|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: new vicar- changes
|
Ecclesiastical Flip-flop
Shipmate
# 10745
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Higgs Bosun:
quote:
Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
I am slightly amused at the suggestion that I may not like them, for in the 16th century when they were devised, there was clearly a need for them at that time. But today, they are not there to be liked or disliked, but remain as for historical reference.
I think that they are of somewhat greater significance in the CofE than mere historical reference. On ordination, or on induction (etc.), a clerk in holy orders must make the declaration of assent, to which the preface is:
quote:
The Church of England is part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church worshipping the one true God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It professes the faith uniquely revealed in the Holy Scriptures and set forth in the catholic creeds, which faith the Church is called upon to proclaim afresh in each generation. Led by the Holy Spirit, it has borne witness to Christian truth in its historic formularies, the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, The Book of Common Prayer and the Ordering of Bishops, Priests and Deacons. In the declaration you are about to make will you affirm your loyalty to this inheritance of faith as your inspiration and guidance under God in bringing the grace and truth of Christ to this generation and making him known to those in your care?
To which the clerk responds with the Declaration of Assent:
quote:
I, A B, do so affirm, and accordingly declare my belief in the faith which is revealed in the Holy Scriptures and set forth in the catholic creeds and to which the historic formularies of the Church of England bear witness; and in public prayer and administration of the sacraments, I will use only the forms of service which are authorized or allowed by Canon.
So, the official line is that the 39 articles "bear witness to Christian truth" and a loyalty to them is required of the ordained. It has to be admitted that this is a watering down from the 1662 version.
Yes, I am aware of this exhortation and I have heard it hundreds of time. A few times, I have been present at the ordination/consecration of a new bishop. Later in the day, they held another service to mark the occasion, by officiating at a service of Benediction of the Most Blessed Sacrament. A seeming contradiction, but there you go!
--------------------
Joyeuses Pâques! Frohe Ostern! Buona Pasqua! ¡Felices Pascuas! Happy Easter!
Posts: 1946 | From: Surrey UK | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ecclesiastical Flip-flop
Shipmate
# 10745
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
quote:
Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
It is protestant extremists who are non-adherents of the Oxford Movement and the fruits thereof, who take a literal and fundamentalist view of the 39 Articles, as thogh these are divinely inspired and fell-down straight from Heaven. These are not articles of faith, but statements of how Anglicans felt about doctrinal tenets, during one period in history now long past. Some of these are a tall order to us living in the 21st century.
To give just two examples - "The Bishop of Rome hath no juridiction in this Realm of England." (I quote from memory.) But in modern times, two popes have made pastoral visits to UK and warmly welcomed. Capital punishment is condoned, but at that time, capital punishment was not only for murder.
In the 16th Century this was a live issue. The Bishop of Rome, prior to the Reformation did have jurisdiction in this realm of England. That's not quite the same as a state visit which is basically, the Bishop of Rome turning up and saying "Oh Hai!". The Articles of Religion are quite cool with that.
To cut a long story short, the Church has moved on since the 16th century and division like that is a legacy of history. It goes without saying that the Pope/Bishop of Rome before the Reformation, did have Jurisdiction is This Realm of England. You know as well as I do, that being a Roman Catholic in those penal times, was a treasonable offence, punishable by death by being burnt at the stake.
--------------------
Joyeuses Pâques! Frohe Ostern! Buona Pasqua! ¡Felices Pascuas! Happy Easter!
Posts: 1946 | From: Surrey UK | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Corvo
Shipmate
# 15220
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
quote:
Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
It is protestant extremists who are non-adherents of the Oxford Movement and the fruits thereof, who take a literal and fundamentalist view of the 39 Articles, as thogh these are divinely inspired and fell-down straight from Heaven. These are not articles of faith, but statements of how Anglicans felt about doctrinal tenets, during one period in history now long past. Some of these are a tall order to us living in the 21st century.
To give just two examples - "The Bishop of Rome hath no juridiction in this Realm of England." (I quote from memory.) But in modern times, two popes have made pastoral visits to UK and warmly welcomed. Capital punishment is condoned, but at that time, capital punishment was not only for murder.
