinariate use the Divine Office or BCP?
 

---

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :
 
From memory, in the first volume of Waugh's Sword of Honour trilogy, the narrator at Oxford is warned by his boring cousin to avoid the Anglo Catholic as "they are all sodomites with unpleasant accents".

As an Anglo Catholic gay man I may have a lack of any sense of humour here.
 

---

Posted by Galilit (# 16470) on :
 
Brideshead Revisited, actually, though the quote is correct as is the setting.
 

---

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :
 
You're quite right, gallit, Brideshead it is. I find bits of Brideshead wonderful despite a suspicion of pretentiousness, and Waugh may be sending up the boring cousin as much as anything.
 

---

Posted by New Yorker (# 9898) on :
 
Can anyone assist in identifying a religious order? At a local parish church last week, during Mass, a religious was in attendance. He looked like a Franciscan (beard and sandals) but he work a black or navy blue cassock with a red cincture. Anyone know what order that is?
 

---

Posted by Mama Thomas (# 10170) on :
 
Sometimes I see people in unfamilar habits in church. Once I asked someone what order he was in and he said in an English accent that he belonged to no order, but God told him to wear the habit. Very similar to the time a red-headed man kitted out like a Hasidic Jew who after Mass told me he had been a once been Carmelite in Mexico City.
 

---

Posted by Stranger in a strange land (# 11922) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by SFG:


Does the Ordinariate use the Divine Office or BCP?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mama Thomas:
Sometimes I see people in unfamilar habits in church. Once I asked someone what order he was in and he said in an English accent that he belonged to no order, but God told him to wear the habit. Very similar to the time a red-headed man kitted out like a Hasidic Jew who after Mass told me he had been a once been Carmelite in Mexico City.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jerrytheorganist:
Hi all, I have a quick question.

In a United Methodist installation service we present a stole to new pastor as a "yoke" to the church . blah blah blah,, and so forth take care of the people .. sheep shepherd stuff . . .

OK

So, what is the name of the service where we take the stole off and say you are no longer the pastor . . blah blah go on, get out of here. . . ??

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jerrytheorganist:
Hi all, I have a quick question.

In a United Methodist installation service we present a stole to new pastor as a "yoke" to the church . blah blah blah,, and so forth take care of the people .. sheep shepherd stuff . . .

OK

So, what is the name of the service where we take the stole off and say you are no longer the pastor . . blah blah go on, get out of here. . . ??

---

Induction > Deduction or subtraction?
Installation > Uninstallation?
Yours sounds a bit like an expulsion, though it could also be a deliverance ..... (might be mutual for pastor and people...?)
 

---

Posted by jerrytheorganist (# 4720) on :
 
The two services are found somewhere in the book of worship but I don't have one of those handy,,,

The installation service is just that, when the pastor is installed in a pastoral relationship with the church which is symbolized by the placing of a stole on the pastor by the head of the SPRC committee.

The (still don't remember the name ) service is a way to say farewell, goodbye, you are released from your pastoral duties to this congregation and then the same person who put the stole on takes it back off, bye bye see you later.


The go away service is usually the last service the pastor preaches and then they get installed at their new church.


So,,, anyone else have a clue what the go away service is?

[ 30. May 2012, 16:48: Message edited by: jerrytheorganist ]
 

---

Posted by Clavus (# 9427) on :
 
At our church on Tuesday 5 June we are showing the Thanksgiving Service from St Paul's on a big screen, then a Gospel reading, the Peace, Offertory Hymn and the Liturgy of the Eucharist.
 

---

Posted by Clavus (# 9427) on :
 
Sorry - that was for the Jubilee thread!
 

---

Posted by PD (# 12436) on :
 
Do any of the Lutheran denominations in the USA still have a Eucharistic Prayer that consists of just the Verba?

Do they preserve the old

Preface and Sanctus
Lord's Prayer
Verba
Pax

way of doing things?

Ta!

