|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Sacraments and priesthood
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
I met someone today who is not called into the priesthood, and yet he is being prompted by God's call into the sacramental ministry of presiding over the Eucharist.
This is the second time I have met such a person, the first a woman. How can this be?
In what way does God call priests into being 'set apart'?
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
It is possible in Anglican churches to get permission to dispense the elements, sometimes without the priest being present.
Maybe they think they are being called to do this?
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Obviously, I've never met this person, and don't know what he's actually saying. Also, you have not indicated to which ecclesial community he belongs. However, I would have thought that either,
- He is not being called into either priesthood or sacramental ministry, or
- He is being called to both, but in some way he is inhibited by an oddly narrow conception of what priesthood is about.
Is it that he is RC, but feels no call to celibacy? If so, I'd agree that's a problem, as unless you're committed to a traditional RC understanding of these things, there's no obvious link that God only calls into ministry those who are also called never to marry.
Another point, which applies irrespective of one's ecclesial community, is whether he is assuming call is something wholly inner, between God and you, or whether it is something that either
- the ecclesial community can see even if he can't, or
- whatever he feels like inside, the ecclesial community can't see it.
[ 27. June 2015, 18:11: Message edited by: Enoch ]
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Serious question: how does this person know?
The prompting of the Holy Spirit which doesn't leave him however much he tries to deny or ignore it.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
It is possible in Anglican churches to get permission to dispense the elements, sometimes without the priest being present.
Maybe they think they are being called to do this?
Maybe. But if this is supposed to be a calling specifically for priests, and he is not called into ordination, what is happening here? Does God not recognise the separation of duties?
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Obviously, I've never met this person, and don't know what he's actually saying. Also, you have not indicated to which ecclesial community he belongs. However, I would have thought that either,
- He is not being called into either priesthood or sacramental ministry, or
- He is being called to both, but in some way he is inhibited by an oddly narrow conception of what priesthood is about.
Is it that he is RC, but feels no call to celibacy? If so, I'd agree that's a problem, as unless you're committed to a traditional RC understanding of these things, there's no obvious link that God only calls into ministry those who are also called never to marry.
Another point, which applies irrespective of one's ecclesial community, is whether he is assuming call is something wholly inner, between God and you, or whether it is something that either
- the ecclesial community can see even if he can't, or
- whatever he feels like inside, the ecclesial community can't see it.
It's interesting isn't it? If the call is recognised by a church, irrespective of ecclesial community, it will be expanded upon so that it will fit a category, while if it is not recognised by a church as it remains a limited calling, it must be denied.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
I vaguely recall reading of the tradition of a "mass priest" charged only with celebrating the Eucharist and not licensed to preach. Perhaps this is a case where the idea needs to be restored?
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
I vaguely recall reading of the tradition of a "mass priest" charged only with celebrating the Eucharist and not licensed to preach. Perhaps this is a case where the idea needs to be restored?
Ah, good, it sounds as if there are precedents.
Would the Churches be open to such ideas today, do you think?
After all, many are called to preach who are not also called to preside at the Eucharist.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
I vaguely recall reading of the tradition of a "mass priest" charged only with celebrating the Eucharist and not licensed to preach. Perhaps this is a case where the idea needs to be restored?
Ah, good, it sounds as if there are precedents.
Would the Churches be open to such ideas today, do you think?
After all, many are called to preach who are not also called to preside at the Eucharist.
I don't know. I think I came across it in the context of a discussion of the practice of communion by extension in remote parts of the SEC. I can certainly see some downsides in terms of what people expect of a priest and how you would manage vocations in such a way that it didn't become a consolation prize for those deemed unsuited to the "regular" priesthood.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
It is difficult to say this, and perhaps difficult to read it. However, here goes.
The fact that I say 'I have a call' does not on its own trump anything at all, and shouldn't. It is not dependent entirely on my interior illumination. We are none of us entitled to say 'I have a call; because I recognise it, so must you'. There would be a profound and disturbing lack of humility about that approach.
