Thread: Change and Nostalgia in All Around I See 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=030347
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
The longer I live, the more aware I am that there have been many changes in church practices, liturgy, worship - nothing stays the same for long. Whilst I'm sure that there are many reasons why people should adapt to new ways, I also have a sneaking suspicion that we have lost something valuable in what has been discarded.
For example, I really miss the Mattins canticles - yes I know that, as a regular service, Mattins did really have to go. But those canticles were rather special, surely we could still sing them once in a while?
(If you don't already know them, try Googling Venite, Te Deum, Benedicite, Benedictus, Jubilate - for the words and also for some quite magnificent settings.
O all ye works of the Lord, bless ye the Lord: praise him and magnify him for ever.
What would you like to retain in the church from times past, even if only for special occasions?
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
posted by Chorister quote:
I know that, as a regular service, Mattins did really have to go
Really: why?
In any case, Matins hasn't 'gone', there are still churches where Morning Prayer according to the BCP is celebrated.
There is no good reason why churches can't use the morning canticles within the context of a eucharist if they choose.
The Te Deum laudamus, in particular, was traditionally sung to mark celebrations: which is why we sang it at my church to mark the Golden and Diamond jubilees of HM The Queen.
The Benedicite omnia opera is about the most appropriate thing ever for celebrating God in creation and, as such, fits right into a Harvest service. If you don't want the full version, there are shortened ones (they only use the Praise him and magnify him for ever at the end of every third verse) - and the Jubilate Deo can also be appropriate for general thanksgiving.
The words of the Benedictus are particularly suitable for Advent and could be slotted into a eucharistic service where the Gloria normally goes.
All it needs is a little ingenuity and thought.
But again I come back to the point: what is wrong with Matins?
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
There's a bit of anecdotal evidence- some of it came up in another thread here recently- that the decline of Mattins alienated quite a lot of people who wanted to worship but for one reason or another did not feel able to make the degree of commitment that they understood a Eucharist to require. (I think Mrs A, whose preference was usually for Evensong or the monthly Mattins that our then church used to schedule, is one such.) I'm a weekly Communion man myself (although I use a slightly abbreviated BCP MP for private prayer) but I think that some churches might do well to consider a reintroduction of Mattins, even if only monthly as the main morning service, or alongside a Eucharist as one of two morning services, time and staff permitting.
Posted by Hilda of Whitby (# 7341) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
In any case, Matins hasn't 'gone', there are still churches where Morning Prayer according to the BCP is celebrated.
<snip>
But again I come back to the point: what is wrong with Matins?
No Eucharist, would be my guess.
When I was growing up and attending services at my Episcopal church, the 8:00 AM service was morning prayer; the 11:00 AM service was Holy Communion. I love the morning prayer service but it is not easy to find one on a Sunday in most Episcopal churches, at least around here. At the Episcopal churches I have attended in the last 12+ years, the early service is Holy Communion (without music) and the 10 or 11 AM service is Holy Communion (with music).
I read the morning daily office from a book called Contemporary Office Book. As well as the daily office prayers and collects from the BCP, it includes the Psalter, and the text of all readings from the Bible for each day. It also has those wonderful canticles, and a daily schedule you can follow to read them, so each day you are reading a different one. It's really lovely to recite those beautiful hymns of praise that I grew up with; they are part of my DNA.
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
The Te Deum laudamus, in particular, was traditionally sung to mark celebrations: which is why we sang it at my church to mark the Golden and Diamond jubilees of HM The Queen....
But again I come back to the point: what is wrong with Matins?
The Te Deum can be sung at the end of solemn or festal evensong to mark major feats such as Easter.
What's wrong with Mattins is that it isn't the Eucharist.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
I know that Matins (or Evensong, for that matter) isn't a eucharist - otherwise it would be differently titled.
But why does every service have to be a communion service? IIRC at the Last Supper the disciples were enjoined to 'do this is memory of me' - no frequency was specified.
Posted by Spike (# 36) on
:
To get away from the argument of Matins vs Eucharist and return to the original question, I've known the Jubilate and Benedictus sung as anthems at the Eucharist, although I agree many of these pieces are sadly neglected. I was well into my thirties when I encountered the Benedicite for the first time and was blown away by the beauty of the words.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
Surely, by and large, the MOTR churches that used to have Choral Mattins have become Eucharist-centred (and few of them these days, including many cathedrals, have the resources to mount two 'main' services every Sunday.) There are very few 'Prayer-Book-Evangelical' churches that might have Mattins as a regular main service: the tendency is for 'all-age family worship' or unstructured Praise services.
It's difficult enough for people to commit to an hour of church every Sunday, let alone the full round of Prayer Book services. The lack of young (i.e. under 50) people in church is not simply because of lack of faith, but the competing demands of modern life (children's football, shopping, family days out, etc. But I don't think the church should give up.. there might not be the numbers to make up choirs or congregations for choral services as of yore, but it is possible to maintain the celebration of the liturgy in simple but festive form provided there is a nucleus. In that way the church is 'keeping the kettle on the boil', as a priest I knew used to say, for anyone and everyone to pop in as and when they feel called. But if only one service is provided it must surely be the eucharist.
What I miss is the lack of daily mass in so many places. Nowadays only cathedrals and a few 'shrines' seem to keep the tradition going, whereas only 20 years ago or so many MOTR and most churches with any pretence to be 'catholic' would offer the eucharist daily. Shortage of priests is one reason, though hardly a compelling one (RC priests are even thinner on the ground yet most RC parishes manage a daily mass); shrinking congregations another, but again, a service attended by two people is making an offering to God and 'keeping the kettle on the boil' just as much as one with a congregation of a dozen or two.
Posted by Arethosemyfeet (# 17047) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
I know that Matins (or Evensong, for that matter) isn't a eucharist - otherwise it would be differently titled.
But why does every service have to be a communion service? IIRC at the Last Supper the disciples were enjoined to 'do this is memory of me' - no frequency was specified.
"Do this as often as you drink it" seems to imply a certain degree of frequency, and pretty much all traditions seem to agree that communion should be celebrated at least weekly (even Calvin, despite the practice of many Calvinists). Not necessarily every service, but communion is the summit and centre of Christian worship and it is appropriate that it be the main act of worship of a Christian community each week. I like Matins too, but give me the choice of Matins or the Eucharist for a Sunday service and I know which I'd choose.
I suppose the obvious thing to do if you live in a parish where Matins is not a regular feature is to offer to lead it yourself, prior to the main Sunday service. It's not essential that it be led by a priest, after all.
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
The previous, previous vicar (gosh, have I been there that long?!) kept some of the Mattins canticles going by having one instead of the Psalm from time to time. I also like the idea of singing one as an anthem occasionally.
Something else I miss in church, from a purely sartorial point of view, is the sight of ladies wearing hats. Our last hat wearer joined the choir about 15 years ago, exchanging her fascinating collection of hats for a choir robe, and the practice died out. Now you only see them at weddings, and even they have gradually been replaced by fascinators. Choir hats for women disappeared when I was still a Treble. What would St. Paul think of today's brazen women?!
Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
The previous, previous vicar (gosh, have I been there that long?!) kept some of the Mattins canticles going by having one instead of the Psalm from time to time. I also like the idea of singing one as an anthem occasionally.
Something else I miss in church, from a purely sartorial point of view, is the sight of ladies wearing hats. Our last hat wearer joined the choir about 15 years ago, exchanging her fascinating collection of hats for a choir robe, and the practice died out. Now you only see them at weddings, and even they have gradually been replaced by fascinators. Choir hats for women disappeared when I was still a Treble. What would St. Paul think of today's brazen women?!
If it makes you happy Chorister, I worshipped with a C. of E. church where the choir still followed the practice of the women (both of them) wearing caps just this last Christmas. One of the churches in Norwich followed the same custom until a few years back but I think their choir is now defunct...
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
Might one mention albs + amices (rather than cassock-albs) here?
[ 01. March 2015, 20:34: Message edited by: Albertus ]
Posted by North East Quine (# 13049) on
:
Proper lined out psalm singing. I couldn't find a good example in English on line, but this is what it sounds like in Gaelic.
It sounds just as lovely in English. It just soars.
Posted by Emendator Liturgia (# 17245) on
:
No! ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
(that comment is regarding the use of cassocks and cottas/surplices, in case you didn't guess)
[ 01. March 2015, 20:47: Message edited by: Emendator Liturgia ]
Posted by Spike (# 36) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Might one mention albs + amices (rather than cassock-albs) here?
Albs & amices are worn where I am
[ 01. March 2015, 20:59: Message edited by: Spike ]
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
Does anyone still sing the BCP Litany? I miss that, too.Have mercy upon us, miserable sinners.
The emphasis had to be on the first syllable of 'miserable', milking it for all it was worth.
Posted by Anglican_Brat (# 12349) on
:
quote:
For example, I really miss the Mattins canticles - yes I know that, as a regular service, Mattins did really have to go. But those canticles were rather special, surely we could still sing them once in a while?
In the Canadian rubrics, the "Act of Praise" or Song of Praise in the beginning need not be the Gloria in Excelsis for the Eucharist. You could theoretically substitute the Te Deum for the Gloria in the Eucharist.
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
"Do this as often as you drink it" seems to imply a certain degree of frequency, and pretty much all traditions seem to agree that communion should be celebrated at least weekly (even Calvin, despite the practice of many Calvinists).
But weekly communion is a very recent innovation (outside the RC & Orthodox churches). Until the Parish Communion movement of the 40's and 50's, the "normal" Sunday morning service was non-Eucharistic.
Personally, I see no reason (other than slavish adherence to Canon Law) why the Eucharist should be the main service every Sunday. I wouldn't want to go back to the situation I encountered in the New Church movement, where The Lord's Supper was an extremely irregular occurrence. But does it really have to be every week?
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
I'm not sure I miss canticles as such. But I do think it is sad that it's an either/or situation. You have BCP Mattins and canticles, OR you have Eucharist and hymns (or free service and happy clappy worship songs). There is no reason why you couldn't include canticles in ANY other type of service. They are usually just as eady to sing as anything else. Well, there IS a reason: no one knows them any more except in churches which still do Mattins. I wonder what some younger congregations would make of things like the Venite. I suspect that they wouldn't be too fazed...
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Wot I miss most in Church these days is people.
Ian J.
