|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Use of screens in liturgy
|
Liturgylover
Shipmate
# 15711
|
Posted
I know these are commonplace in charismatic churches or those with especially large congregations. A church near me has begun using them for their Sunday morning sung eucharist. I hate them with a passion as I feel they make it impossible to know the shape of the liturgy unfolding, but even more for the fact that they draw the assembly's attention away from the action. Any views or comments based on your experience of them?
Posts: 452 | From: North London | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Liturgylover:
<snip> they draw the assembly's attention away from the action <snip>
At least their heads are not down in their books when the action is happening.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
Yikes! (based on practically no experience of them)
But having thought for a moment: if worship is basically a big singalong, then screens are probably quite a good thing and an improvement on books and leaflets. If worship is participating in the shared action of the liturgy, they are quite wrong, for the reasons you have given. But books and leaflets can be as bad, keeping the worshippers focussed on words and details rather than the action (see the thread on 'who says the Collect')
--------------------
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
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
You probably wouldn't think so from my posting history here, but I actually prefer screens to books. The reason is that a screen makes you look up and adopt an outward-looking posture of attentiveness, while a book tends to make you look down and adopt a more inward-looking posture. Screens are better than books for helping you be aware of the people around you and (as any exasperated choirmaster will tell you) an upright outward-facing posture helps you sing better.
However, there are problems with screens. Aside from considerations of copyright, visibility can be a problem if there's someone tall in front of you. If the technology breaks down, so does the liturgy - a missing page from a book affects one person, but a missing page from Powerpoint affects everybody. And oddly enough, the commonest problem with screens is the easiest to solve - a discrepancy between what most people are following on the screen, and what the clergy or musicians are following in their books. A simple run-through would help.
At the hospital where I work, our big Christmas carol service is always on screens.
[Cross-posted with BroJames and Angloid.]
[ 08. August 2013, 14:18: Message edited by: Adeodatus ]
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trickydicky
Shipmate
# 16550
|
Posted
We use screens in our (mainly trad) Methodist/URC. They improve teh singing, and mean that you can use material from several different books. It also means you can use appropriate illustrations.
Last Sunday I had the first comment on their use in the Liturgy. I put the sentence leading up to any response section. The complaint was that they concentrated too much on the 'lead up' sentence, and didn't hear the rest of the prayer.
Fair point. Do we use books? Or do I put the whole of the great prayer of thanksgiving on the screen? Or just carry on?
--------------------
If something's worth doing, its worth doing badly. (G K Chesterton)
Posts: 57 | From: Greater Manchester | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Comper's Child
Shipmate
# 10580
|
Posted
Sorry - but I immediately thought - rood screens and parclose screens...
Adeodatus makes a good point, though. Still I am happy to have never seen one used in Christian worship.
Posts: 2509 | From: Penn's Greene Countrie Towne | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulBC
Shipmate
# 13712
|
Posted
A former church I was part of used a screen
when it went experimental in how worship was done . However it was a non liturgical church.
I have seen it in an Anglican church but the way the screen was mounted, from the ceiling made in non obtrusive and yes they put the entire service up there .
In my current parish we print the liturgical
texdt in the bulletin. Should anyone suggest a screen I would be uncomfortable with it. The use of book oe bulletin is less distracting
--------------------
"He has told you O mortal,what is good;and what does the Lord require of youbut to do justice and to love kindness ,and to walk humbly with your God."Micah 6:8
Posts: 873 | From: Victoria B.C. Canada | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sergius-Melli
Shipmate
# 17462
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Comper's Child:
Sorry - but I immediately thought - rood screens and parclose screens...
Adeodatus makes a good point, though. Still I am happy to have never seen one used in Christian worship.
