|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Fighting the Liturgical War
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
We tend to alternate the Benedictus es with the Te Deum unless MP as ante-communion occurs twice in Eastertide, or something of that nature. The usual setting of the Te Deum in our place is "Set A" from the 1940 Hymnal of the PECUSA which is Monk/Croft.
The tradition here was Low side of Central in British terms. 8.00am Communion (Low Mass) was followed by 10.00am Sung Communion alternating with Morning Prayer. This remained the case until about 1990 when the then rector then knocked MP back to 'whenever the rector is away.' He seemed to be one of those 'one change a year' guys as he introduced mass vestments in 1992; Office lights in 1993; and perpetual reservation of the MBS in 1994; a holy font by the door in 1995; and started introducing bits and bobs from the Missal in 1996/7 just before his retirement. The next guy was a full on Missal Mass, rammed it down everyone's throats, and there was an explosion that split the parish.
When I came here in 2002 the general feeling was that they would like MP back in the schedule. Initially, it was said before the Low Mass, and then there was a request for Sung MP occasionally. At that point I was in the position of either:
(a) saying no
(b) putting up with no Eucharist at the main service on fifth Sundays.
(c) using MP as the ante-communion once a month.
I decided (c) was the line of least resistence. We do not have a worship committee so things tend to get left to the Rector's commonsense, if he has any. I do put out feelers though to see if there is anything folks would like to see added to the schedule or changed. It was also a useful barginning chip when I introduced incense a year or so later.
The only time I get much static about the way we do things is when someone comes in from outside and does not have the necessary humility to sit back for six months to see if the parish tradition works.
PD
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gottschalk
Shipmate
# 13175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PD:
We tend to alternate the Benedictus es with the Te Deum unless MP as ante-communion occurs twice in Eastertide, or something of that nature. The usual setting of the Te Deum in our place is "Set A" from the 1940 Hymnal of the PECUSA which is Monk/Croft.
The tradition here was Low side of Central in British terms. 8.00am Communion (Low Mass) was followed by 10.00am Sung Communion alternating with Morning Prayer. This remained the case until about 1990 when the then rector then knocked MP back to 'whenever the rector is away.' He seemed to be one of those 'one change a year' guys as he introduced mass vestments in 1992; Office lights in 1993; and perpetual reservation of the MBS in 1994; a holy font by the door in 1995; and started introducing bits and bobs from the Missal in 1996/7 just before his retirement. The next guy was a full on Missal Mass, rammed it down everyone's throats, and there was an explosion that split the parish.
When I came here in 2002 the general feeling was that they would like MP back in the schedule. Initially, it was said before the Low Mass, and then there was a request for Sung MP occasionally. At that point I was in the position of either:
(a) saying no
(b) putting up with no Eucharist at the main service on fifth Sundays.
(c) using MP as the ante-communion once a month.
I decided (c) was the line of least resistence. We do not have a worship committee so things tend to get left to the Rector's commonsense, if he has any. I do put out feelers though to see if there is anything folks would like to see added to the schedule or changed. It was also a useful barginning chip when I introduced incense a year or so later.
The only time I get much static about the way we do things is when someone comes in from outside and does not have the necessary humility to sit back for six months to see if the parish tradition works.
PD
One thing from your post I think worth noting is that despite the general climate of liturgical havoc or apathy raging in the last couple of decades, your community was trying to find its ways through traditional liturgies and forms.
The Anglican choral tradition is so rich and beautiful - Monk, Croft, Purcell, Tallis, Wesley, Stanford, and so forth. One wishes it were more available beyond the cathedrals, colleges and big churches.
--------------------
Gottschalk
Ad bellum exit Ajax
Posts: 157 | From: The Kingdom of Fife | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
We have monthly full choral matins: setting of at least one of the canticles, proper psalm, anthem, sung responses, etc, etc
Attendance is on a par with parish communion - sometimes even exceeds it.
Settings range from simple Morley to Mathias, via Stanford, Wood and Britten.
Lovely!
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gottschalk
Shipmate
# 13175
|
Posted
@L'organist
I'm sure it must be lovely. ![[Smile]](smile.gif) I wish I had that fare more regularly.
I don't understand why some churches will do the office traditionally, but when it comes to Holy Communion, then all Hell, forgive the expression, breaks loose.
Isn't it simple - we've got the straight BCP, the Dearmer, the Fortescue ceremony-wise for those thus inclined? How can one find satisfaction in those anglicanised versions of the Novus Ordo? There is an interesting Communion Service on the website of St Michael in Cornhill - rearranged BCP communion. Does anyone know if they still follow this order?