In the 16th Century this was a live issue. The Bishop of Rome, prior to the Reformation did have jurisdiction in this realm of England. That's not quite the same as a state visit which is basically, the Bishop of Rome turning up and saying "Oh Hai!". The Articles of Religion are quite cool with that.
To cut a long story short, the Church has moved on since the 16th century and division like that is a legacy of history. It goes without saying that the Pope/Bishop of Rome before the Reformation, did have Jurisdiction is This Realm of England. You know as well as I do, that being a Roman Catholic in those penal times, was a treasonable offence, punishable by death by being burnt at the stake.
It was a bit more complicated than that: https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/penal-laws
For the most part lay people were fined for not attending the C of E; priests ran the risk of execution (by hanging, drawing and quartering).
Posts: 672 | From: The Most Holy Trinity, Coach Lane, North Shields | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
RdrEmCofE
Shipmate
# 17511
|
Posted
in 65 years of experience in the CofE I have reached a conclusion on how incoming vicars should proceed in leadership.
My simple adage would be:
(1) If it works, don't even try to fix it.
(2) If by general agreement it does not work, then help the congregation to fix it.
(3) If the vicar's foresight and insight tells him/her that though something is only working tolerably well at present but is becoming less effective and in need of replacement, then share your vision of how the church might move forward together to become even more effective in being Christ's 'church'.
The problem as I see it is that some vicars go straight into (3) without sharing their vision and without bringing as many as possible of the congregation along with it.
They see themselves as a Moses figure leading a difficult and recalcitrant tribe, striding out purposefully but leaving the lame and infants far behind in the wilderness, wondering why they don't know where they are going, why they are 'going' and what all the God damned hurry is about anyway.
--------------------
Love covers many sins. 1 Pet.4:8. God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not holding their sins against them; 2 Cor.5:19
Posts: 255 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jan 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Corvo:
quote:
Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
quote:
Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
It is protestant extremists who are non-adherents of the Oxford Movement and the fruits thereof, who take a literal and fundamentalist view of the 39 Articles, as thogh these are divinely inspired and fell-down straight from Heaven. These are not articles of faith, but statements of how Anglicans felt about doctrinal tenets, during one period in history now long past. Some of these are a tall order to us living in the 21st century.
To give just two examples - "The Bishop of Rome hath no juridiction in this Realm of England." (I quote from memory.) But in modern times, two popes have made pastoral visits to UK and warmly welcomed. Capital punishment is condoned, but at that time, capital punishment was not only for murder.
In the 16th Century this was a live issue. The Bishop of Rome, prior to the Reformation did have jurisdiction in this realm of England. That's not quite the same as a state visit which is basically, the Bishop of Rome turning up and saying "Oh Hai!". The Articles of Religion are quite cool with that.
To cut a long story short, the Church has moved on since the 16th century and division like that is a legacy of history. It goes without saying that the Pope/Bishop of Rome before the Reformation, did have Jurisdiction is This Realm of England. You know as well as I do, that being a Roman Catholic in those penal times, was a treasonable offence, punishable by death by being burnt at the stake.
It was a bit more complicated than that: https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/penal-laws
For the most part lay people were fined for not attending the C of E; priests ran the risk of execution (by hanging, drawing and quartering).
You have to ask what the point of the church was at this point in history don't you? I mean, if it can't distance itself from religiously motivated murder then it really is struggling to see how it was Salt and Light. Where was the Holy Spirit's guiding?
I'm inclined to recall my "Has God Failed Again?" thread, probably now in Limbo somewhere.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ecclesiastical Flip-flop
Shipmate
# 10745
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Corvo:
quote:
Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
[qb] It is protestant extremists who are non-adherents of the Oxford Movement and the fruits thereof, who take a literal and fundamentalist view of the 39 Articles, as thogh these are divinely inspired and fell-down straight from Heaven. These are not articles of faith, but statements of how Anglicans felt about doctrinal tenets, during one period in history now long past. Some of these are a tall order to us living in the 21st century.