Having said that, I have also encountered clergy who were duff preachers. Yet I would have said they showed all the markets that they were called, had been rightly ordained and had the characteristics of priesthood, both sacramentally and pastorally. I'm sure there are other shipmates who would say the same.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
It is difficult to say this, and perhaps difficult to read it. However, here goes.
The fact that I say 'I have a call' does not on its own trump anything at all, and shouldn't. It is not dependent entirely on my interior illumination. We are none of us entitled to say 'I have a call; because I recognise it, so must you'. There would be a profound and disturbing lack of humility about that approach.
Having said that, I have also encountered clergy who were duff preachers. Yet I would have said they showed all the markets that they were called, had been rightly ordained and had the characteristics of priesthood, both sacramentally and pastorally. I'm sure there are other shipmates who would say the same.
There's surely a place for honesty. If someone believes that he or she is being called by God into any aspect of ministerial service, they are allowed to say so without being accused of a lack of humility. I agree that it doesn't 'trump' anything, and that discernment through others is the way in which God most often affirms a calling.
The way we lump together certain aspects of service into roles perhaps doesn't mirror the way God wants it to be, so it seems to me.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dal Segno
al Fine
# 14673
|
Posted
There doesn't seem to be any biblical reason why someone needs to be ordained in order to preside at the eucharist.
Luther recognised this:
quote:
If a little group of pious Christian laymen were taken captive and set down in a wilderness , and had among them no priest consecrated by a bishop, and if there in the wilderness they were to agree in choosing one of themselves, married or unmarried, and were to charge him with the office of baptizing, saying mass, absolving and preaching, such a man would be as truly a priest as though all bishops and popes had consecrated him.
--------------------
Yet ever and anon a trumpet sounds
Posts: 1200 | From: Pacific's triple star | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Yes, but in Lutheran theology that man would possess the one thing that makes a pastor different from any layperson, which is a call extended by the church--in this case, his fellow desert islanders, who are asking him to serve in this way. That's a pretty profound difference to someone who feels an inner prompting but his outer circumstances are not in agreement (in this case, the church he is a part of would expect him to assume a fuller role he is not interested/willing to assume).
The reason Lutherans value the call of the church so highly is because we find it more trustworthy--i.e. we expect to see the Holy Spirit's leading when a community of Christians does something (with suitable prayer and meditation, etc.) but a single individual, no matter how pious, is easily carried away by enthusiasms that may be all too human. So "tell it to the church" has long been one way of testing whether a person is in fact being divinely called. Particularly in cases like this one, where what the person senses is a very unusual "call" of a pattern not normally seen in his branch of the church.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
What has God got to do with this? With our grandiose, sexist OCD? What emperor's clothes of meaning can we ascribe to this?
I would have said that He meets is where we are regardless, but that doesn't wash any more.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
The NT knows nothing of either priesthood as an office or caste, or of sacraments (as opposed to ordinances), or of the restriction of the administration of the Lord's Supper to certain Christians to the exclusion of others.
Carry on.
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
The NT knows nothing of either priesthood as an office or caste, or of sacraments (as opposed to ordinances), or of the restriction of the administration of the Lord's Supper to certain Christians to the exclusion of others.
Carry on.
Where do the scriptures speak of "ordinances" as opposed to sacraments? Where do they speak of all Christians being able to administer the Lord's Supper?
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
"You".
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
You're being vague as usual, though I can probably guess what you're referring to. Still, it does nothing to prove your point.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
I don't have to prove anything. You do. And it can't be done of course. But I have to go now. To communion.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
I don't have to prove anything. You do. And it can't be done of course. But I have to go now. To communion.
Eh? If I have to prove something then so do you. My point was that if the scriptures don't prove sacraments or the priesthood then neither does it prove the opposite, but then the scriptures are a handbook as to how to do these things. Rather one has to look to the actual practice of the Church.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
A calling in the broad (applicable to everyone) sense is something YOU need to respond to, but not necessarily expect OTHERS to recognize in you.
