|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: new vicar- changes
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Puzzler:
Yes, more than meets the eye, of course.
My personal opinion, for what it is worth, is that the new vicar would have done better to consult, maybe set up a small group representing all the services and those who rarely come, and listen before taking action on the style and pattern of services.
Whilst taking steps to get to know people, I would like to see him start to get in touch with less regular attenders and those families who come to Messy Church and recent baptism contacts and see what they want and when they would be able and willing to come. Or what alternative would suit them.
Depending on results, I would have expected any new service to run alongside existing forms of worship for quite a while before considering abandoning either or merging them.
I would have supported the musical tradition in the existing services.
I would not have thrown my weight around by telling people that I can do whatever I want.
Other internal changes eg what he wears, where he stands, what forms of prayer he uses, are less significant.
So that nails my colours to the mast.
All this seems perfectly reasonable and what I would call "good practice'. If this is not what people are being taught to do during their training for ordination and subsequent curacy, then what ARE they being taught?
The more I hear such examples of what some new ministers do in their first few months, the more I feel that there is a desperate need for good training to be given (and made mandatory!) on "transitions to a new parish". Good practice in this matter is not hard to find - so why are there still so many examples of ministers blundering in and throwing their supposed weight around?
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
All this seems perfectly reasonable and what I would call "good practice'. If this is not what people are being taught to do during their training for ordination and subsequent curacy, then what ARE they being taught?
The more I hear such examples of what some new ministers do in their first few months, the more I feel that there is a desperate need for good training to be given (and made mandatory!) on "transitions to a new parish". Good practice in this matter is not hard to find - so why are there still so many examples of ministers blundering in and throwing their supposed weight around?
Alas, this is a 'party' tradition that goes back over 150 years to people now regarded as the heroes of Anglo-Catholicism. Those who agree with them admire them for their determination in the late C19 for introducing 'advanced' practices against the resistance of parishioners and Protestant campaigners.
Far too many people since have picked up the idea that this is what a dynamic, effective and principled incumbent does, irrespective of churchmanship. At the moment, the tide is moving in an evangelical direction. So evangelicals are presented to MoR congregations, and some of them feel that it is their duty to turn their congregations into what they see as bastions of the truth. Between the wars, it was Anglo-Catholics inspired by the Anglo-Catholic Congresses of the 1920s who were accused of much the same sort of thing.
Slightly difficult slant, but Dearmer's Parson's Handbook encourages the same sort of thing. It sees the Parson's job as to know what is right - or tasteful - and impose it on 'his' congregation, whether they like not or not.
Irrespective of the cause it's done in, the perpetrators are likely to regard the diocese as getting in their way, not providing valuable mentoring and support.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Puzzler:
Yes, more than meets the eye, of course.
My personal opinion, for what it is worth, is that the new vicar would have done better to consult, maybe set up a small group representing all the services and those who rarely come, and listen before taking action on the style and pattern of services.
Whilst taking steps to get to know people, I would like to see him start to get in touch with less regular attenders and those families who come to Messy Church and recent baptism contacts and see what they want and when they would be able and willing to come. Or what alternative would suit them.
Depending on results, I would have expected any new service to run alongside existing forms of worship for quite a while before considering abandoning either or merging them.
I would have supported the musical tradition in the existing services.
I would not have thrown my weight around by telling people that I can do whatever I want.
Other internal changes eg what he wears, where he stands, what forms of prayer he uses, are less significant.
So that nails my colours to the mast.
Great idea but would the sub group have been welcomed by those who resist any change? It's what I have seen happen: they try to cut off any thing which affects their power base at source.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
There is an adage in teaching that 20% of a group will work with you, 20% of a group will work against you and it's up to you to win the 60% in the middle. I think something similar applies with vicars and congregations.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
At the moment, the tide is moving in an evangelical direction. So evangelicals are presented to MoR congregations, and some of them feel that it is their duty to turn their congregations into what they see as bastions of the truth.