To give just two examples - "The Bishop of Rome hath no juridiction in this Realm of England." (I quote from memory.) But in modern times, two popes have made pastoral visits to UK and warmly welcomed. Capital punishment is condoned, but at that time, capital punishment was not only for murder.
In the 16th Century this was a live issue. The Bishop of Rome, prior to the Reformation did have jurisdiction in this realm of England. That's not quite the same as a state visit which is basically, the Bishop of Rome turning up and saying "Oh Hai!". The Articles of Religion are quite cool with that.
To cut a long story short, the Church has moved on since the 16th century and division like that is a legacy of history. It goes without saying that the Pope/Bishop of Rome before the Reformation, did have Jurisdiction is This Realm of England. You know as well as I do, that being a Roman Catholic in those penal times, was a treasonable offence, punishable by death by being burnt at the stake.
It was a bit more complicated than that: https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/penal-laws
quote:
For the most part lay people were fined for not attending the C of E; priests ran the risk of execution (by hanging, drawing and quartering).
Of course it was a bit more complicated than that. Each time I post on this topic, I cannot put it all there.
--------------------
Joyeuses Pâques! Frohe Ostern! Buona Pasqua! ¡Felices Pascuas! Happy Easter!
Posts: 1946 | From: Surrey UK | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RdrEmCofE:
in 65 years of experience in the CofE I have reached a conclusion on how incoming vicars should proceed in leadership.
My simple adage would be:
(1) If it works, don't even try to fix it.
(2) If by general agreement it does not work, then help the congregation to fix it.
(3) If the vicar's foresight and insight tells him/her that though something is only working tolerably well at present but is becoming less effective and in need of replacement, then share your vision of how the church might move forward together to become even more effective in being Christ's 'church'.
The problem as I see it is that some vicars go straight into (3) without sharing their vision and without bringing as many as possible of the congregation along with it.
They see themselves as a Moses figure leading a difficult and recalcitrant tribe, striding out purposefully but leaving the lame and infants far behind in the wilderness, wondering why they don't know where they are going, why they are 'going' and what all the God damned hurry is about anyway.
1. What do you mean by "working"?
2. The hurry? Well, people are dying without support and without Christ. isn't that enough?
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
What has [2] got to do with the situation in the OP?
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Poppy
Ship's dancing cat
# 2000
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RdrEmCofE:
in 65 years of experience in the CofE I have reached a conclusion on how incoming vicars should proceed in leadership.
My simple adage would be:
(1) If it works, don't even try to fix it.
(2) If by general agreement it does not work, then help the congregation to fix it.
(3) If the vicar's foresight and insight tells him/her that though something is only working tolerably well at present but is becoming less effective and in need of replacement, then share your vision of how the church might move forward together to become even more effective in being Christ's 'church'.
The problem as I see it is that some vicars go straight into (3) without sharing their vision and without bringing as many as possible of the congregation along with it.
They see themselves as a Moses figure leading a difficult and recalcitrant tribe, striding out purposefully but leaving the lame and infants far behind in the wilderness, wondering why they don't know where they are going, why they are 'going' and what all the God damned hurry is about anyway.
When I arrived at my current church I found a lot that was broken. Mostly the congregation didn't notice it as it had been that way for twenty years. As far as some of them were concerned it wasn't broken. It was however profoundly inward focused with a club mentality. For them it was comfortable and safe and I understand that but being a disciple isn't about being safe. Changing culture is hard and can't be done overnight.
--------------------
At the still point of the turning world - there the dance is...
Posts: 1406 | From: mostly on the edge | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Poppy:
It was however profoundly inward focused with a club mentality. For them it was comfortable and safe and I understand that but being a disciple isn't about being safe. Changing culture is hard and can't be done overnight.
This.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Poppy:
When I arrived at my current church I found a lot that was broken. Mostly the congregation didn't notice it as it had been that way for twenty years. As far as some of them were concerned it wasn't broken. It was however profoundly inward focused with a club mentality. For them it was comfortable and safe and I understand that but being a disciple isn't about being safe.