Posted by Bran Stark (# 15252) on
:
I'm a young 'un, so this is hardly "nostalgia" for me, but I would like to see a schedule something like this.
On ordinary Sundays: Simple service of Morning Prayer (perhaps abbreviated by removing one Lesson and one Canticle), immediately before the Eucharist.
On Great Feasts: Full-blown Choral Mattins, followed by a brief intermission for those only attending one service to leave or arrive, and then the Eucharist.
Posted by Bostonman (# 17108) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
"Do this as often as you drink it" seems to imply a certain degree of frequency, and pretty much all traditions seem to agree that communion should be celebrated at least weekly (even Calvin, despite the practice of many Calvinists).
But weekly communion is a very recent innovation (outside the RC & Orthodox churches). Until the Parish Communion movement of the 40's and 50's, the "normal" Sunday morning service was non-Eucharistic.
It was a "very recent innovation" for which we have strong evidence from the 150s (Justin's First Apology) onwards, which was only changed after over a thousand years of Christian continuity in Britain during the Reformation by the innovation of NOT having the Eucharist.
"Tradition" is what my grandparents did, "innovation" is anything else, right?
Posted by ChastMastr (# 716) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
But does it really have to be every week?
It's why I go.
Posted by Galilit (# 16470) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
Proper lined out psalm singing. ... It just soars.
WE had an organ (suburbs, 60's and 70's) but one Sunday it broke down (or whatever organs do) and we had a "Precentor".
Never forgotten it.
And I can't even sing well.
There is a little on YouTube from the wilds of Scotland in English (see David Murray's channel)
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Wot I miss most in Church these days is people.
Ian J.
I miss large numbers at evensong. In the church I used to attend as a child, it was the most popular service of the day, so very well attended by people of all ages. Now, we get 20-30 in the nave plus 20-30 in the chancel. And I've been told that is an unusually large number compared with other churches which still do evensong - may don't. Guess everyone has been hastily revising their expectations over the years.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Does anyone still sing the BCP Litany? I miss that, too.Have mercy upon us, miserable sinners.
The emphasis had to be on the first syllable of 'miserable', milking it for all it was worth.
Let me paint you a picture Chorister...
My church is down to one service a month. It does full sung BCP Mattins, with Hymns A&M, robed choir, 10 minute sermon, priest in scarf and MA Oxon hood. At the dismissal the priest goes to the door to shake hands with those congregants clearing out at that point....then comes back and picks up with the comfortable words and launches straight into "shortened Holy Communion."
All done in an hour and quarter.
And, surprisingly, about 100-150 in the congregation every month.
some reasons why that have been speculated:
- because it's only once a month people find it easier to commit to it
-people that only want Mattins can have it
- people that want the Eucharist can have it
- the priest is a fine preacher
One other point - and I'm getting close here that some will know where I'm talking about but I'm not going to out it... It was going to be absorbed into a multi-church benefice 10 years ago (when it was down to one service a month anyway). Quick as a flash, the PCC passed A,B, and C, put themselves under a flying bishop and petitioned for a non-stipendiary p-in-c.
Net result, they don't have any more services than they would have had if the merger had gone ahead, but people are coming from all the villages in the united benefice they would have joined to worship there because it gives them what they want. And it's not (really) a dead horses thing - more that the patron (who lives in the village) saw a canny way to get round the diocesan restructure and preserve the village church as the village church.
It's a time capsule, but we don't get " church tourists" really and it works for the locals.
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
Nice one- and an illustration of the continuing value of patronage, if done well.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
Precisely, Betjemaniac: we try to give people what they want and that is for the church to be for the whole of the parish as a centre, not some private club. And our PinC has had to accept that includes keeping Matins as a main service at least once a month.
We're now reintroducing Evensong - first took place yesterday and the turnout was about the same as for a parish eucharist (it was Family Eucharist in the morning).
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
Perhaps now that churches are joining together in groups, it would be more possible for each church to have a specialism, in addition to a main Eucharistic service. For example, in the summer months, a rather special church - well known to tourists - has a weekly Evensong by gaslight. There is a small regular congregation, supplemented by tourists during the season. That church would probably find it hard to keep going without such a specialism, and would probably cease to be viable. I guess the trick is to discern what each church would be particularly good at, and to offer that - so there is variety across the whole group. I like the idea of one church being seen as having a particular mission to offer Mattins! After all, there might be another church, perhaps close to a school, which goes great guns for Messy Church....
Posted by Al Eluia (# 864) on
:
Regarding the OP about the Matins canticles, in the TEC 1979 prayer book it says "a song of praise" may be sung in place of the Gloria at the Eucharist. Our parish substitutes a canticle from time to time, such as Surge Illuminare during this past Epiphany season.
When I first began attending this church in 1982, and up until about 1990, twice a month we had Morning Prayer with Communion. MP serving as the liturgy of the word and then picking up with Communion after the Peace. I miss that sometimes.
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
We never had a Mattins canticle in place of the Gloria, but instead of the Psalm, during the Eucharist, on occasion. Up until about 10 years ago.
Posted by Carys (# 78) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Does anyone still sing the BCP Litany? I miss that, too.Have mercy upon us, miserable sinners.
The emphasis had to be on the first syllable of 'miserable', milking it for all it was worth.
It was sung in procession at St Mary Redcliffe on Ash Wednesday. We also keep up weekly choral Mattins. The Eucharist is much better attended...
Carys
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Perhaps now that churches are joining together in groups, it would be more possible for each church to have a specialism, in addition to a main Eucharistic service. For example, in the summer months, a rather special church - well known to tourists - has a weekly Evensong by gaslight. There is a small regular congregation, supplemented by tourists during the season. That church would probably find it hard to keep going without such a specialism, and would probably cease to be viable. I guess the trick is to discern what each church would be particularly good at, and to offer that - so there is variety across the whole group. I like the idea of one church being seen as having a particular mission to offer Mattins! After all, there might be another church, perhaps close to a school, which goes great guns for Messy Church....
I think that this is a great idea. But why restrict it to parishes that are formally grouped together? Why shouldn't ANY group of churches reasonably close together begin to liaise in order to provide a breadth of good quality services where each church can focus on what it is good at?
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
We have The Litany during at Matins during Lent and Advent.
But then we also sing Easter Anthems during the octave (they are the Gradual at the Parish Eucharist on Easter Day) - anyone else out there do that?
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
It is encouraging to see that there are still pockets existing of what, to some of us, were significant services and components of services. I guess what I miss is their widespread 'Common' usage, and especially their use within easy reaching distance of my part of Creamtealand. Perhaps I should base one of my holidays around a church / cathedral / abbey where such things are still practised. In any case, occasional use ensures that such things remain special, rather than humdrum. Rather like I feel about incense, for example.
Posted by ChastMastr (# 716) on
:
I think that having those other services would be awesome, but I would not get rid of Communion in order to have them.
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
My personal desire is to sing the Mattins canticles again from time to time. But this conversation doesn't only have to be about those. Are there other things that other people would like to see in today's church which haven't been part of common practice (at least in your area) for a long while?
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
I'd love to see nuns in habits, priests in cassocks and birettas, and the tiara on the Pope's head.
Posted by Pulsator Organorum Ineptus (# 2515) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Wot I miss most in Church these days is people.
Ian J.
I miss large numbers at evensong. In the church I used to attend as a child, it was the most popular service of the day, so very well attended by people of all ages. Now, we get 20-30 in the nave plus 20-30 in the chancel. And I've been told that is an unusually large number compared with other churches which still do evensong - may don't. Guess everyone has been hastily revising their expectations over the years.
I attended evensong at King's last Saturday, when the music was mostly of a fairly challenging nature. By the time the doors opened at 5.15, the back of the queue was somewhere out on Kings Parade.
It wasn't like that when I was an undergraduate 40 years ago, and there certainly wasn't any need to reserve the stalls and sub-stalls for members of the college and university (respectively) as is done now. Back then, anybody could sit in the stalls and feel the considerable downdraught from the windows on back of their neck.
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
Mind you, what does Kings charge to see the chapel, outide services, nowadays? Same thing is a factor I suspect in large numbers at evensong in cathedrals which charge for admission. (I think in those cases- not Kings- on balance I'd prefer free entry and sparsely attended daily services to large congregations who are there because the Dean and Chapter think that it is acceoptable to charge to enter the House of God.)
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
Couldn't agree more, Albertus.
But then its the old problem that the vast majority of occasional, non-churched visitors to churches and cathedrals (either for services or just as tourists) will, if left to their own devices, either give nothing at all or leave a generous 50p/ £1 in the plate.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pulsator Organorum Ineptus:I attended evensong at King's last Saturday, when the music was mostly of a fairly challenging nature. By the time the doors opened at 5.15, the back of the queue was somewhere out on Kings Parade.
It wasn't like that when I was an undergraduate 40 years ago, and there certainly wasn't any need to reserve the stalls and sub-stalls for members of the college and university (respectively) as is done now. Back then, anybody could sit in the stalls and feel the considerable downdraught from the windows on back of their neck.
Which is why, a few days earlier, we had decided to go to Evensong at St. John's instead! (Actually it turned out to be choral eucharist for some reason). The music was glorious (Palestrina) and splendidly sung, but people had definitely come to worship rather than for a religious concert sort of thing. There were about 40 present, not counting choir and clergy: no queue!
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Mind you, what does Kings charge to see the chapel, outide services, nowadays?
£8.50, I think.
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Mind you, what does Kings charge to see the chapel, outide services, nowadays?
£8.50, I think.
It's free to members of the University both current and also past graduates.
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
Re-Mattins - with plans to reduce further the number of stipendiary clergy, it might make a comeback here.
Currently we have two churches sharing a vicar. When he retires, we shall get one vicar for 3 churches. So it's likely that two churches would get a eucharist in the morning - 9.30 and 11. The other would get it at 6pm.
I can imagine us doing a full blown choral mattins (with a said with hymns HC in the evening)- we last did so during the interregnum and it was quire popular.
Posted by Ceremoniar (# 13596) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
But weekly communion is a very recent innovation (outside the RC & Orthodox churches). Until the Parish Communion movement of the 40's and 50's, the "normal" Sunday morning service was non-Eucharistic.
Pedantic note: It may have reached your area at that time, but the parish communion movement actually dates from the 1920s and 1930s.