Whilst I'm sure screens (and the type of service/denomination they are normally used in) make the Baby Jesus Cry, we occasionally make use of one in particular services, the mention of rood screens has given me a great idea for a future PCC ![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
[ 08. August 2013, 18:23: Message edited by: Sergius-Melli ]
Posts: 722 | From: Sneaking across Welsh hill and dale with a thurible in hand | Registered: Dec 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
I immediately thought of iconostasis when I saw the thread title. I am slightly disadvantaged by screens on account of slowly failing eyesight-- if the church or the screens are not brightly lit and if I am a bit too far away, I cannot read the text. As long as the priest sticks to an approved rite, my memory supports me but, the moment they deviate (and about half of them do), I am totally lost.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
I have been to two Lutheran churches that use screens. Can't say they helped or hurt the liturgy. But I am thinking you will see more of this, not less.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
jerrytheorganist
Shipmate
# 4720
|
Posted
Here in middle of nowhere UMC, we've used a screen and powerpoint for about 10 years. In that time I have never, not even once experienced the liturgy of communion that actually worked. The preachers do their ad lib stuff, and the congregation is staring at the screen, and i'm looking at the book at the organ. None of these things is the same. So the preacher is blathering on as the people come in wrong and then pause in a weird spot cause the powerpoint stopped all the while I keep right on reading out of the hymnal,thus making me look like an ass when I keep going and the people have stopped.
So,, no,, i'd rather we use the book. and don't even get me started about the M-C-F that was our last baptism service ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
mcf = mass cluster****
Posts: 94 | From: Plainville, Kansas, United States | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
A Sojourner
Apprentice
# 17776
|
Posted
Works well when I have experienced it, it makes sure everyone is on the same page (literally). Also reduces confusion of when to stand/sit etc. if it is on the screen...
Posts: 21 | Registered: Jul 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
seasick
...over the edge
# 48
|
Posted
We use them quite a lot and I quite like it to be honest. In my ideal world, all the congregation would know the liturgy by heart so no one would need any kind of aide-memoire. However, in the churches I serve that's not going to happen so we need something and the screen frees you from endless page number announcements, heads in books and complaints that people didn't know where you were. I use a tablet to lead from so I am looking at the same thing as the congregation thus avoiding problems of what the congregation are seeing not matching up to what I am doing (mostly... I'm still human). Some thought does need to be given to those who can't see it and providing printed versions or other alternatives can be helpful.
--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley
Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
If the screen fits naturally into the space without looking stupid, then I can deal with it. (Similar to my feelings about changing wallbound altars into freestanding: do it only if it won't look horrendous. Some spaces are made for this, and some not so much.)
Also, having screens is a bit like having a contemporary worship ensemble: you have to put lots of money, effort, and time into it to get it right, not to mention the talent required.
The best screens, IMHO, can be hidden when need be. I think I've shared before on earlier threads that a local funeral parlor has flatscreens hidden in the side walls which can easily be covered by framed artworks when desired.
[ 09. August 2013, 02:12: Message edited by: Olaf ]
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
They make me feel like I'm stupid and I'm not sure why - same as powerpoint in pretty much any context. I don't know why it makes me feel this way, when it's essentially just a bigger version of a book.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
BulldogSacristan
Shipmate
# 11239
|
Posted
In a world where most of us stare at screens for hours and hours and hours, church is often the respite, where we can unplug, relax, and just be. The fact that some people want to put yet another aspect of consumer work culture into church is wrong-headed at my most generous and it's down-right evil if I were being honest.
Posts: 197 | From: Boston, Massachusetts | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by BulldogSacristan:
In a world where most of us stare at screens for hours and hours and hours, church is often the respite, where we can unplug, relax, and just be.
That's a good point, I think. One I hadn't considered, as I'm thoroughly at home with projectors and screens being used in church services.
quote:
Originally posted by BulldogSacristan:
The fact that some people want to put yet another aspect of consumer work culture into church is wrong-headed at my most generous and it's down-right evil if I were being honest.
However, I don't get this at all! Aren't digital projectors just an update on film projectors, which were an update on books, which were an update on papyrus...? Yes, we'd do well to think about how best to use each item of new technology that's developed (and maybe not use it at all), but what is so 'consumer work culture' and 'down-right evil' about digital projectors?