PD

[ 31. May 2012, 23:24: Message edited by: PD ]
 

---

Posted by Episcoterian (# 13185) on :
 
I don't know, but if I have to guess, it'll be the LCMS. At least as an option in their book.

Their mission church in Brazil (IELB) follows this exact pattern.
 

---

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:
Do any of the Lutheran denominations in the USA still have a Eucharistic Prayer that consists of just the Verba?

Do they preserve the old

Preface and Sanctus
Lord's Prayer
Verba
Pax

way of doing things?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:
Cheers!

I was just wondering whether the traditional form had been completely displaced or whether it is just the pastors around here. I recently passed a comment in a new members class that 1662, like the traditional Lutheran liturgy, placed all the emphasis on the Verba. An ex-Lutheran who was there looked at me as though I had arrived from Mars on the last wagon train, and then proceeded to argue!

PD

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jerrytheorganist:
Hi all, I have a quick question.

In a United Methodist installation service we present a stole to new pastor as a "yoke" to the church . blah blah blah,, and so forth take care of the people .. sheep shepherd stuff . . .

OK

So, what is the name of the service where we take the stole off and say you are no longer the pastor . . blah blah go on, get out of here. . . ??

---

quote:

---

Did any shipmates attend or hear about a service on Oak Apple Day (28th May) to celebrate the return of His late Majesty King Charles II and the restoration of the monarchy and the English church in 1660? This was only removed from the BCP with its special readings and propers as recently as 1859.

If so, what was it like?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
Posted by sebby on a thread now closed:

quote:

---

Did any shipmates attend or hear about a service on Oak Apple Day (28th May) to celebrate the return of His late Majesty King Charles II and the restoration of the monarchy and the English church in 1660? This was only removed from the BCP with its special readings and propers as recently as 1859.

If so, what was it like?

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by venbede:
Enoch beat me to it. It is there in my George I prayer book for 29 May, giving thanks for God's "unspeakable mercies".

I would certainly give thanks for the restoration of the episcopacy and sacramental liturgy (or do I mean liturgically celebrated sacraments?)

---

The original impetus was very much more the Restoration of Charles II after the hiatus of what it calls "the Great Rebellion". The restoration of episcopacy and the BCP would have been seen as no more than a consequential benefit.
 

---

Posted by Fr Raphael (# 17131) on :
 
incense question/s, help please!

How do you make incense less smokey and more smelly (in the best cense of course)

Is it to do with the heat of the coal, and the type of incense?
 

---

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :
 
I've often wondered. If the charcoal isn't hot, there won't be much smell, but there will be smoky fumes when the incense burns out. If you pile on the incense, the charcoal goes out, and you get no smoke.

There's a sermon in there somewhere.
 

---

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :
 
My bishop insists on high scent:smoke output when he is serving, and requires one or maybe two grains of incense at the most, placed beside rather than on the charcoal. While I generally agree about excessive amounts of incense, I find that placing the incense directly onto the charcoal doesn't make too much of a difference, and at least stops the grains from bouncing around inside the censer.

The above, of course, assumes use of the larger grains of incense and one or two brickets of charcoal. If the tiny-grained variety is used, the necessary adjustment will need to be made. Overfilling the censer with upwards of three pieces of charcoal can also be problematic.
 

---

Posted by Fr Raphael (# 17131) on :
 
Thanks. Answers often bring more questions with me - sorry!

Michael, The incense I have in mind is like 'Basilica' it is small grains.

I see the spoons for boats are often smaller than tea spoons. Is that deliberate? Is three teaspoons simply too much?

And finally, for now at least, what is a good not smokey but nicely scented incense available in UK?


 

---

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Raphael:
I see the spoons for boats are often smaller than tea spoons. Is that deliberate? Is three teaspoons simply too much?

