Ship of Fools: MW2476: Midnight Eucharist: St James's Piccadilly

Thread: MW2476: Midnight Eucharist: St James's Piccadilly Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=025008

Posted by sebby (# 15147) on :

I was disappointed at the Mystery Worshipper's downer on what sounded a quite spectacular celebration of the first eucharist of Christmas at St James's Piccadilly.

The music, preaching and liturgy all sounded wonderful. If the Rector has anything to do with it, it would have been magnificent.

The writer was overly subjective from the start saying that 'high Anglican worship does nothing for me'

It led me to speculate whether

(1) the writer was the right person to make the report - although they were clear in stating their prejudice early on.

(2) whether the writer will find that the worship of Heaven (probably quite High), will fit their tastes? One wonders if the incense in the heavenly censors will be less cloying than the sulpher elsewhere?

[added reference and link to report]

[ 05. January 2013, 15:50: Message edited by: seasick ]

Posted by seasick (# 48) on :

AIUI, MW reports are intended to be subjective - they are that person's experience of that worship on that day.

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

The irony is that I don't think anyone identifies St James Piccadilly as a particularly high up the candle place and certainly not as Anglo-Catholic. I always thought it was MOTR-modern. The exterior, however, is charming: one of my favourite churches in London from an architectural standpoint.

Posted by Garasu (# 17152) on :

So someone says generally positive things about an event but mentions that it's not to their taste as an ongoing experience... Doesn't seem overly dreadful of them to me...

(And, btw, on what grounds do you conclude that worship in heaven is going to be high anglican?)

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

Have they still got those hideous light fittings which look like those on Tube escalators?

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:

(And, btw, on what grounds do you conclude that worship in heaven is going to be high anglican?)

Everybody knows that God is C of E, surely? [Biased]

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

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Have they still got those hideous light fittings which look like those on Tube escalators?

Oh, I hope they're like the ones in the St John's Wood and Swiss Cottage stations!

Posted by sebby (# 15147) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
So someone says generally positive things about an event but mentions that it's not to their taste as an ongoing experience... Doesn't seem overly dreadful of them to me...

(And, btw, on what grounds do you conclude that worship in heaven is going to be high anglican?)

A glance at the Book of Revelation and its depiction of heavenly worship. It sounds very similar to a High Mass with four and twenty concelebrants. Plenty of incense most certainly. And robes. Palms as well.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Have they still got those hideous light fittings which look like those on Tube escalators?
Oh, I hope they're like the ones in the St John's Wood and Swiss Cottage stations!

They look fine on the escalators. Not so much on pews in a Wren church.

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :

quote:
Originally posted by sebby:
It led me to speculate whether

(1) the writer was the right person to make the report - although they were clear in stating their prejudice early on.

Why not? The MW is partly to highlight what a particular church looks like to an outsider. I often find that reports written by people unfamiliar with the tradition of the church they are reviewing to be among the most interesting and, I daresay, the churches being reviewed find the criticism helpful.

Posted by Jon in the Nati (# 15849) on :

I must say that I don't really have much of an issue with what the MWer did. He/she was pretty fair throughout; the whole thing really came out more-or-less to, "It was well done, but it's not really my scene."

I'm a high-church partisan; it is where I live and what I do. If I had to MW a happy-clappy praise band service, I'd probably say much the same thing.

And yes, hopefully the incense in heaven will not offend the MW's nostrils when he/she is there!

Posted by sebby (# 15147) on :

For some reason objection taken to incense in church, reminds me of Queen Victoria when told that she would meet Abraham in heaven, and that he had more than one wife: 'Then we shall not receive Abraham'.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

Even more of a tangential connection, but Bishop Mervyn Stockwood, when an evangelical clergyman objected to prayers for the dead, is reported to have said, 'In that case I won't be able to pray for 80% of my diocese.'

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

Personally I think the lights in the church look more like the ones outside Piccadilly Circus station, not the famous 1930s style you still see on a few escalators (I believe they're listed).

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

I was surprised it got a 1 even though the sermon received a high score and the MW-er praised the organ playing and the nice informal touch with the gathering around the altar for communion.

