|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Hell: F*$#! in the middle of the service.
|
Oriel
Shipmate
# 748
|
Posted
Not nearly as major as some of the ones on here, but I've just come back from the service, so it's quite fresh in my mind at the moment.
Our lay reader was preaching. He preached the same sermon he almost always preaches. It went something like this:
"The Gospel reading I've just read was from Mark's Gospel. Now, as you all know, Mark was the first gospel to be written, in around 60AD, and Matthew and Luke were written with reference to Mark. In fact, there are only 24 verses in Matthew and Luke that are not present in Mark. These Gospels are so similar they are called the "Synoptics". "Synoptic" is a Greek word meaning "similar". There are so many details in Mark that could only have been recorded by an eye-witness, so this record of Jesus' life wasn't secondhand. And scholars believe that this witness was St Peter."
And continued in this vein for about twenty minutes. Now, all this wouldn't have been so bad, if
a) He didn't introduce every sermon he ever preaches with a similar sort of introduction (and he's done Mark quite recently. We know this, he knows we know it, he's just told us we already know it, why is he telling us AGAIN?)
b) He didn't get in a loop and repeat all the above twice more.
c) He didn't present historical speculation as (i) absolutely true and (ii) vital to our salvation.
d) He didn't get said historical speculation wrong on several counts.
e) He actually got to some sort of point that was relevant to (i) the passage (ii) our Christian lives. The nearest he got was to tell us we Must Believe, without either (i) giving us reasons to believe or (ii) inspiring our hearts to believe. Nobody is going to believe anything merely because they are *told* to.
f) He hadn't made such a fuss about the necessity of correct doctrine, and used Paul as the yardstick of said correct doctrine; and the epistle passage (which he took from the wrong year in the lectionary, thus rendering our noticesheets (which contained references to the *correct* readings) useless) hadn't been about how we shouldn't follow Paul or Apollos, but Christ.
g) He didn't slag off a bishop he'd heard on the radio for not challenging an atheist on the same panel for saying that God was a figment of the imagination, when we couldn't hear the context and make up our own minds as to whether that was a reasonable thing to do (the bishop may have passed over the theological point to make a moral one more relevant to the discussion, the presenter may have not let the bishop answer, the bishop may have answered but been edited out -- without the context, we can't tell).
Both my husband and I were sitting on our hands trying not to object. I think maybe I should next time he preaches, but I know he'd be hurt.. Perhaps I'll work a conversation with him round to how he feels about theological discussion amongst the congregation first.
--------------------
Unlike the link previously in my sig, I actually update my Livejournal from time to time.
Posts: 796 | From: Scotland | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tiffer
Shipmate
# 3073
|
Posted
Not very funny, but something which annoyed me an awful jing bang lot.
My girlfriends Cof E church was having an inter-regnum and I was worshipping there over the summer, the visiting preachers were all pretty dull, or just hilariously funny. There were a few weeks when I was left to look after her families house (and Grandma) while she was in France. There was one who I only saw once who seemed really clever, very astute and actually had something to say. We had had the Joseph being sold into slavery as the reading, and he started by clarifying how awful slavery is. (I have since realised that Joseph being sold into slavery was a very very good thing, but anyway) He then went through the bible, picking out every thing about slavery he could find, including in the New Testament, where he said that although Paul did say that all men were equal (implying this was his one saving grace) he also told slaves to serve their masters, how could he!
It was done very well, with a reader reading out the bible passages and very concise well thought out statements - really thought provoking.
I was waiting for a really fantastic ending, how was he going to save this attempted own goal with which he was tricking Satan? Well, to be fair, he didn't. He left a rather naive congregation to make up their own conclusions, in a church which ends any religious instruction for their congregation at the age of 15. I was so angry, if I hadn't had to walk a 90 year old lady home (who thankfully hadn't heard a word of the sermon) I may well have taken up the readers offer of talking to him after the service, however that may have given myself a bad name - my gfs parents still dont realise I am a closet evangelical (of sorts).
The bit about Paul I could already have proved him wrong on, and much of the OT stuff I have since proved him wrong on (in my head). I just thought it was so irresponsible to tear apart something which is so important to many peoples faith, evangelical or not. If I had been in the same place I had been a year before I dont know how damaging to my faith that may have been. No audible F&*^s but certainly some internal ones!
--------------------
"All the Fat belongs to the Lord"
-Leviticus 3:16b
Posts: 411 | From: England (all over) | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chukovsky
Ship's toddler
# 116
|
Posted
I am not quite sure what Tiffer found objectionable about the service he attended - not particularly because I would have found it great but because I don't quite understand what happened! What was wrong with it? if you tell us maybe we'll agree!
On the other hand I do find it bizarre that anyone over the age of 15 would need religious instruction (are you afraid people will make up their own minds if they aren't instructed what to think? How Awful!), and I find your description of the congregation as "rather naive" a bit patronising, to say the least; what is so awful about people making up their own minds? do you know them all personally, to know they are naive? Since you are an irregular attender at this church, I'd guess you don't.