---

Almost certainly, in my opinion. If you have a larger church, I would suggest two pieces of charcoal at most with just enough incense to cover the recess in the middle of each one. Again, this is based on an assumption: that you use the 2.5 cm diameter brickets, which seem most common. If you use a smaller or larger size, again, you'll need to make adjustments. I prefer the 3.5 cm ones as they last longer, but the enormous ones are too big to light properly without some sort of large flame source, which I suspect most parishes don't have. The very tiny ones seem to be prone to absorbing moisture, then they explode when you try to light them.

quote:

---

And finally, for now at least, what is a good not smokey but nicely scented incense available in UK?

---

Just about anything from the Brookwood Monastery.
 

---

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :
 
And a link.
 

---

Posted by Fr Raphael (# 17131) on :
 
Thanks Michael, but I think their fragrances may be more at home in an Orthodox church than a western one.

Correct me though if I am wrong.

They also seem a bit pricey. But I realise that maybe less is used so they may turn out more economical.

Do Hayes and Finch or someone do a good less smokey fine smelling blend?
 

---

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

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:
The very tiny ones seem to be prone to absorbing moisture, then they explode when you try to light them.

---

Indeed they do. I had this very problem at an Epiphany procession about three years ago.
 

---

Posted by aig (# 429) on :
 
Originally posted by Fr Raphael

quote:

---

How do you make incense less smokey and more smelly (in the best cense of course)

---

The charcoal needs to be lit well in advance and be very hot before the incense is imposed: lighting the charcoal 20 minutes before needed will work. Adding new charcoal after the gospel will keep the thurible at furnace level.
I'm not sure about little spoons. On Pentecost we were using huge lumps of incense; the president got frustrated with the spoon to lump ratio and tipped the boat contents - all of them - onto the charcoal, which being white hot, did not go out.
I also have exploding charcoal stories with the bonus of involving small children. You have to be careful...

 

---

Posted by Devils Advocate (# 16484) on :
 
I always light the charcoal with a Kitchen blow torch. It also pays to keep the lid up when you aren't using the Thurible.
 

---

Posted by Fr Raphael (# 17131) on :
 
Is rosa mystica a good one for smokeless zones?

It seems to be nice in odour and low in smoke when I have come across it.
 

---

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by aig:
Originally posted by Fr Raphael

quote:

---

How do you make incense less smokey and more smelly (in the best cense of course)

---

The charcoal needs to be lit well in advance and be very hot before the incense is imposed: lighting the charcoal 20 minutes before needed will work. Adding new charcoal after the gospel will keep the thurible at furnace level.
I'm not sure about little spoons. On Pentecost we were using huge lumps of incense; the president got frustrated with the spoon to lump ratio and tipped the boat contents - all of them - onto the charcoal, which being white hot, did not go out.
I also have exploding charcoal stories with the bonus of involving small children. You have to be careful...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
What do you mean by the 'legal bits'? I assume the vows ("I N take you N to be my...") are unrepeatable in that form. On a couple of occasions I have amended that to '..have taken...'. But I wonder what the official position is, especially that of the Diocese in Europe.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
What do you mean by the 'legal bits'? I assume the vows ("I N take you N to be my...") are unrepeatable in that form. On a couple of occasions I have amended that to '..have taken...'. But I wonder what the official position is, especially that of the Diocese in Europe.

---

quote:

---

use such form of service, as may be approved by the General Synod under Canon B 2,

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
On the basis of that Canon, e.g.

quote:

---

use such form of service, as may be approved by the General Synod under Canon B 2,

---

I would deduce that one must use the service in CW for the blessing of a civil marriage and may not cut and paste bits of the ordinary wedding service to make up something else that looks more like an imitation wedding. Am I correct?

However, do the Canons apply in full in the Diocese of Europe?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:


The Diocese of Europe is a diocese of the Church of England - and canon law applies.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:


The Diocese of Europe is a diocese of the Church of England - and canon law applies.