Given some of the positive comments, I was expecting a 6 or 7. I've done some Mystery Worshipping - many moons ago ... and I don't think I'd have ever given anything a 1, even if it wasn't 'my style' unless it was outrageously bad in some way or other eg, if they'd all started passing poisonous snakes around or if there was some health-wealth style over-the-top appeal for funds.

I think the text/reactions of the MW-er were probably fair reactions given their church background and preferences, but I think a score of 1 is incredibly mean and doesn't follow from some of the positive remarks they'd made.

It's a mystery to me ...

Posted by Olaf (# 11804) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I was surprised it got a 1...

Me as well. The report was quite positive, with criticisms only about incense and moderate Latin. I hope that the church does take those issues into account when evaluating herself.

It would not have avoided this circumstance, but I do wish the score question were phrased more specifically, such as "If you lived nearby, how would you feel about making this church your regular?" That would at least eliminate the occasional "3...I'm afraid it's too far away!" that we see.

This is too wordy, no doubt, but I wonder if it could be something along the lines of "If you lived nearby, and belonged to this denomination, how would you feel about making this church your regular?" Perhaps that could be an additional question. [Olaf is just thinking 'aloud']

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

Please remember that the question reads: "How would you feel about making this church your regular?" Not "On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate this service?"

The MWer could have thought the service was the next best thing to the celestial banquet itself, but could still not be at all likely to make the church his or her regular.

The rating of 1 means that regardless of how good the service was, the MW is not at all likely to make this church his or her regular. It does not mean that on a scale of 1 to 10 the MWer really hated the service.

We considered changing the wording of the question, but the overwhelming consensus of those who weighed in on the question was to leave it as it is.

[ 06. January 2013, 00:34: Message edited by: Amanda B. Reckondwythe ]

Posted by Anglican_Brat (# 12349) on :

I have noticed that in some broad church parishes, Christmas and Easter are the only times when they break out the incense and go "High-church lite." While a lot of people only go to church during these two services, the services of Christmas and Easter don't necessarily reflect the average liturgy week by week.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

It's also the only time of the year when the word 'Mass' can be used without frightening the horses.

Posted by Abigail (# 1672) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
It's also the only time of the year when the word 'Mass' can be used without frightening the horses.

This is something that puzzles me (and I’m sorry to say, irritates me a bit) very year… that so many churches that never normally use the word “Mass” advertise “Midnight Mass” on Christmas Eve.

My church is consistent – we call it “Midnight Communion”. [Smile]

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

I bet it's at 11.30 pm.

When young and self-righteous I can remember correcting my sister who said "Midnight Mass" (she went to a convent school) by saying just that: "It's Midnight Holy Communion".

It was at 11.30.

I'm wiser and kinder now.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by sebby:
For some reason objection taken to incense in church, reminds me of Queen Victoria when told that she would meet Abraham in heaven, and that he had more than one wife: 'Then we shall not receive Abraham'.

Or the duchess who said to Fr. Sianton, at S. Alban's Holborn, that she didn't like the incense, to which he replied, 'Well, it wasn't being offered to you.'

Posted by SyNoddy (# 17009) on :

December 24th is the only time Holy Communion gets the moniker 'mass' round our way. But in every day parlance we use an Altar rather than a Communion Table, go figure!

Posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop (# 10745) on :

Midnight Mass does not necessarily begin at midnight. In a RC church near me, it began at 22.00 hours and advertised in inverted commas, "Midnight Mass".

Posted by Metapelagius (# 9453) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Abigail:

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
It's also the only time of the year when the word 'Mass' can be used without frightening the horses.
This is something that puzzles me (and I’m sorry to say, irritates me a bit) very year… that so many churches that never normally use the word “Mass” advertise “Midnight Mass” on Christmas Eve.

My church is consistent – we call it “Midnight Communion”.

The beginning of January a few years back, while taking my daughter and her paraphernalia back to university in London I found myself waiting in traffic in Finchley Road outside S. Andrew's URC (ex Presbyterian, I'm sure). The notice board listed Christmastide services, including, on December 24th, 'Midnight Mass' (sic). That did strike me as a bit startling .... What would John Knox have to say?
[Help]

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
Midnight Mass does not necessarily begin at midnight. In a RC church near me, it began at 22.00 hours and advertised in inverted commas, "Midnight Mass".