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
BulldogSacristan
Shipmate
# 11239
|
Posted
I really disagree with your premise that all digital projection is an update of papyrus. For one thing, I think that's a little akin to comparing apples and oranges. Secondly, I think a digital screen is something more like a roadside billboard than a papyrus scroll or a book. It overwhelms everything and becomes the center of focus.
I do see a time when actual printed-on-paper words aren't needed in church. (We managed to get along quite a while without them.) But to put up an ugly, garish, mind-sucking billboard in a church is silly and gimicky. People in my generation think it's dated and cheesy. People in my parents are just annoyed by it. I'm not quite sure who they're for.
Like everywhere, restaurants, bars, doctors' offices, stores, dinner tables, the screen can take center-stage at church to the exclusion of anything else.
Posts: 197 | From: Boston, Massachusetts | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
My congregations complaint about screens, they did not feel that pictures during worship were appropriate, after all if pictures were used for a prayer did you keep your eyes open or shut.
We use projection almost solely for pictures not words of hymns or prayers.
Mind you if you keep your eyes shut while praying then having the liturgy in a booklet ain't much use either!
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
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
My take is that books and leaflets have worked for quite a few decades now and that if well done they can be helpful and welcoming. And those who wish can ignore them if they've memorized the responses and can follow the liturgy on their own. A screen tends to insist on itself and can less easily be ignored.
I think a better evolution from paper would be to inexpensive flexible handheld screens on which can be "screencast" the information needed for following the service. Or if we'll all have tablets with us anyway, those can be used instead.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ORGANMEISTER
Shipmate
# 6621
|
Posted
I will preface this by saying that as I've gotten older I've developed an antagonism towards the latest in technological innovation......Our Worship and Music Committee had debated the pros and cons of screens for over a year. I knew that the Pastor was very much pro screen and that they would appear eventually regardless of my protestations. The pro screen argument was that it would make it easier for visitors and those considering becoming new members to participate in the Liturgy, especially for those not familiar with a liturgical worship service. I am of a generation where one was expected to learn the Liturgy as a matter of course. I've been told those days are gone and are not returning any time soon. They alternative was to print a 12 page Bulletin and that was deemed to be both too expensive and wasteful. So....the dreaded screens arrived and were installed at the begining of Lent. I am convinced this was part of my personal Lenten penance.
We now have two approx. 4x6 screens, one on either side of the chancel. They are not as hideous as I had feared and are not too much of an insult to the late 19th cent. Neo-Gothic style of the nave. About 15 min. prior to the service they descend silently and the projectors start displaying the announcements that also appear in the Bulletin. They display the full text of the Liturgy and the verses to the hymns. They silently ascend during the homily and reappear for the eucharistic portion of the Liturgy.
I will grudgingly admit that the congregational singing has improved and I have noticed better participation in the Liturgy. No one has actually said to me that visitors and others feel more comfortable but I suspect that is the case.
I am reminded of a cartoon I recently saw in The New Yorker where Gutenberg is showing one of his new books to a person whose says, "Your books are nice, but people will always want scrolls."
Posts: 3162 | From: Somerset, PA - USA | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
I have recently noted worshippers following on their tablets, as opposed to books and leaflets. Breaking from my usual habit of sprinting out of the church to get some decent espresso, I asked one of them if they would mind showing me how it worked-- it had the BCP text with propers for the date, psalms in a little box, epistle & gospel in another little box, and tabs for alternate translations and even languages for the scriptures. The size of the font could be adjusted and, I was informed, I could easily flip to Facebook if the sermon got oppressive. I have since learned that some TEC parishes have their services available for tablet so one could even channel into the local liturgy version without more than the regular confusion.
I may be a convert to this, as it would help me avoid the screen-squint and, should I be treated to another 35-minute sermon against anal sex, I can easily check out my friends' FB updates.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by BulldogSacristan:
In a world where most of us stare at screens for hours and hours and hours, church is often the respite, where we can unplug, relax, and just be. The fact that some people want to put yet another aspect of consumer work culture into church is wrong-headed at my most generous and it's down-right evil if I were being honest.