Posted by BroJames (# 9636) on
:
Indeed, and there is a church in my neck of the woods which dates its current practice from then.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
I'd love to see nuns in habits, priests in cassocks and birettas, and the tiara on the Pope's head.
I mean, even on the wilder shores of Anglo Catholicism I'm not sure anyone does a papal tiara, but I can point you in the direction of several CofE churches in Oxford where you could see the first two....
Posted by Arethosemyfeet (# 17047) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Re-Mattins - with plans to reduce further the number of stipendiary clergy, it might make a comeback here.
Currently we have two churches sharing a vicar. When he retires, we shall get one vicar for 3 churches. So it's likely that two churches would get a eucharist in the morning - 9.30 and 11. The other would get it at 6pm.
I can imagine us doing a full blown choral mattins (with a said with hymns HC in the evening)- we last did so during the interregnum and it was quire popular.
The unfortunate thing is that those churches most likely to be deprived of a Priest on a Sunday morning are those least likely to be able to do justice to full blown choral matins.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
I know of very few churches with the resources for a 'full choral Mattins' or Eucharist, or any other service demanding a cathedral style choir. Maybe I move in the wrong circles, but most parishes are lucky to have an organist. A music group consisting of varied instrumentalists would be a bonus (before the usual suspects faint with horror, this doesn't necessarily imply amplified guitars and Kendrick).
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
Exeter Cathedral has given up Sunday Mattins. Not sure how many other Cathedrals have done so.
Posted by Carys (# 78) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Perhaps now that churches are joining together in groups, it would be more possible for each church to have a specialism, in addition to a main Eucharistic service. For example, in the summer months, a rather special church - well known to tourists - has a weekly Evensong by gaslight. There is a small regular congregation, supplemented by tourists during the season. That church would probably find it hard to keep going without such a specialism, and would probably cease to be viable. I guess the trick is to discern what each church would be particularly good at, and to offer that - so there is variety across the whole group. I like the idea of one church being seen as having a particular mission to offer Mattins! After all, there might be another church, perhaps close to a school, which goes great guns for Messy Church....
A friend has blogged on a version of this idea
Carys
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Re-Mattins - with plans to reduce further the number of stipendiary clergy, it might make a comeback here.
Currently we have two churches sharing a vicar. When he retires, we shall get one vicar for 3 churches. So it's likely that two churches would get a eucharist in the morning - 9.30 and 11. The other would get it at 6pm.
I can imagine us doing a full blown choral mattins (with a said with hymns HC in the evening)- we last did so during the interregnum and it was quire popular.
The unfortunate thing is that those churches most likely to be deprived of a Priest on a Sunday morning are those least likely to be able to do justice to full blown choral matins.
Maybe - but we are lucky in that we have the university choir (in term time anyway)
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Exeter Cathedral has given up Sunday Mattins. Not sure how many other Cathedrals have done so.
I think mine did in about 1931 when it fell down in an earthquake. Though more honestly and without checking records it probably went the way of all flesh in the current cathedral in the 1970s.
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on
:
Regarding the use of the BCP litany and miserable sinners I found it both amusing and nostalgic (from a mis-spent childhood in Anglican circles) to rediscover it in a certain parish northist of Auckland, NZ.
Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on
:
The Benedictus is part of the daily worship of the Anglican church by nature of being part of Morning Prayer in CW. I know this is very likely to be private, but it's still there.
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Uncle Pete:
a certain parish northist of Auckland, NZ.
Hmmmm
Posted by venbede (# 16669) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Does anyone still sing the BCP Litany? I miss that, too.Have mercy upon us, miserable sinners.
The emphasis had to be on the first syllable of 'miserable', milking it for all it was worth.
Before Sunday Sung Mass at St Michay's Croydon every Sunday in Lent.
Posted by venbede (# 16669) on
:
And the seasonal plainchant anthem of Our Lady and the Angelus at the end.
Posted by venbede (# 16669) on
:
Change of tack
I think the biggest difference (other than for RCs or Orthodox) is not to do with the form of service, but an attitude.
When someone went to church abouot twenty years ago, they knew what they were getting, or if they didn’t, they got what was typically done. That would be so in most non-liturgical churches as well I imagine. In a liturgical communion, you got the lectionary. With luck, the service would be taken with imagination and pastoral sensitivity, but most of the content was set.
But nowadays worship leaders often can’t trust the congregation to accept the Usual Thing. The president seems like a compère or primary school teacher trying desperately to ingratiate her or himself with an uninformed and reluctant body of laity. The congregation spends much of the service sitting down passively. There is no sense at such a service that they are themselves essential participants actively taking part in a serious business. The whole thing ends up unconvincing because the leader clearly has no confidence in the service and has to placate, simplify and explain the whole time.
The sense we are taking part in something greater than our personal experience has been lost and with it the possibility of worship redeeming or challenging us.
And I can no longer rely on getting the lectionary.
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
When someone went to church about twenty years ago, they knew what they were getting. . . . But nowadays worship leaders often can’t trust the congregation to accept the Usual Thing. . . . The congregation spends much of the service sitting down passively. There is no sense at such a service that they are themselves essential participants actively taking part in a serious business. . . . The sense we are taking part in something greater than our personal experience has been lost. . . .
But that's what it was like in pre-Vatican II RC churches. No one had any real idea of what was going on at the altar. All anyone cared about was doing something vaguely religious, like telling their beads or lighting candles in front of statues, while the priest and altar boys mumbled to themselves in Latin. We heard the gospel read in the vernacular, we got a sermon (either an appeal for money or a hellfire-and-brimstone diatribe against wishy-washy Catholics), we took communion (sometimes, that is), we maybe sang a hymn or two that had nothing to do with the day's commemoration, and that's about it.
Not that I long for those days -- although I do long for mass celebrated with a sense of decorum; fortunately it is still found in some churches.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
Change of tack
I think the biggest difference (other than for RCs or Orthodox) is not to do with the form of service, but an attitude.
When someone went to church abouot twenty years ago, they knew what they were getting, or if they didn’t, they got what was typically done. That would be so in most non-liturgical churches as well I imagine. In a liturgical communion, you got the lectionary. With luck, the service would be taken with imagination and pastoral sensitivity, but most of the content was set.
But nowadays worship leaders often can’t trust the congregation to accept the Usual Thing. The president seems like a compère or primary school teacher trying desperately to ingratiate her or himself with an uninformed and reluctant body of laity. The congregation spends much of the service sitting down passively. There is no sense at such a service that they are themselves essential participants actively taking part in a serious business. The whole thing ends up unconvincing because the leader clearly has no confidence in the service and has to placate, simplify and explain the whole time.
The sense we are taking part in something greater than our personal experience has been lost and with it the possibility of worship redeeming or challenging us.
And I can no longer rely on getting the lectionary.
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
Well said, venbede! This needs to be said many times and said loudly, especially to those in the C of E who have convinced themselves that they are in the marketing business and need to convince as many people as possible that the tasteless fast-food they are selling is nutritious and wholesome. We need an ecclesiastical (not just ecclesiantical) Jamie Oliver.
Posted by venbede (# 16669) on
:
Amanda - I'm sure you're right about your experience of pre-Vat 2 RC worship.
But what you didn't get was the apologetic attitude which comes across in the C of E all too often. "I'm a vicar, I know it's funny but don't kick me and I'll cut out as much of the boring bits as I can and eke it out with feeble jokes and reduce the gospel to sentimental platitudes, OK?"
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
Venbede
You must have been to my local church (not where I go, at least not willingly) and heard the incumbent doing her own version of liturgy lite.
Quite apart from the attitude of "I'm so stressed, its so hard being a pastor for so many people (population of parish less than 2,400), aren't I cutely forgetful" the sermons plumb depths that would shame the average 12 year old.
I'm told that even the wardens are in discussion with the bishop and archdeacon to see what can be done...
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on
:
I can assure you none of that apologetic and self-serving bleurgh comes from my pad ... but I'd have to say though it's a caricature I hear from time to time, I doubt many of my colleagues perpetrate it either (though I admit in this corner of the woods liturgy is badly taught if taught at all in theological college).
On the other hand I doubt you'll be able to overthrow the vicar, either. Bombard him/her with tomes that highlight the value of liturgy as sacred drama and gospel tool.
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
I've wondering whether the "I'm so stressed...." plea means that the wrong people are now being chosen to be priests?? Are they the ones trying to escape or avoid other jobs deemed as stressful? the ones with least stamina, perhaps? Or is it that priests are expected to do more now? Something has changed, certainly. Perhaps it's that today's smaller vicarages don't have room for a train set chill-out zone?
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
I think the biggest difference (other than for RCs or Orthodox) is not to do with the form of service, but an attitude...
And I can no longer rely on getting the lectionary.
Can I ask why the Lectionary is so important to you? Granted it gives a good balanced framework for, and commentary to, the Christian year. That is especially true if different people are presiding and preaching from week to week.
But there are whole chunks of the Bible it never goes near. And what about the preacher, instead of grappling with an unresponsive set text, seeking the mind of the Spirit about what God might want to say to THIS congregation TODAY? A risky business, I agree ...
[ 17. March 2015, 16:11: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
I've wondering whether the "I'm so stressed...." plea means that the wrong people are now being chosen to be priests?? Are they the ones trying to escape or avoid other jobs deemed as stressful? the ones with least stamina, perhaps? Or is it that priests are expected to do more now? Something has changed, certainly. Perhaps it's that today's smaller vicarages don't have room for a train set chill-out zone?
We have room for a train set. But I'd feel guilty spending all that money on one, and it's cold up there in the winter ... I do have some (non-running) model buses and trams, though.
Speaking seriously: I can't speak for the competence of priests. But it strikes me that they now have to cope with multiple parishes, possibly less lay help (that former army of housewives), increased expectations of professionalism, more form-filling and safeguarding ... allied (dare I say it?) to doubts about their exact role in society, a crippling pressure to fill the pews and a huge sense of failure when they don't.
That's for starters, anyway. I also think that some priests/ministers are workaholics who are bad at "switching off" from the job.
[ 17. March 2015, 16:18: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by Arethosemyfeet (# 17047) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
But there are whole chunks of the Bible it never goes near. And what about the preacher, instead of grappling with an unresponsive set text, seeking the mind of the Spirit about what God might want to say to THIS congregation TODAY? A risky business, I agree ...