I know a (CofE) church in Norfolk which more accurately advertises: "'Midnight' Mass". The position of the quotation marks makes all the difference!

And I suspect that the noise of Knox birling in his grave is fairly inaudible there!

[ 06. January 2013, 16:24: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

Presbyterian or Presbyterian-heritage shipmates may correct me, but I suspect that Knox would have been pretty much as cross about the mention of Christmas as he would have been about the use of the word Mass.

Posted by Metapelagius (# 9453) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Presbyterian or Presbyterian-heritage shipmates may correct me, but I suspect that Knox would have been pretty much as cross about the mention of Christmas as he would have been about the use of the word Mass.

True. Calvin's wish for weekly communion had of course been frustrated; Knox on his return to Scotland suggested quarterly celebrations on the first Sundays in March, June, September and December so that traditional festivals would be avoided. The June date would, however, have coincided with Pentecost from time to time. Even so Knox's first Genevan service book has details of how to determine the date of Easter and of feasts dependent on its date.

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

I've always, charitably, assumed that an 11.30pm start means that's its approaching midnight by the time they reach the communion part - having gone through some carols, prayers and other preliminaries.

Posted by seasick (# 48) on :

Midnight Mass is mass "during the night" - it's not actually essential that it be at 12:00am. Liturgically Christmas begins with first vespers.

Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
... the nice informal touch with the gathering around the altar for communion.

It does sound nice. But I'm having trouble picturing it. If I interpret the MWer's description of the place correctly, it sounds like there were hundreds of people present. I've only done this at smaller services.

Posted by Carys (# 78) on :

I wasn't surprised by the 1 because it was obvious that it was not the reviewer's cup of tea. I seem to recall a similar thread to this with another review.

I was surprised at the gathering round at communion as I'm not sure how that would work with such a full church. I've known that work well in small groups (especially at Franciscan meetings when you can assume everyone is communicant) but with a full midnight mass crowd?

Carys

Posted by *Leon* (# 3377) on :

I used to go there, so it's interesting to read the report.

I like the fact that reports are very personal and subjective, so I'm not complaining about this one. I'm slightly disappointed that we aren't having a discussion about the differences between the service style at St James and your typical MOTR-to-high church, but there you go.

A couple of bits of info:

Incense is indeed only used on special occasions. From memory I'm guessing it's used twice a year.
I suspect the 'latin bits' were a Taize chant.

The gathering round the altar does work fine, although I imagine any visiting sidespeople would spend the entire eucharistic prayer worrying about the risks of riots and stampeeds. Basically, once you've received you wait till the chalice is nowhere near the people blocking your exit then barge past them. If there's a mob of people in one place and no-one somewhere else, people will move to fill the gap. All this works with very little explanation, with the (numerous) visitors just following the example of the locals.

I'd say the service is MOTR-to-slightly high, but the serving is done very deliberately and there a few deliberate informalities compared to usual.

Posted by *Leon* (# 3377) on :

Oh, and to further clarify on the way communion is done, the pattens and chalices are carried round by appropriately licensed people, not passed from person to person as tends to happen in smaller groups.

Posted by Liturgylover (# 15711) on :

quote:
Originally posted by *Leon*:
I used to go there, so it's interesting to read the report.

I like the fact that reports are very personal and subjective, so I'm not complaining about this one. I'm slightly disappointed that we aren't having a discussion about the differences between the service style at St James and your typical MOTR-to-high church, but there you go.

I'd say the service is MOTR-to-slightly high, but the serving is done very deliberately and there a few deliberate informalities compared to usual.

I agree with you that this is an interesting question for discussion. I must say I reacted with surprise when I saw the MW describe the church as an Anglo-Catholic one when it has never been described as such before, and that impression didn't come across when I visited last year.

Certainly the celebration of communion around the altar suggested a more informal approach than would be evident elsewhere in other MOTR-high London churches - I am thinking here of St Marylebone, St George Hanover Square and St Mary Abbott as examples of churches that would be at a similar place on the liturgical candle. All three use incense on occassion (AFAIR) but have choral rather than congregational mass settings.