--------------------
This space left intentionally blank. Do not write on both sides of the paper at once.
Posts: 6842 | From: somewhere else | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
biscuit
Shipmate
# 3550
|
Posted
This is more like a series of O f#$%^ moments - at my home church several years ago, one lady preacher would frequently get very emotional about her children when they were little, other people's babies etc. Not big world things (street kids getting killed, Rwanda etc) but "fluffy bunny" stuff. ![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif) You could almost hear the musicians group (mostly male, admittedly)"Not again..." when she got that catch in her voice.
On another occasion when the Spirit had moved and various folks had spent time re-dedicating themselves publicly, after God had done his bit powerfully and mysteriously, this same lady preacher also got up and proceeded to deliver her whole message. That she started at the time when the service would usually have been ending, added insult to the injury of "Well, that was very nice, now let me add my two-pennyworth" ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
--------------------
"The strength of the fish is in the water" (proverb)
Current flavour: Chocolate hobnob
Posts: 455 | From: South Hobbiton | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022
|
Posted
Yes, I agree with chukovsky. Ther's nothing wrong with questioning the assumptions of the Bible, many of which are culture bound. Sounds good to me. What's the problem??
--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced
Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tiffer
Shipmate
# 3073
|
Posted
It may not have upset everyone in the church, but it upset me, and I feel that I am perfectly entitled to my own opinion, no? And my opinion is that he was on a mission to devalue a book, a book which does not contain God, but enlightens me about His promises which I have learnt to live for, and a book which God uses to give encouragement and direction to my brothers and sisters, whom I care about very much. The dude in question decides that he is strong enough not to need the promises and advice of the bible, fine, but then to go to a priestless congregation, a congregation not particularily steeped in the bible, and tear it to shreds, is entirely irresponsible, and certainly not the kind of behaviour recommended in the NT.
And yes, as I said, I too enjoyed it, until he failed to explain any of it to the glory of God. I am perfectly happy to accept that God has told people to do things that appear nasty to us, that is fine, but only because I respect Gods ways as higher, and trust that all he does is for the best. But the visiting priest was quite clear that modern day cultures view of slavery as bad and wrong is the correct one, and God was condoning it, or that Godly people twisted Gods commands to condone it in the bible.
And yes, I do know many of the members of the congregation, and I would say I was a regular worshipper there, although it is not my home church. I know some of the cong personally, and I found that the culture was not one of bible-studying or the like, but far more of looking out for one another and loving their neighbours, which, as we all know, is far better.
Religious instruction was a bad way of putting it, but I cant quite put it into words. There are no official bible study groups or prayer groups to my knowledge, (however the pastoral care is great) so this is the kind of church it is. If anyone has a problem with that then they should analyse themselves and not me, because I don't believe I made any direct judgements in my past thread or my current one, other than to point out something which made me want to swear out loud in church, which I do believe was the original topic of conversation. ![[brick wall]](graemlins/brick_wall.gif)
Sorry for the tone (I am e-tactless),
Tiffer
PS If my gf corrects me below then I shall swallow my words, as she should know about the church better than I.
--------------------
"All the Fat belongs to the Lord"
-Leviticus 3:16b
Posts: 411 | From: England (all over) | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022
|
Posted
I think he shoukld be congratulated : hopefully some people will have recognised that the Bible is simply WRONG on some issues.
I'm sick of saying, 'oh well, its because of when it was written'
The Bible is WRONG on women , its WRONG on gay people, its WRONG on slavery, its WRONG on obeying governments.
And why you can't believe that Jesus has something to offer without thinking that, well, you can, and its about time the Church started saying so.
--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced
Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chukovsky
Ship's toddler
# 116
|
Posted
Actually I'd say the Bible is right (if analysed properly, including understanding of the historical context and the way in which the testaments were written) on slavery and women (I hope you aren't completely disallowing Jesus' attitude to women in your dismissal of the Bible's message on us!). It has nothing in it that is remotely relevant to homosexual relationships.
So it sounds like Tiffer is cross with this preacher because he dared to suggest that you might use your intellect to examine the bible. BZZT! Sorry. Not allowed on this thread. I don't think you'll get a consensus on that being a "F"£$£" moment.
--------------------
This space left intentionally blank. Do not write on both sides of the paper at once.
Posts: 6842 | From: somewhere else | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
MCC
Shipmate
# 3137
|
Posted
Following our curate's being priested ( a very "join our male club event which had me nearly walking out in disgust") his First Mass (in a Church which usually has Eucharist) involved a line of male priests in Purple (!) sitting there gloating over us, and ended with us being told that after the new priest had receieved some flowerrs which he would give to his mother to lay at the shrine at Walsingham, we could all go up for a blessing from the new priest, and kiss his hand. What the FXXX was that?
Far too high for me, I liked the guy, but really didn't enjoy his service at all.