Risky, in part, because it can aid in the preacher pushing their own agenda and confusing that with the Spirit. The lectionary forces you to consider God's message, and sets you the question of what God is saying to this congregation through these passages. Often in the last few months the minister here has found in the lectionary passages that forced her to confront issues with the congregation that she might have avoided if left to choose the readings herself, but tackle them in a way that was grounded firmly in scripture.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
We have room for a train set. But I'd feel guilty spending all that money on one, and it's cold up there in the winter ... I do have some (non-running) model buses and trams, though. ...
The late Rev Peter Denny largely built his out of any bits and pieces he could lay his hands on. The mechanism for his signalling system was built round bits of old piano keys.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Ah, but he was one of the all-time greats of railway modelling!
Yet again one must ask: did he, as a Vicar in the 50s/60s, have more time on his hands? (One could ask the same of Wilbert Awdry).
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Ah, but he was one of the all-time greats of railway modelling!
Yet again one must ask: did he, as a Vicar in the 50s/60s, have more time on his hands? (One could ask the same of Wilbert Awdry).
The answer he gave, was that this was his one hobby which he chose single-mindedly to concentrate on. Bishop Eric Treacy said the same about photography. Also, there wouldn't have been much television or other things to do in rural Cornwall then.
What, though, also represents a different era with different conditions, is that he described how he spent most mornings in his study. This would not just have been things like sermon preparation. The study would have functioned as an office - clergy didn't have secretaries in those days and largely had to do all their own admin - and people would have come and seen him there. He then spent the afternoons out and about in the parish. If he got any time for his hobby, he said it would usually be in the evenings. That's a big contrast with now, when the evening is the only time when a lot of parishioners are around,
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
The study would have functioned as an office - clergy didn't have secretaries in those days and largely had to do all their own admin - and people would have come and seen him there.
How many clergy actually have secretaries these days? I know big parishes with resources often have a full time (or nearly) administrator; in a medium-sized and not desperately poor parish I could find the cash for a couple of hours admin help a week. But very many priests are still struggling singlehanded with a much bigger load of administration than would be the case in Peter Denny's day. Or am I just unlucky?
Posted by Barefoot Friar (# 13100) on
:
I of course cannot speak about the United Kingdom, but here in the U.S., we are finding it harder and harder to fund church employees and even clergy. UM churches in my Conference are combining jobs into one person, moving from two or more appointed clergy to just one, and moving from paid positions to volunteer. Those who are on payroll are thus finding themselves working harder for the same money. Saying "We'll get people to volunteer to do it" is fine and good, but recruiting, managing, and maintaining those volunteers is a job unto itself -- I know, because I worked it. It seems that volunteers think they can do whatever they like because they're free.
Many churches are combining the youth minister with the contemporary worship leader. Sometimes that's great, but sometimes it means that the great worship leader who is terrible at being a youth minister, or the great youth minister who is terrible at leading contemporary worship, find themselves in jobs that pay significantly less than they did a few years ago, with fewer and fewer options for a better position. Not only that, but the UMC made the (I think greatly mistaken) decision in 1992 to split ordination into either deacons or elders (presbyters), thus creating the permanent diaconate. Deacons must find their own jobs, and are then appointed by the bishop (not unlike the Anglican way of doing things), whereas elders are guaranteed an appointment. Deacons are clergy, though, and thus must be paid a minimum amount and given the same (conference standard) health benefits as the elders, which can be very cost-prohibitive to churches. Thus we have fewer and fewer deacons being ordained, and those we have are finding it harder and harder to stay in full time ministry. It usually seems better to a church to ask for an elder or two (or an elder and a part-time local pastor, whose salary minimums are less than either the deacon or the elder) instead of having an elder and a deacon.
Doing more with less is a good thing, but occasionally you hit a wall and end up getting less with less.
[ 18. March 2015, 16:49: Message edited by: Barefoot Friar ]
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Barefoot Friar:
Many churches are combining the youth minister with the contemporary worship leader.
I have to say that that raises a smile for me, here in Britain - the number of churches that could employ either a youth minister or a paid worship leader must be tiny; the number who could think of having both must be miniscule (although I'm sure there are some).
I wonder if - on both sides of the Pond - we are seeing a growing division of churches into "small churches who are struggling to resource their activities, share paid ministry with other congregations and depend on a decreasing pool of volunteers" and "large professionalised churches who lack not for cash and can multiply their paid staff" - with fewer and fewer churches falling between?
Posted by Barefoot Friar (# 13100) on
:
It would appear so.
Posted by Hooker's Trick (# 89) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Exeter Cathedral has given up Sunday Mattins. Not sure how many other Cathedrals have done so.
As someone who finds himself not infrequently in Exeter, this was a great loss. I've found an alternative on Sunday mornings.
What I miss, especially in the US, is the "I believe" for of the Credo. The "We believe" version is an option in the 1979 BCP, even in the Trad Language rite, and seems to creep in everywhere.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
Astonishingly, I've been to a church in my city for the first time this morning that is entirely BCP* in its services (and it has services daily).
*except on the first Sunday of the month where it makes a concession to modernity by using CW Order 1 (Traditional Language)... So it's 8am BCP HC every Sunday, and then 1030 is 1st CW HC, 2nd BCP Mattins, 3rd BCP Holy Communion, 4th BCP Mattins.
I think I've gone to heaven. I've lived here 9 years, how on earth did I not know??.
Posted by Pomona (# 17175) on
:
I have certainly encountered groups of churches (where the grouping is fairly informal - it's a historically a very Nonconformist area so it's just a group of the MOTR and higher Anglican churches) which each have a different 'flavour' and it works well. One does indeed have BCP Mattins and BCP Evensong on Sundays along with a main morning CW Eucharistic service, and a midweek short BCP Eucharist. The church is part Saxon and thick-walled, so is fairly dark and quiet inside - the BCP seems to work well with that.
I am not from a Christian home and still in my 20s so haven't experienced a lot of change in church services, but would certainly welcome a resurgence in Prayer Book evangelicals to combat the lectionary-lite tendencies in CoE evangelicalism.
Posted by Pomona (# 17175) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
I think the biggest difference (other than for RCs or Orthodox) is not to do with the form of service, but an attitude...
And I can no longer rely on getting the lectionary.
Can I ask why the Lectionary is so important to you? Granted it gives a good balanced framework for, and commentary to, the Christian year. That is especially true if different people are presiding and preaching from week to week.
But there are whole chunks of the Bible it never goes near. And what about the preacher, instead of grappling with an unresponsive set text, seeking the mind of the Spirit about what God might want to say to THIS congregation TODAY? A risky business, I agree ...
IME churches that use a lectionary actually use a much bigger proportion of the Bible - when preachers set the text it's just the standard favourites. Recently in an online discussion group we were discussing Song of Songs, and many of those in churches with a heavy focus on preaching and where there is no lectionary were not familiar with it and had never heard it read in church at all (Baptists and other historical Nonconformist churches, and charismatics/Pentecostals). Admittedly those of us in churches which use a lectionary won't hear it much, but we will hear it and at weddings if nothing else.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Astonishingly, I've been to a church in my city for the first time this morning that is entirely BCP* in its services (and it has services daily).
*except on the first Sunday of the month where it makes a concession to modernity by using CW Order 1 (Traditional Language)... So it's 8am BCP HC every Sunday, and then 1030 is 1st CW HC, 2nd BCP Mattins, 3rd BCP Holy Communion, 4th BCP Mattins.
I think I've gone to heaven. I've lived here 9 years, how on earth did I not know??.
Were there many other people there apart from you?
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Astonishingly, I've been to a church in my city for the first time this morning that is entirely BCP* in its services (and it has services daily).
*except on the first Sunday of the month where it makes a concession to modernity by using CW Order 1 (Traditional Language)... So it's 8am BCP HC every Sunday, and then 1030 is 1st CW HC, 2nd BCP Mattins, 3rd BCP Holy Communion, 4th BCP Mattins.
I think I've gone to heaven. I've lived here 9 years, how on earth did I not know??.
Were there many other people there apart from you?
70-odd plus choir. Average age about 35
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Astonishingly, I've been to a church in my city for the first time this morning that is entirely BCP* in its services (and it has services daily).
*except on the first Sunday of the month where it makes a concession to modernity by using CW Order 1 (Traditional Language)... So it's 8am BCP HC every Sunday, and then 1030 is 1st CW HC, 2nd BCP Mattins, 3rd BCP Holy Communion, 4th BCP Mattins.
I think I've gone to heaven. I've lived here 9 years, how on earth did I not know??.
Were there many other people there apart from you?
70-odd plus choir. Average age about 35
to clarify that was for a 1030 BCP Mattins
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
Sounds like you've fallen on your feet there!
I think- and this point may have been made upthread- that the appeal of the BCP, and Mattins, are overlooked. They don't suit everyone, by a long chalk, but they appeal to, and so can draw in, more people than some might expect.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
Although not spectacular, the most consistent figures at our place are for Matins - and the overall trend is of growth.
Similarly our Good Friday liturgy (basically just BCP readings with extended motets and anthems plus a few hymns, opening and closing prayers) attracted 3 times the usual numbers this year.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
Chichester cathedral (a few years ago, and I imagine still) have Choral Mattins before the Eucharist (with a gap, so most people escape or arrive in between). It seems to be well-attended, with a congregation largely consisting of well-heeled, well-educated and retired people as one might expect in such a city. I am told they represent the sort of intelligent semi-agnostic cultural Anglicanism prevalent in those social circles; they enjoy the music and thoughtful preaching, but sacramental worship is a step too far for them.
That is a diminishing constituency but one that is important and needs to be catered for. However I'm not sure if there are enough people like that in the average parish to make a viable congregation, nor enough resources in the way of musicians and preachers to provide what they are looking for.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Sounds like you've fallen on your feet there!
I think- and this point may have been made upthread- that the appeal of the BCP, and Mattins, are overlooked. They don't suit everyone, by a long chalk, but they appeal to, and so can draw in, more people than some might expect.
I think that's very true - I'm perpetually torn between the two stools of full-on nosebleed anglo-catholicism with smells, bells, angelus, and the NEH; and on the other hand by-the-book BCP with Hymns A&M. Anything else doesn't quite do it for me. I think there was a thread a while ago that touched on weekly parish communion, and it was observed (validly, I thought) that the widespread disappearance of Mattins is a real babies-and-bathwater by-product.