Posted by Corvo (# 15220) on :

I used to worship at St Jim's now and then and would describe it as having a style of its own rather than fitting into the usual 'MOTR', 'high' etc categories. Rector Donald Reeves created this and it seems to continue.

I remember the church being censed 'non-liturgically' before the service began.

Posted by Corvo (# 15220) on :

St Marylebone and Hanover Square were far more trad, but not too far away at St John's Wood it was also the custom to stand around the altar (actually a drop-leaf dining-room table) and there to hold hands through the eucharistic prayer.

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

quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I've always, charitably, assumed that an 11.30pm start means that's its approaching midnight by the time they reach the communion part - having gone through some carols, prayers and other preliminaries.

St Mary the Virgin, Times Square, this year was a good example of how to start First Mass of Christmas at 11:00 p.m. and not reach the Consecration until 12:10 a.m. Long processions with a lengthy station at the crib and another at the rood, full and bombastic hymn introductions and interludes, two chaplains with vimpa following the bishop about to receive, hold, and return his mitre and crosier, etc. On the other hand, with everything else going on, the canon of the mass got rather lost in the two hour liturgy.

Posted by Utrecht Catholic (# 14285) on :

It was most interesting to read the report on the Midnight Eucharist at St.James's Piccadily.
I love High Anglican worship,provided that the ceremonial is relaxed and natural.
St.James's is certainly not High Church or Anglo-Catholic, it has a central tradition of its own.
The Midnight Eucharists at St.Paul's Cathedral or Westminster Abbey are far more High Church,with a latin setting for the ordinary of the mass and the use of incense,which you hardly smell because of the large size of the buildings,
For smaller churches,I would suggest, use Russian or Greek Orthodox incense,much sweeter than the much stronger product in the western church.
Moreover it will not have a bad effect on your throat.

Posted by Liturgylover (# 15711) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Corvo:
St Marylebone and Hanover Square were far more trad, but not too far away at St John's Wood it was also the custom to stand around the altar (actually a drop-leaf dining-room table) and there to hold hands through the eucharistic prayer.

Oh yes. I think that St John's Wood do that at their earlier 9.30am service, and follow at 11am with a more tradiotnal (and fully choral) one.

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

I wouldn't criticise the MW-er unduly for making a 'category error' in terms of the churchmanship of St James's. If one is low church CofE and unused to incense that one would automatically assume that anywhere that used incense or a Latin chant at some point MUST be Anglo-Catholic rather than Broad, MoTR or in a category of its own.

I would've done at one time. I'm only aware of the range and nuances within Anglicanism through Ship of Fools ... I've long been familiar with Low, Middle and High, of course, but there are strands and variations within all three broad categories and subsets and shades and all manner of other stuff ...

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :

"High" is a movable feast. I went to Midnight Mass at the church in my parents' village and dragged them along. It was MOTR to low, albeit following the liturgy, but elderly male parental comment was "too high church for me".

Methodist upbringing, you see.

Posted by malik3000 (# 11437) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
I have noticed that in some broad church parishes, Christmas and Easter are the only times when they break out the incense and go "High-church lite." While a lot of people only go to church during these two services, the services of Christmas and Easter don't necessarily reflect the average liturgy week by week.

The twice-a-year incense thing is true at our church (sigh)

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
It's also the only time of the year when the word 'Mass' can be used without frightening the horses.

One of our priests uses the word "mass" but the word doesn't appear in posted and written announcements of services except for the twice-a-year "Mass on the grass" -- an outdoor and very folksy not-at-all high celebration taking place in the park next to the church. We have it the last Sunday in May and the first Sunday in September as a beginning and an end to the summer. Casualness is emphasized and the priests wear shorts and t-shirts (with stole -- not necessarily in the liturgically correct color [Smile]

)

Re midnight masses that don't start at midnight -- it seems to me that if it ends around midnight it could still legitimately be called a midnight mass.