--------------------
Gottschalk
Ad bellum exit Ajax
Posts: 157 | From: The Kingdom of Fife | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
Percy Dearmer's 'The Parson's Handbook' would be on the list of 'books that changed my life' for me. I came across a copy when I was at a day retreat at Edward King House, Lincoln, when I was about 17. The retreat was no great shakes, so I was playing hookie in the library after lunch, and started reading Dearmer - a name alread familiar to me from the school hymnbook - Songs of Praise. Thank God, my school was still trying to civilize a no longer existant empire!
What a revelation! A beautiful ordered ceremonial, fully in accord with the BCP and soaked in the mediaeval. I was hooked. When the retreat was over I repaired to SPCK around the corner on the top of Steep Hill, found a copy in the secondhand section for a few quid, and went home a happy PD.
I have to confess that I have spent most of the last ten years trying to turn my MOTR American parish into a Dearmerish sort of a place. We are only halfway there even now, but the ceremonial at the Eucharist is recognizably Dearmer, and we do our best to follow the BCP. I am a part time parish priest, but I am careful to schedule the Office and the Eucharist as much as I can - not just on Sundays! Our basic pattern is Sundays, Wednesdays, and major Holydays for the Eucharist, and before the Eucharist and on the above plus any day I am in the office for Matins and/or Evensong.
One thing I think it is important to do is pray for the membership of the parish. I pray for 2/3 of folks each day of the month mentioning them before the Prayer for all sorts and conditions. I think the Daily Office offers a time for intercession, and I am quite happy with folks sharing their prayer needs in the appropriate place at Matins or Evensong.
I do wish I could get them chanting the office to plainsong on weekdays, but perhaps that will come in the Lord's time and not mine! Maybe, they just prefer to say not sing. As a priest one just has to keep heart, eyes and eas open, and try to perceive the need.
Another idea I need to play with at some point is that of reviving West Gallery Music as part of the liturgy. My organist is big on Baroque music, and likes slightly off the beaten track stuff, and plays a lot of good second rate stuff by English and American composers of the 1700s. We have even had Turlough O'Carolan arrange for keyboard played on the organ as the voluntary after Church of a Sunday. It went over well, I can assure you.
I would like to be a bit more "Volkskirche" in the way we do things, but I have to deal with the ghost of Victorian "properness." It would be nice to do a 'Jane Austen Era' service once in a while, and I would love it if the back pew was once again the singers pew, and we had a little instrumental music in church. Just spare me the guitars and drum kits - that's getting boring fellas!
PD
(who knows how to dance Grimstock!)
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PD:
... I do wish I could get them chanting the office to plainsong on weekdays, but perhaps that will come in the Lord's time and not mine! Maybe, they just prefer to say not sing. As a priest one just has to keep heart, eyes and eas open, and try to perceive the need.
Another idea I need to play with at some point is that of reviving West Gallery Music as part of the liturgy. My organist is big on Baroque music, and likes slightly off the beaten track stuff, and plays a lot of good second rate stuff by English and American composers of the 1700s. We have even had Turlough O'Carolan arrange for keyboard played on the organ as the voluntary after Church of a Sunday. It went over well, I can assure you.
I would like to be a bit more "Volkskirche" in the way we do things, but I have to deal with the ghost of Victorian "properness." It would be nice to do a 'Jane Austen Era' service once in a while, and I would love it if the back pew was once again the singers pew, and we had a little instrumental music in church. Just spare me the guitars and drum kits - that's getting boring fellas!
Rather than plainsong, why not revert to singing your psalms in metre. Rollo Wood's Praise and Glory has some lively settings.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Rather than plainsong, why not revert to singing your psalms in metre. Rollo Wood's Praise and Glory has some lively settings.
Blech. Give me Coverdale any day, and the adapted Sarum tones from Briggs & Frere!
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gottschalk
Shipmate
# 13175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Rather than plainsong, why not revert to singing your psalms in metre. Rollo Wood's Praise and Glory has some lively settings.
Blech. Give me Coverdale any day, and the adapted Sarum tones from Briggs & Frere!
Am not a great fan of metrical psalms and paraphrases either - though I see their value. I'm ok for plainsong if it is done well, and the congregation is motivated. And hymns, or course - but the problem with many hymn tunes is their romantic/secular character.
--------------------
Gottschalk
Ad bellum exit Ajax
Posts: 157 | From: The Kingdom of Fife | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
As far as I have been able to work out, the metrical psalms were not usually used as a substitute for the 'saying psalms.' For much of the 18th century the liturgy was basically a duet of Parson and Clerk with the laity only joining in a few places. The congregational response was largely provided by the metrical Psalms.