--------------------
mcc____
Posts: 419 | From: London | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
MCC
Shipmate
# 3137
|
Posted
Following our curate's being priested ( a very "join our male club event which had me nearly walking out in disgust") his First Mass (in a Church which usually has Eucharist) involved a line of male priests in Purple (!) sitting there gloating over us, and ended with us being told that after the new priest had receieved some flowerrs which he would give to his mother to lay at the shrine at Walsingham, we could all go up for a blessing from the new priest, and kiss his hand. What the FXXX was that?
Far too high for me, I liked the guy, but really didn't enjoy his service at all.
--------------------
mcc____
Posts: 419 | From: London | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chukovsky
Ship's toddler
# 116
|
Posted
In response to a PM which Tiffer sent me, I'd rather discuss this in public thank you, he objected to my previous post where I said I didn't think there would be a consensus on his objections.
Though the fact that no-one has responded positively to his objections doesn't mean no-one agrees with him, it does seem suggestive given that almost all the other Worst Moments have had a positive response from someone else. Sure you are going to get some things that one person REALLY dislikes and others think is wonderful, but I don't think calling the congregation "naive" is going to help your case.
--------------------
This space left intentionally blank. Do not write on both sides of the paper at once.
Posts: 6842 | From: somewhere else | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sean D
Cheery barman
# 2271
|
Posted
Merseymike - just because those things are (mostly) dead horses doesn't mean you can say that the Bible is just plain wrong about them all and have nobody challenge you on it.
Personally I do think the Bible can be wrong about stuff, this is not the issue I am getting at. It's the tactic I object to:
OK, I have my head up my arse for disagreeing with you on a "moaning" thread rather than one for discussion. However, this is exactly what you did with Tiffer, who is an apprentice and now might think he can't post stuff without people jumping on him.* I completely agree that when people say stuff you think is naive and disagreeable you have every right to say so. But posting a series of blanket statements, all of which can be challenged (but not here without looking a dick like I now am) is an unpleasant tactic to look clever and right, as no-one will contradict you. So, I am calling attention to it.
* Compare the way you responded to him with the way Chukovsky did. Tiffer actually then apologised and rephrased substantially, but you just had to get in there to make your point one more time.
--------------------
postpostevangelical
http://www.stmellitus.org/
Posts: 2126 | From: North and South Kensington | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarkycow
La belle Dame sans merci
# 1012
|
Posted
Wanders through with hostly toasting fork in hand
For the benefit of y'all, I'll go over some of the basics about Hell.
- This is a place for discord and vigourous disagreement (among other things, but this is what we're concentrating on here). It's ok for two people to completely disagree and say so. Out loud and in public.
- Anyone is allowed to particpate on this thread, and indeed any other in Hell (unless specifically prohibited by hosts). Participation is not limited to those who agree with each other.
- I'm bored of some people bringing homosexuality into everything they post. Boredom does not make me amenable to said people in any way. Take note.
Any questions?
Viki, hellhost
--------------------
“Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar.”
Posts: 10787 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tiffer
Shipmate
# 3073
|
Posted
Sean D, may I thank you for being nice. I was feeling very alone and unspoken for over here.
And Chukovsky, I cannot defend myself for using the word naive, I apologise, it was not intentional just part of my writing style (a bad one). Other than that we must just agree to disagree.
Tiffer xx
--------------------
"All the Fat belongs to the Lord"
-Leviticus 3:16b
Posts: 411 | From: England (all over) | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
I am not disagreeing with Chukovsky on this one (wouldn't dare! ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) ), and I think only Tiffer really knows if this was a genuine 'F*&%' moment for him. But
I think I know what he was driving at?! There is a difference, very often, between using scripture in a fairly academic fashion, making scholarly deductions which may be all well and good if the only goal aimed for is instruction or teaching. But, generally, sermon-time is for exhorting and finding a message which, while it may well educate, will also inform in an encouraging and hopeful way.
Maybe, there's a fine line between offering patronizing fairytales of Jesus stuff, and smack 'em between the eyes deconstruction.
If the preacher was trying to demonstrate how thorough his own Biblical knowledge was, at the expense of a useful spiritual message for his congregation, then I suspect that even if he did have a challenge for them, they will have missed it.
Of course, as Merseymike points out some preachers may well view certain scriptures as wrong; or as Chukovsky points out, not interpreted correctly or helpfully. And there must be times when it's right to challenge people about their views of scripture; as well as challenging them with scripture.
But maybe (and I'm only saying maybe!) Tiffer's preacher's gaff was forgetting to somehow relate his own ideas of what the Bible had to say on slavery to an idea that could be taken away by the congregation members and used throughout the week to come, to their own and others' encouragement?
Sadly, I recognize this to be something I can easily fall into; wanting so much to share my own 'exciting' discoveries of what the Bible really says, only to find, when I preach it, that there's actually nothing in my sermon that someone could use to help them love or serve God more!
