|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: A House of Prayer
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
While I agree with you (and I sense a tangent coming on if we're not careful), I don't think that the Café Church advocates (or, to put it more technically, the advocates of church "in a third place") would say, "Let's go down to Costa and fellowship with our mates and that's sufficient ..".
I think they'd say, "Let's go down to Costa and fellowship with our mates because that's both culturally relevant and accessible". Where awe and wonder come into this is another question entirely; it could be argued that Café Church reduces Church to merely a fellowship level.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I suspect, from what Raptor Eye has written, though, that he's not describing a context where 'cafe-style' seating arrangements have been laid out for a particular informal style of service - but one where these are 'left out' as it were as a permanent fixture - and he finds that a distraction.
Would that be correct, Raptor Eye?
No, it wasn't a distraction for me, but I felt as if I were a distraction for them. I went in looking for somewhere to pray, first and foremost. If I had felt welcome, I might even have gone and bought a cuppa and joined them. But it didn't feel as if it were a place where someone would go to pray, nor did it point to a corner where they might, which is the point I'm making. It felt like a cafe in a church building.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
That's helpful, Gamaliel.
May I just make one point which, ISTM, some posters haven't quite recognised: that there are two kinds of church café.
One is basically an operation which exists to make money for the Church and, indeed, "keep the show on the road". At the extreme, this may mean an agreement with a commercial operator or catering company who rents the space or runs the café; or it may be largely run "in-house" with volunteers.
The other way of doing café is basically evangelistic and/or community building. This is not a commercial operation; it may be run exclusively by volunteers and even make a financial loss for the Church. However it aims to be a touching-point between church and world and may also be an important community resource.
Or even a third... a recent US reality show (yes, I know, guilty secret) featured an inner-city church that had a fast-food outlet within the church. From the fast-food corp pov, it was just another franchise like all their other franchisees. But the church was using it as part of their extensive outreach, hiring ex-cons and other community members who had a hard time finding employment. The particular franchise was chosen for the sorts of job skills it would teach and the potential for future employment, moving up in the corporation, etc. Proceeds from the franchise did not go back into the general church budget but were targeted to their community development/ job training program. But to a visitor it would look like a crass food court.
[ 22. July 2015, 15:12: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
While I agree with you (and I sense a tangent coming on if we're not careful), I don't think that the Café Church advocates (or, to put it more technically, the advocates of church "in a third place") would say, "Let's go down to Costa and fellowship with our mates and that's sufficient ..".
I think they'd say, "Let's go down to Costa and fellowship with our mates because that's both culturally relevant and accessible". Where awe and wonder come into this is another question entirely; it could be argued that Café Church reduces Church to merely a fellowship level.
I don't think it is a tangent, as it does feed into the point of the op. When Christians join together to worship, it can be anywhere: in schools, halls, in the street, etc, but by observation it doesn't take long before they want their own church building. Why is that?
Whether it's from the story of Jesus driving out the moneychangers I don't know, it's highly likely, but for me a church building is and should be a house of prayer, first and foremost. It can be all kinds of other things too.
If it's deconsecrated, it might be a museum or a restaurant, that's OK. It's not called a church any more, and I wouldn't consider going in to use it to pray to God.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
Whether it's from the story of Jesus driving out the moneychangers I don't know, it's highly likely, but for me a church building is and should be a house of prayer, first and foremost. It can be all kinds of other things too.
We're going 'round in circles here, but I still haven't heard you answer: what is a "house of prayer"? What does it look like? Is it only one thing? Can a cafe be a house of prayer? How about a garden? A small monastic cell? A large beautiful cathedral? Must a house of prayer be quiet, or can it be filled with music, with praise, or with many voices praying at once? (In some cultures, that's what corporate prayer is like-- not taking turns to pray, but everyone praying at once). I'm still very uncomfortable with the assumptions being made about which churches are or are not a "house of prayer" based solely on their architecture.