If God is calling you to write music, or do landscaping, or feed the homeless - get busy. Years later others will recognize your calling through what you have already been doing.
The problem is the modern church (or at least many branches of the modern church) blocks people responding to God this simply and directly, because the church has been superimposed with a massive organization. I'm way oversimplifying and groping for how to express. Organizations have their legitimate needs, but people need to not be fixated on them.
If someone sincerely and persistently feels called to preach, they need to go preach and not narrow their focus or concept of preaching to the church organization as the only way to do that.
If someone sincerely and persistently feels called to preside over sacraments, *I* draw the same conclusion: find the people or places in need, not currently being served through the formal system, and get busy. But *I* am not one who thinks God has any interest in restricting presiders to a sliver of all Christians or thinks anyone should be without just because none of that sliver have showed up.
Too many people think a calling has to operate through a formal church - and those looking to that formal structure for their expression of calling are the worse offenders, too often using the word "calling" as if the word applies only to formal church positions. As if "I have a calling" is sufficient to say what the calling is about! Nope.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Shouldn't there be a 'not' in there somewhere?
And.
I agree. It's up to us to work it out without being exclusive, divisive, sectarian, esoteric, weird about it.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Shouldn't there be a 'not' in there somewhere?
Yes.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Darllenwr
Shipmate
# 14520
|
Posted
I would suggest that Ordination is a matter of church discipline within certain denominations and not others. If Ordination is a problem to the individual we started with, then there is the question of whether or not that individual should remain within their current denomination. If this individual is set upon presiding at a Eucharist, but not being ordained, then the answer is to join a denomination wherein ordination is not a prerequisite. Many of the local chapels around where I live would offer the facility, though the person in question would need to prove themselves fit, in the eyes of the congregation, to preside before they would be invited to do so - there will always be some sort of qualification, formal or otherwise - nobody can just walk into a church and expect to be allowed to preside at the Eucharist just like that, purely on the strength of "I feel led ..."
--------------------
If I've told you once, I've told you a million times: I do not exaggerate!
Posts: 1101 | From: The catbox | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Vast wisdom.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Darllenwr:
...If this individual is set upon presiding at a Eucharist, but not being ordained, then the answer is to join a denomination wherein ordination is not a prerequisite.
A lot of callings involve the discomfort necessary for growth. Getting out of your habitual way of seeing things is often uncomfortable, some people want to stay in their familiar denomination and want the denomination to change to conform to their sense of calling.
Any maybe sometimes staying in the poor fit is exactly where you belong - it's the misfits who stayed and fought for change that got CofE and TEC to accept female clergy.
No one firm set of rules - of course; God seems to like doing things new ways.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
The NT knows nothing of either priesthood as an office or caste, or of sacraments (as opposed to ordinances), or of the restriction of the administration of the Lord's Supper to certain Christians to the exclusion of others.
Carry on.
Even if your reading of the NT is correct, so what? The books of the NT are products of the very early years of the church. Do you do everything the way you did it when you were 18?
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
The NT knows nothing of either priesthood as an office or caste, or of sacraments (as opposed to ordinances), or of the restriction of the administration of the Lord's Supper to certain Christians to the exclusion of others.
Carry on.
Even if your reading of the NT is correct, so what? The books of the NT are products of the very early years of the church. Do you do everything the way you did it when you were 18?
No I don't but then again at 18 I wasn't inspired by God. That's rather different from the biblical text.
We have layered a lot of church practice with tradition - none more so than the Eucharist which has had a "priestly" caste involvement from the very early years. Like Kaplan, I can't find any scriptural reason why the "president" of a communion/mass/eucharist service has to be a priest.
However, there is a strong argument that seems to indicate that the act itself is limited only to those who believe and therefore, anyone believing and present is qualified to "preside" in the sense of praying, giving thanks and participating generally.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
No I don't but then again at 18 I wasn't inspired by God. That's rather different from the biblical text.