High Churchmen remained Psalms only quite late. The original hymnbook in my home parish c. 1836 was snappily entitled 'The New Version of the Psalms in Metre, with a selection of Hymns for the Church seasons.' It basically consisted of Tate and Brady and a selection of about 70 hymns. It was replaced by Hymns Ancient and Modern about 1865. Chad Varah maintained that his Dad -Vicar 1911-45 - used the English Hymnal, and we went to HA&MR c.1952. The current hymnal is Common Praise. The first really big selling hymnbook in the Church of England was Bickersteth's 'Hymnal Companion to the BCP' which was published in 1856.
PD
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gottschalk:
.... - but the problem with many hymn tunes is their romantic/secular character.
Like "the dove on the far-off terebinths"?
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
seasick
...over the edge
# 48
|
Posted
I regret that the duties of my real life work have prevented me from getting to this thread until now. There have been a number of comments which are way outside the realm of acceptable comment in Ecclesiantics. I am particularly looking at Gottschalk but there are others who are not guiltless. I advise you all to remind yourselves of the 10 Commandments and of the guidelines of this board. Personal attacks are contrary to Commandment 3 and will not be tolerated.
seasick, Eccles host
[ 24. July 2013, 19:12: Message edited by: seasick ]
--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley
Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PD:
I have to confess that I have spent most of the last ten years trying to turn my MOTR American parish into a Dearmerish sort of a place.
Why? What was so wrong with the MOTR liturgy they had before you exerted ten years of effort into changing the way they worship?
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vade Mecum
Shipmate
# 17688
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by PD:
I have to confess that I have spent most of the last ten years trying to turn my MOTR American parish into a Dearmerish sort of a place.
Why? What was so wrong with the MOTR liturgy they had before you exerted ten years of effort into changing the way they worship?
Well, YMMV, obviously, but I find it (using it for the giant amorphous mass of practices which could be considered MOTR) to be often apologetic, cack-handed and uninspiring, and more than usually lacking in reverence and an understanding of the liturgical dynamic.
Even Dearmerish British Museum Religion would be preferable. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
--------------------
I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Posts: 307 | From: North London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
Clearly MOTR worship is not to your personal liking, and PD obviously finds Dearmerish worship to be very much his cup of tea. But it seems to me that spending the better part of a decade exerting efforts to change a parish's liturgy would be based on something more than personal preference. So I thought PD might explain what was wrong with the MOTR worship being practiced by his parish when he got there.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Clearly MOTR worship is not to your personal liking, and PD obviously finds Dearmerish worship to be very much his cup of tea. But it seems to me that spending the better part of a decade exerting efforts to change a parish's liturgy would be based on something more than personal preference.*snip*
While I would say that this be the case on a sane planet, RuthW, I have seen extraordinarily determined longterm efforts by a rector simply to suit his preference. I do not know PD or this parish situation, but I would not rule it out.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
My predecessors had tried to move the parish up the candle, and had got good natured tolerance which eventually tapered off into open rebellion when the American Missal was introduced. As sacking and a back tracking to somewhere around MOTR followed, but in the process a variety of liturgical minimalism set in. The services were either Masses or hymn sandwiches.
Basically, what they were doing had gotten very stale, so it was time to push on some doors and see which ones opened. I initially tried continuing what my immediate predecessor had done, whilst slowly removed the non-BCP material. That got as favourable response, as did reintroducing Morning Prayer, which had dropped out of the schedule.
There basically is not a huge difference between MOTR and British Museum Religion, so it was mainly a tidying up exercise. Certainly the old MOTR manual "The Middle Way" by Latta Griswold (Morehouse, 1928) is a bit Dearmerish, so that was the direction I took things. Moving to a new building helped, as the new space allowed the painless removal of a lot of altar clutter.
The main changes have actually been fairly periferal. The ablutions are taken at the end of Mass, not immediately after Communion. Genuflection has been replaced with bowing, etc..
The big changes are things like a proper Good Friday liturgy (which has been popular) and the restoration of some of the old ceremonies on Maundy Thursday. I think my biggest change was the elimination of 'Office Lights' hich occured when we moved from the old building to the new, and the introduction of incense on major festivals. No-one seems to have minded my liturgical changes, and for the most part, the folks seem to have a bit more ownership of the liturgy now that the dominating factor is doing it 'by-the-book' rather than 'parson's pleasure.'