When this happened at our church, some years ago now, the incumbent (who stayed for 7 months, though was only active in ministry for 3) not only saw his job as turning the church into a bastion of truth, but publicly denouncing & turning us away from the wrong teaching he believed we had received previously.
And so I second this hope:
quote:
Originally posted by andras:
Your new vicar sounds exactly like someone I knew a couple of years back, and who moved on to a new parish a few months ago. I do hope for all your sakes that it isn't the same chap...
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Puzzler
Apprentice
# 18908
|
Posted
To my knowledge there is no “power group” other than the core PCC.
As is often the case there are people who attend the early BCP service who would make their feelings known if necessary, but they don’t really venture outside that service.
The congregation is all for making church more accessible, though not necessarily in agreement as to what that means.
Given that the families we do have contact with would be unlikely to attend on a weekly basis on Sundays, I see no valid reason to discontinue our traditional services on certain Sundays.
In this day and age there are many other ways to reach out to others, beside Sunday services. I look forward to the new incumbent’s ideas on this.
Thank you for all your thoughts and comments.
Posts: 27 | From: England | Registered: Jan 2018
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aggie
Ship's cat
# 4385
|
Posted
At the church I often attend, the new Vicar always uses modern Roman Catholic liturgy rather than C of E liturgy. Several members of the congregation are unhappy about this and have complained, but the Vicar always challenges anyone who complains.
--------------------
“I see his blood upon the rose
And in the stars the glory of his eyes,
His body gleams amid eternal snows,
His tears fall from the skies.”
(Joseph Mary Plunkett 1887-1917)
Posts: 581 | From: A crazy, crazy world | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Felafool
Shipmate
# 270
|
Posted
When I was involved in training newbies at the vicar factory, we did quite a lot of work on servant leadership and managing change. One useful little book was Hit the Ground Kneeling, an apt title, written by Stephen Cottrell. I also recall Bill Hybels saying that a church can only move as fast as its pastor on his knees.
It is almost a truism that whenever there is a new minister appointed in an overall leadership capacity, some people will not get on with her and some people will leave, whatever she does. This is similar in other working situations, except for the leaving bit. In a church you are dealing with people who volunteer their support and attendance, which is easier to withdraw than in a working contract.
Another truism is that you will never satisfy all of the people all the time. However long you take attempting to bring people along, however gently or persuasively, there will be some who are never going to get it. That is no excuse for not consulting, listening and learning before instigating change.
I have experienced (and also been guilty of) both the bull in a china shop approach as well as the patient listening one. Both generated a similar amount of pain and unrest, but the difference was that in one case the pain was intense but relatively short lived, and in the other it was perhaps milder but much more drawn out.
I also experienced and practised a middle way - setting up change in parallel with the status quo. This is potentially much harder work unless delegation is widespread, but in the end much more rewarding. The merits or otherwise of the 'experiment' can be seen and felt, and if they aren't then perhaps the change is the wrong one.
--------------------
I don't care if the glass is half full or half empty - I ordered a cheeseburger.
Posts: 265 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Slightly difficult slant, but Dearmer's Parson's Handbook encourages the same sort of thing. It sees the Parson's job as to know what is right - or tasteful - and impose it on 'his' congregation, whether they like not or not.
Gross slander! Dearmer started from the principle (accepted by all at that time) that the BCP was the standard for Anglican worship, and aimed for a dignified and reverent expression of it. He was quite willing to accept less elaborate ceremonial but insisted that anything done in church should be consistent with Prayer Book order.
We are now in a quite different situation. Effectively 'anything goes' in Anglican worship. But there are constraints and one of them is the insistence that any changes in the style of worship should be agreed between the parish priest and the PCC.
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Aggie:
At the church I often attend, the new Vicar always uses modern Roman Catholic liturgy rather than C of E liturgy. Several members of the congregation are unhappy about this and have complained, but the Vicar always challenges anyone who complains.
This really needs the Bishop to take a stand and, if necessary, start disciplinary proceedings for using an unauthorised liturgy. But what are the chances of that in the modern CofE? .
