quote:

---

But if He hadn't had that lifeline up to the bank of being God as well as man when He jumped in after us, it wouldn't have been quite the same result, I think. He certainly wouldn't have been able to save ALL of us by doing it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Texas Tumbleweed:
There's an condescending implication here that these urbanites are not capable of learning reverence.

---

Enough already of this absurd discussion. Enough already of the absurd 'theology' which underpins this farcical piece of performance art. Enough already of people pretending that 'Vaux' and all that it stands for is the only way to engage youf culture when it in fact repels youf who when you explain to them what a High Mass is and how it works never want to have anything else. Enough already of the absurd levels of self-righteousness and sanctimony displayed on this thread by people who clearly have the capability to know better.

Go and sit in Westminster Abbey or Westminster Cathedral or All Saints Margaret St or St Mary's Bourne St for Holy Week and Easter and suddenly this piece of dross will fade away into the land of Betamax videos and Sinclair C5's as you are confronted with real, painful religion.

Nothing is more embarassing than the Church trying to be 'relevant'. As soon as people realise that the better.

Alternative Worship is one of the "traditions" in the church which isn't about being "relevant" or "accessible", but about people expressing their own culture in their worship.

Accessible: No.
Easy: No.
Relevant: Not in the "lets be trendy christian sense"

Does Alt.Worship represent the living tradition of the church in interacting with a changing growing god in the language of the worshipers: Yes

Does Alt.Worship engage the mind, body and senses in an experience of the other: Yes

Is it closer to pre-reformation worship in its breadth, folk religion, and opportunities for personal devotion: Yes

Does it work, and does it plumb greater depths than "charismatic" and "traditional" forms: Hell Yes

I have the utmost respect for Cosmo and the High Church tradition (as Cosmo knows), but perhaps there is some fear here. Where is the ritualistic exploration and innovation coming from today? A lot is coming from the Alt.Worship communities and groups which share the underlying principles. The Oxford Movement is dead, let us say a last requiem and go deeper in.

Do go to Mass, do explore our living tradition, do it in silence with projected images and incense (oops betrayed the fact I have been spending too much time at Westcott) do it with a Down Beat sound track, do it in Latin, but explore your faith, interact with your liturgy, interact with the evolving church.

quote:

---

i'm intrigued that you're seeing this particular eucharist as the opposite of reverent to god. it certainly wasn't irreverent, it was deadly serious. no-one was taking this lightly. the people who did it have enormous reverence for god. part of this reverence is a feeling that we pass too easily over the crucifixion, and that sometimes it's good to be reminded a little more graphically of what it entailed, before we eat and drink. maybe it's not reverence exactly, in the usual sense, but it's homage.it seems condescending to assume that these urbanites don't already know a lot about reverence, in conventional or other forms, whether or not they showed it on this occasion. they're all very experienced worshippers.

---

I wasn't there, and that puts me at a disadvantage. But it was certainly shocking to the observer, and I think that would destroy the close communion with the Lord I try to have when communion occurs. That's why I thought it might work as a video or theatrical piece before the sermon. The celebrant could teach on it, and the shock would have faded so communicants could approach communion in a state that allows each to accept the sacraments in communion with Jesus.

One time, a couple of people got to nail turkish breads to a huge lump of wood, and we had to tear bits off them to eat them. The broken remains hanging off the nails, and the crumbs on the floor, were extremely poignant. I think there was spilling of wine, too...

And on that s word, if i remember it right Mark Pierson once did a service where he had a bread machine baking bread while the service began, timed so the bread finished baking just as the communion hymn finished. Timed a little too well, because when he opened the machine and tore the bread in two he got burnt, and instead of "this is my body", he said "shit this is hot."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Texas Tumbleweed:
I wasn't there, and that puts me at a disadvantage.

---

i know, and many of the posts on this thread have caused me to reflect on the shortcomings of my own writing. of course i wanted to stir things up and shock you a bit, but in the process what got left out was the seriousness of intent and atmosphere in the service that made these outrageous things more than just shock tactics.

it's worth reflecting on the fact that none of the things that were done would seem particularly shocking in any other context than a church service. which is a mark of how we separate worship from the rest of our lives. for some that's a good thing, for others that's a bad thing. vaux, obviously, think it's a bad thing.

quote:

---

the shock would have faded so communicants could approach communion in a state that allows each to accept the sacraments in communion with Jesus.