In some cases it is worse than this - they *know* that things are broken but would rather stick with it than change.
A priest at one church told me of the opposition he'd encountered from elderly congregants when he first arrived - they knew the parish was dying but quite openly said that as long as it lasted long enough to see them out that was all they cared about...
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RdrEmCofE
Shipmate
# 17511
|
Posted
quote:
[ ! ] 1. What do you mean by "working"?
Almost any church that has any 'regenerate members' left is at least semi functional in some respect or other. Otherwise they would not have ever even got a new vicar. (They are in ever increasingly short supply). If prayerfulness is the last remaining 'working' function of an otherwise dying church, then 'prayer' needs to be encouraged and valued, not discarded by the new incumbent as 'not sufficiently productive in putting paying bums on seats'. The same goes for any other still functioning activity.
'Working' means any function which remains operational concerning the mission Christ has for the church in that location. (It might be something as non 'religious' as a youth group or drama society or toddlers group full of very nominally religious slum dwelling mums). It could be a socially cohesive and well established traditional Choir, (but in need of spiritual direction) to spiritually focus its already professional performance abilities. : A difficult one this, as there are many talented singers who do not understand their key role in leading worship but do it just for the joy of singing. (and there's no shame in that).
quote:
2. The hurry? Well, people are dying without support and without Christ. isn't that enough?
Well yes. BUT 'The poor will always be with you'. Don't make your elderly parishioners give up BCP and replace Matins with a Sally Army style tambourine and saxophone spectacular on a Wednesday morning, because perhaps the 'change' will bring floods of young, enthusiastic percussionists wanting to join the church.
Being church is not about adopting the latest entertainment techniques, it is about discovering its purpose for Christ, in the context of its locality and that could be simply to love and support one another in decline.
The greatest failure of Christ was his greatest victory and conquest. The most unrealistic expectation from congregations, from new vicars is 'success', the kind of success that gets measured by money in the bank and bums on pews.
--------------------
Love covers many sins. 1 Pet.4:8. God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not holding their sins against them; 2 Cor.5:19
Posts: 255 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jan 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
RdrEmCofE
Shipmate
# 17511
|
Posted
quote:
A priest at one church told me of the opposition he'd encountered from elderly congregants when he first arrived - they knew the parish was dying but quite openly said that as long as it lasted long enough to see them out that was all they cared about...
My wife and I moved into a small country benefice. As priest in charge of 3 churches she suggested to the PCC that we should begin to pray over some weeks to discover the needs and future direction of each church. We were told, "WE tried that and it does not work". That was when we realized there was an uphill task ahead. Their suggestion for changes to worship was drop the sermon and add two more hymns.
--------------------
Love covers many sins. 1 Pet.4:8. God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not holding their sins against them; 2 Cor.5:19
Posts: 255 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jan 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
It was a bit more complicated than that: https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/penal-laws
For the most part lay people were fined for not attending the C of E; priests ran the risk of execution (by hanging, drawing and quartering). [/qb][/QUOTE]You have to ask what the point of the church was at this point in history don't you? I mean, if it can't distance itself from religiously motivated murder then it really is struggling to see how it was Salt and Light. Where was the Holy Spirit's guiding?
I'm inclined to recall my "Has God Failed Again?" thread, probably now in Limbo somewhere. [/QB][/QUOTE]
As i understand it, and very generally, RC executions of Protestants were religously motivated,the crime being heresy. 'CofE' punishment /execution of RCs was politically motivated, the crime being treason or at least disputing the authority of the Crown. There is a difference.
--------------------
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
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
quote:
Originally posted by Poppy:
When I arrived at my current church I found a lot that was broken. Mostly the congregation didn't notice it as it had been that way for twenty years. As far as some of them were concerned it wasn't broken. It was however profoundly inward focused with a club mentality. For them it was comfortable and safe and I understand that but being a disciple isn't about being safe.
In some cases it is worse than this - they *know* that things are broken but would rather stick with it than change.