It has reall been a bit of a sideline exercise all the way through. It terms of my attention and effort preparing sermons, dealing with the routine pastoral work, and navigating the week-in; weel out aggreviations of being a Rector have had far for of my attention. It started out as a case of something needing to be done, and between my background and training and the parishes preference it has ended up being the direction that has worked for us.
PD
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Holding
Coffee and Cognac
# 158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PD:
for the most part, the folks seem to have a bit more ownership of the liturgy now that the dominating factor is doing it 'by-the-book' rather than 'parson's pleasure.'
PD
Forgive a chuckle. Parson's Pleasure is/was the name of a spot on the Cherwell reserved for nude bathing by members of the University...all men at the time it started, though it continued/continues for many decades after the admission of women.
Your phrasing conjured up the image of a nude PD, possibly wearing a stole, presiding at a north end....
Forgive.
John
Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gottschalk
Shipmate
# 13175
|
Posted
Come on, now! Now that Parson's Pleasure has been mentioned someone should regale us with the Bowra Anecdote. ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
[ 26. July 2013, 01:08: Message edited by: Gottschalk ]
--------------------
Gottschalk
Ad bellum exit Ajax
Posts: 157 | From: The Kingdom of Fife | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
PD briefly mentions:
altar clutter
Can you elaborate for us?
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
John, the tongue in cheek reference to a certain spot on the Cherwell was intentional. I thought it would give someone a checkle, but I did not quite expect such a lively imagination!
TSA, I am afraid I tend to regard the gradine, faux tabernacle, and the six gimcrack candlesticks, flower vases and IHS cross that they bore to be altar clutter. Especially when all that brassware usually comes at the expense of no proper frontal, just the liturgical miniskirt of a superfrontal. In a broader sense, it also includes the needles multiplication of prie dieu and other woodwork within the sanctuary. I have heard the effect described as 'being like Watts and Co's backroom.'
PD
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by PD:
... I do wish I could get them chanting the office to plainsong on weekdays, but perhaps that will come in the Lord's time and not mine! Maybe, they just prefer to say not sing. As a priest one just has to keep heart, eyes and eas open, and try to perceive the need.
Another idea I need to play with at some point is that of reviving West Gallery Music as part of the liturgy. My organist is big on Baroque music, and likes slightly off the beaten track stuff, and plays a lot of good second rate stuff by English and American composers of the 1700s. We have even had Turlough O'Carolan arrange for keyboard played on the organ as the voluntary after Church of a Sunday. It went over well, I can assure you.
I would like to be a bit more "Volkskirche" in the way we do things, but I have to deal with the ghost of Victorian "properness." It would be nice to do a 'Jane Austen Era' service once in a while, and I would love it if the back pew was once again the singers pew, and we had a little instrumental music in church. Just spare me the guitars and drum kits - that's getting boring fellas!
Rather than plainsong, why not revert to singing your psalms in metre. Rollo Wood's Praise and Glory has some lively settings.
Some of the tunes were very familiar, especialy Cranbrook, though the words are other than those I know. The version I am most familiar with begins
"Where has tha bin since I saw thee,
On Ilkla Moor bah t'at?"
Abends is familiar to 'Through all the changing scenes of life' and Lydia (Phillips) is one of the many alternatives to 'O for a thousand tongues to sing...' though I am more used to Lyngham.
The NV lacks some of pith of the Scottish (Roos) Version of psalms in metre, but both are something of an improvement on Sternhold and Hopkins (OV). That said, the Old Hundreth remains familiar to this day, whilst off the top of my head I cannot think of anything from Tate and Brady that is still that familiar.
PD
[ 26. July 2013, 03:52: Message edited by: PD ]
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
Thanks, PD. All you say about clutter is certainly coördinate with all the rest you've said.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Metapelagius
Shipmate
# 9453
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PD:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by PD:
... I do wish I could get them chanting the office to plainsong on weekdays, but perhaps that will come in the Lord's time and not mine! Maybe, they just prefer to say not sing. As a priest one just has to keep heart, eyes and eas open, and try to perceive the need.
Another idea I need to play with at some point is that of reviving West Gallery Music as part of the liturgy. My organist is big on Baroque music, and likes slightly off the beaten track stuff, and plays a lot of good second rate stuff by English and American composers of the 1700s. We have even had Turlough O'Carolan arrange for keyboard played on the organ as the voluntary after Church of a Sunday. It went over well, I can assure you.
I would like to be a bit more "Volkskirche" in the way we do things, but I have to deal with the ghost of Victorian "properness." It would be nice to do a 'Jane Austen Era' service once in a while, and I would love it if the back pew was once again the singers pew, and we had a little instrumental music in church. Just spare me the guitars and drum kits - that's getting boring fellas!