---

But surely not when canon law conflicts with the law of the particular country. And that particular canon seems ambiguous in any case.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
It didn't seem that ambiguous to me. There's an authorised book with a prescribed service in it. But Sacred London tells me I've misunderstood it and am wrong.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:


Incidentally, on this, suppose a couple marry civilly at a time when they have no faith, and subsequently come to faith. If one takes the high view that a church marriage is sacramental and a civil one is not, does the blessing service convert the one into the other?

---

quote:

---

approved by the General Synod under Canon B 2,

---

quote:

---

the Canons and regulations of the General Synod for the time being in force.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
But apart from the Blessing one, is any form of service currently

quote:

---

approved by the General Synod under Canon B 2,

---

for this purpose? And apart from the Blessing service, is there any other service in this context which would currently comply with?

quote:

---

the Canons and regulations of the General Synod for the time being in force.

---

I'd find it difficult to be persuaded otherwise than that the default conclusion has to be that the existence of a different form of service means that unless the full marriage service has also been explicitly approved for this purpose, it isn't.

It perhaps doesn't matter too much. If the couple are already married in law, using the wrong form of service is only a canonical error, with no legal consequences. But what prompted my original question was what the practice is where there is no legal alternative to having a church wedding in two stages.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
But apart from the Blessing one, is any form of service currently

quote:

---

approved by the General Synod under Canon B 2,

---

for this purpose?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:
More of a random question than a random liturgical question, but...

Was the Brotherhood of St Andrew - the old TEC men's organisation associated with a particular churchmanship (High, Low, or Broad) or non-aligned? My assistant wants to start a chapter here, and I will not do anything that screams 'X. churchpersonship' if I can avoid it.

PD

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
The RC Church does not have a service of Blessing. What we do is called a convalidation. It is just the usual marriage service, with no alterations. The only thing missing is the signing of the civil register.

The name convalidation indicates what it is doing: recognising the civil marriage, but making it equally a Christian marriage. So not a "validation" (which would suggest the civil marriage was not valid) but a CONvalidation - making it valid for both Church and State.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
The Brotherhood of St Andrew was still found in various Texas dioceses perhaps into the first decade of the 21st Century (certainly in the Diocese of Texas, and in the Diocese of Northwest Texas into at least the late C20). I think I recall it from the Diocese of Dallas and the area that subsequently became the Diocese of Fort Worth into the 1980s, though it had less presence in that Anglo-Catholic/High Church territory than in the aforementioned dioceses. I always perceived it as being an artifact of low to MOTR churchmanship and typically existing where you also had Daughters of the King (DoK). I never knew much about them.

---

quote:

---

Give us the wisdom and grace to use aright the time that is left to us here on earth, to turn to Christ and follow in his steps in the way that leads to everlasting life.

---

quote:

---

O God of spirits and of all flesh, Who hast trampled down death, defeated the devil, and given life to thy world; do Thou, the same Lord, give rest to the souls of thy departed servants (N. and N.) in a place of brightness, a place of refreshment, a place of repose, where all sickness, sighing, and sorrow have fled away. Pardon every transgression which they have committed, whether by word or deed or thought. For Thou art a good God Who lovest mankind; because there is no man who lives yet does not sin, for Thou alone art without sin, thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy word is truth.

For Thou, O Christ our God, art the Resurrection and the Life, and the Repose of thy servants who have fallen asleep, and unto Thee we ascribe glory, together with thy Father, Who is without beginning, and thine all-holy, good, and life-creating Spirit, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

---

 

---

Posted by Fr Raphael (# 17131) on :
 
When iis the zuccheto worn liturgically?

I have seen a priest remove it for the Eucharistic prayer, but I am not sure when it is on and when off I

Is it right that some wear it under the beretta / mitre?
 

---

Posted by Michael Astley (# 5638) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Raphael:
Is it right that some wear it under the beretta...?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Raphael:
When iis the zuccheto worn liturgically?

I have seen a priest remove it for the Eucharistic prayer, but I am not sure when it is on and when off I

Is it right that some wear it under the beretta / mitre?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
However, if they are Roman Catholics then they do not use the zucchetto at all during the liturgy - that is reserved to those of episcopal rank. Clerics may indeed wear a skull-cap all day long, if they wish, but as soon as they participate in the liturgy, they leave it in the sacristy.