A priest at one church told me of the opposition he'd encountered from elderly congregants when he first arrived - they knew the parish was dying but quite openly said that as long as it lasted long enough to see them out that was all they cared about...
I've had that experience, almost. Not verbalised in quite that way but I got the drift.
Of course a new vicar, if s/he has any vision and guts, will want to change attitudes like that. However, as I understood the situation in the OP, it is much more a clash of understanding and priorities: the new vicar sees the priority of drawing in new people to - perhaps - a more evangelically-focussed, personal faith in Christ; the existing congregation is comfortable to be a eucharistic community. There can be, and probably is, much complacency and self-righteousness about both perspectives.
In the current culture wars in the C of E, it's asking for trouble to appoint a non-sacramental evangelical to a traditional eucharistically-based congregation. There are many priests with the vision and imagination to reinvigorate such a parish without disturbing the basic pattern and structure of worship.
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Can you?
They can always back peddle until you leave.
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
|
|
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376
|
Posted
Albertus - I'm not sure how you separate in the 16th and 17th century politics and religion.
Whilst it is quite true that Catholics were generally persecuted as being traitors to the Crown with hundreds of both priests and laypeople being put to death, Catholicism would have been seen as contrary to the 'established' form of religion, so it was in a way 'heretical'.
Of course I do not condone the Marian (and of course also Henrician) execution of Protestants, no more than I expect you would nowadays approve of the execution of Catholics.
It does, however, seem to me a bit of a cop-out to say that the Catholics were executed simply for political reasons.
We had the same problems here in Scotland during the 'Killing times' in the 17th century when the upholders of Episcopacy persecuted the upholders of Presbyterianism ( and vice versa) Without going into details this was an explosive mixture of politics and religion.
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
'in a way'... you can stretch things a very long way with that term, can't you?
I certainly wouldn't approve of the execution of RCs. But insofar as- and that's a very big proviso and I don't know how far there were any- there were people who, whether for religious or other reasons, were actively conspiring against the Crown or were consciously giving their support to those who were, I do not think it was unreasonable to take action against them.
--------------------
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
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
It was certainly the case that the Pope excommunicated Elizabeth Tudor and declared that oaths made to her didn't need to be honoured. Given that there were successive Catholic plots to have her overthrown it's hardly surprising she became less tolerant. James VI & I was likewise made more wary by repeated attempts on his life.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Please note there were equivalent Protestant/Puritan 'Martyrs' in the reign of Charles II. You can see one case if you do not believe me.
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
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
I think we are a long way from the OP here and well into Purgatorial territory.
If anyone wants to pursue this tangent, perhaps a new thread in an appropriate place would be worth opening. This thread could then resume it's original course.
Your cooperation, as ever, appreciated.
dj_ordinaire, Eccles host
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Higgs Bosun
Shipmate
# 16582
|
Posted
The punishment inflicted is the indication of the offence. Partly as a result of the declarations of the Pope, some Catholics were a threat to the Crown (both Elizabeth and James) and so were punished by drawing, hanging an quartering. The Protestants under Mary (and, incidentally, the Lollards up to and including the time of Henry VIII) were punished by burning at the stake, the punishment for Heresy. They did not represent anything like the same threat to the Crown.
The irony is that Mary's treatment of the Protestant martyrs led to Fox's Book of Martyrs, which was something which provoked anti-Catholic sentiment, and so contributed to England turning more to Protestantism at a popular level.
Posts: 313 | From: Near the Tidal Thames | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I don't think Puzzler's new vicar - much though most clergy probably in their worst moments have occasionally wished it - has the power either to burn or to hang, draw and quarter stubborn, recalcitrant or even back-biting parishioners.
--------------------
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 RdrEmCofE:
quote:
[ ! ] [QUOTE]2. The hurry? Well, people are dying without support and without Christ. isn't that enough?
Well yes. BUT 'The poor will always be with you'. Don't make your elderly parishioners give up BCP and replace Matins with a Sally Army style tambourine and saxophone spectacular on a Wednesday morning, because perhaps the 'change' will bring floods of young, enthusiastic percussionists wanting to join the church.