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
Just so. A neighbouring parish uses the Roman rite exclusively, having taken the decision (priest, PCC, and people, AFAIK) to do so when the most recent revision of the rite was made (2011?).
At least that has the benefit of consistency, unlike the wretched mish-mash bequeathed to us at Our Place by our now retired (and not much missed) Father Fu**wit...
+Chartres, late of London, had the right idea, IIRC. Use Common Worship unless there is no suitable provision, in which case you can borrow from Rome.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
Just a general reminder (in a quasi-official capacity I suppose) that we cannot really make judgements about the circumstances in any given church simply on the basis of an Internet discussion.
This thread seems like it could serve a valuable purpose for discussing how changes can and should come about, but please, keep gossip to a minimum!
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Isn't using the Roman rite a blatant and intentional breach of the incumbent's Declaration of Assent,
“in public prayer and administration of the sacraments, I will use only the forms of service which are authorized or allowed by Canon”.
I'd understand that as meaning, 'in accordance with either Common Worship or the 1662 BCP'.
I also can't see any reason other than cussedness why a person wants to do that. Except that it sometimes tends to be a bit wordy, Common Worship is fairly flexible but the instructions can be confusing. I can see reasons why a person might select shorter options and simplify a bit more than they are meant to.
I know there are people who insist on using the Roman rite, but I can't see what their excuse is. If they think that somehow makes the elements more consecrated than if they use the rites they are supposed to, then I'd suggest that,
a. they are in the wrong ecclesial community, and
b. their Eucharistic theology is awry.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Whilst I have a lot of time for individual Anglo-Catholics, I find the full-on Anglo-Papalist upper reaches of it very baffling.
They seem to want their cake and eat it.
I've seen RC priests tear their hair out.
'What more do these people want? We've got the Ordinariate, they can bring their wives ...'
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Mention of the Ordinariate must bring to mind the delayed departure of the bishops until after the Christmas holiday period. The "having their cake and eating it" reminds us that they undertook few if any of the sorts of duties a bishop would normally undertake in that period.
In general terms, I much prefer the language of the APBA to the latest Catholic translation. It's much less clunky, and is language well understood across a modern community without losing dignity or reverence. I do like the Catholic general confession to God and the others in the congregation, and then seeking forgiveness both from God an "you, my brothers and sisters". But if you want to use the Missal, then you go to Rome.
[ 01. February 2018, 01:36: Message edited by: Gee D ]
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
I assumed the Anglo-Papalists who haven't already departed either can't handle the pay cut or can't handle the idea of being expected to obey their oath of obedience to their ordinary. I may be being uncharitable.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
You may be, but I'm not sure just how many would say that now.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
I think Enoch may be right, insofar as a Certain Priest I know is concerned.
He seems to think that, if it's Roman, it must (by definition) be more Holy. Yes, he could join the Ordinariate, and take his Lovely Wife with him, but there is no convenient local group.
A former Shipmate used to have as his sig 'Why can't we just do what it says in the book?'.
![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
How do you classify a church that Mass is Catholic and Office is BCP?
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aggie
Ship's cat
# 4385
|
Posted
I am really not sure why our Vicar isn't a Roman Catholic priest as he uses modern Roman Catholic liturgy all the time and during the prayers of Intercession and in the Eucharistic prayer mentions "Francis our Pope" first before + Justin, our Archbishop and our diocesan bishop.
--------------------
“I see his blood upon the rose
And in the stars the glory of his eyes,
His body gleams amid eternal snows,
His tears fall from the skies.”
(Joseph Mary Plunkett 1887-1917)
Posts: 581 | From: A crazy, crazy world | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
Jengie jon asks:
quote:
How do you classify a church that Mass is Catholic and Office is BCP?
'Prayer-Book Catholic' was the term used in the Olden Days, but, IIRC, presupposed the use of the BCP form of the Eucharist, or perhaps the English Missal.