That's not just me being a spoil-sport - them's the rules.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Raphael:
It seems then that there are two sets of rules.

---

 

---

Posted by Fr Raphael (# 17131) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceremoniar:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Raphael:
It seems then that there are two sets of rules.

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Raphael:

What I mean is you say one thing, with authority, and Triple Tiara says another about the Zuchetto.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:
And a link.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Raphael:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Astley:
And a link.

---

Looking again at the St Edward Brotherhood site. Is there a popular fragrance? I notice the frankincense is least expensive, is that OK?u

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evensong:
Does anyone know at what point in the Anglican church did lay assistants at the Eucharist became the norm?

---

In the Church of England authorised lay people may distribute Holy Communion under Canon B 12(3) and in accordance with regulations passed by General Synod. In fact, those originally made by the Church Assembly in November 1969 remember in force.
 

---

Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 
Thank you Sacred London. I thought it might be around that time.

Would I be correct in assuming before that, all those assisting at the Eucharist would have been ordained ministers?

I guess I'm asking because I think I might be more called to serve the distinctive diaconate rather than the priesthood.......perhaps I should start a thread....I have lots of questions that Google is not helping much with.
 

---

Posted by Sacred London (# 15220) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evensong:
Thank you Sacred London. I thought it might be around that time.

Would I be correct in assuming before that, all those assisting at the Eucharist would have been ordained ministers?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evensong:

Would I be correct in assuming before that, all those assisting at the Eucharist would have been ordained ministers?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
The pernickety traditionalist of a vicar refused to allow any lay person to help with the administration even though there was a large number of communicants; I remember rebelling and saying that I was willing to preach and/or celebrate but not travel miles just to do a job lots of other people could. I don't think that changed his mind.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evensong:

Would I be correct in assuming before that, all those assisting at the Eucharist would have been ordained ministers?

---

I think it would be closer to the truth to say that in the vast majority of parishes nobody at all ever assisted at Communion. The vicar did everything.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:
But remember it's not just a job anyone can do or help with. Only those authorised by the bishop may assist in the distribution of Communion.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Albertus:
At a couple of times in my life I've been exploring ordination and found myself regularly administering the chalice, never with AFAIK a licence from the Bishop. However, one was a Missions to Seamen chapel (in England) which effectively ran as a Peculiar, while in both parishes (one in England, one in Wales) where I did this the incumbent happened to be Rural Dean at the time and each said that they could licence me informally under some kind of delegated authority. I don't know whether this is legally correct, though.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:
The application has to be made, and is granted, in writing - so it can't really be made informally (and you'd know if you had it).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Polly Plummer:
So that's different from being authorised to take home communion, where you get a nice certificate signed by the bishop - I suppose in case the communicant wasn't sure that it was all official, though no one ever asked to see mine.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
No I think 'extended communion' refers to services held in church in the absence of a priest. 'Home communion' I would take to mean the Blessed Sacrament being taken to the homes of the sick and/or housebound (in this context: 'house masses' are different).
As I understand it, the bishop's permission to administer the sacrament applies both to administering in church during the eucharist and to taking it to the sick. Leading formal worship in church is a different matter and would imply more restrictions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vulpior:
Our Diocese no longer requires the Bishop's licence for those who assist with distribution of communion. The parish priest and wardens are supposed to agree and the priest should notify the name(s )and invite any objections to be submitted directly to the bishop or via priest/wardens.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:
No I think 'extended communion' refers to services held in church in the absence of a priest. 'Home communion' I would take to mean the Blessed Sacrament being taken to the homes of the sick and/or housebound (in this context: 'house masses' are different).
As I understand it, the bishop's permission to administer the sacrament applies both to administering in church during the eucharist and to taking it to the sick. Leading formal worship in church is a different matter and would imply more restrictions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by georgiaboy:
In TEC there is (or was?) a requirement that lay persons assisting at communion (administering the chalice) be licensed by the Bishop.
I think all that was required was that your priest sent in your name and you got licensed.