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sean D
Cheery barman
# 2271
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sarkycow:
- This is a place for discord and vigourous disagreement (among other things, but this is what we're concentrating on here). It's ok for two people to completely disagree and say so. Out loud and in public.
- Anyone is allowed to particpate on this thread, and indeed any other in Hell (unless specifically prohibited by hosts). Participation is not limited to those who agree with each other.
Apologies if I sounded like I disagreed with any of the above basics. I certainly don't. Fair point, consider my knucles rapped.
--------------------
postpostevangelical
http://www.stmellitus.org/
Posts: 2126 | From: North and South Kensington | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. Spouse
Ship's Pedant
# 3353
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tiffer:
Religious instruction was a bad way of putting it, but I cant quite put it into words. There are no official bible study groups or prayer groups to my knowledge, (however the pastoral care is great) so this is the kind of church it is. If anyone has a problem with that then they should analyse themselves and not me, because I don't believe I made any direct judgements in my past thread or my current one, other than to point out something which made me want to swear out loud in church, which I do believe was the original topic of conversation.
So it's not being judgemental to criticise a Church for not providing bible study or prayer groups? Does this mean there is no individual prayer or bible study in the church? I would guess not. How are you qualified to assess the spiritual condition of the congregation? What does the pastoral care consist of?
I accept you felt upset enough to post here - but look out for your own plank before taking the specks out of your part-time congregation's eye's. If you want to upset people round here, just keep that condescending attitude...
Oh, and MM -- what was all that about? I'll simply agree with what Sean D said.
--------------------
Try to have a thought of your own, thinking is so important. - Blackadder
Posts: 1814 | From: Here, there & everywhere | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
I'd probably agree with Tiffer, althought I was not at the service, so I cannot comment on the particular sermon. For that shipmate, there was a problem with that sermon - can't you accept that?
As if it is the first entry on this thread that "not everyone would agree with". Get real folks.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tiffer
Shipmate
# 3073
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by madferret:
quote:
Originally posted by Tiffer:
Religious instruction was a bad way of putting it, but I cant quite put it into words. There are no official bible study groups or prayer groups to my knowledge, (however the pastoral care is great) so this is the kind of church it is. If anyone has a problem with that then they should analyse themselves and not me, because I don't believe I made any direct judgements in my past thread or my current one, other than to point out something which made me want to swear out loud in church, which I do believe was the original topic of conversation.
So it's not being judgemental to criticise a Church for not providing bible study or prayer groups? Does this mean there is no individual prayer or bible study in the church? I would guess not. How are you qualified to assess the spiritual condition of the congregation? What does the pastoral care consist of?
I accept you felt upset enough to post here - but look out for your own plank before taking the specks out of your part-time congregation's eye's. If you want to upset people round here, just keep that condescending attitude...
Oh, and MM -- what was all that about? I'll simply agree with what Sean D said.
madferret please can you tell me in words of one syllable where I am being judgemental in my above statement? Criticise I believe means either pointing out of faults or to discus the merit of literary or artistic works, neither of which I did in my above post, unless YOU count not having bible study groups as faults, because I certainly didn't. I think I am allowed to state the truth, and that is, certainly as far as you know, the truth. If you have a problem with this church having no bible studies or prayer groups then you can complain about it - I don't believe I have and I think it is unfair of you to make me look like I have.
I am sure there is private personal prayer and bible study, you can buy bible study notes through the church indeed, however it doesn't seem to be an emphasis in the church, which like I said, I haven't commented on, as I am not in a position to. I invite you to knock my gfs church, I think I could defend it pretty well. I spend much of my life defending the traditions in front of people not familiar with the Anglican church, so how dare you call me judgemental!
I have a high regard for the pastoral care because my girlfriends grandma who I am quite close to and who has quite a lonely life is visited frequently by members of the congregation, as well as being taken communion at home whenever she wants it. That is more important that forcing the old lady into a bible study I feel, but if you feel otherwise, complain away - don't make me the culprit here for your problems with certain types of churches!
--------------------
"All the Fat belongs to the Lord"
-Leviticus 3:16b
Posts: 411 | From: England (all over) | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
Tiffer, if you take such an outraged approach without explaining why you were upset, I'm afraid you must expect to be jumped on. (Admittedly, you weren't as heavy handed here as you were on Homosexuality in Dead Horses, so I'm a bit surprised at the strong reaction on this thread.)
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alergy
Shipmate
# 3600
|
Posted
I produced my own 'Oh F***' moment when leading worship to around 800 folks at a reigonal combined uni CU type gathering years ago. I hadn't quite realised how many people were there, and as I took to the microphone I blurted out 'Oh my God, there are loads of people here'. ![[Embarrassed]](icon_redface.gif) Taking the Lord's name in vain to start worship - maybe I should've just uttered 'Oh F***' instead!