Rather than plainsong, why not revert to singing your psalms in metre. Rollo Wood's Praise and Glory has some lively settings.
Some of the tunes were very familiar, especialy Cranbrook, though the words are other than those I know. The version I am most familiar with begins
"Where has tha bin since I saw thee,
On Ilkla Moor bah t'at?"
Abends is familiar to 'Through all the changing scenes of life' and Lydia (Phillips) is one of the many alternatives to 'O for a thousand tongues to sing...' though I am more used to Lyngham.
The NV lacks some of pith of the Scottish (Roos) Version of psalms in metre, but both are something of an improvement on Sternhold and Hopkins (OV). That said, the Old Hundreth remains familiar to this day, whilst off the top of my head I cannot think of anything from Tate and Brady that is still that familiar.
PD
The NV versions of Pss 34 and 42 (Through all the changing scenes of life and As pants the heart) are, I would suggest, still pretty well known - albeit only for a few verses. I can only ever recall coming across an OV psalm in a service once. Kethe's version of Ps 100 (Old Hundredth, though the tune was originally set to Ps 134) isn't in fact the OV version - that has a ballad metre version by Hopkins. Kethe's version appeared in the Anglo-Genevan Psalter of 1561, but not Day's Psalter of 1562 (the first "standard" edition of the OV). It appeared in a supplement to the 1564 printing, and, of course, in the 1564 Scottish Psalter which substituted in a number of cases versions by Kethe (9 in all, including pretty good ones of Pss 91 and 104), Craig, Whittingham and Pullain &c for those of Sternhold or Hopkins. Millar Patrick's Four Centuries of Scottish Psalmody is, as ever, useful on this point.
It isn't particularly accurate to decribe the 1650 Scottish Psalter as the 'Rous' version. The compilers started with Rous and other sources, but substituted so many bits and pieces from other versions or that not that much Rous was left. Ian Bradley in his collection of favourite hymns gives the sources as far as can be determined for Ps 23 - it really was translation by committee. Rous had no variety of metre - everything was in ballad metre.
--------------------
Rec a archaw e nim naccer.
y rof a duv. dagnouet.
Am bo forth. y porth riet.
Crist ny buv e trist yth orsset.
Posts: 1032 | From: Hereabouts | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by PD:
'being like Watts and Co's backroom.'
PD
Lovely phrase - conjures up images of orgies in vestments
There's websites for that sort of thing, at least until Call-Me-Dave gets his bill through.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Metapelagius:
The NV versions of Pss 34 and 42 (Through all the changing scenes of life and As pants the heart) are, I would suggest, still pretty well known - albeit only for a few verses. I can only ever recall coming across an OV psalm in a service once. Kethe's version of Ps 100 (Old Hundredth, though the tune was originally set to Ps 134) isn't in fact the OV version - that has a ballad metre version by Hopkins. Kethe's version appeared in the Anglo-Genevan Psalter of 1561, but not Day's Psalter of 1562 (the first "standard" edition of the OV). It appeared in a supplement to the 1564 printing, and, of course, in the 1564 Scottish Psalter which substituted in a number of cases versions by Kethe (9 in all, including pretty good ones of Pss 91 and 104), Craig, Whittingham and Pullain &c for those of Sternhold or Hopkins. Millar Patrick's Four Centuries of Scottish Psalmody is, as ever, useful on this point.
It isn't particularly accurate to decribe the 1650 Scottish Psalter as the 'Rous' version. The compilers started with Rous and other sourc ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif) es, but substituted so many bits and pieces from other versions or that not that much Rous was left. Ian Bradley in his collection of favourite hymns gives the sources as far as can be determined for Ps 23 - it really was translation by committee. Rous had no variety of metre - everything was in ballad metre.
That gave me my quota on new facts to file away for today! I had quite forgotten that 'Through all the changing scenes of life' was a metrical of Ps.34. I also need to brush up on my metrical Psalter history!
PD
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
womanspeak
Shipmate
# 15394
|
Posted
Despite Liturgical wars, I don't really care what form of Anglican service I attend when all is said and done (although my sneezing and asthma when its high up the candle stick does limit this expression of worship to a once only visit).
What I care about is the welcome for those new to the faith, for seekers such as young families who have not been raised themselves in the church.
Working with young children and their families I often worry that the boring middle of the road provision including the ubiquitous 80 year old organists will not resonate culturally with them regardless of the preparation and evangelism and discipleship offered through Messy Church, Playgroup, Mainly Music etc.