I wonder if a bit less communion (and uncertainty about what to do/whether to go up/what's going on) might be a help in getting people through the door - for something which is basically hymns and prayers (I'm not going to say "just"). I can cope with monthly communion if it means people actually feel they can come the rest of the time.
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
I don't think I could, or would necessarily want to, see every parish church doing it every Sunday. But I'd like to hope that certainly in moderately sized towns there would be at least one place that would.
I was looking at Trevor Beeson's little book of reminiscences of '50 years round the Church' and it seems pretty clear from his account of the Parish and People mobement, which pushed the Parish Eucharist in the 1950s and in which he was heavily involved, that it was actually almost entirely clerically-driven and clerically-led. That isn't in itself an objection, of course- the CofE's not a congregational church. (Cross-posted with betjemaniac.)
[ 14. April 2015, 14:23: Message edited by: Albertus ]
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
posted by Angloid quote:
Chichester cathedral (a few years ago, and I imagine still) have Choral Mattins before the Eucharist (with a gap, so most people escape or arrive in between). It seems to be well-attended, with a congregation largely consisting of well-heeled, well-educated and retired people as one might expect in such a city. I am told they represent the sort of intelligent semi-agnostic cultural Anglicanism prevalent in those social circles; they enjoy the music and thoughtful preaching, but sacramental worship is a step too far for them.
I have five friends who are regulars at Chichester's Choral Matins: two could be described as 'well-heeled', 4 as well-educated and none are retired.
ALL would take exception to being described as 'semi-agnostic' and would be puzzled by your reference to "those social circles" (as I am, for that matter).
They go to Matins because they like the rhythm of the service: they appreciate a balance of readings from both Old and New testaments; find inspiration and food-for-thought in the Psalms (which are largely absent from most CofE services nowadays); and enjoy anthems on a wider selection of themes than the eucharist.
Far from seeing sacramental worship as a step too far, all my friends are very thoughtful, conscientious people who were well-prepared for confirmation and see their participation in a eucharist as a serious matter: that cannot be said for large swathes of people who attend week by week.
The only thing that is likely to drive them away is the noticeable change in the music since the departure of Sarah Baldock last year.
Posted by bib (# 13074) on
:
I get the impression that many people these days expect to be entertained at church and often the church feels it has to comply. It is a relief to enter a church that is quiet and contemplative, but maybe these feelings are a symptom in me of aging and the march of time. My grandchildren expect to go to church and have fun which would have been unheard of when I was a child. It is very difficult to satisfy all of the people all of the time.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
posted by Angloid quote:
Chichester cathedral (a few years ago, and I imagine still) have Choral Mattins before the Eucharist (with a gap, so most people escape or arrive in between). It seems to be well-attended, with a congregation largely consisting of well-heeled, well-educated and retired people as one might expect in such a city. I am told they represent the sort of intelligent semi-agnostic cultural Anglicanism prevalent in those social circles; they enjoy the music and thoughtful preaching, but sacramental worship is a step too far for them.
I have five friends who are regulars at Chichester's Choral Matins: two could be described as 'well-heeled', 4 as well-educated and none are retired.
ALL would take exception to being described as 'semi-agnostic' and would be puzzled by your reference to "those social circles" (as I am, for that matter).
They go to Matins because they like the rhythm of the service: they appreciate a balance of readings from both Old and New testaments; find inspiration and food-for-thought in the Psalms (which are largely absent from most CofE services nowadays); and enjoy anthems on a wider selection of themes than the eucharist.
Far from seeing sacramental worship as a step too far, all my friends are very thoughtful, conscientious people who were well-prepared for confirmation and see their participation in a eucharist as a serious matter: that cannot be said for large swathes of people who attend week by week.
The only thing that is likely to drive them away is the noticeable change in the music since the departure of Sarah Baldock last year.
Oh dear! I was trying to be generous in my view of a group of people from a very different demographic and theological perspective from my own. I'm sorry if any snarkiness came across. I was simply relaying the views of a senior member of the clergy who was very sympathetic to this group albeit, like myself, not on their particular wavelength. I have preached at the Choral Eucharist there and witnessed the Mattins congregation 'from afar', as it were. My impression was as I have described it, but I didn't mean to imply that they were all elderly or rolling in wealth (though I doubt if many of them were on housing benefit either).
'Semi-agnostic' was not intended as a jibe but a description of many Anglicans brought up in the culture of the BCP who nevertheless have serious intellectual reservations about the faith. I can't believe that there is not a significant number of such people in that congregation, if not among your friends. I respect them and am glad that the Church is able to offer them a liturgical experience that respects their integrity.
But your point about serious preparation for the Eucharist is well-made and important. Those of us brought up on the view that 'it's the Mass that matters' need to recognise that there is a respectable Anglican tradition of reverence for the sacrament based on restraint and reluctance to be over-familiar with holy things. ++Michael Ramsey of blessed memory made much the same point many years ago.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Our Place has 930am BCP Matins every Sunday - the Parish Mass - Common Worship Order 1 - with (allowed) Carflick bits follows at 1030am.
Despite being advertised on the Prayer Book Society's website, and, of course, on our own websites and noticeboards, we have yet to see a congregation at Matins of more than 6. Where is the enthusiasm for this service of which some of you speak? Or should we be doing more to advertise it (sensible suggestions welcome!)?
I fully agree that not everyone might be able, willing, or spiritually ready to take on the Eucharist, so perhaps it's time for us to make something more of Matins.
The service is said 'by the book' from the opening versicles and responses up until the Grace, after the State Prayers. No hymns or other music/singing, but if the potential was there, I'd like to have at least an Office Hymn and the Benedictus sung......
Anyone like to come and join us???
Ian J.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
Good point, Bishop's Finger. The Prayer Book offices are very popular (or at least Evensong is) when they are able to be offered with the sort of musical resources that are available in cathedrals but very rare in the average parish church (especially when, rightly, the priority is given to the Sunday eucharist). Many parishes have BCP Holy Communion at 8am or thereabouts, usually quietly said; congregations are usually in single figures.
Posted by Al Eluia (# 864) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
quote:
For example, I really miss the Mattins canticles - yes I know that, as a regular service, Mattins did really have to go. But those canticles were rather special, surely we could still sing them once in a while?
In the Canadian rubrics, the "Act of Praise" or Song of Praise in the beginning need not be the Gloria in Excelsis for the Eucharist. You could theoretically substitute the Te Deum for the Gloria in the Eucharist.
Same in the US BCP. At times I've suggested to our rector that we replace the Gloria sometimes during post-Pentecost with another canticle just for variation, and we've done that from time to time. The rubric says "Gloria in Excelsis or some other song of praise" or words to that effect.
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Our Place has 930am BCP Matins every Sunday - the Parish Mass - Common Worship Order 1 - with (allowed) Carflick bits follows at 1030am.
Despite being advertised on the Prayer Book Society's website, and, of course, on our own websites and noticeboards, we have yet to see a congregation at Matins of more than 6. Where is the enthusiasm for this service of which some of you speak?
...
How big a congregation does the Cathedral choral mattins get? If I were looking for Mattins in your neck of the woods, that's the first place I'd look.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
posted by Angloid quote:
Oh dear! I was trying to be generous in my view of a group of people from a very different demographic and theological perspective from my own. I'm sorry if any snarkiness came across. I was simply relaying the views of a senior member of the clergy who was very sympathetic to this group albeit, like myself, not on their particular wavelength. I have preached at the Choral Eucharist there and witnessed the Mattins congregation 'from afar', as it were. My impression was as I have described it, but I didn't mean to imply that they were all elderly or rolling in wealth (though I doubt if many of them were on housing benefit either).
Unless you've made some attempt to speak to them, how on earth can you possibly state that a whole congregation (numbering over 100) is entirely made up of people "from a very different demographic and theological perspective from my own" - anymore, I suspect, than the senior cleric you allude to.
Yes, a great deal of snarkiness came over - in both of your posts. And yet again you make a snide point about presumed wealth at the end of your paragraph.
But then in my church (different diocese) we've all recently been told from the pulpit (at the behest of a bishop's letter) that we can afford to give another £10 per week each. When I pointed out to our diocesan that the clerical salary plus housing, etc, package, puts incumbents on a good £14,000 per annum more than the national average he blanked it out, and carried on pleading poverty. Still, what to expect when parish share has just been put up by another 8% when salaries have barely risen and inflation is under 3%?
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
The internet isn't very good at nuance. If we were able to discuss this face to face I'm sure our respective hackles wouldn't be raised. Can I just point out though that I didn't say the congregation was 'entirely' made up of people from a different background to myself. I just doubt that many of them would be working class northerners.
Not that that matters. I know from experience that ministering to people from a different cultural background can be enlightening and particularly that the common ground is much greater, and more important, than the differences. The common ground I was trying to suggest in this situation is that this congregation appeared to find great value and spiritual nourishment in that form of worship. The quality of their spiritual experience , rather than the context, is what matters.
Cathedrals are in the fortunate position that they can provide different experiences of worship to suit different personalities and backgrounds. The difficulty most of us in ordinary parishes find, is finding the 'one size' that truly 'fits all': few churches are able to put on more than one 'main' service and this is bound to be something of a compromise.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
posted by Angloid quote:
Cathedrals are in the fortunate position that they can provide different experiences of worship to suit different personalities and backgrounds. The difficulty most of us in ordinary parishes find, is finding the 'one size' that truly 'fits all': few churches are able to put on more than one 'main' service and this is bound to be something of a compromise.
Really? Since Matins (or any other non-Eucharistic liturgy) doesn't require the presence of an ordained minister it shouldn't be beyond the capabilities of any parish to provide a true choice of 'main' service.
Yes, some worshippers may prefer a Lay Reader (or at least someone in cassock and surplice) but it is possible to have full Choral Matins without a priest, deacon or reader - I know, because we do it.
The only thing therefore is to arrange the diary in such a way that the maximum number of people can find a service they're comfortable with at a time that suits them.
Pie-in-the-sky? Well no. We have a PinC who thought as you did about 8am BCP being a fair 'alternative' and we called his bluff by getting a vote for an experimental period of having Choral Matins at 09:45 and a BCP Choral Communion at 11:00. To his amazement the total numbers at both services went up and its become a fixture; in fact its enabled us to produce evidence that the service that attracts previously un-churched people is Matins - not well-received by either archdeacon or bishop!