I had been licensed in a previous diocese but not in my present one when, acting as server at a well-attended 7 am mass on Ash Wednesday, the celebrating bishop said to me 'Are you licensed to administer the chalice?' At my reply of 'No sir.' he said 'You are now!'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:
I have to agree that the (over) use of EEMs has tended to undermine the deacon's ministry, and I am inclined to think that this is a bad thing.

PD

---

I have seen, more than once, a (RC) deacon sitting on his butt in a chair in the sanctuary as EEMs administer the chalice during Mass.


 

---

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:
The application has to be made, and is granted, in writing - so it can't really be made informally (and you'd know if you had it).

---

Though in my experience the bishop (or archdeacon) just sends a letter to the incumbent listing the names: individual EMs don't get anything in writing. Practice clearly varies between dioceses.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zacchaeus:
And in my experience, any lay Eucahristic ministers have to have the approval of the PCC before being put forward.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Polly Plummer:
So that's different from being authorised to take home communion, where you get a nice certificate signed by the bishop - I suppose in case the communicant wasn't sure that it was all official, though no one ever asked to see mine.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evensong:

I was wondering if lay assistance at the Eucharist brought about the demise of the Deacon in liturgical function.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:

I think most MOTR and MOTR+ parishes with actual deacons use them in the traditional way. It's just that in the nature of things few parishes actually have them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zacchaeus:
In the UK, the problem will be not only cost, but there just isn't enough clergy for that model.
The numbers of stipendiary clergy are being reduced and in the next 5-10 years even more are set to retire.

Curates are few and far between and curacies are purely training posts then after the requiered 3-4 years they go on to other posts - if they can get them!!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:

There was a requirement at least until latish in the 19th century for fellows of Oxford and Cambridge colleges to be in holy orders. This would be fulfilled by being in deacons' orders. I think Lewis Carroll, for example, never became a priest.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:
I have a vague memory that in one of the London Areas all the Readers were recently asked whether they would like to 'upgrade' to the Distinctive Diaconate.

---

quote:

---

There may be legal implications to being in holy orders - apart from having to dress in a way that is a sign and mark of their holy calling.

---

Lots of clergy don't dress differently anyway so I doubt if that would be an issue.

Though there seem to have been recent changes in the CofE. You see a lot more clerical dress on the street than you used to. Isuspect its to do with ordainign women - many of them went for distininctive clerical dress in a big way, maybe its encouraged some of the men to follow suit.
 

---

Posted by Morlader (# 16040) on :
 
"... maybe its encouraged some of the men to follow suit..."

 

---

Posted by Sacred London (# 15220) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:

There was a requirement at least until latish in the 19th century for fellows of Oxford and Cambridge colleges to be in holy orders. This would be fulfilled by being in deacons' orders. I think Lewis Carroll, for example, never became a priest.

---

Yes of course. But that sort of "diaconate" is very different in practice from the "diaconate" of trainee priests. And those academics would have been very unlikely to have functioned as liturgical deacons at Holy Communion. At the begining of the century they would probably not have known what such a thing was, unless they were ecclesiastical historians, and even by the end of it only the more catholic-moinded would have attended churches where it was done.

Yes, I agree. My point was that there were presumably a few more 'permanent' deacons around than we assume, and that the order (rather than the liturgical role) might have been better known than it is today.

quote:

---

There may be legal implications to being in holy orders - apart from having to dress in a way that is a sign and mark of their holy calling.

---

Lots of clergy don't dress differently anyway so I doubt if that would be an issue.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:
I was being facetious about dress, but wondering whether there might be other legal implications of, say Readers, becoming Deacons and therefore entering holy orders - along the lines of not being able to serve on juries, be MPs etc.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trisagion:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:
I was being facetious about dress, but wondering whether there might be other legal implications of, say Readers, becoming Deacons and therefore entering holy orders - along the lines of not being able to serve on juries, be MPs etc.