Methinks thou dost over-reach there. Your post can be parsed as "I have enough of screens at work and would prefer not to have them at church therefore". It's a bit of a jump from there to "wrong headed" and a giant leap to "evil". By that logic librarians should consider service and hymn books as wrong headed at best and evil if they're honest.
Our screen doesn't detract from the "action" because when it's in use it's as much part of the action as anything else.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
BulldogSacristan
Shipmate
# 11239
|
Posted
I just don't think you can say, "a projector screen has words; therefore, it's on equivalence with all things containing written words." I think the librarian metaphor doesn't hold water.
I'm not some anti-technology Luddite. I'm one of those oft-written about twenty-something Millennials who can't tear himself away from technology. I love technology and live inside and outside of it all day. I couldn't live without my iPhone. I just think huge screens and Powerpoint presentations in church are a particularly poor and sterile use of technology.
On a positive note, however, I do think that over-sized screens are something of a passing fad, soon to be replaced with cheap tablets and the like.
Posts: 197 | From: Boston, Massachusetts | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
They're tools. When they're poor and sterile they're poor and sterile. When they're imaginatively used to augment the worship they're imaginatively used to augment the worship.
cf. organs.
And why would they be synonymous with bleedin' Powerpoint? I don't think we use that at all on ours.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by BulldogSacristan:
In a world where most of us stare at screens for hours and hours and hours, church is often the respite, where we can unplug, relax, and just be. The fact that some people want to put yet another aspect of consumer work culture into church is wrong-headed at my most generous and it's down-right evil if I were being honest.
Methinks thou dost over-reach there. Your post can be parsed as "I have enough of screens at work and would prefer not to have them at church therefore". It's a bit of a jump from there to "wrong headed" and a giant leap to "evil". By that logic librarians should consider service and hymn books as wrong headed at best and evil if they're honest.
Our screen doesn't detract from the "action" because when it's in use it's as much part of the action as anything else.
Maybe librarians would prefer to avoid books at church. Busman's holiday. I'm not a librarian, but I try my best to avoid having anything do to with computers, the sound system, or video projection at church. Even though I (certainly, probably, possibly in that order) know more about them than anyone else in the congregation. I do that stuff all the time, I don't want to carry on doing it in church.
I dislike screens at church and much prefer books. They don't break down. They don't display a different version of the song the to one the choir is trying to sing. They don't display 3/4 of a verse at a time. They don't flick over to the next line too late (*) They let you see what is coming next so you can be ready for it. They let you read the whole hymn or prayer or Bible reading so you know what you are saying or singing. They are easier on the eye. Partially sighted people can use big print versions. Bored kids can flick through them and read other pages (This is really important. A vital tool for surviving at church.)
Also computers and so on have so many more interesting failure modes than books do. When you are giving a talk or leading some meeting, even if you have all your stuff on a computer (whether at church or at work or anywhere else) you have to have a paper backup because sooner or later the bloody things just won't work.
And, my bugbear on this: Projectionists! All of you! Listen to me!
1) Many people take about half a second to read a line of verse to sing it, or liturgy to say it, so you need to display the next page half a second before the congregation get to it because if you don't slow readers who don't already know the words won't be able to read them or sing them.
2) Most people have a reaction time of about half a second. So they need to start doing something about half a second before they want it to happen. AND THIS MEANS YOU (assuming you aren't a fast jet pilot, a formula one driver, a Korean Video Games championship finalist, the all-time fastest buzzer in University Challenge, or an Olympic 100-metre sprint cheat) You. Have. To. Start. Moving. Early.
3) So because you need to start half a second before it needs to happen, and it needs to happen half a second before they start singing it you need to hit the button or click the mouse to display the next page while the singers are half way through the last line on the page before
WHY does NO ONE ever get that?