---

this didn't seem to be a problem. partly because there was a little time while the bread was being set out on the altar and more wine was poured, to get over some of the shock [assuming one was shocked]. and the communion itself could only be received two by two, so it took a long time. as people came forward and knelt at the altar they seemed very grave and reverent [children excepted of course]. as far as i could tell, the drama had made people more aware of christ - more serious, more prayerful. many took the symbolism further, unbidden, by preferring to dip their bread in the pool of spilt wine rather than drink from the cups. a couple brought their pieces of toilet paper with sins written on and left them in the pool of wine [and i had to remove them to take photos at the end!].

I agree with ChastMaster, it is very difficult for Christians to agree or unite in any effort of worship, and there will always be the loners. Wise, solemn, quiet, and misunderstood by the majority, they will continue for as long as the earth lasts.

As for using "bad" words, who said they were bad? If God did not, we may re-evaluate their values, for that in saying the same thing by uttering different sounds, if it is not sin, then one must wonder why it is considered wrong. It is generally only considered rude by humankind, but as our language evolves this will change, just as many words commonly used now were once thought terribly rude.

What is sin, however, is cursing another human being. The Scripture states clearly, "Bless, and curse not." And again, "'Vengeance is mine, I will repay,' saith the Lord."

quote:

---

Enough already of the absurd 'theology' which underpins this farcical piece of performance art. Enough already of people pretending that 'Vaux' and all that it stands for is the only way to engage youf culture when it in fact repels youf who when you explain to them what a High Mass is and how it works never want to have anything else.

---

Cosmo, I have to say that that is the most patronising crock of shite I have read in a while. I honestly don't think you have grasped the edges of the debate if you think people like Vaux, and others doing alt worship are interested in engaging 'youf culture'. It's precisely that dumb attitude - that as soon as you do something different using media and ideas that are foreign to church but not to the rest of the world it means you are fishing for trendy converts - that puts a damper on any sort of change.

David Wells wrote of the established church "Not only has the fat lady sung, but the chairs have been put away, the lights turned out ... and the wrecking ball stands ready to swing the next day... but all these men in purple still huddle in groups talking of the great opera's they are going to stage."

quote:

---

As far as I'm concerned, hats off to Vaux for getting on and doing something. It's not like they insist this is the only way, but at least allow them the respect of doing what works for them, rather than sitting around masturbating from the sidelines - getting all worked up, but doing nothing, creating nothing while the walls are crumbling around. You may not want anything else, but at least have then sense to appreciate that others might.

---

So.... if Vaux finds that sacrificing babies on the altar works for them, hats off to them? I don't mean to be flip - it boils down to where to draw the line, because there is a line. Where the line is is, of course, the point of this whole discussion.

I've been mulling this over at length, and the word "disrespect" keeps coming to mind. As practicing Christians we KNOW better. Yes, Christ climbs down into the deepest foulest ooze to get us, but now that we know better, why should we intentionally foul His sacraments and say it's a good thing? I'm speaking now of throwing them down as part of the eucharist, not in other contexts or parts of the service.

We won't sully Him - nothing can do that. But we sully ourselves when we show such disrespect while knowing better.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cosmo:
youf who when you explain to them what a High Mass is and how it works never want to have anything else.

---

quote:

---

So - Vaux and Cosmo to set up next door to each other. Both to have their style of services. See which one attracts more people to Christ.

---

Yeah right I think Celebrity DeathMatch between the two would work better But the quote implies that it's either or when surely the Body needs both Cosmo and Vaux.

I would like to welcome all the new visitors to small fire who have come in via this thread. It is clear many of you still have some misconceptions about alt.worship, but you are still very welcome to ask questions and contribute to conversations.

There are a few things that you may need to know about small fire, and the alt.worship community in general.

The regular contributors here generally know what they are talking about: many of them are far better read, educated and experienced in matters of worship, liturgy and educational methods than the average church goer; this is their specialist area.

The regular contributors here are not trying to be relevant for the "yoof". They are expressing their own culture in the way they worship. for example s3 services range in age between teens and sixties.