We have layered a lot of church practice with tradition - none more so than the Eucharist which has had a "priestly" caste involvement from the very early years. Like Kaplan, I can't find any scriptural reason why the "president" of a communion/mass/eucharist service has to be a priest.
However, there is a strong argument that seems to indicate that the act itself is limited only to those who believe and therefore, anyone believing and present is qualified to "preside" in the sense of praying, giving thanks and participating generally.
So you admit that the church had this practice from very early in its history (and, by the way, priesthood is discussed quite extensively in Hebrews, with Christ as the model) but because the authors of the New Testament didn't write down the details of how to conduct worship you feel at liberty to disregard it? Sola Scriptura really is a nonsense.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
Yes, sola scriptura is nonsense. So is the idea that the church trumps the Bible. So is talking about the church as opposed to the churches, as if it was ever uniform. So is the idea that how to conduct worship was a settled thing down to the details, that someone could have written down.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
So are priests equal to laity in the royal priesthood of ALL believers. But more so?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
The only priesthood that makes sense to me is the priesthood of Jesus. (And like all titles for Jesus we need to remember that it's such a poor fit as to be pretty much a joke, and that the pairing changes the title, not Jesus.)
And our encounter with Jesus today is through the churches (though not in a direct or reliable way), and church means community, and community means people in relationship, and relationship requires equality, or at least, openness to the call of equality and moving down the road towards it. So priestliness in the churches today is a flickering emergent property of the mysterious Body. It might be associated from time to time with certain people called and set apart, but we don't control it, because it is of God.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
So we divide - set apart - over who can be foreman in the remembrance of Jesus' sacrifice?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
I wasn't thinking of the Lord's Supper particularly, but of whose visit makes a person feel cared for, whose word includes or excludes, whose presence can heal, whose understanding or support is felt to matter. These are priestly functions, and will often be centred in the person asked to be leader / servant, but obviously not always.
When it comes to the eucharist I think the key person is the one who irons the frilly cloths.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I hope they (the cloths, that is) have crocheted edges with "IHS" incorporated into the motif. If not, you cannot be part of the One True Church.
P.S. You also need to have a large, wooden, carved and extremely uncomfortable chair for the Presiding Minister. Ideally bits of the carving will stick into inconvenient parts of their anatomy. Without this, the Eucharist simply won't "work".
This example may fail the test by being marginally too comfy.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
We have layered a lot of church practice with tradition - none more so than the Eucharist which has had a "priestly" caste involvement from the very early years. Like Kaplan, I can't find any scriptural reason why the "president" of a communion/mass/eucharist service has to be a priest.
So you admit that the church had this practice from very early in its history
Yes of course, and Paul makes clear that from the very beginning churches got a lot of stuff wrong.
The human inclination is to rule, set up pecking orders, regard people as mostly lesser but a few greater. From the very beginning - and today - churches attract people looking to build their own turf. It takes only a small minority of this kind to dominate the larger group looking only to enjoy each other and God.
I would love to see George Orwell on churches. What word would he put on a few people wearing outrageously ornate clothes, dominating the proceeding, telling others they are forbidden to do the things he does, and claiming these all prove he is a "humble servant"?
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
I hope they (the cloths, that is) have crocheted edges with "IHS" incorporated into the motif. If not, you cannot be part of the One True Church.
P.S. You also need to have a large, wooden, carved and extremely uncomfortable chair for the Presiding Minister. Ideally bits of the carving will stick into inconvenient parts of their anatomy. Without this, the Eucharist simply won't "work".
This example may fail the test by being marginally too comfy.
That chair is what we call 'lookshuree'. The one I most often sit on has no carved bits, but has a steeply sloping, shiny cushion. The effort of sitting calmly at the table makes your thighs burn. So I stand.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Oddly enough, Belle Ringer, George Orwell chose to be buried in Anglican fashion ...
Not sure what that tells us. Except perhaps that he didn't object to it that much.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
At the risk of being overly subjective, we have to 'speak as we find' and pick up on the cues/atmosphere etc wherever we are.
What hatless describes is, I think, the ideal at the 'better end' of his own Baptist tradition. Baptist Trainfan the same.