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
I dislike screens at church and much prefer books. They don't break down. They don't display a different version of the song the to one the choir is trying to sing.
Sorry! Yes they can, I have been in the congregation at least twice when this happened!
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
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
People can take leaflets and booklets home with them at the end of the service and look at them during the week, if they so choose. You can't do that with a screen.
Mr. C. says screens (and particularly Powerpoint) remind him of work presentations, which is the last thing he wants at weekends.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Basilica
Shipmate
# 16965
|
Posted
My objection to screens is actually the lack of choice they give.
First, I know the liturgy without needing the words in front of me. I know most of the hymns too. If I have a book, I can put it down. If there are screens, it's really hard not to look at them constantly. Yes, looking at a screen is better than a book, but looking at neither is arguably better still.
Second, give a church a screen and they will use it. Constantly. With corny, sentimental images whenever there are no words on the screen. And they will have animations. And then, when I'm on my knees praying before the service begins, I find my eyes being drawn not to the cross or the altar or something beautiful and conducive to prayer, but to a gaudy image of a butterfly or some such rubbish.
Unfortunately, I have to acknowledge that I'm not really the average churchgoer...
Posts: 403 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ceremoniar
Shipmate
# 13596
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Comper's Child:
Sorry - but I immediately thought - rood screens and parclose screens...
Same here, as well as confessional screens. ![[Angel]](graemlins/angel.gif)
Posts: 1240 | From: U.S. | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pia
Shipmate
# 17277
|
Posted
We use screens (when needed) to convey images of what's happening up at the business end to the far-flung corners of the (fairly large) building, but not for words (liturgy or hymns), although I've been in churches where they are used.
I dislike screens mostly because my sight isn't brilliant and I find them hard to read (if you must use them, use a large font and don't try to fit too much on one screen, folks), but (and I don't know whether this is standard or just a feature of the churches I've been to where they've been used) I also object to the use of images, which seem to be picked specifically in order to kill metaphor stone dead ('Christ, whose glory fills the skies' = picture of the sky; 'Rock of ages, cleft for me' = picture of a rock), with place-holders usually featuring lakes and mountains when there are no metaphors to be destroyed. I think I'd object less if the screens were used for words only; but once they're up there will always be the temptation to liven things up with some lakes and mountains, even though no-one (to the best of my knowledge) looks at a service booklet or hymn sheet and thinks: 'What this really needs is a picture of some mountains and a lake'.
Personally, I really dislike the idea that we need constant (and constantly-changing - I often have to switch channels on the TV because I can't bear programmes where each shot is only on-screen for 2 seconds before the camera flits to the next thing) visual stimulation. Church for me is more (not exclusively, of course) about the auditory than the visual.
Interestingly (or maybe not...) I had a conversation on these lines with my students early in the academic year just gone. They asked why I didn't use powerpoint in my lectures, as most other lecturers did. I said that if they could tell me what powerpoint would add to my lectures, then I would start to use it. But if it was just in order to avoid having to listen and/or look at my ugly mug for an hour, then I'd continue as before. I got not one reason why powerpoint would have been an advantage (and they got to continue looking at my ugly mug ![[Razz]](tongue.gif) ).
Posts: 151 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pia:
Church for me is more (not exclusively, of course) about the auditory than the visual.
That's an interesting post, but for me church is visual and tactile as much as auditory. But the visuals are what's going on around us.
--------------------
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
|
|
|
|
Pia
Shipmate
# 17277
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
quote:
Originally posted by Pia:
Church for me is more (not exclusively, of course) about the auditory than the visual.
That's an interesting post, but for me church is visual and tactile as much as auditory. But the visuals are what's going on around us.
Agreed, which is why I don't mind screens being used to show the 'action' of the service itself if there are people sitting where they would otherwise not be able to see it. (We've just come through some fairly extensive renovations, during which people had to sit in all kinds of dusty corners!) But personally I don't actually mind all that much if I can't see much of what's going on, as long as everything is audible.