One other F@*%! moment that my father told me about, although not in a service, was when a particularly forthright minister described how divorcees were hellbound to the gathered population of a local primary school, the majority of whose pupils were from single parent / divorced parent homes. I really hope this is just an urban myth, but knowing the minister I'm not so sure. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
Member 3600
I am not a number, I am a fre... wait a minute - dammit, I am a number.
Posts: 110 | From: Here, there, everywhere | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rowen
Shipmate
# 1194
|
Posted
I can relate to producing one of "those" moments in a service. I was breaking the bread when the elastic on my halfslip died. It fell to my knees, but all was well until the time came to move away from the table and hand the servers the elements. I thought I'd turned the mic off, but like a fool, I hadn't. The half-petticoate tied up my ankles, and I said "Bugger" quite loudly into the mic. "Bugger" over the elements is not normally part of my liturgy. Then I needed to get the blasted undergarment off in a dignified manner, whilst everyone looked on and giggled.
--------------------
"May I live this day… compassionate of heart" (John O’Donoghue)...
Posts: 4897 | From: Somewhere cold in Victoria, Australia | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Alergy
Shipmate
# 3600
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rowen:
I can relate to producing one of "those" moments in a service. I was breaking the bread when the elastic on my halfslip died. It fell to my knees, but all was well until the time came to move away from the table and hand the servers the elements. I thought I'd turned the mic off, but like a fool, I hadn't. The half-petticoate tied up my ankles, and I said "Bugger" quite loudly into the mic. "Bugger" over the elements is not normally part of my liturgy. Then I needed to get the blasted undergarment off in a dignified manner, whilst everyone looked on and giggled.
Lol!
--------------------
Member 3600
I am not a number, I am a fre... wait a minute - dammit, I am a number.
Posts: 110 | From: Here, there, everywhere | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. Spouse
Ship's Pedant
# 3353
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tiffer:
madferret please can you tell me in words of one syllable where I am being judgemental in my above statement?
I was referring to your earlier post- "He left a rather naive congregation to make up their own conclusions, in a church which ends any religious instruction for their congregation at the age of 15" sounded it to me.
quote:
Criticise I believe means either pointing out of faults or to discus the merit of literary or artistic works, neither of which I did in my above post, unless YOU count not having bible study groups as faults, because I certainly didn't. I think I am allowed to state the truth, and that is, certainly as far as you know, the truth.
see above. I can only express an opinion on what you said.
quote:
If you have a problem with this church having no bible studies or prayer groups then you can complain about it - I don't believe I have and I think it is unfair of you to make me look like I have....
If I have, I will. I didn't. Have another read of your post and Chukovsky's response. I don't see how my comment "So it's not being judgemental to criticise a Church for not providing bible study or prayer groups?" can be interpreted as having a problem? I was responding to the criticism, not the absence of bible study or prayer.
quote:
don't make me the culprit here for your problems with certain types of churches!
You're being judgemental again. I have NO problem with churches of the type you describe. So don't tell me I have, thank you. You started the criticism; I was actually attempting to defend it (I know very well the difficulties in promoting bible study and corporate prayer to a church congregation)!
I'm still not clear why you consider the congregation naive; but you have clarified your position and my accusation appears to have been unfounded. Good. I apologise for any upset it may have caused you. ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
--------------------
Try to have a thought of your own, thinking is so important. - Blackadder
Posts: 1814 | From: Here, there & everywhere | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nunc Dimittis
Seamstress of Sound
# 848
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by anglicanrascal:
Rowen defrocked at the Communion!
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
Posts: 9515 | From: Delta Quadrant | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rowen:
. "Bugger" over the elements is not normally part of my liturgy.
I sincerely hope there was an appropriate manual act to accompany this psalmic lamentation of woe? ![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif) Though, come to think of it, the problem wasn't with your 'elevation', but quite the reverse.....
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
Maybe, there's a fine line between offering patronizing fairytales of Jesus stuff, and smack 'em between the eyes deconstruction.
Myself, I find patronizing deconstruction worse than either... though I have mainly encountered that in grad school, and it did make me want to say F*$#! in the middle of the lecture, anyway.
On the other hand, I don't think I mind smack 'em between the eyes fairy tales. Better than the watered-down ones. ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
I do find genuinely heretical sermons a real piss-me-off-instantly sort of thing. But as Lewis puts it, no matter what nonsense is preached from the pulpit, we go right into the Creed, "We believe in one God," etc. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Rowen:
Then I needed to get the blasted undergarment off in a dignified manner, whilst everyone looked on and giggled.
I'm sorry, but
You could have said, "Yea, brethren, and as you can see, we do not desire to be unclothed, but re-clothed..."
--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity
Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bagpuss
Magical saggy cloth cat
# 2925
|
Posted
I'm a high Anglican girl but have been known to venture into evangelical pastures on occasion.
On one such occasion I was attending communion where a lay person was assisting in the distribution of the host.
It was sliced bread - which I hate anyway - if you're going to use bread why don't they use a nice crusty loaf not Tesco's economy stuff!