Our Place will, I hope, sooner or later revert to Common Worship with the Carflick bits allowed by Canon. BCP is our current usage for the Office, though the Office is not at present said in church each day.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Aggie:
I am really not sure why our Vicar isn't a Roman Catholic priest as he uses modern Roman Catholic liturgy all the time and during the prayers of Intercession and in the Eucharistic prayer mentions "Francis our Pope" first before + Justin, our Archbishop and our diocesan bishop.
To keep hold of his Pension? ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
Together with his House, and his Wife (should he possess such a useful Appendage)!
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Not necessarily the latter - I knew a married Anglican who became an RC priest. The process took about 4 years and required a special dispensation from His Holiness. Both he and Mrs. Priest were popular in their church.
BTW I seriously considered moving from the Baptists to the URC a few years ago, and my pension arrangements were certainly an important aspect of my decision to stay (though by no means the only one).
[ 01. February 2018, 17:36: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
Fair point - I was being slightly ironic!
At the risk of resurrecting bits of Dead Horse, the fact that the RCC now has a number of married priests exercising their ministry within it, may make it a bit easier for that Church as a whole to accept yet more married priests, in the future, who are not refugees from elsewhere..
![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I get accused of equivocation and hedging my bets all the time, yet even I can't understand why an Anglican cleric would have prayers for the Pope before those for Welby and the rest of the Anglican clergy ...
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Pension may have something to do with it but I suspect it's not as simple as that.
The issue Baptist Trainfan has highlighted, whether to move from one form of congregational church to another - ie Baptist to URC - seems a completely different kettle of fish.
I'm not trying to underestimate the disruption it might cause but crossing the Tiber from Canterbury does seem a bigger deal.
Perhaps it isn't?
Perhaps I'm making it a bigger issue in my own mind than it actually is.
But I don't quite understand how full-on Anglo-Papalists who have reached the stratospheric heights of spikiness can balance away up there without toppling down the other side and landing in Rome.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Now that being married ('I should have gone last Tuesday week, had not my wife objected' -EL Mascall's Ultracatholic) is no longer an insurmountable obstacle,I'd go with pension. And status. And perhaps most of all - I'm guessing- not wanting to serve under Bishops who actually expect to be obeyed and can move you around.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Gamaliel, I don't understand either.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
I imagine, too, that some of the more twiddly spiky practices would not be well received in the (mainstream) contemporary RCC, however common they might have been in the pre-V2 Church from which they were borrowed.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
n the (mainstream) contemporary RCC, however common they might have been in the pre-V2 Church from which they were borrowed.
That has been my experience of liturgical Anglo papalists over the past forty years. They are the ones who follow the austere rubrics of Vatican 2. I always thought English Missal wasn't catholic after Vat 2, just 'Igh Church.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
Getting back to the issues raised by Puzzler: There were two different issues and the discussion confused them
ONE. How a responsible (Anglican) pastor manages (liturgical) change and also the larger issues of how they exercise authority generally and what that authority is.
TWO. What (liturgical) changes to have. It is not for me to say what change if any Puzzler’s parish should have. I will only say I hope I would have the grace to be hung, drawn and quartered other than give up belief that the eucharist is the principal Christian service, particularly on Sunday. And provided there’s a eucharist, I don’t mind the eucharistic prayer, provided it's mainline catholic.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I get accused of equivocation and hedging my bets all the time, yet even I can't understand why an Anglican cleric would have prayers for the Pope before those for Welby and the rest of the Anglican clergy ...
I wouldn't do it myself largely because of the misunderstanding it would cause in a congregation. But I can see the logic: you don't have to be an extreme papalist to accept that in some sense the Anglican church is dependent on Rome. Not in the sense that we are 'in communion' as we are with fellow-anglicans (though this itself is very fragile). But in the sense that our tradition was formed through one and a half millennia as part of the Western Catholic church. Hence if we pray for Church leaders we should surely be looking beyond our own domestic bishops to the de jure leader of the largest body of Christians, and the de facto leader of many more. The Archbishop of Canterbury and our own diocesan bishops make no claim to universal jurisdiction; the Pope of course can't exercise it in the present divided church. But he can have a moral and a spiritual authority which we recognise by praying for him.