[ 10. August 2013, 18:39: Message edited by: Pia ]
Posts: 151 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. Rob
Shipmate
# 5823
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Liturgylover:
... comments based on your experience of them?
I've experienced the use of projection screens in church and other venues for worship. While such screens can be useful when used creatively on occasion. The problems come when they are used all the time. Then I say a pox on them! Put the screens away or get rid of them! Generally speaking, projection screens have no useful place at Mass. The use of screens is a distraction from the liturgy. That is to say for those who have and enjoy the use of liturgical forms and the Eucharist.
*
Posts: 862 | From: USA | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
I think they're the current "Get rich quick...erm, Get members quick" scheme that appeals to bored church leaders.
Tried:
Folk music. Check.
Conversational sermons. Check.
Drama. Check.
Contemporary service. Check.
Christian rock. Check.
Facebook page. Check.
Ditching the vestments. Check.
Contemplative silence. Check.
Odd-night service. Check.
Simplified wording. Check.
Projector screen. Check.
I suppose a church has to find its niche, and if any of the above work, then more power to them. In many places, it just seems like another unnecessary gimmick.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingale
Shipmate
# 16599
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Liturgylover:
I know these are commonplace in charismatic churches or those with especially large congregations. A church near me has begun using them for their Sunday morning sung eucharist. I hate them with a passion as I feel they make it impossible to know the shape of the liturgy unfolding, but even more for the fact that they draw the assembly's attention away from the action. Any views or comments based on your experience of them?
The Lutheran church I attend has screens. It has some positive aspects - it's easier for people to read their responses up on the screen to the left and right of the altar than to try to flip around in the ELW liturgy. There's also some good multimedia presentation during special liturgies (like stations of the cross).
On the other hand, no one at the church uses the hymnal for reading the notes any more, and it opens up the church to more modern worship music which I'm not fond of.
Posts: 679 | From: Connectilando | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
Forgive me if this is too Hellish, but I'm amazed at this negativity towards projectors and screens. Would you nay-sayers have been similarly negative about hymn and liturgy books when they first became available? After all, the people can remember the words so why do we need these expensive, cumbersome books?
I'm not saying all churches should introduce screens without thinking, but surely each church should consider whether the technology could be put to good use in its building(s)?
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
seasick
...over the edge
# 48
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Olaf:
I think they're the current "Get rich quick...erm, Get members quick" scheme that appeals to bored church leaders.
Nonsense! They're pure practicality for us. I don't believe they will increase our membership but nor do I believe our membership would sky-rocket if we changed every service to a perfectly choreographed Tridentine mass. We seek to do something of quality which works in our context. Give us some credit.
--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley
Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
aig
Shipmate
# 429
|
Posted
Looking up at a screen hurts my neck.
Singing from a hymn book held at a suitable level (so I can sing out in a way that will warm the heart of the most critical music director) does not hurt my neck.
Therefore I really don't like screens.
Apart from rood screens, obviously...
--------------------
That's not how we do it here.......
Posts: 464 | From: the middle bit at the bottom slightly to the right | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Forgive me if this is too Hellish, but I'm amazed at this negativity towards projectors and screens. Would you nay-sayers have been similarly negative about hymn and liturgy books when they first became available? After all, the people can remember the words so why do we need these expensive, cumbersome books?
I'm not saying all churches should introduce screens without thinking, but surely each church should consider whether the technology could be put to good use in its building(s)?
Nay-sayers are an important part of achieving balance. We need to look at the practical reservations which are being expressed, and discern which are valid problems related to screens and which are really reactions to (yet another) imposed intrusion. Both need engagement from local leadership.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seasick:
quote:
Originally posted by Olaf:
I think they're the current "Get rich quick...erm, Get members quick" scheme that appeals to bored church leaders.
Nonsense! They're pure practicality for us. I don't believe they will increase our membership but nor do I believe our membership would sky-rocket if we changed every service to a perfectly choreographed Tridentine mass. We seek to do something of quality which works in our context. Give us some credit.