Anyway the guy dropped a piece of bread - with bated breath I waited to see what he would do. He used his foot to discretely try and push it out of the way whilst continuing to dish out the bread to the communicants. Then after it was all squished and dirty he picked it up and stuffed it in his pocket.
I wanted to shout out what the *&%" do you think you're doing to Jesus!!!!
I know they're more biblical and I'm more sacramental but even so I could barely cope!
Posts: 473 | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
St. Punk the Pious
Biblical™ Punk
# 683
|
Posted
I just had a #$%@ moment reading MM posts.
MM, you have twice put down someone else's moment. Though this is Hell, most people here are more considerate than that. I let it pass the first time, even though the first time was directed at my moment.
Further, you try to hide behind Jesus in trashing the Bible. You forget that Jesus said not a jot or a tittle will pass away from God's word. In this and in other statements, He clearly believed the canon of God's word at that time. You can say you believe Jesus. Or you can say the Bible is "WRONG", but you can't have it both ways.
Now kindly shut up and let people say their moments without your tendentious comments. If you have a $#@% moment, feel free to share. Giving your prejudice against orthodox (small o) Christianity, I'm sure you have many to share. If you want to rant against the authority of God's word, there are plenty of threads available for that.
--------------------
The Society of St. Pius *
Wannabe Anglican, Reader
My reely gud book.
Posts: 4161 | From: Choral Evensong | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
MTP - you get offended my MM? I am truly sorry to hear that, given that you are always so kind, considerate and open minded to the views of others.
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
KenWritez
Shipmate
# 3238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Merseymike:
The Bible is WRONG on women , its WRONG on gay people, its WRONG on slavery, its WRONG on obeying governments.
Y'know Mike, one of these days you're actually going to express an opinion and stop being so coy. ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
--------------------
"The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin', Ringo. I'm tryin' real hard to be a shepherd." --Quentin Tarantino, Pulp Fiction
My blog: http://oxygenofgrace.blogspot.com
Posts: 11102 | From: Left coast of Wonderland, by the rabbit hole | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sean D
Cheery barman
# 2271
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bagpuss:
It was sliced bread - which I hate anyway - if you're going to use bread why don't they use a nice crusty loaf not Tesco's economy stuff!
Fully agreed - that stuff mings.
quote:
I wanted to shout out what the *&%" do you think you're doing to Jesus!!!!
I know they're more biblical and I'm more sacramental <snip>
All the same, one should be respectful of other traditions that may be there. Personally I couldn't care less what happened to the elements, but treating them with anything but the utmost respect would be disrespectful to those who had a higher view of them than me, and those people certainly do matter.
--------------------
postpostevangelical
http://www.stmellitus.org/
Posts: 2126 | From: North and South Kensington | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarkycow
La belle Dame sans merci
# 1012
|
Posted
Raises toasting fork slightly higher
Alright people. This thred is for the 'oh f*$#!' moments in a service. If you have one of those, please post here.
If, however, you are deep in an argument, then open your own thread. Got it? Or do I need to start naming names?
Viki
--------------------
“Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar.”
Posts: 10787 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Ancient Mariner*
SOF Co-editor
# 105
|
Posted
Ah, well, now...
I'm putting the finishing touches to my first novel where the vicar finally loses it and swears at the congregation during a sermon. It's a baptismal service, too.
Thought you might like to know.
--------------------
'Now if you'll excuse me, I have to appear on a tortilla in Mexico...'
Jesus to Homer Simpson
Posts: 1087 | From: St Helens (near Liverpool) UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
birdie
fowl
# 2173
|
Posted
*sigh* I started to post this somewhere else, but this is the right thread really, I suppose.
I was at a wedding last weekend and was very near standing on my pew and shouting *!$@!! at several points during the service (and reception).
There were a couple of things. Firstly, i was just longing for someone to say something realistic. Y'know, when they're all going on about what a wonderful adventure they're embarking on together etc etc. i just want to scream 'yes! okay! sometimes that adventure consists of: get up... go to work... come home... collapse in tired heap... drag self to bed... repeat for as many weeks as necessary until one of you has a spark of energy and decides to do something different - like the laundry or the dishes.' grrr. Somebody, please, just be honest.
The other thing, and you get this a lot I think at certain types of wedding, was that at times the whole thing felt like a thinly disguised 'let's get this over so these two can get home and get to bed' exercise. Around the time of my own wedding I got so pissed off about this. Suddenly it's open season on what should be your private life (geddit? private life? the clue's in the name...) and everyone feels free to give you their bit of advice, or do the old 'nudge nudge, wink wink' thing. Am I the only person in the world who felt this was totally intrusive and rude? Men at this wedding seemed to feel totally free to make quite intimate type remarks about the bride's body, her figure, and what she and the groom would be up to later that evening. There just seems to be this feeling in the air that that is what the whole thing is about. Maybe I'm just oversensitive, but when my wedding was coming up this got to the point where my husband had to reassure me that he did want to marry me for reasons not limited to having sex, since that's all anyone seemed to be talking about.