---

The Criminal Justice Act 2003 removed the disqualification from jury service and The House of Commons (Removal of Clergy Disqualification) Act 2001 repealed the provisions of The House of Commons (Clergy Disqualification) Act 1801. Lords Spiritual are still disqualified for sitting in the House of Commons.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
But they might have made knowing remarks about sensistive, over-excitable, and artistic-minded young men)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by churchgeek:
1. Do you cross yourself at the beginning of the Gloria in Excelsis? I've seen it done (and it fits the rule of crossing yourself at canticles etc. drawn from Gospel text, such as the Benedictus, Magnificat, and Nunc Dimittis), but there are already lots of gestures in that particular hymn. I'm just curious if anyone here has seen it done, or can give a good reason one way or the other.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by venbede:
The other canticles are gospel texts, and we cross ourselves at the start as we (or at any rate some of us) do at the start of a gospel reading. The Gloria is not a gospel text.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:
But aren't there other things like not being allowed to bear arms?

---

That hasn't stopped them from blessing battleships.
 

---

Posted by malik3000 (# 11437) on :
 
On one or more threads the topic has come up of what different folks call the mass or eucharist or holy communion or the Lord's Supper. This is especially discussed in anglican contexts the term one uses is usually considered to indicate how high or low on the candle one is.

However i just came across a usage i have never before encountered. St. Andrew's Episcopal Church in Cincinnati Ohio calls it Eucharistic Mass! ... like what other kind of mass is there?

Has anyone else heard this particular term?

Edited for punctuation

[ 02. July 2012, 23:41: Message edited by: malik3000 ]
 

---

Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on :
 
I haven't, but I wouldn't be surprised if somebody here had.

It really is Textbook Episcopanglican Doublespeak, isn't it, like "Sacramental Rite"?
 

---

Posted by malik3000 (# 11437) on :
 
Except that (and i am open to correction) while all sacraments are rites, not all rites are sacraments. (I am thinking of both RC and the various Angl. uses of the term sacrament here)

ETA that of course you are right that sacramental rite is, in any case, redundant.

[ 03. July 2012, 00:17: Message edited by: malik3000 ]
 

---

Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by malik3000:
<snip> i just came across a usage i have never before encountered. St. Andrew's Episcopal Church in Cincinnati Ohio calls it Eucharistic Mass! ... like what other kind of mass is there?
Has anyone else heard this particular term?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:
And if they read their Luther carefully (or their Schillebeeckx for that matter), they'll learn there's only really-big-S SACRAMENT: Jesus Christ.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jlav12:
Why does the 1979 Prayer Book place the Benedictus before the Te Deum in Morning Prayer?

---

quote:

---

In 1770 he was appointed Vicar-General of the Southwell College of Canons, and had jurisdiction over 28 Churches for all purposes, except Confirmation and Ordination.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jlav12:
Why does the 1979 Prayer Book place the Benedictus before the Te Deum in Morning Prayer?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:
Southwell was a bit of an oddity in the old days. Like Ripon it was a collegiate Church, but it had a Vicar-General rather than a Dean. The V-G also administered a peculiar belonging to the Archbishop of York in which the non-sacramental functions of the Bishop were delegated to the V-G.

IIRC, the peculiar appertaining to Ripon disappeared in 1540s and was not reinstated with the Dean and Chapter in 1604. However, the Peculiar of Masham remained in existence until the 19th century and is referenced in the name of one of Theakston's Brewery's products.

PD

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Southwell Minster in its collegiate days also had its own choir and choir school which the cathedral inherited.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by jlav12:
Why does the 1979 Prayer Book place the Benedictus before the Te Deum in Morning Prayer?

---

Because it is the gospel canticle - linking OT to NT - like the mag. at evensong.,

1662 was a bad mistake (in more ways than one!)

---