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
Indeed. We often pray for 'the leaders of our sister churches' in the Intercessions, though not usually by name, IYSWIM.
It's certainly misleading for an Anglican to pray for 'our' Pope in the Eucharistic Prayer, but we do have one occasional Visiting Priest who includes 'Pope Francis, Bartholomew the Ecumenical Patriarch, Archbishops Justin and John etc. etc.' in Eucharistic Prayer B.
Which seems fair enough, given what Angloid has said.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Indeed. We often pray for 'the leaders of our sister churches' in the Intercessions, though not usually by name, IYSWIM.
It's certainly misleading for an Anglican to pray for 'our' Pope in the Eucharistic Prayer, but we do have one occasional Visiting Priest who includes 'Pope Francis, Bartholomew the Ecumenical Patriarch, Archbishops Justin and John etc. etc.' in Eucharistic Prayer B.
Which seems fair enough, given what Angloid has said.
IJ
Not misleading. Wrong and subject to discipline under canon law
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
I meant 'misleading' inasmuch as reference to 'our' Pope might confuse a newcomer as to which denomination's church he or she had entered...
I wish Bishops and Archdeacons would uphold Canon law, though.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ecclesiastical Flip-flop
Shipmate
# 10745
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I meant 'misleading' inasmuch as reference to 'our' Pope might confuse a newcomer as to which denomination's church he or she had entered...
I wish Bishops and Archdeacons would uphold Canon law, though.
IJ
I think the wording is slightly different in this respect in an RC church to what it is in an Anglican Normative Rite Mass, but newcomers, would not know that of course. RC, the wording is "We Pray for Francis our Pope" (which I quote from memory). With possible exceptions, Anglicans would usually say, "We pray for Pope Francis".
--------------------
Joyeuses Pâques! Frohe Ostern! Buona Pasqua! ¡Felices Pascuas! Happy Easter!
Posts: 1946 | From: Surrey UK | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I, a Baptist, have certainly prayed for "the Pope" in worship, also the Archbishop of Canterbury and other Church leaders. But never "our Pope" nor "our Archbishop" as we are not under their authority.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sure, it was the 'our' part I was referring to.
Incidentally, I will remember a visiting preacher being taken to task by the deacons in a Baptist church in South Wales for praying for the recovery of Pope John Paul II after the assassination attempt.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376
|
Posted
Indeed,as EFF says, if the vicar is using the text
of the Roman rite of Mass, he would automatically say,if using Eucharistic Prayer 1
'... we make humble prayer... that you accept these gifts... for your holy catholic church . Be pleased to grant her peace...together with your servant.......our Pope and ...our Bishop and all those who,.... hand on the catholic and apostolic faith'.
EP2 says 'Remember,o Lord your Church throughout the world and bring her to the fullness of charity together with ....our Pope and...our ... Bishop and all the clergy
EP3 Be pleased to confirm in faith and charity your pilgrim church on earth,with your servant...our Pope and ...our Bishop,the Order of Bishops,all the clergy and the entire people you have gained for your own'.
EP4 Therefore,Lord, remember now all for whom we offer this sacrifice,especially your servant...our Pope,,,,,our Bishop.... your entire people and all who seek You with a sincere heart.
As Angloid said it is logical to recognize the debt in heritage and ideas which the CofE and the other historic churches of the Protestant Reformation owe to the Church of Rome,of which they are all sort of 'out of town' members.
On the other hand,like Gamaliel and others, I cannot understand,how a priest who sees in the CofE an integral part of the Catholic Churc,h is unable to use the rites which are proposed for use by that same CofE.
'
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
... I cannot understand,how a priest who sees in the CofE an integral part of the Catholic Churc,h is unable to use the rites which are proposed for use by that same CofE.