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Really? Since Matins (or any other non-Eucharistic liturgy) doesn't require the presence of an ordained minister it shouldn't be beyond the capabilities of any parish to provide a true choice of 'main' service.
Yes, some worshippers may prefer a Lay Reader (or at least someone in cassock and surplice) but it is possible to have full Choral Matins without a priest, deacon or reader - I know, because we do it.
Time-wise it should be possible to fit one in, but priority-wise, churches seem to want to spend their time on other things than services now. Perhaps it's more an idea of getting out amongst the people, rather than expecting them to come into church for a service. (Or maybe by Sunday evening, everyone is tired and don't want to turn out again for anything else.) How else to explain that a very large proportion do not even have a Sunday evening service these days (Evensong doesn't require leading by a priest, either).
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Many churches would feel either that they have no person capable of leading such a service, or that they are simply too small to put on two viable services.
(Which is not to say that those ways of thinking shouldn't be challenged!)
The provision of music could be an issue, too - especially if choir and organist are perceived to put all their resources into one service and "ignore" the other. There is also the danger of creating two separate congregations which rarely meet, although there are ways around this (e.g. coffee for all between the two services).
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Really? Since Matins (or any other non-Eucharistic liturgy) doesn't require the presence of an ordained minister it shouldn't be beyond the capabilities of any parish to provide a true choice of 'main' service.
Yes, some worshippers may prefer a Lay Reader (or at least someone in cassock and surplice) but it is possible to have full Choral Matins without a priest, deacon or reader - I know, because we do it.
Time-wise it should be possible to fit one in, but priority-wise, churches seem to want to spend their time on other things than services now. Perhaps it's more an idea of getting out amongst the people, rather than expecting them to come into church for a service. (Or maybe by Sunday evening, everyone is tired and don't want to turn out again for anything else.) How else to explain that a very large proportion do not even have a Sunday evening service these days (Evensong doesn't require leading by a priest, either).
A newly-done deacon of my acquaintance complains that his proposal to have the offices daily in the parish (downtown Toronto) was nixed as it was made clear that this would interfere with staff meetings - he notes that as a former street social worker, he was well used to committee meetings but had foolishly thought clerical life would be less bureaucratic and more liturgical. With about 20 hours a week of various meetings (he keeps track), 10-15 of admin, and about 15-20 of pastoral work, he says that it is no wonder that the clergy feel too tired and burned out to go to services.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
O dear. Our 'staff meetings' naturally follow on from daily Morning Prayer, as we move from the Church to our nearby community centre café for breakfast (accompanied by a very powerful Fairtrade double espresso...)!
Ian J.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Depends how early you want to, or can, get out ...
For instance, that pattern might not work for a clergyperson with a working spouse who leaves the house early, so has to get children off to school. That was true of me some years ago: I basically couldn't get to anything before 9am in term-time.
I like the sound of the coffee - I note that it's not "church instant" ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
!
[ 15. April 2015, 14:05: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
posted by Angloid quote:
Cathedrals are in the fortunate position that they can provide different experiences of worship to suit different personalities and backgrounds. The difficulty most of us in ordinary parishes find, is finding the 'one size' that truly 'fits all': few churches are able to put on more than one 'main' service and this is bound to be something of a compromise.
Really? Since Matins (or any other non-Eucharistic liturgy) doesn't require the presence of an ordained minister it shouldn't be beyond the capabilities of any parish to provide a true choice of 'main' service……..
Pie-in-the-sky? Well no. We have a PinC who thought as you did about 8am BCP being a fair 'alternative' and we called his bluff by getting a vote for an experimental period of having Choral Matins at 09:45 and a BCP Choral Communion at 11:00. To his amazement the total numbers at both services went up and its become a fixture; in fact its enabled us to produce evidence that the service that attracts previously un-churched people is Matins - not well-received by either archdeacon or bishop!
To be fair to all needs you'd have to have at least three services: prayer book Mattins, informal family service, and Eucharist. Since round these parts many churches struggle to get above 30 people attending any service, offering three would run the risk of splitting the potential attendance. And not many potential worshippers would be attracted to a congregation of 10 people trying to sing Anglican chant (or reciting the psalms and canticles without music). Maybe such an experiment would work in many places, but I would trust the pastor's judgement that it might be disastrous.
Many churches attempt to solve this by alternating styles of service week by week. Apart from alienating those for whom weekly communion is non-negotiable, this approach assumes that casual attenders run their lives according to the church's programme rather than just turning up when they can or wish.
Posted by Hooker's Trick (# 89) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Our Place has 930am BCP Matins every Sunday - the Parish Mass - Common Worship Order 1 - with (allowed) Carflick bits follows at 1030am.
Despite being advertised on the Prayer Book Society's website, and, of course, on our own websites and noticeboards, we have yet to see a congregation at Matins of more than 6. Where is the enthusiasm for this service of which some of you speak? Or should we be doing more to advertise it (sensible suggestions welcome!)?
.
My devotion to BCP Mattins is insufficient to overcome my aversion to such an early start of a Sunday morning.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
posted by Angloic quote:
To be fair to all needs you'd have to have at least three services: prayer book Mattins, informal family service, and Eucharist.
Eh?
Prayer book Matins - I assume you mean BCP? OK, no problems and it is a bona fide liturgy.
Eucharist - you don't stipulate but could be BCP or one of the Common services (such a well-named book, Common Worship).
"informal family service" - what? Where from?
In the bad old days before liturgical reform everyone went to services that, by-and-large, were as printed in the BCP. If we didn't understand them all at the age of 4 we did at 14 and people without children under 10 (even then the majority) didn't have to put up with some half-baked, home-knitted "worship" experience aimed at a not very bright 6 year old.
Yes, I know the clergy are firmly wedded to the idea of liturgy-lite (sorry, "family worship") but it could be because they have so little experience of taking children to church themselves. I know my own father was absolutely useless at taking us when we holidayed - we played him up deliberately but in general he cracked before the creed - until mama intervened and it was agreed we could either go to 8am or evensong, because they allowed for a full day on the beach.
Family Services have been around now for nearly 50 years - funnily enough the same period of time which has seen the greatest haemorrhaging of families from congregations. IME "informal family worship" is second only to service-time creches in guaranteeing that children never develop a church-going habit.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
posted by Angloic quote:
To be fair to all needs you'd have to have at least three services: prayer book Mattins, informal family service, and Eucharist.
Eh?
Prayer book Matins - I assume you mean BCP? OK, no problems and it is a bona fide liturgy.
Eucharist - you don't stipulate but could be BCP or one of the Common services (such a well-named book, Common Worship).
"informal family service" - what? Where from?
In the bad old days before liturgical reform everyone went to services that, by-and-large, were as printed in the BCP. If we didn't understand them all at the age of 4 we did at 14 and people without children under 10 (even then the majority) didn't have to put up with some half-baked, home-knitted "worship" experience aimed at a not very bright 6 year old.
Yes, I know the clergy are firmly wedded to the idea of liturgy-lite (sorry, "family worship") but it could be because they have so little experience of taking children to church themselves. I know my own father was absolutely useless at taking us when we holidayed - we played him up deliberately but in general he cracked before the creed - until mama intervened and it was agreed we could either go to 8am or evensong, because they allowed for a full day on the beach.
Family Services have been around now for nearly 50 years - funnily enough the same period of time which has seen the greatest haemorrhaging of families from congregations. IME "informal family worship" is second only to service-time creches in guaranteeing that children never develop a church-going habit.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
I agree, l'Organist. To my mind, the Mass is the Family Service/ All age liturgy. But the sort of punters that would be deterred by the Eucharist are also likely to be put off by BCP Morning Prayer (which as a teenager - I never encountered it before - I found unutterably boring). So if you are catering for all tastes you need three services.
I don't understand your jibe at the title of Common Worship. It is Common in exactly the same sense that the Book of Common Prayer is common.
And you are guilty of gross generalisation in saying that 'the clergy' are sold on 'liturgy-lite'. Many - maybe too many - of them are, but I know many priests including myself who wild horses wouldn't drag into such a situation.
[ 15. April 2015, 16:53: Message edited by: Angloid ]
Posted by Barefoot Friar (# 13100) on
:
Oh gosh. I think the kids (14 and under) who attend both of my churches like the liturgy even better than the adults do. One young man in particular (just turned 4, mind you) gets all excited when he comes in and immediately starts asking for "Jesus bread". Perhaps it is because I've recruited everyone who is in first grade and up to be acolytes, and make sure they all know they are ministers as surely as I am, and that they are an important part of our worship. I don't make any changes to the liturgy to make it an "all age" service. I haven't seen the need.
Maybe a liturgy-lite "family service" is good for other people in other places, but here we seem to be doing just fine with the weekly Communion service.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Returning to a question from Albertus a little while ago, on the only occasion I attended Sunday Matins at our Cathedral, there were about 40 people in the Quire. Most of them were the Choir, IYSWIM - only a dozen or so 'civvies'.
Mind you, much the same could be said of Evensong on a quiet winter Sunday! (A fair few more on High Days and Holydays, though).
Ian J.
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
Perhaps Chichester and the Medway towns have different demographics.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
Very true, in part at least (though the MP for that part of our fair towns in which standeth the Cathedral is a Kipper...... ![[Help]](graemlins/help.gif)
).
Ian J.
Posted by Pomona (# 17175) on
:
I realise that Eccles denizens are never going to be fans of informal family worship, but I promise that it CAN work and can be enjoyable for everyone. Although I disagree with them on most things, evangelical Anglican churches with large and good youth and kids provision can do brilliant informal family services - other churches are just not good enough at youth and children's work to do them well. I can assure you L'Organist, I know many churches with both informal all age worship and creches that are heaving with people, never healthier, and multi-generational. It's MOTR and higher churches full of elderly people trying to attract families that fail at all-age worship, because such churches usually can't fund a full-time children's worker. I say that as a member of such a church. I feel like this is where ecumenism would really help.
Also I don't get the issue with creches - they're surely pretty essential if you want to keep families with babies around.
Posted by BroJames (# 9636) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
(Or maybe by Sunday evening, everyone is tired and don't want to turn out again for anything else.) How else to explain that a very large proportion do not even have a Sunday evening service these days (Evensong doesn't require leading by a priest, either).