Those of a more sacramental bent would see things differently and those same aspects that they've described expressed in a different way - or present in a different way perhaps.
Others might say that those aspects aren't present in more sacramental or traditionally sacerdotal forms at all - or at least, less well-articulated and realised.
We can only speak as we find - and whatever our doctrinal position on these things our own experiences are going to colour things. My wife has a bit of an issue with bishops, for instance, after two snooty Anglican bishops gave her a hard time in a Christian bookshop where she once worked ... donkeys' years ago now ...
For my own part, our local parish vicar doesn't regard himself as a 'priest' in the traditional sacerdotal sense, eschews clerical garb for the most part and is about as 'low' as you can get without dropping out of the bottom entirely. He's a nice bloke but I've got to be honest - whereas he thinks that eschewing clerical garb and ceremony makes him more 'accessible' he's the last person I'd go for if I ever needed some kind of pastoral help/advice or guidance etc.
Ok - that might still be the case even if he were to dress up to the nines in copes and chausables and albs and what-not ...
But the point I'm making is very much in line with an old Greek saying ... apparently the Greek Orthodox have a saying (and you'll forgive my lack of the Greek term) which is, 'it's not the thingummy ie. whatever Greek term it is for whatever it is that Greek priests were - that makes the priest.'
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
If it was an RC church across the road (and it was for as long as it hasn't been ...), I'd go. And I would comply in my invincible ignorance: I'd know my place and feel far, far LESS challenged than I do under its present ownership. As I did in Westminster Cathedral last month. What an AWESOME place. I LOVE the austerity!
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I stuck my head round the door at Westminster Cathedral recently -- some kind of very high High Mass going on ... I don't know whether there was a particular reason for this but the congregation seemed very Phillipino or South-East Asian Catholic on this occasion.
I was only there for a short peek but it was pretty sharp and high-octane.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
That'll be a kalimavkion that they WEAR.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Oddly enough, Belle Ringer, George Orwell chose to be buried in Anglican fashion ...
Not sure what that tells us. Except perhaps that he didn't object to it that much.
This
article tells us, among other things, that he was of a family with clerical associations, was confirmed by the Blessed Charles Gore, took the Church Times, helped refurbish church statuary, and was married and buried according to the rites of the CoE.
It appears that he was more conerned over the RCC and its connexion with Fascism in Spain and with totalitarian practice, associating the inquisitor with the Stalinist interrogator.
Generally speaking, I find it dangerous to project views on one subject on the basis of writing on other topics, but on the basis of his support of English folkways and practices (village life, the Maypole, e.g.,) I suspect that Orwell would have had a preference for the anglo-catholicism of Blessed Percy's folk-and-socialism's ritual practices over the baroque anglo-papalist version. It is unfortunate that the Statesman never asked him to review Ritual Notes.
Where's a ouija board when one really needs it?
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
What an interesting article. I should say that from it, Orwell looks like a particularly strong case of 'belonging without believing' - which is certainly not the worst thing to be.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
And in terms of the OP, one cannot forget Animal Farm's dictum that, while all animals are equal, some animals are more equal than others.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
[QB] So you admit that the church had this practice from very early in its history (and, by the way, priesthood is discussed quite extensively in Hebrews, with Christ as the model) but because the authors of the New Testament didn't write down the details of how to conduct worship you feel at liberty to disregard it? Sola Scriptura really is a nonsense.
Of course I admit it - but I wouldn't begin to say that it's a correct innovation. It's more an interpretation that's become a tradition.
I wouldn't agree either that the priesthood described in Hebrews is at all like the Priesthood we see today. For one thing, there's only one Jesus.
We do "this" in memory and in proclamation of Him but there's no restrictions on "who" does "this" nor on "how" it is done. Who and how are the stuff of tradition.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Of course it's the stuff of tradition. How could it be otherwise?
Even if we base things on direct 'chapter and verse' it's still tradition.
The question is whether it's small t tradition or Big T Tradition.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