Being church is not about adopting the latest entertainment techniques, it is about discovering its purpose for Christ, in the context of its locality and that could be simply to love and support one another in decline.
The greatest failure of Christ was his greatest victory and conquest. The most unrealistic expectation from congregations, from new vicars is 'success', the kind of success that gets measured by money in the bank and bums on pews.
I don't think I've ever said that church is about success. It's about faithfulness as far as I can see: faithfulness to that fellowship's call to minister to its community in a way that is relevant and which is contextually appropriate.
I agree wholeheartedly that wholesale changes in practice aren't likely to bring anything about apart from division. What might be needed - as it is surely for us all - is for our hearts to be transformed by Christ. That's way harder than changing what we do.
No it's not about technique at all - it's about people. Preach the word, build up the saints, reach the lost. Simple isn't it? Trouble is there are a lot of churches around who've missed even these simple points -- reaching the lost being the most likely to be missed. To make a church winsome requires change and often we who are already there, are the least likely to see what change is needed.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Puzzler
Apprentice
# 18908
|
Posted
Prompted by the thread a
Posts: 27 | From: England | Registered: Jan 2018
| IP: Logged
|
|
Puzzler
Apprentice
# 18908
|
Posted
Prompted by the thread about Ash Weds and St Valentine’s Day and discussion of which Collect, can anyone confirm that in BCP Evensong it is mandatory to say all three Collects?
We had just one yesterday.
Posts: 27 | From: England | Registered: Jan 2018
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
Well, I don't know exactly how mandatory it is, but it's certainly the usual custom to say the Collect of the Day, followed by the Second and Third Collects.
The Third Collect, for Aid against all Perils, must surely be one of the best-known Anglican prayers.
Why on earth would you leave any two out, except to shorten the service by a few seconds?
![[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 mandatory are the rubrics? The rubrics say three. You only need to check in the BCP to find that out.
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
|
|
Poppy
Ship's dancing cat
# 2000
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Puzzler:
Prompted by the thread about Ash Weds and St Valentine’s Day and discussion of which Collect, can anyone confirm that in BCP Evensong it is mandatory to say all three Collects?
We had just one yesterday.
As someone who has been the new vicar may I suggest talking to the cleric concerned? It may be that the new vicar is not familiar with the BCP and doesn't know that it is custom and practice to do all three collects. As a curate I was delighted that there was a very wise sacristan who taught me how to do the service as it was not my tradition.
One of the hardest things about being a new vicar is that the parish assumes that their way of doing things is the only way of doing things. They then get cross when the new vicar doesn't have a psychic moment and know that they have by custom and practice added this bit of the 1928 service to the BCP standard or they kept this other bit of high AC ritual during Lent that a previous vicar introduced in 1953 despite the fact that the church has slid down the candle quite a way since then.
I have put my foot down about processions. I'm sure that there is much wailing and bemoaning the changes the nasty new vicar has made but never to my face oddly enough. Unfortunately what worked when the church was full with a complete altar party is very different from today when we might have 30 in the congregation with one server with a dodgy knee who walks with a stick. Not processing doesn't mean we love Jesus any the less but we are being realistic about where the church is now and that is probably where it hurts.
--------------------
At the still point of the turning world - there the dance is...
Posts: 1406 | From: mostly on the edge | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Poppy:
One of the hardest things about being a new vicar is that the parish assumes that their way of doing things is the only way of doing things. They then get cross when the new vicar doesn't have a psychic moment ...
Yes, I only discovered that our Christmas Eve service was Communion by chance, a few days before. The church leaders had simply assumed that all churches have communion at "Midnight Mass" but in fact I've not encountered it at the other churches I've served! Fortunately we had a bit of a laugh about it and it wasn't a problem, we may discuss our future practice at some point though.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ecclesiastical Flip-flop
Shipmate
# 10745
|
Posted
An outgoing Rector, whom I have just said goodbye to, as he was leaving for pastures new, related how one parishioner said to him when he first came, "But we don't have a sermon at the 8 o'clock early Communion service!" "Well, you do now!", replied the then new Rector.