We used to have Evensong every week, early evening in the lighter months and mid-afternoon in the darker months. There was a fixed pattern of BCP or ASB (later CW) evening prayer depending on which Sunday in the month it was (5th Sundays were communion). There was no difference in the numbers between BCP and modern language services. Numbers were generally slightly higher for 5th Sundays. The choir were never available for it since before my time in the parish. Gradually numbers declined to the point where, even though the organist was there, there were too few of us to sing.
The PCC was keen to keep the service going because it had a view that there was a need to provide that alternative for those that wanted it. Numbers continued to drop as worshippers became too old to get out, or died. Very occasionally numbers were swelled by visitors, but typically there were no more then 4-8 recorded in the register, two or three of whom had come in order to unlock, count money, lead the service, play the organ etc. In the winter it was a regular occurrence for it to be just the minister and the duty churchwarden. In the end the PCC reluctantly agreed it to call it a day.
Currently we have a monthly informal evening service attracting 20-30, and (on a different Sunday) a 'Messy Church' attracting a very different clientele varying between a dozen and 30.
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on
:
We have a simple monthly BCP Evensong (5pm on the third Sunday), followed by Benediction. Even with priest, thurifer and cantor, we rarely have more than 10 people present.
However.....although I say it myself, we do this sort of quiet, reflective service rather well at Our Place, and (at our Churchwarden's suggestion) have recently added a BCP Eucharist (sung to Merbecke) when there is a fifth Sunday. Again, only a small congregation, but if it meets the needs of those present, it's well worth making the effort.
I'd like to have a different style of service (Iona/Taize/Franciscan or whatever) on another Sunday, perhaps with tasty food to follow, and aimed at our (numerous) local students!
I think the point has been forcefully made, that whatever sort of service you put on, do it as well as you can.
Ian J.
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
About 10 - 15 years ago, a short informal second morning service was trialled. It was aimed at young families and was non-Eucharistic. But it didn't catch on, because the existing families were happy with the usual Eucharist (with children's corner), and no new people came to the informal service.
We are fortunate in having several denominations in the town, they each offer something different in terms of worship style and content, so there is already quite a lot of choice. Maybe it is therefore not necessary for each church to offer several morning services, but perhaps they could work as a 'Churches Together' team and advertise each other's?
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Working together? Is outrage!
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I'd like to have a different style of service (Iona/Taize/Franciscan or whatever) on another Sunday, perhaps with tasty food to follow, and aimed at our (numerous) local students!
Ian J.
This is where I chip in as an"insight" professional...
Is that based on any research? Do you *know* that's what the students want?
I mean, I worry that there's this thing where people say "go a bit taize or evo and the students will come.
I'm fully aware Oxford's not the real world but it manages to support MOR, nosebleed high, BCP, charismatic and snake belly low CoE student congregations.
Please don't assume students want what you'd "like" to offer. I make no doubt some would, but others absolutely won't. I certainly never darkened the doors of Exeter Uni's student services, precisely because they were patronising me with what you're talking about.
[ 16. April 2015, 19:21: Message edited by: betjemaniac ]
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
Basically, for a student service, you need a critical mass of students to come. You may have the sort of constituency where your plan will work- in which case good luck- but please be aware that if you make your "student" service like that, and get 50 students, you've probably slammed the door in the face of a different 50 students.
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
When I was an undergraduate most of my chums were, like me, Choral Evensong fans. But we were rather fogeyish and that was in the days when God was a boy and His mother rode a bike*, so I appreciate that that will not be the case everywhere.
*Not really, but still getting on for 30 years ago.
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
Also I don't get the issue with creches - they're surely pretty essential if you want to keep families with babies around.
Why not bring the babies into church? I do.
One of my chief gripes with my current shack is that they keep organizing "family" events where what they mean is "send your kids to watch a DVD in room A while all the adults are doing the activity in room B".
That's not a family activity - it's an adult activity with babysitting.
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
That's not a family activity - it's an adult activity with babysitting.
Except that more often than not, the 'adult' activity is aimed at the level of a rather dim 8 year old.
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
My student sons are a pretty accurate guide to what 'yoof' want and their reaction to what some churches, and SUs, lay on for their age group is telling.
As one puts it, the only people happy with the SU at his uni are either very low-church ConEvos or people previously unchurched who are having problems fitting into university life.
In an attempt to fit in he tried going to the SU and, when asked what sort of service he liked, he told them: cue fit of the vapours from all the SU in-crowd and a lecture from the anglican chaplain about 'free worship'. Son goes to the local cathedral and has introduced 3 friends to the delights of Matins and Evensong.
Taize, unless done really well, can be toe-cringingly dreadful - IME it is much loved by the middle to elderly who grew up thinking Psalm Praise and its ilk were cutting edge.
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Family Services have been around now for nearly 50 years - funnily enough the same period of time which has seen the greatest haemorrhaging of families from congregations. IME "informal family worship" is second only to service-time creches in guaranteeing that children never develop a church-going habit.
It's also the same period where non denominational churches have seen their greatest growth. IME such churches have grown because people have become disillusioned with a church which treats them as spiritual infants within the dualistic (and sub Christian) Platonic framework of clergy/lay. [It's not actually about new churches giving them what they want as many allege].
I agree about creches to the extent that in nay cases in the UK they aren't needed: there's no children there. In our own church we are quite ok with children interacting all the time but I know from personal experience that's not always the case. We also have a variety of liturgical forms (yes we Baptists aren't as free as we or others think) which encourage participation in some cases but generate awe and reflection in others.
I'm very ok with a hungry child being fed "in church" but I know that scandalises a lot of people who think a perfectly natural action should be shoved in a corner of a different room. That's part of the reason why creches started. I suppose for some the rot set in when families came to church with young babies who might need to be fed occasionally. Haven't they got homes to stay in? (Irony alert)
Posted by Pomona (# 17175) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
Also I don't get the issue with creches - they're surely pretty essential if you want to keep families with babies around.
Why not bring the babies into church? I do.
One of my chief gripes with my current shack is that they keep organizing "family" events where what they mean is "send your kids to watch a DVD in room A while all the adults are doing the activity in room B".
That's not a family activity - it's an adult activity with babysitting.
IME having a creche at least available makes things much easier for parents with breastfeeding babies, or toddlers that need distracting. There are plenty of badly-done church creches though and I agree that the example you give is not good.
Posted by Pomona (# 17175) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
My student sons are a pretty accurate guide to what 'yoof' want and their reaction to what some churches, and SUs, lay on for their age group is telling.
As one puts it, the only people happy with the SU at his uni are either very low-church ConEvos or people previously unchurched who are having problems fitting into university life.
In an attempt to fit in he tried going to the SU and, when asked what sort of service he liked, he told them: cue fit of the vapours from all the SU in-crowd and a lecture from the anglican chaplain about 'free worship'. Son goes to the local cathedral and has introduced 3 friends to the delights of Matins and Evensong.
Taize, unless done really well, can be toe-cringingly dreadful - IME it is much loved by the middle to elderly who grew up thinking Psalm Praise and its ilk were cutting edge.
Do you mean the CU? I have never known an SU to put on religious services. That would be quite unusual - where do your sons go to uni?
It's difficult when there's no local cathedral - I would have really valued one when I was at uni. There was the Catholic cathedral but obviously no Evensong, and I couldn't take Communion. Non-CU Christian societies struggle (with the exception of ones with an ethnic or cultural association eg black Pentecostal or Orthodox) and chaplaincies mostly deal with non-Christian students in my experience. It seems to work best when chaplaincies are independently-run, eg the multi-uni chaplaincy at Manchester.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
My student sons are a pretty accurate guide to what 'yoof' want and their reaction to what some churches, and SUs, lay on for their age group is telling.
As one puts it, the only people happy with the SU at his uni are either very low-church ConEvos or people previously unchurched who are having problems fitting into university life.
In an attempt to fit in he tried going to the SU and, when asked what sort of service he liked, he told them: cue fit of the vapours from all the SU in-crowd and a lecture from the anglican chaplain about 'free worship'. Son goes to the local cathedral and has introduced 3 friends to the delights of Matins and Evensong.
But most young British Christians today haven't grown up with Matins and Evensong, so your son could hardly expect the CU (which is what I think you mean, rather than SU) to understand where he was coming from. He's surely no more representative of young Christians than the CU people are.
It's good that he's introduced Evensong to some of his friends. I love Evensong now, but when I was at uni in the early 90s I'd never heard of it. I didn't have much to do with the CofE then.
quote:
Taize, unless done really well, can be toe-cringingly dreadful - IME it is much loved by the middle to elderly who grew up thinking Psalm Praise and its ilk were cutting edge.
I think it's a bit of a shame that Taize has lost popularity now. It seems to have moved more to the fringe of things. Perhaps the Catholics are still keen on it, though.
[ 21. April 2015, 10:00: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Taize, unless done really well, can be toe-cringingly dreadful - IME it is much loved by the middle to elderly who grew up thinking Psalm Praise and its ilk were cutting edge.
I think it's a bit of a shame that Taize has lost popularity now. It seems to have moved more to the fringe of things. Perhaps the Catholics are still keen on it, though.
I'm sure there can be 'toe-cringingly dreadful' ways of presenting a Taizé service. As any other liturgical style. I think what is deeply needed, and appreciated, is a contemplative experience with plenty of silence, and if Taizé chants help with this, fine, but there are many other ways. Evensong, and for those who can take it, Benediction, can be wonderfully prayerful experiences. My problem with standard parish evensong (such as I have not experienced in years, never being at a church with a viable evening congregation) is that people try and turn it into a 'church service' which means overloading it with hymns, wordy prayers and sermon instead of just offering it, in the context of silence, as a contemplative office.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
I go to Evensong regularly and find it lovely, but I do wonder how something of that type would work in the Non-conformist settings I'm more familiar with. Evening worship based around Taize-style atmosphere works well, IME.
BTW, is Evensong a copyrighted format, or could any Protestant church use it freely and tweak it for their own purposes?
[ 21. April 2015, 17:43: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
BTW, is Evensong a copyrighted format, or could any Protestant church use it freely and tweak it for their own purposes?