Sorry, I know I'm ranting, but God the whole thing pissed me off. And I thought it might stop after the wedding. Ha! About five weekes after our wedding, we were late to church one morning. You'd have thought we'd walked in still buttoning up our clothes, the reaction we got. For God's sake people, grow up.
Or am I just being very old fashioned about this?
b
--------------------
"Gentlemen, I wash my hands of this weirdness."
Captain Jack Sparrow
Posts: 1290 | From: the edge | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tiffer
Shipmate
# 3073
|
Posted
I agree, just wrote a long post but had to delete it because it was far too personal, but yes, marriage preparation classes should be more personal and invasive about this.
I kind of get annoyed at couples who are open about having SBM getting married in the usual way, with the same emphasis on the wedding night and the like. I know it is wrong of me to judge but I just dont understand it - it is just the double mindedness of it. They want the glamour and specialness of the wedding night, and the white virginal dress, and the Christian service designed to give a girl over to a man (to do with her what he pleases!), and yet also fight for their right to have SBM. I dunno, my girlfriend says that she can only see it as a good thing, because it shows that you can be a Christian and not have to follow rules(however she may have changed her mind about this by now).
Not that I am an active protestor - I just dont get it is all.
--------------------
"All the Fat belongs to the Lord"
-Leviticus 3:16b
Posts: 411 | From: England (all over) | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tiffer
Shipmate
# 3073
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by birdie:
There were a couple of things. Firstly, i was just longing for someone to say something realistic. Y'know, when they're all going on about what a wonderful adventure they're embarking on together etc etc. i just want to scream 'yes! okay! sometimes that adventure consists of: get up... go to work... come home... collapse in tired heap... drag self to bed... repeat for as many weeks as necessary until one of you has a spark of energy and decides to do something different - like the laundry or the dishes.' grrr. Somebody, please, just be honest.
b
I didnt quite get this, surely as you say these are parts of the adventure they dont need to be included. I mean holidays in Barbados aren't really mentioned in wedding services, why should drudgeries. I think I agree that people should remember that the adventure will always have downsides or boring parts, but I just dont see how the wedding service could be made different to accomodate this. Maybe we should put laundry and washing up in the vows? Or have readings from housewifery books, or have a staged row just to remind the couple what they are getting themselves into!
--------------------
"All the Fat belongs to the Lord"
-Leviticus 3:16b
Posts: 411 | From: England (all over) | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
birdie
fowl
# 2173
|
Posted
Okay, just quickly, or the thread will be derailed, but… I think the marriage vows including ‘in sickness & in health, for better, for worse’ etc are now so familiar to us that we miss what they really mean.
I was at a wedding last year where they wrote their own vows which were much more explicit about this – included things like ‘I promise to love you on days when love is easy, and on days when our human-ness makes love difficult’ – only much more beautifully put than that!
Because the words were new, I think people really listened to them and you got a real sense of two people entering into something they knew would be hard at times, with a clear head and a determination to make it as good as they could. It was one of the best wedding services I have ever been to.
At my own wedding we didn’t have vows like that, unfortunately, but our pastor did give a very sensible and realistic message, and it all felt a bit less like Barbie and Ken driving off into the sunset than some weddings tend to.
bird - sorry for tangent everyone
--------------------
"Gentlemen, I wash my hands of this weirdness."
Captain Jack Sparrow
Posts: 1290 | From: the edge | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tiffer:
Not that I am an active protestor - I just dont get it is all.
fnarr fnarr
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bagpuss
Magical saggy cloth cat
# 2925
|
Posted
I had another *&%^ moment AGAIN today with one of my fellow students.
I am an Anglican - an Anglo Catholic and he is Roman Catholic. If he calls me a Protestant one more time I am going to ram something painful somewhere he will not like. ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
What also p's me off big time is when he insists on telling me how things are done in MY tradition. I don't tell him how to practice Roman Catholicism so why should he insist on doing it to me. ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
What was even worse today was that he was so f*****g rude in the Anglican cathedral we were visiting. Eventually I could take no more and when he insisted that Protestants (as all non RC's are to him) do not believe in transubstantiation or elevate the host during the eucharist - well I'm afraid I put him right rather vehemently and loudly. ![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
I'm on a roll now! I also get p'd off when people generalise about religions, and this is the trainee RE teachers I am with, 'real' RE teachers and lecturers alike. It isn't restricted to Christianity however that does seem to be the prolific culprit.
As an Anglican in the last 6 months from various sources I have been told that I don't use icons (orthodox), revere BVM (RC), believe in transubstantiation (RC), etc etc etc - well that's bloody funny because I have been doing for many years.
All I can say is thank God for the sensible and sane ones out there. Especially the ones preventing me from slapping the two main culprits.