I feel almost embarrassed in inviting them to such old-fashioned, dull and too often incomprehensible offerings. But I'm only a lay person, what do I know!
--------------------
from the bush
Posts: 62 | From: rural australia | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by womanspeak:
Despite Liturgical wars, I don't really care what form of Anglican service I attend when all is said and done (although my sneezing and asthma when its high up the candle stick does limit this expression of worship to a once only visit).
What I care about is the welcome for those new to the faith, for seekers such as young families who have not been raised themselves in the church.
Working with young children and their families I often worry that the boring middle of the road provision including the ubiquitous 80 year old organists will not resonate culturally with them regardless of the preparation and evangelism and discipleship offered through Messy Church, Playgroup, Mainly Music etc.
I feel almost embarrassed in inviting them to such old-fashioned, dull and too often incomprehensible offerings. But I'm only a lay person, what do I know!
You're absolutely damned right, but don't expect a sympathetic hearing from the denizens of this particular part of the SoF.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
I read womanspeak as implying that the style or details of worship are unimportant compared to the genuineness of the participants. Not 'lets not bother about how we worship as long as we welcome people'.
Each style of liturgy - Dearmerite or Tridentine High Mass, post-Vat2/Common Worship, formal Protestant bible-and-hymn sandwich, modern praise service, Quaker meeting, etc etc - has its own integrity and as long as the people involved in it believe in it and respect that integrity, the 'welcome' will take care of itself. All too often people appear embarrassed by the worship they are offering and it comes across as false.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by womanspeak:
Working with young children and their families I often worry that the boring middle of the road provision including the ubiquitous 80 year old organists will not resonate culturally with them regardless of the preparation and evangelism and discipleship offered through Messy Church, Playgroup, Mainly Music etc.
Yeah, it's funny how a lot of church-based activities are tailored to be culturally relevant to people with little or no church background, but then there's often a massive cultural jump to the actual church services; with people in funny robes, ancient languages, unexplained rituals and so on. As if those things are more important than welcoming people into the family of God...
I know people here have explained the importance of the funny robes, ancient languages etc. etc. but I still don't understand why they are a necessary part of how we should gather to praise God and encourage one another.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
I would suggest that the "otherness" of Christian worship is itself necessary - worship at its best is a foretaste of heaven, and if the world in general were like that there would be no need of services at all. Otherness occurs because Christ is not like the world.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Well, I don't understand why wearing chinos, putting your hands in the air, singing every chorus three times and punctuating your prayers with 'Lord, we just want to...' at least twice every sentence are necessary to worshipping God. But I accept that they work for some people.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Personally I don't really "get" either of them. Both stereotyped styles seem utterly culturally divorced from anything normal people do or can relate to.
The people in the churches of course are not "normal people". If they were, they'd be playing football/out on the club ride/reading the paper/in bed/visiting relatives along with the other 95% of the population.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
wearing chinos
Typical clothing for many developed-world people in semi-formal situations.
quote:
putting your hands in the air
Just a typical expression of celebration and joy.
quote:
singing every chorus three times
Helps newcomers learn the songs quicker, that's all.
quote:
punctuating your prayers with 'Lord, we just want to...' at least twice every sentence
Inelegant language, I grant you, but if that's the language of the people...
None of these things are 'necessary to worshipping God', IMO. They are merely about worshipping God and gathering together to encourage one another in the life of Christian discipleship without putting up cultural barriers for those who are new to, or on the fringe of, the church community.
[ 05. August 2013, 10:54: Message edited by: South Coast Kevin ]
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
putting your hands in the air
Just a typical expression of celebration and joy.
Really?
Thurible
--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."
Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
Sure, at concerts and sporting events for a start.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
I know people here have explained the importance of the funny robes, ancient languages etc. etc. but I still don't understand why they are a necessary part of how we should gather to praise God and encourage one another.
That's more or less the point I was making. If your church, Kevin, started to think that they 'ought' to wear robes and chant in Latin, but couldn't do that without being embarrassed about it, then there would be something wrong. They are clearly not a necessary part for your community. However, it would be equally wrong and embarrassing for the Dean of St Paul's (for example) to suddenly appear at the altar one Sunday in chinos and polo shirt, having sent the choir packing and shredded all the copies of Common Worship eucharist.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
punctuating your prayers with 'Lord, we just want to...' at least twice every sentence
Inelegant language, I grant you, but if that's the language of the people...