Of course. And not just Protestants: Liverpool Metropolitan Cathedral (RC) used to sing BCP Evening Prayer every Sunday in the early 1970s. Even when they moved to the (then new) Divine Office version they kept (and AFAIK still keep) many Anglican settings for the Magnificat.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
... Taize, unless done really well, can be toe-cringingly dreadful - IME it is much loved by the middle to elderly who grew up thinking Psalm Praise and its ilk were cutting edge.
There was a time when they were.
For a lot of us, we go on thinking that what was cutting edge when we were in our twenties, remains so. After a certain point, we never catch up. It's the same as how there was nothing less cool than our parents' taste in popular music.
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
Can't see why it wouldn't work in a Methodist setting (you are a Methodist, I think, Svitlana?). The Wesleys would have used it.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
The Wesleys were employed by the CofE, but I doubt that Evensong was part of their evangelistic strategy. As for today, I think Evensong would provide an interesting change of pace for the British Methodist churches that still have evening services, but I can't imagine it as a permanent thing.
Looking at the website for Wesley's Chapel I see that the evening services there use Taize materials. Taize is probably a better fit for Methodism, ironically, than a traditional Evensong service.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
The Wesleys were employed by the CofE, but I doubt that Evensong was part of their evangelistic strategy.
I suspect you mean that the Wesleys were ordained to the C of E. They were great preachers and even though they travelled the country, were obviously blessed with great pastoral skills. It's a pity that the C of E could not retain them.
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
It is. And as C18 CofE clergy they would have used the 1662 BCP, including Evening Prayer (which is Evensong, though possibly without some of the musical accoutrements- I don't know enough about C18 worship practice to be sure, although no doubt some Shipmate does).
Posted by seasick (# 48) on
:
For better or for worse, services where it might be felt that the congregation simply observe what happens and the singing etc is all done by the choir and clergy don't sit well with most Methodist congregations - that would be the problem I would anticipate in regular use of Evensong in a Methodist congregation. The use of archaic language is also something we generally avoid - even our most formal liturgies would be in modern language. We did sing Choral Evensong once when I was at Wesley House but that would be the exception rather than the rule!
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
Ah, you're thinking of Choral Evensong. But a non-choral sung evensong is as overtly participative as any other liturgical service.
Language: well, that's a matter of taste or prejudice, I suppose. 'Archaic' is rather a value judgement, isn't it?
[ 22. April 2015, 08:22: Message edited by: Albertus ]
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Language: well, that's a matter of taste or prejudice, I suppose.
Yes, I agree - although as Christians we shouldn't be self-centred about this.
quote:
'Archaic' is rather a value judgement, isn't it?
No, I don't think so: language can surely be judged using objective semantic, grammatical and other criteria. For instance Milton necessarily wrote in "archaic" language, while "The Sun" uses contemporary language (or, at least, the peculiar journalistic version thereof).
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
Yes, OK, on reflection I agree with you about 'archaic'. I have too often seen it used with overtones of 'obsolete' or 'incomprehensible', which it does not necessarily bear, and I jumped to assuming that that's what seasick meant.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Yes, OK, on reflection I agree with you about 'archaic'. I have too often seen it used with overtones of 'obsolete' or 'incomprehensible'.
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Of course, there is modern language (such as "management-speak", "legalese" or technical jargon) which can also be incomprehensible - not just to Joe Public but even, at times, to the folk who are supposed to be able to understand it!
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
It is. And as C18 CofE clergy they would have used the 1662 BCP, including Evening Prayer (which is Evensong, though possibly without some of the musical accoutrements- I don't know enough about C18 worship practice to be sure, although no doubt some Shipmate does).
A bit, but not that much, and what I'm saying is possibly slightly late for period, Rev George Austen rather than Rev Gilbert White.
There are areas of doubt about this. After all, there's no one who can remember, and people don't tend to record what everyone at the time knows.
The service was usually held in the late afternoon. It opened with the evening hymn, 'Glory to thee my God this night' sung to the same tune as now. There might then be a metrical psalm. By the late C18, this was more likely to be sung from the New Version by Tate and Brady, than the Old Version by Sternhold, Hopkins and others.
A few rich town churches were beginning to install organs, but in most churches, the music was provided by a small band.
In many churches they would then have gone straight through the words of Evening Prayer in the BCP, including the appointed psalm(s) at the appropriate point, as 'reading psalms'. Often, the only music inside the service itself would be that there might be an anthem at the point 'in quires and places where they sing', an opportunity for the band and singers to show their prowess. The vicar and the parish clerk sang/bawled the versicles and responses backwards and forwards between each other.
After the service ended with the grace, there might be another metrical psalm, sung, then a sermon, and then a final sung metrical psalm.
In more adventurous places, towns say, they might try to chant the prose Magnificat and Nunc Dimittis. There are quite a lot of settings from the later part of the period, but nobody's quite sure how they handled the tempo.
Another area of doubt is to what extent people sang the metrical versions of the canticles and the appointed psalm(s) inside the service rather than before and after. Technically, it was probably illegal, but nobody really knows what happened. Away from cathedrals and a few minsters (e.g. Southwell) with employed choirs, it is fairly certain that nobody tried to sing the BCP prose psalms. They were read.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Ah, you're thinking of Choral Evensong. But a non-choral sung evensong is as overtly participative as any other liturgical service.
Language: well, that's a matter of taste or prejudice, I suppose. 'Archaic' is rather a value judgement, isn't it?
Sorry, yes, I did mean Choral Evensong.
The language used in the CofE Choral Evensong services I go to isn't particularly hard to understand, but by Methodist standards all the thees and thous are a bit excessive! It's just a different way of using the language.
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
Sorry- perhaps I didn't make it clear that I was posting in reply to seasick.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Gee Dee, the CofE did retain the Wesley brothers, both of were Anglicans when they died. The secession of Methodist societies from the CofE only occurred after John Wesley's death although, arguably it was inevitable that it was going to happen.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Apologies, Gee D ... not Dee.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
Thanks for that snippet Gamaliel - I had always understood that the brothers felt so isolated by the formal structures of the C of E (and of those holding power by virtue of those structures) that they left is sadness.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
@ExclamationMark, IME the growth in the non-denominational churches was largely fuelled by transfers from more traditional non-conformist churches such as Baptists and Brethren rather than Anglicans and Methodists - although these weren't unknown. There were also former FIEC people and plenty of Penties. The impact of the 'new churches' on the CofE was slight. The Vineyard had more influence in terms of inspiring events like New Wine among the Anglican charismatic constituency. Arguably, this served to 'democratise the holy' as someone once put it. However, just as you have identified that Baptist churches are more liturgical than they at first appear, I would add that nnon-denominational churches are far more 'clerical' than they appear. They have more Popes and prelates than even the most sacramental of churches - they don't realise how 'clerical' they actually are.
I would also suggest that many so-called non-denominational churches are also far more denominational than the denominations.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Gee D, Charles Wesley had no beef with the CofE whatsoever and was among his brother John's most severest critics when John started to 'ordain' his own preachers.
Some of what the Wesleys did went against conventional wisdom open air preaching, crossing parish boundaries etc - but in many ways they remained conventional Anglicans.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
I would also suggest that many so-called non-denominational churches are also far more denominational than the denominations.
Especially those who proudly say that they abhor denominations, and then mix only with those who share their precise form of antidenominational denominationalism.
If you see what I mean (and, yes, I've met them).
[ 22. April 2015, 22:33: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Yes, I've met them too. I was one myself at one time ... ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
To be fair, I was always more eirenic than that and grew out of it - these things can be phases we pass through.
In fairness too, some of my fellow-travellers and the church I was involved with grew out of this tendency too - although they are a shadow of their former selves. Only about 40 people or so left - when there were around 300-400 at its height in the mid-1980s.
Mind you, some of those I knocked about with in those days have gone into even worse things ... extreme forms of health/wealth and prosperity gospel teaching ... or small groups of friends meeting in one another's homes and blarting on and on about how it all went wrong ...
Sad.
In fairness, others have ended up in better places.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Yes, I had some friends back in the 80s who were part of an all-dancing (well, lightly hopping) charismatic fellowship and were very dismissive of their "dead" Parish Church.
Guess who've now been Church Wardens for years?
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Ha ha ...
Yes, would that this were more common.
Looking back, a good number did move on to what we might consider broader or more mainstream forms of church - whether non-conformist or Anglican. The Baptists tended to be the main 're-entry point' if I can put it that way, as they offer much that is familiar but without the somewhat authoritarian approach to leadership.
I've found that fewer have gone into Anglicanism - although a number have - including some former leaders or budding leaders.
I know of one or two who have gone further, if you like, into Orthodoxy or over to Rome - but these are fewer and further between. An Orthodox convert I know from a 'restorationist' background once told me - some years ago now - that he could only think of around 5 people in the whole of the UK from 'new church' or Pentecostal backgrounds who had ended up in Orthodoxy. I get the impression that this has been more common in the USA.
Anyhow, this is a tangent - although there is the issue, of course, of how more traditional forms of worship can appeal to those who have - for whatever reason - become sated with what's on offer across the 'newer' outfits.
In some ways, though, some of the newer groups have indeed been drawing from older models - experimenting with liturgy or contemplative prayers and so on. I don't knock this tendency - although I know some who do, regarding it as rather too 'pick-and-mix' or decontextualised. I can appreciate why they might consider it that way, but on balance, I'm always happy when I see people adopting daily offices, say, such as members of the Northumbria Community or using some 'ready-made' liturgy.
When I was in a Baptist church we often used to 'nick' chunks out of the Anglican prayer book for communion services - and once I was even given a section to read from the Roman missal (by an ex-Catholic). Nobody noticed and the sky didn't fall in.
Posted by Jengie jon (# 273) on
:
Using liturgical texts out of context, so old that they have been doing it since Biblical times.
Jengie
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Ha ha. Yes, nice one.
Posted by Stephen (# 40) on
:
....and indeed quite possibly before.....
however imitation is the sincerest form of flattery or so we are told and I don't see any reason why different churches can't use materials from elsewhere
And yes, I have been in a Methodist church where they once used not Evensong itself but an adaptation of it, but it was a long time ago....just after I'd finished college.
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
I would also suggest that many so-called non-denominational churches are also far more denominational than the denominations.
Especially those who proudly say that they abhor denominations, and then mix only with those who share their precise form of antidenominational denominationalism.
If you see what I mean (and, yes, I've met them).
Brethren and Quakers. The latter being denominational in their rejection of creeds and belief statements.
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0