[code]
[ 22. July 2015, 15:46: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
Whether it's from the story of Jesus driving out the moneychangers I don't know, it's highly likely, but for me a church building is and should be a house of prayer, first and foremost. It can be all kinds of other things too.
We're going 'round in circles here, but I still haven't heard you answer: what is a "house of prayer"? What does it look like? Is it only one thing? Can a cafe be a house of prayer? How about a garden? A small monastic cell? A large beautiful cathedral? Must a house of prayer be quiet, or can it be filled with music, with praise, or with many voices praying at once? (In some cultures, that's what corporate prayer is like-- not taking turns to pray, but everyone praying at once). I'm still very uncomfortable with the assumptions being made about which churches are or are not a "house of prayer" based solely on their architecture.
[code]
Who has said anything about architecture? I still don't think you understand what I'm talking about. To me, any building that Christians call a church is, or should be, a house of prayer. This doesn't imply that nowhere else can be used for prayer, nor that there's only one way of praying, nor that any one way is a better way.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think we get that, Raptor Eye, but perhaps 'ergonomics' might be a better term to use than 'architecture' - although architecture includes that, of course.
I didn't take it that you were implying that a building used for worship should be used exclusively for that function - nor indeed that you would restrict the term 'worship' purely to prayer, the singing of songs or whatever else that goes on in church services or meetings.
I'm still having difficulty, though, envisaging exactly what it was you encountered in the instance you cite.
It sounds to me like you went into a church building of some description which had chairs and tables laid out as if in a cafe. People were sat at those tables, presumably 'fellowshipping' in some way - and presumably over tea and coffee etc.
You were hoping to find a quiet corner in which to pray and because of the lay-out you found it distracting - or, rather - because you wanted to sit elsewhere for some quiet prayer and reflection, the others found it distracting because you weren't doing what they were doing.
Would that be it?
--------------------
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
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
Whether it's from the story of Jesus driving out the moneychangers I don't know, it's highly likely, but for me a church building is and should be a house of prayer, first and foremost. It can be all kinds of other things too.
We're going 'round in circles here, but I still haven't heard you answer: what is a "house of prayer"? What does it look like? Is it only one thing? Can a cafe be a house of prayer? How about a garden? A small monastic cell? A large beautiful cathedral? Must a house of prayer be quiet, or can it be filled with music, with praise, or with many voices praying at once? (In some cultures, that's what corporate prayer is like-- not taking turns to pray, but everyone praying at once). I'm still very uncomfortable with the assumptions being made about which churches are or are not a "house of prayer" based solely on their architecture.
[code]
Who has said anything about architecture? I still don't think you understand what I'm talking about. To me, any building that Christians call a church is, or should be, a house of prayer. This doesn't imply that nowhere else can be used for prayer, nor that there's only one way of praying, nor that any one way is a better way.
But what is your basis for saying that a particular church is or is not "a house of prayer"? So far, as best I can understand (and we do seem to be talking past each other so most likely I am NOT understanding correctly) your basis is architecture-- primarily the absence of cafes. Although I'm still unclear on the positive-- what IS a house of prayer, only what it is NOT. But again, I'm probably still misreading-- and pleading for clarity to end our cycle of miscommunication!
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Raptor Eye
I think the practical problem you have is that most churches are closed most of the week. Those that are open outside of communal worship are open either for some sort of social activity (whether evangelistic or secular) or else are cathedrals or important parish churches open for tourists as well as people who want to pop in for quiet prayer.
The 'ordinary' local church that happens to be open for quiet prayer when you need it is very rare. The funds and/or manpower don't allow for this in most cases. Perhaps security considerations mean that leaving a side room unattended while social stuff happens elsewhere is problematic.
I do think this is a shame, but I'm not sure that such provision would really be worth the effort in many churches. Sadly, quiet sanctuaries in some areas would be more likely to attract beggars or vandals than casual visitors who want to pray. I'm not dismissing anyone, but offering support and advice to people in trouble is quite a different service from providing space where people can pray in peace and quiet.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
It sounds to me like you went into a church building of some description which had chairs and tables laid out as if in a cafe.