Posts: 473 | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
birdie
fowl
# 2173
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tiffer:
<snip> marriage preparation classes should be more personal and invasive about this. <snip>
This isn't quite what I was getting at, Tiffer, but this isn't really the place for long explanations...
b
--------------------
"Gentlemen, I wash my hands of this weirdness."
Captain Jack Sparrow
Posts: 1290 | From: the edge | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Glenys
Apprentice
# 1496
|
Posted
Being too polite too use the F word and not being sure what it was anyway (this was a long time ago, guys) I was moved to say "Rubbish" or something similar in my little country church in the middle of a sugary sermon about how God gives special grace to Mothers - on Mothers Day.
--------------------
Glenys
Posts: 2 | From: Adelaide, SA, Australia | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Genie
Shipmate
# 3282
|
Posted
I had my first F*£% moment in church this morning. It was our candlemas service - the presentation of the Christchild in the temple. All well and good. Our Reader began her sermon by stating that the child Jesus was a sign of hope, and in the same way all children are signs of hope. Somehow that mutated into 'some children grow up without hope and it's our job to give it back to them'. Fair enough. She then produced a box full of plastic hearts, and stated that these are the empty hearts of Romanian orphans. Anyone interested should take one at the end of the service, and fill it with a gift of love which will then be sent out to a Romanian orphanage on valentines day. Tacky, but fine.
She then changed her mind two minutes later and called all of the littlest children to the front of the church, instructing them to give the plastic hearts out to everyone present. Whether or not people intended to participate, it's impossible to refuse when youve got an angelic three year old holding this plastic monstrosity out to you. I have no objection to charitable giving - I think it's fantastic to give freely of our time, love and possessions, not to mention it being a sacred duty. However I object strongly to being blackmailed into it. Especially when the method she's chosen is tacky and ineffective. The plastic monstrosity would perhaps contain a very small teddybear or a pair of gloves. The plastic heart shape is one of the most inefficient stacking shapes possible, so sending them out will be far more unwieldy and difficult than if we'd been filling shoeboxes. And surely the money she's wasted on these plastic things would be far better spent towards something for the poor little orphans we're helping?
--------------------
Alleluia, Christ is risen!
Posts: 762 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Donne
Renaissance Man
# 220
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tiffer:
They want the glamour and specialness of the wedding night, and the white virginal dress, and the Christian service designed to give a girl over to a man (to do with her what he pleases!),
Tee hee! I know you are joking Tiffer. You are aren't you? Or is this some grubby little fantasy you have about the lovely mimsey?
'Cos we all know that in the solemnization of marriage the gentleman confers upon the lady his rank and dignities and the worth of his person (worship=worth-ship) and pledges that the wealth that is his is hers also. Of course you will be doing this before slaking your lust on her body in an earnest effort to help fulfil the prayer regarding fruitfulness in the procreation of children.
Posts: 13667 | From: Perth, W.A. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Presleyterian
Shipmate
# 1915
|
Posted
Thank you, Icarus Coot, for explaining that Tiffer's comments were in jest. I was ready to fire off a post asking him in what century he was living, in what tribe were men encouraged to marry girls, in what country are brides considered chattel to be "given over to a man," and on what planet is one's wedding night -- or any other night -- a matter of a husband "do[ing]with [a wife] what he pleases." (Yeah, right.) Somebody's little imagination seems to be getting a bit overheated. Laying off the Barbara Cartland novels wouldn't be a bad idea.
And it took me a few minutes to figure out what "SBM" was. I didn't know we had a cute acronym for it now.
Posts: 2450 | From: US | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
auntbeast
Shipmate
# 377
|
Posted
Posted by Presleyterian:
quote:
And it took me a few minutes to figure out what "SBM" was. I didn't know we had a cute acronym for it now.
I don't know...but around here "SBM" means "single black male" in the personals. Which leads me to agree with Tiffer that "I kind of get annoyed at couples who are open about having (a single black male)getting married in the usual way, with the same emphasis on the wedding night and the like". Having each other before the wedding doesn't so much bother me, but I am not sure about the couple having anyone else, regardless of gender or race, before the wedding , although I suppose consenting adults and all what the heck. But it would certainly make for a less traditional wedding.
Cheers,
Auntbeast
--------------------
"My vices are the children of a forced solitude that I abhor; and my virtues will necessarily arise when I live in communion with an equal" - Mary Shelley (Frankenstein)
Posts: 820 | From: Vancouver, Canada | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
I thought it was 'Straight Black Male', Auntbeast.
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
auntbeast
Shipmate
# 377
|
Posted
I have most often seen it as single black male as opposed to DBM (divorced) but I have also seen it as straight black male as opposed to GBM. the complexities of personals ads.. could lead to some real confusion.. think I will continue to avoid them and be content with my houseplants and dust bunnies.
All good things,
Auntbeast
--------------------
"My vices are the children of a forced solitude that I abhor; and my virtues will necessarily arise when I live in communion with an equal" - Mary Shelley (Frankenstein)
Posts: 820 | From: Vancouver, Canada | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Not worthy!]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