And as Seasick accurately states:

quote:
Originally posted by seasick:
Midnight Mass is mass "during the night" - it's not actually essential that it be at 12:00am. Liturgically Christmas begins with first vespers.

[ 08. January 2013, 17:59: Message edited by: malik3000 ]

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

quote:
Originally posted by malik3000:
One of our priests uses the word "mass" but the word doesn't appear in posted and written announcements of services except for the twice-a-year "Mass on the grass"

So I'm guessing he's either rather posh, or from the North of England [Smile]

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:

quote:
Originally posted by malik3000:
One of our priests uses the word "mass" but the word doesn't appear in posted and written announcements of services except for the twice-a-year "Mass on the grass"
So I'm guessing he's either rather posh, or from the North of England

Open air mass in the North of England in May?? I suspect the former. (Oh, just checked, it's North America. That figures.)

[ 08. January 2013, 19:11: Message edited by: Angloid ]

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

In Southern English as I learnt it, mass and grass don't rhyme. In Northern English they would, both with a short "a". (As I speak, mass has as short "a" and grass has a long "a".)

But in old fashioned, posh (I hate using that word) Southern English, they would rhyme, as in John Betjeman's poem about St Barnabas' Oxford: "Where once the fritillaries hang in the grass/The baldachin pillar is guarding the mass", both with a long "a".

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
In Southern English as I learnt it, mass and grass don't rhyme. In Northern English they would, both with a short "a". (As I speak, mass has as short "a" and grass has a long "a".)

But in old fashioned, posh (I hate using that word) Southern English, they would rhyme, as in John Betjeman's poem about St Barnabas' Oxford: "Where once the fritillaries hang in the grass/The baldachin pillar is guarding the mass", both with a long "a".

That has never occurred to me! I've always read those lines as I would speak them, i.e.. both short 'a's. I should have imagined Betjeman himself reading it.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

I've always understood that only recusants of ancient family pronounce 'mass' with a long 'a', and that in anyone else, it is an affectation.

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

Try saying "grass" with a Devon accent - a short "a" sounds pinched and affected by comparison.

I think I have a recording of Betjeman using the recusant pronunciation of mass on some other recording. Nation's sweeetie though he became, a bit of him as a young man was a middle class climber.

[ 09. January 2013, 08:12: Message edited by: venbede ]

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :

Graaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaass and Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaass

Well, they rhyme [Biased]

Posted by Corvo (# 15220) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
"High" is a movable feast.

I think 'high' is often used nowadays simply to mean 'obviously religious'.

Anything in a service that goes beyond well-known hymns, Bible readings and the Lord's Prayer is for many people uncomfortably 'religious'. Anything in fact that is more than might be found in an old-fashioned school assembly.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

quote:
Originally posted by venbede:

I think I have a recording of Betjeman using the recusant pronunciation of mass on some other recording. Nation's sweeetie though he became, a bit of him as a young man was a middle class climber.

He certainly was, although in fairness he did own up to his sense of social insecurity in quite a lot of his work. And he didn't climb as obsessively as his mate E Waugh. (I don't know, but I'd put money on it that Waugh said Maaass and his father would have said Mass.)

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

Definitely, Lord Copper.

And a genuine aristocrat, like the father of their chum Nancy Mitford, would have said Holy Communion.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
a genuine aristocrat, like the father of their chum Nancy Mitford, would have said Holy Communion.

Protestant aristocrat, certainly (though they would have preferred Mattins). But there were plenty of aristocratic recusants.

Posted by sebby (# 15147) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Metapelagius:

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Presbyterian or Presbyterian-heritage shipmates may correct me, but I suspect that Knox would have been pretty much as cross about the mention of Christmas as he would have been about the use of the word Mass.
True. Calvin's wish for weekly communion had of course been frustrated; Knox on his return to Scotland suggested quarterly celebrations on the first Sundays in March, June, September and December so that traditional festivals would be avoided. The June date would, however, have coincided with Pentecost from time to time. Even so Knox's first Genevan service book has details of how to determine the date of Easter and of feasts dependent on its date.

Those who object to 'mass' or Midnight Mass seem not to object to the word 'Christ-mas' = The Mass of Christ.

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

John Knox probably did.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0