The regular contributors here use this is as an open creative forum, not just somewhere to argue over "the best way to do something", and certainly not somewhere to ridicule other peoples ideas.

The regular contributors here are from a range of church backgrounds and experiences. For some Alt.Worship is their main expression of church, for others it is just part of it. Do not make any assumptions about the "churchpersonship" of alt.worship. It doesn't have one.

I am posting this here, and also in Adrian's small buckets of water thread. I would prefer discussion of it to go in that thread rather than dragging this one off track.

Also see:

What is Alt.Worship which as part of our guidlines for this board you will have all read of course.

I am posting this as a member of the small fire community not as a host, however I promise that if people "forget" what I have just explained I will gently remind them.

[Added URL]

I can understand the need for shock. The Christian faith's central story is shocking. The imagery is familliar to me even though I have not used it in worship.

What I want to know is that how was the transcendant communicated in the service. I get the most of the write up shows the immanent part of worship which is crucial but I would like to know about the transcendant to.

The communion service, however managed, ceebrates the fact that Jesus died and rose - we remember Him, what He suffered, and that He is waiting for us to join Him in a place where there is no more suffering, no more tears, where He is the light.

Also thank you to Steve for his enlightening comment. Perhaps he could explain to me why the most rapidly expanding bit of my own little conventicle are 20-30 year olds who previously went to places like Vaux? It's a poser isn't it? Why on earth should they want to go to a place which celebrates the traditional (in the proper sense of the word) sacraments of the Church in a way which has light, beauty, reverence and hope along with a recognition of the past, present and future of the Church and are praught the doctrine of the Church Catholic when they could be going to a place that throws Our Lord into the dirt becuase that's obviously the place we want him to belong. 'If I'm in the shit, O Lord, then you ought to be too'. I can't think why. Others, less kind than me, have suggested that these people have begun to grow up. I couldn't possibly make such an unkind suggestion.

The problem with places like Vaux is not their experimentation with liturgy. I can cope with that as long as experimentation doesn't mean just casting off everything that has gone before as so much dross. The main problem with it is that its theology seems so dubious. The service of dirt has a theology of death. It was all about (as far I can see and read from its description) Christ dying and breaking, all about sinfulness and hopelessness. It was as though all that matters is Good Friday and not Easter Day. I know for some people that this is their theology: Christ's atoning death being all that matters and the Resurrection and Ascension being a bit of a side-show later on to show that he was God as well as Man. But the Mass, the Christian Life, is about life not death. It is about hope not despair. And its focus is not on us but to God. All worship is to God and not just about ourselves and trying to force God into the postion that what we want God to be in.

And that's why I get irritated by things like Vaux which seem to play around with ourselves rather than God and glories in the transitory and the Now, that glories and concentrates on us, here, now, because that's all that matters, (and who cares about those before us, they are dead, and let those who follow us look after themselves; it's we who matter) rather than allow ourselves to be under the Eternal God, to worship him with those who have gone before us and glory in his resurrection hope.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Steve:
Cosmo - playing the numbers game? Surely not.

---

No. I'm just saying that that part of my own little place which is expanding most are the 20-30 year olds. I'm sorry if that disturbs you unduly.

maybe cosmo would like to get some of his ex-vaux group to comment on their experience of alt.worship?

I actually think that the success of anglo-catholicism and the development of alt.worship with the mid 20's and 30's are related phenomena. Both offer opportunities for the post-modern, the post-conservative and the post-evangelical. If one is going to take the rather arrogant position of "you grow up out of evangelicalism into something else" then both alt.worship and ang.catholic are possible routes. For many I know it is a both rather than an either. Alt.Worship is not about numbers, as Steve has pointed out, but it does have a significant influence on the church for its size as a "movement". I would suggest that the influence of alt.worship over the next 30 years could be compared to say the parish communion movement. alt.worship is helping take the church in a certain direction.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jengie:
I have given this a lot of thought and I hope Steve will give this some consideration in reply.

I can understand the need for shock. The Christian faith's central story is shocking. The imagery is familliar to me even though I have not used it in worship.

What I want to know is that how was the transcendant communicated in the service. I get the most of the write up shows the immanent part of worship which is crucial but I would like to know about the transcendant to.