--------------------
Joyeuses Pâques! Frohe Ostern! Buona Pasqua! ¡Felices Pascuas! Happy Easter!
Posts: 1946 | From: Surrey UK | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Poppy:
It may be that the new vicar is not familiar with the BCP and doesn't know that it is custom and practice to do all three collects.
I'm not a particular fan of the BCP, but it's one of the fundamental documents of the Anglican liturgical tradition. Evensong (choral or a less musically-elaborate version) is one of the classic elements of that. If clergy are being let loose upon parishes without a basic knowledge of the tradition, or of liturgical principles in general, something is very wrong.
Of course, the priest in Puzzler's church may be very familiar with all that and simply have his/her own reasons for doing something different. Provided it has a clear rationale and is well-explained there's no problem. But anecdotal evidence suggests that many of today's clergy are both liturgically and pastorally inept.
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
An outgoing Rector, whom I have just said goodbye to, as he was leaving for pastures new, related how one parishioner said to him when he first came, "But we don't have a sermon at the 8 o'clock early Communion service!" "Well, you do now!", replied the then new Rector.
Probably the sort of parishioner who said 'we just want the pure and simple Prayer Book service.' To which the answer would have been much the same.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
I suspect it was also that parishioner who was somewhat surprised to find that the Prayer Book service, pure and simple, contained the full Decalogue, Collect for the Queen, Exhortation, and a homily from the book of homilies...
....but was refused Communion because he had not signified his name to the Curate the day before....
![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.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
|
|
Ecclesiastical Flip-flop
Shipmate
# 10745
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I suspect it was also that parishioner who was somewhat surprised to find that the Prayer Book service, pure and simple, contained the full Decalogue, Collect for the Queen, Exhortation, and a homily from the book of homilies...
....but was refused Communion because he had not signified his name to the Curate the day before....
IJ
A reasonable matter of conjecture, but a specially printed booklet was prepared for Holy Communion in traditional language, according to the choices and ways of doing things of this Rector. I go to this service at that church mid-week; it doesn't matter to me whether it is traditional or contemporary language and I don't mind either way.
The prayer for the Queen is left out, as is the Decalogue; the summary of Christ's Law is invariably used. The readings are for the day, rather than for the previous Sunday. The Agnus Dei is inserted between the Prayer of Consecration and the receiving of Communion. The Prayer of Oblation, is the invariable use at the post-communion, to the exclusion of the Thanksgiving Prayer.
This Rector (Mirfield trained) explained to me once, that he liked to handle the elements during the saying of the Prayer of Oblation - moved from pre- to post-communion. In his words to me, "The handling of the elements in this way is important. As in German, the verb goes to the end, this goes to the end as well."
B. F. Your other mentions are archaic, of course!
BTW I don't know who the parishioner is or was and whether or not they are still on the scene.
--------------------
Joyeuses Pâques! Frohe Ostern! Buona Pasqua! ¡Felices Pascuas! Happy Easter!
Posts: 1946 | From: Surrey UK | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
Archaic?
Yea, verily, but yet in ye rubricks....
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
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
anecdotal evidence suggests that many of today's clergy are both liturgically and pastorally inept.
Sadly, that is undeniably true. The introduction of Common Worship in the C of E was supposed to be an opportunity to encourage clergy to become more liturgically adept and creative. Sadly, all it seems to have done is give clergy the freedom to indulge their own preferences without any regard to even mild levels of good practice and liturgical tradition.
Bodging up something as basic as a BCP service is baffling.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RdrEmCofE:
in 65 years of experience in the CofE I have reached a conclusion on how incoming vicars should proceed in leadership.
My simple adage would be:
(1) If it works, don't even try to fix it.
(2) If by general agreement it does not work, then help the congregation to fix it.
(3) If the vicar's foresight and insight tells him/her that though something is only working tolerably well at present but is becoming less effective and in need of replacement, then share your vision of how the church might move forward together to become even more effective in being Christ's 'church'.
The problem as I see it is that some vicars go straight into (3) without sharing their vision and without bringing as many as possible of the congregation along with it.