A big 'if'. I've never heard anybody talk like that outside of (a particular kind of) church. If it's the 'language of the people' it's the language of a very narrow sub-set of middle-class anglophones strongly influenced by American evangelical jargon.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Sure, at concerts and sporting events for a start.
Concerts I can't really speak to but, at football matches, one might jump up and down, one might punch the air, one might hug one's neighbour. But one's hardly going to stand there with a hand raised whilst singing "Wanky, wanky, wanky Oxford", for example.
Thurible
[ 05. August 2013, 11:14: Message edited by: Thurible ]
--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."
Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
punctuating your prayers with 'Lord, we just want to...' at least twice every sentence
Inelegant language, I grant you, but if that's the language of the people...
A big 'if'. I've never heard anybody talk like that outside of (a particular kind of) church. If it's the 'language of the people' it's the language of a very narrow sub-set of middle-class anglophones strongly influenced by American evangelical jargon.
I just really want to say, Angloid, that I really agree, Angloid, with that, and I just really want to say that that's really just not how I talk normally, Angloid.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
punctuating your prayers with 'Lord, we just want to...' at least twice every sentence
Inelegant language, I grant you, but if that's the language of the people...
A big 'if'. I've never heard anybody talk like that outside of (a particular kind of) church. If it's the 'language of the people' it's the language of a very narrow sub-set of middle-class anglophones strongly influenced by American evangelical jargon.
I just really want to say, Angloid, that I really agree, Angloid, with that, and I just really want to say that that's really just not how I talk normally, Angloid.
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) ![[Axe murder]](graemlins/lovedrops.gif)
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Thurible:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Sure, at concerts and sporting events for a start.
Concerts I can't really speak to but, at football matches, one might jump up and down, one might punch the air, one might hug one's neighbour. But one's hardly going to stand there with a hand raised whilst singing "Wanky, wanky, wanky Oxford", for example.
Uhhhhh..... yes, sometimes they do. Really. OK, the words are likely to be ruder but...
Not so much the one arm held vertically thing beloved of charismatic evangelicals and left-wing olympic medallists but more often both arms held out at about 45 degrees, with the fingers in appropriate signalling positions
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206
|
Posted
Oh, I agree entirely, ken, about the double handed thing. (Certainly when we played Millwall at Wembley a couple of years back...)
It was, rather, the idea of the gentle, arm up, let's sway type thing.
Thurible
--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."
Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
wearing chinos
Typical clothing for many developed-world people in semi-formal situations.
quote:
putting your hands in the air
Just a typical expression of celebration and joy.
quote:
singing every chorus three times
Helps newcomers learn the songs quicker, that's all.
quote:
punctuating your prayers with 'Lord, we just want to...' at least twice every sentence
Inelegant language, I grant you, but if that's the language of the people...
None of these things are 'necessary to worshipping God', IMO. They are merely about worshipping God and gathering together to encourage one another in the life of Christian discipleship without putting up cultural barriers for those who are new to, or on the fringe of, the church community.
Blimey, SCK, I thought I was taking the piss out of you, but even though I've checked my irony meter a couple of times, you do really seem to be serious!
As I say, if they work for you and yours, fine. I'll accept that and you can have the decency to accept that liturgy and vestments work for some of the rest of us- including some newcomers. If there's one thing worse IMO than snooty tat queens or BCP fundies it's the 'ooh look at us, we're ever so much more in touch and accessible than you are' crowd who don't recognise that what they regard as normal and accessible may well be just as much a product of a particular subculture, and equally alien to many others, as the stuff they are so smugly comparing themselves with.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
Oddly, most modern worship comes across to me as being "fwightfully middle-class" and the property of those folks who would not say shit if they stepped in it. It always strikes me as surreal when they pray intensely about social justice for left-footed lesbians in Guyana or peace in the middle East, and do not pray, never mind try and do something, about the life destroying problems on their own back doorstep. It always puts me in mind of the old Victorian respectability vices of transference and avoidance.
Church should be different. After all, you are worshipping Almighty God, not a Tesco's shopping cart. How it is different is very much a YMMV but it was sign, symbol, and mystery being taken serious that moved me from being a curious working class baptized agnostic to being a committed Christian. Just as important was the fact that they did their fallen best to live their Christian faith from day-to-day, so there was a connection between worship and life. That is pretty powerful stuff.
Most folks have a pretty well-developed bullshit detector, so if what the church does is radically out of alignment with what the church says* then no amount of "dumbing-down to reach out" (other evangelism options available, but rarely tried, IMHO) then your efforts to bring people in are stuffed before you start. Oh, and the other thing is that your attempts to bring folks in are not going to be successful if they are "yours" and not "His." Evangelism has to be done in such a manner that it points away from self towards God.