The background to this was that I was going through a tough time at precisely the point that I read the article it left me not cold.
I did not feel reassured by the fact God was with me in it as I felt he was as helpless as I. This may be a personal response may be because I could not take in the transcendant part or any of a hundred other reasons but I would like some clarification.

---

i think that, for vaux, the fact that god is present in the dirt is the hope - because they don't think that makes god helpless. in time we'll be redeemed from the dirt - but right now we are in it, and need to find god with us in it rather than sitting on a throne a long way away watching.

i'm trying to analyse why i don't feel any need to dwell on transcendence, but am hugely excited by immanence.

most of the people in vaux - most of the people in alt worship i suspect - are from charismatic evangelical backgrounds, where transcendence has often been emphasised to the point where we forget that god was ever fully human, ever struggled with temptation or compromise, ever knew human weakness. we forget that we have "a high priest who can
sympathise with our weakness" because he is only presented to us as triumphant and in heaven. which is a long way from where we are.

so dwelling on the poverty and suffering of god, for a lot of us, is hugely uplifting - it tells us that god does understand, god is present here and now. but it's a redemptive and transforming presence - not necessarily transforming the situation, but us. we often need god's strength to stay where we are, not god's help to escape. this service was trying to speak to that need. if you had been there, it may have been completely unhelpful, or you may have been enabled to discover god in power in your situation.

Have been following the activity from the sidelines up until now. Couldn't ignore this from Cosmo though ...

quote:

---

The service of dirt has a theology of death. It was all about (as far I can see and read from its description) Christ dying and breaking, all about sinfulness and hopelessness. It was as though all that matters is Good Friday and not Easter Day. I know for some people that this is their theology: Christ's atoning death being all that matters and the Resurrection and Ascension being a bit of a side-show later on to show that he was God as well as Man. But the Mass, the Christian Life, is about life not death. It is about hope not despair.

---

OK so I find it hard to put my reaction to the fact that Jesus rose from the dead into words, let's just say I'm pretty stoked about it.

However, one of the most amazing things about Jesus is that he is with me in the shit. I don't know about you but I have shit times sometimes and knowing that God is there is the most exciting thing about my faith. I know from my experiences with the charismatic church that this often gets ignored because apparently we should be in a constant state of joy and wonder about the resurrection.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cosmo:
It was as though all that matters is Good Friday and not Easter Day.

---

but cosmo, good friday and easter day are on
different days. does every act of worship have to cover everything? the church doesn't do the resurrection stuff on good friday, because to do so means not really experiencing good friday. and thereby devaluing both.

quote:

---

Posted by The One Whom Smart Girls Carry: Perhaps [Steve] could explain to me why the most rapidly expanding bit of my own little conventicle are 20-30 year olds who previously went to places like Vaux? It's a poser isn't it?

---

Well, yes it is.

Funny that it's 20 and 30-somethings who also seem to be the main constituency of those big EA and Spring Harvest churches, too, your Pioneers and your NFIs and what-have-you.

Maybe it's the need for certainty and cheerfulness.

Sure, they're different certainties presented in different ways - on the one hand you've got the 'doctrine of the Catholic church', the hope of resurrection, its beauties and triumphs and emphatic reverences, on the other the assurance of being in a church 'like the New Testament' with the certainty of salvation, the triumphal songs of the 'saved', the offer of aid in 'spiritual warfare' - but they're certainties, aren't they?

Which is no bad thing.

A lot of alt. worship seems, for good or ill, to want to avoid those certainties.

quote:

---

The main problem with [Vaux] is that its theology seems so dubious. The service of dirt has a theology of death. It was all about (as far I can see and read from its description) Christ dying and breaking, all about sinfulness and hopelessness.

---

With this I agree. It did seem - from Steve's article - to be a wee bit of a downer, although the elements were retrieved and offered.

quote:

---

All worship is to God and not just about ourselves and trying to force God into the postion that what we want God to be in.

---

While our approaches are about as different as two Christians can be, I unreservedly agree with you here.

I'll be honest. I'm not an alt. type. It ain't me.

I find a fair amount of it a wee bit pretentious, just a tad second-year art student. I find beauty in the simple, the frank, the straightforward. But then, I'm a crusty old reformed minimalist. I'm almost zen, in fact. What do I know?

quote:

---

Posted by Ed: I find all this "the christian life is hope not despair" to be rather triumphalist.