They see themselves as a Moses figure leading a difficult and recalcitrant tribe, striding out purposefully but leaving the lame and infants far behind in the wilderness, wondering why they don't know where they are going, why they are 'going' and what all the God damned hurry is about anyway.
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
As a new vicar one year in, Amen I say and amen. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zappa
Ship's Wake
# 8433
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Well, I don't know exactly how mandatory it is, but it's certainly the usual custom to say the Collect of the Day, followed by the Second and Third Collects.
The Third Collect, for Aid against all Perils, must surely be one of the best-known Anglican prayers.
Why on earth would you leave any two out, except to shorten the service by a few seconds?
IJ
While I do obey this ancient tradition when I do BCP, I think it's bad liturgical theology. A collect collects together a theme. One theme. Not scatters three.
--------------------
shameless self promotion - because I think it's worth it
and mayhap this too: http://broken-moments.blogspot.co.nz/
Posts: 18917 | From: "Central" is all they call it | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
The introduction of Common Worship in the C of E was supposed to be an opportunity to encourage clergy to become more liturgically adept and creative. Sadly, all it seems to have done is give clergy the freedom to indulge their own preferences without any regard to even mild levels of good practice and liturgical tradition.
Another step towards Nonconformism, then?
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
The expectation was that liturgy was taught by the training incumbent.
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
anecdotal evidence suggests that many of today's clergy are both liturgically and pastorally inept.
Sadly, that is undeniably true. The introduction of Common Worship in the C of E was supposed to be an opportunity to encourage clergy to become more liturgically adept and creative...
And why the blue blazes would you want the CofE clergy to be 'liturgically creative'? Get some good liturgy (which the CofE has on the whole a tradition of) and then get the clergy to use it without sodding it about. Say the black, do the red. Job done.
--------------------
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
'Creative' perhaps in the sense of using appropriate seasonal alternatives, where provided, for instance?
Otherwise, yes - say the black, and do the red.
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
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Perhaps seasonal alternatives, yes: personally I think they can be overdone but that's probably just a matter of personal taste.
--------------------
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
|
|
Ecclesiastical Flip-flop
Shipmate
# 10745
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Archaic?
Yea, verily, but yet in ye rubricks....
IJ
I apologise if Archaic was the wrong word. All I wanted to do was to explain the use of BCP Communion as devised by this Rector in his church.
--------------------
Joyeuses Pâques! Frohe Ostern! Buona Pasqua! ¡Felices Pascuas! Happy Easter!
Posts: 1946 | From: Surrey UK | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
posted by Angloid quote:
But anecdotal evidence suggests that many of today's clergy are both liturgically and pastorally inept.
IME that can be re-written thus: quote:
It is evident that many of today's clergy are inept.
As I've pointed out on this and other threads, it takes a particular kind of hubris and ineptitude to be unable to read from a large-print copy on a reading desk, or to follow simple instructions such as "give out the hymn number here".
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
anecdotal evidence suggests that many of today's clergy are both liturgically and pastorally inept.
Sadly, that is undeniably true. The introduction of Common Worship in the C of E was supposed to be an opportunity to encourage clergy to become more liturgically adept and creative...
And why the blue blazes would you want the CofE clergy to be 'liturgically creative'? Get some good liturgy (which the CofE has on the whole a tradition of) and then get the clergy to use it without sodding it about. Say the black, do the red. Job done.
"Back in the day" (ie when CW was being introduced), Bishop Colin Buchanan came up with an enlightening metaphor. I may be about to misquote him, but it was something like this:
The BCP is basically like a frozen meal. All you have to do is reheat it. In fact, do NOT try and do anything else with it because you will just end up with a mess.
The ASB was like an "a la carte" restaurant, where you could choose from a menu ("choose any one item from section a and any one item from section b").
Common Worship is like being given the ingredients and then having the chance to cook your own meal.
The point he was making was that to get the most out of CW, you had to have developed some basic "cooking" skills. You can always just take the pre-prepared service provided in CW, but that isn't actually what CW was intended to do.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