I do, and I certainly allowed for it in my prior post. I say again, if it works for you, then more power to you. That said, I've been to way too many meetings lately where pastors all but felt obligated to get screens, just because others are doing so and they think it therefore must be the secret to everything. It's the fad du jour in the ELCA, along with our perennial deviating from the liturgical book...
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
seasick
...over the edge
# 48
|
Posted
That's the other great thing about it - the congregation all think you're being new and innovative when actually what you're doing is by the book liturgy ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley
Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Avila
Shipmate
# 15541
|
Posted
Thoughts to different points -
'books/leaflets allow to follow all liturgy'
I have been where the leaflet didn't give the presider's text just the cue lines for the full congregational responses. The idea there being to provoke us to look and to listen.
'neck ache from screen not from books'
I have had bad arm ache from some books, hymn or liturgy in the past.
Screens would save Mrs Jones from trying to find the page for herself and her neighbour in the pew who is always confused even when only one book but can read ok when knows what to look at.
Yes the can be ugly, yes the technology can go haywire, and too many do it badly.
But leaflets locally produced can be horrendous too, poorly done, bad font choices for clarity etc and the full books too many page hops and heavy, not to mention scary when handed out at the door en masse as some places.
So - horses for courses, each is a tool, each has its place, and each will be loved by some and hated by others.
--------------------
http://aweebleswonderings.blogspot.com/
Posts: 1305 | From: west midlands | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
Projecting lyrics and liturgy is less wasteful that printing them on leaflets. And books do breakdown; I've had books with broken spines and disintegrating/torn pages.
I'm a new Anglican and attended one service where the church used books, and had half of the row trying to help me find the right page. Not that I asked, but apparently my lack of speed in flipping to the correct place was distracting enough to my neighbors that they felt the need to jump in. At my home parish with screens I never felt so obviously like a newbie.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
The more I read this thread, the more I find myself agreeing with something Adeodatus, I think, said on another thread lately: really, if you have a liturgy, the congregational parts should become so familiar that people really say them by heart.
In that case, books / screens are really prompt sheets and for newbies: and books, if properly managed, are less obtrusive. I am also a believer in the principle- emphasised by John Habgood when he was chairing the group that produced the CofE's Alternative Service Book 1980, but lost in CW- that the principal services should be gathered into one book which people can have at home, use to some extent, and become familiar with.
If you are not liturgical, of course, this doesn't apply.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
Some theatres now, instead of programmes, sell the whole script of the play in book form. But I have never seen anybody try to follow it instead of watching and listening to the actors. It is very useful to take it home afterwards and read through the text to think about it.
That ISTM is, or should be, the function of printed liturgy books. Yes, the difference is that there are some words we are expected to join in with, unlike normally in the theatre. But they are quickly learned by heart and then the books become redundant.
I haven't attended a RC mass more than once since the new texts came in; I would be surprised if people are still referring to the missalettes/leaflets, because they never used to.
--------------------
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
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
I'm a new Anglican and attended one service where the church used books, and had half of the row trying to help me find the right page. Not that I asked, but apparently my lack of speed in flipping to the correct place was distracting enough to my neighbors that they felt the need to jump in.
They were trying to be helpful and make you feel comfortable but in fact having the opposite effect
--------------------
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
|
|
gog
Shipmate
# 15615
|
Posted
I know in one place where we used a screen, it was one of the elder ladies who was most grateful - as she had arthritis, thus couldn't turn the pages, and was long sighted and needed to hold the book so far away to see it - as she could freely worship.
However I've always tried a firm policy of choice, where both screen and book are available. And many use the screen but hold the book.
Also as to this:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
3) So because you need to start half a second before it needs to happen, and it needs to happen half a second before they start singing it you need to hit the button or click the mouse to display the next page while the singers are half way through the last line on the page before
WHY does NO ONE ever get that?
As some of us are reading the line in question as we sing, and the change at this point means we lose half a line, however YMMV. Better I think to have a few bars between slides.
Posts: 103 | From: somewhere over the border | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