---

Why? 'Triumphalist' is 'the Christian life is a victorious ride of health, wealth and squashed demonic forces'. 'Hope' is not a victorious ride. 'Hope' is something that you don't hear much in the really 'triumphalist' places. It's too subtle. 'Hope' is a reason to go on when there's no other reason to do so.

Hope is one of the the three barest things that make us a Christian. If we have no hope, what's the point?

I may have read Fr. Cosmo wrong, but I get the impression that he loathes triumphalism as much as you do (and thus abouthalf as much as I do ) - he wasn't talking about triumph. He was talking about what he perceived as the absence of hope in the Vaux meeting as reported.

quote:

---

Posted by Steve Collins: i think that, for vaux, the fact that god is present in the dirt is the hope - because they don't think that makes god helpless.

---

I think I get it. Honest question - how clearly was this idea expressed in the meeting?

quote:

---

i'm trying to analyse why i don't feel any need to dwell on transcendence, but am hugely excited by immanence.

---

It's nice to be amongst friends who value your thoughts and the worship that comes from them.

quote:

---

When they said repent, repent, repent
I wonder what they meant.

---

I think they meant if you're going to come back and be obnoxious at least do it on a different thread.

Did you learn nothing?

quote:

---

The regular contributors here are not trying to be relevant for the "yoof". They are expressing their own culture in the way they worship. for example s3 services range in age between teens and sixties.

---

Many people here think that I am up the wall because we have had devotions to our lady in our alt.worship, but the express their reservations politely, because:

quote:

---

The regular contributors here use this is as an open creative forum, not just somewhere to argue over "the best way to do something", and certainly not somewhere to ridicule other peoples ideas.

---

Also please remember that:

quote:

---

The regular contributors here are from a range of church backgrounds and experiences. For some Alt.Worship is their main expression of church, for others it is just part of it. Do not make any assumptions about the "churchpersonship" of alt.worship. It doesn't have one.

---

Your tone is far more appropriate to Hell than Small Fire. This is a creative space where people can wonder aloud without being slammed for it. Ridicule, disrespect and sarcasm belong in the nether regions. If you can't post to this board without resorting to those practices, then by all means hightail it back to the ghetto.

And it's this middle ground that is not so contencious to talk about - to say that the elements were thrown to the ground is easier than dealing with the fact that they were tenderly reinstated afterwards... To take offence at God being found in the shit - as if this excluded any thought on the part of Vaux that God might be also elsewhere - is much easier. Balance is hard.

quote:

---

Originally posted by see-man:
The truth, of course, pretty much always lies somewhere in the middle.

---

This truth, of course depends on where either end starts off.

The middle is also a place where fences are often to be found. I have to say that this thread is one of the most interesting that has been dragged into existence for AGES; it's got everything, bannings, rude words, pretentious crocks.

Any thread which has Wood agreeing with Cosmo is bound to be a corker.

See-man you should pop over to MW some day... see if you can cope with the uneasy middle ground being churned over there

quote:

---

Originally posted by Septimus:

Any thread which has Wood agreeing with Cosmo is bound to be a corker.
S.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by see-man:
Steve - a question, as you initiated this debate - do you think that the service in question existed in a context of balance?

---

i do, but that context is wider than a single service. it's balance over a whole year of services, or two years of services. after all, vaux have been doing this monthly for over three years now. they've covered a lot of ground. right now they're doing dirt, by june they may be doing triumphalist escatology for all i know. they probably will now, for spite.

It seems to me that how far is too far depends on who is coming. Vaux are in the wonderful position of knowing (for most of the time)what sort of people are coming. You know roughly what sort of thing you are in for if you go. If you don't like it, don't go. I don't go to Catholic high mass for the same reason!

The difficulty of doing anything at all like this in a "normal church doing some alt. worship" situation is that you don't know who you are going to get, and most people around probably don't know what they are getting themselves in for either. I wouldn't dream of doing that sort of thing at my Church, but I do the odd alt. service which appears to be appreciated. Am I making sence? Or am I talking through my ********??

quote:

---

Originally posted by see-man:
What the hell is MW?!
.

---