'
And that, I think, is the killer punch. Spot on. Brilliantly put, Forthview.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Puzzler
Apprentice
# 18908
|
Posted
Back to the new vicar.
First Baptism since he arrived,
in the main 10.00 am eucharist, and when it came to the Peace, he announced that the friends and family of the baptism party would be leaving now.
I know that they are not a church-going family.
Is this done elsewhere? I have never come across this before anywhere.
Posts: 27 | From: England | Registered: Jan 2018
| IP: Logged
|
|
andras
Shipmate
# 2065
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Puzzler:
Back to the new vicar.
First Baptism since he arrived,
in the main 10.00 am eucharist, and when it came to the Peace, he announced that the friends and family of the baptism party would be leaving now.
I know that they are not a church-going family.
Is this done elsewhere? I have never come across this before anywhere.
I think it's the sheer bad manners of this that appals me, though whether on the part of the members of the baptismal party or the vicar I'm not quite sure.
And no, I've never seen such a thing, though I do remember with horror the days when it wasn't unusual for almost half the congregation at a Eucharist to slip out more-or-less quietly during the offertory hymn.
--------------------
God's on holiday.
(Why borrow a cat?)
Adrian Plass
Posts: 544 | From: Tregaron | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
Sounds like a throw-back to the early days of the Church when the catechumens had to leave at the Offertory (do the Orthodox still do that?).
AIUI, it was also the practice during early post-Reformation days in England (as reflected in more recent times by what andras has mentioned!).
Perhaps the Vicar had arranged it beforehand with the baptismal party, in case they were exposed to too much religion?
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Whatever - it does sound very odd indeed.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Yes. That's odd. It's also conveying a very odd message. Did this happen before or after the Peace? Were the baptism party included in the Peace? If they weren't it sounds a bit inconsistent with, quote:
we are children of the same heavenly Father; we welcome you.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
Most unwelcoming.
This chap needs to be returned to the vicar factory for re-calibrating.
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Puzzler
Apprentice
# 18908
|
Posted
In the interregnum, baptisms were on the first Sunday in this service, always part of the Eucharist. No other time was possible, eg those who wanted a “private” service were not accommodated.
This baptism was already booked, and I believe this was the new vicar’s suggestion, agreed in advance, that they leave early, as soon as the Peace was announced, to save them having to stay too long.
In future, the new vicar intends that this service will be a family service, non-Eucharistic, so the situation will not recur.
Posts: 27 | From: England | Registered: Jan 2018
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
I would just mention that for people not familiar with church a communion service can be a bit scary and off-putting if not handled well. I grew up in a church that dealt with this by breaking for coffee at the peace allowing people who wanted to slip out quietly while still making it clear that the service was of a piece and would continue. It had the added bonus of encouraging people to stay for coffee rather than dash off. I realise the very idea will lead to much clutching of pearls here in eccles but it was effective.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
The problem with family-orientated, non-Eucharistic, all age worship services is that, in my experience, they are not popular with people who actually go to church, with attendance numbers down for that Sunday. Neither do they seem to encourage those who do not normally attend church.
I have recently written an email to the organiser of these services at the local CofE church explaining why we will not be bringing Guides monthly. Fortunately our pack is not affiliated to the church, so we can politely decline. (We struggle to get girls to weekend events anyway: a combination of other things on, seeing the other parent at weekends, visits to grandparents, ...)
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zacchaeus
Shipmate
# 14454
|
Posted
I know of cases where the baptism family have upped and left during the peace – but this was not at the churches request and caused a lot of mutterings among the congregation
Posts: 1905 | From: the back of beyond | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
But why should the Eucharist be so scary? No-one is forced to take it, they can stay quietly in their pew if they wish (and this should be explained by the person presiding).
To come back to the baptism - to me as a Baptist (and I'm not trying to open a DH stable) this could hardly be worse, although I can see that Anglicans are hardly jumping for you either. The family brings their child for baptism and a welcome into the church community - then scarpers as soon as they are able and apparently with no requirement for any religious commitment. What on earth does that say about the sacrament?
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