One of the reasons I like the vestments and ritual of the catholic movement is that they submerge the individual into a corporate God-orientated activty - the Mass. Of course, that is my response to God, and I am aware of the fact that other folks do not respond well to that sort of ritualized behaviour, or prefer different rituals.
Anyway - here endeth the rant!
PD
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by womanspeak:
Despite Liturgical wars, I don't really care what form of Anglican service I attend when all is said and done (although my sneezing and asthma when its high up the candle stick does limit this expression of worship to a once only visit)...
By those standards, why bother limiting oneself to Anglicanism at all? If the form of service doesn't reflect any sort of doctrinal positions, one could just as easily drop into a Baptist church, and in that case one would need not fear for incense.
When I drop into a Lutheran church, I do expect that the language used reflects Lutheranism. I am Lutheran, and to be honest, it is probably the best fit for my beliefs. I do frequently encounter home-brewed prayers, and I'm afraid many of them make mistakes such as verging into heresy to preserve a rhyme.
When I encounter changes to the expected order of service, they invariably involve replacing congregational parts with performance parts (sermons, talks, musical acts, drama, etc.) Yes, I take issue with this too, as I like to participate by more than simply listening. Is it my personal preference? Sure. Yet it is also the norm set out and commended for use by the denomination, and thus it's not exactly like I am fighting for something out of the ordinary.
To be frank, some do self-concocted liturgy well. More power to them. Unfortunately, most do not. Then they persist in beating a dead horse.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Blimey, SCK, I thought I was taking the piss out of you, but even though I've checked my irony meter a couple of times, you do really seem to be serious!
Heh, don't worry; I know your post was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. I was just playing it with a straight bat, as it were.
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
If there's one thing worse IMO than snooty tat queens or BCP fundies it's the 'ooh look at us, we're ever so much more in touch and accessible than you are' crowd who don't recognise that what they regard as normal and accessible may well be just as much a product of a particular subculture, and equally alien to many others, as the stuff they are so smugly comparing themselves with.
Guilty as charged, at least to some extent. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif) I agree with what a few folks have already said, that authenticity is the key. Which will mean different things to different people, but I guess I mean churches using music that sounds a bit like the secular music their people are listening to at the moment, people wearing clothes similar to what they'd wear out to a mixed-company social occasion etc.
quote:
Originally posted by PD:
Church should be different. After all, you are worshipping Almighty God, not a Tesco's shopping cart.
I'm glad the 'difference' worked for you, PD, in terms of nudging you towards faith in Christ, but I'm still struggling to understand the argument. However, I think that's based on our respective theological bases (that is the plural of basis, right?!) in terms of what we think is the point of church services / meetings.
As I've said upthread (I think it was this thread), IMO church meetings are for mutual encouragement and reminding one another of the wonderful, great God we belong to. They aren't for 'worshipping God', because IMO the clear New Testament witness is that worshipping God is a whole-life thing. Everything we do, if done for the glory of God, is an act of worship. From this theology springs the idea that church gatherings shouldn't be different from the rest of our lives; rather, they should reflect and be rooted in our lives. So I do agree with you on the connection between worship and life, I'd just phrase it differently.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PD:
Church should be different. After all, you are worshipping Almighty God, not a Tesco's shopping cart. How it is different is very much a YMMV but it was sign, symbol, and mystery being taken serious that moved me from being a curious working class baptized agnostic to being a committed Christian.
Much the same as my experience, except that I was an unbaptised agnostic. My only experience of 'church' before my late teens (apart from sporadic and unwilling attendance at Sunday school) was once or twice attending 11.00 Mattins and being bored out of my mind. Then I attended my first (very MOTR, said 1662 with vestments) eucharist and immediately sensed that something very important was going on. I didn't know what it was, but there was a perceptible sense of presence which made me feel it was worth taking seriously. All the solemn po-faced hymn-singing seemed irrelevant by contrast; as I am pretty sure any sort of charismatic worship would, had I encountered it. It's all very much YMMV, but it's easy to lose out on the mystery if one is striving after 'relevance.'
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
...it's easy to lose out on the mystery if one is striving after 'relevance.'
This would be an interesting idea to explore further, I think. Naturally, I want it to be perfectly feasible to have both mystery and relevance, but is it? Thinking about my own church experience, our Sunday gatherings are (I think!) very relevant but I'm not sure there's much mystery. Perhaps transcendence is a better, broader word, and I'd more readily say we have some of that...
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