I thought he was talking about a church with an actual cafe. There are a few churches in these parts with an actual coffee shop - you walk in to the building and the first thing you see is a price list, a glass counter with pastries and the like, and someone in a church uniform polo shirt ready to sell you a hot beverage. It seems to be intended as outreach - get people through the door for a coffee, and maybe they'll come back for Christ. I have no idea whether it's successful.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Our local Pentecostal church has a cafe frontage ie. it has a popular cafe run by volunteers - although it isn't always open. Behind that is the actual meeting space - which is effectively a long portacabin style hut. They've recently secured grant aid to develop an extension as a community hub for the training of community volunteers, a drop centre for Citizens' Advice and a permanent location for the local Food Bank.
That's all good.
It certainly isn't the sort of building you'd want to drop into for some quiet prayer and contemplation - so in that sense it may well disqualify itself from being what Raptor Eye is calling a 'house of prayer'.
I don't think that applies - it's still a 'house of prayer' only in a different kind of way. The prayer takes place there on Sundays during their services - the rest of the week the building - or at least parts of it - are serving a different function - as a cafe and as a drop-in advice/community hub.
That's great. I fully applaud that. It might be an issue if it was the only church building around - but it isn't. One of the two Anglican parish church buildings is just a few hundred yards away and it has a policy of remaining open - despite incidents and petty vandalism - for quiet contemplation and prayer. I sometimes avail myself of that opportunity.
Interestingly, the previous vicar (they are now in an interregnum which is about to end within the next week) offered part of the church building - the old vestry area which is a small meeting room - to the local Community Support Officers - you know the folk who aren't police but who support the police. So, they keep their gear there and bob back to file reports, send emails and so on in between patrols.
Previously, they had to drive 5 miles to a nearby town to do that then come back again.
It's an arrangement that suits everyone and it also means that the church can stay open during the day without as much risk of vandalism.
So this strikes me as the best of both worlds.
Anyone wanting a quiet place to prayer or reflect can bob into the parish church in town if they so wish, whilst the Pentecostals are making the most of their central location and rather unprepossessing building to offer a valuable service to the community.
--------------------
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
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
It must be only me that has an idea in my mind that if a Christian church is open I may feel free to go in and pray to God in there. They are usually Anglican churches, agreed, as few other denominations leave the churches open.
Yes, a lot of churches are closed unless there is a specific event on, in which case of course the event whether a coffee morning or whatever will be noticeable. The church I left didn't have a notice to say that there was an event on, it seemed to be a cafe rather than a church, and not a place to pray, which triggered this reflection. Thank you all for your valuable input.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
No, it isn't just you, Raptor Eye ... I will often nip into a church and spend a few moments in quiet prayer and contemplation if I find one open - and yes, most often it'll be an Anglican church but RC churches are often open too ... it depends where you are.
So no, I don't think there's anything unusual in wanting to do that. I think what some of us were finding hard to grasp was your attitude towards this particular church you had in mind ... would it not be unrealistic to expect a church which didn't emphasise the setting aside of space for private prayer and contemplation to do so simply to fit in with your or my tastes?
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
It'd be a bit like complaining that the local Pentecostal church has guitars and tambourines rather than an organ or some form of acapella singing.
Or that your nearest Orthodox parish didn't use drum'n'bass in its services ...
--------------------
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
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
I applied for a job once in a suburban church in a wealthy Virginia suburb. The church was on a quiet residential street. The rector showed me around and pointed out the big cross, hanging above the altar. They used to keep the doors unlocked, day and night, so that people could come in and meditate. Then one night very late a guy came in with a rifle. He tried to blast the cross away, and did some good damage. They left the bullets in there -- the marks are visible. But now they lock the doors at night.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I read somewhere that there is a subtle difference in "feel" between an open Anglican church and a Nonconformist one.
The former gives the sense of being part of the community, offering a welcome to anyone. In the latter, one may feel just as welcome, yet still have the slight feeling of intruding into someone's private domain.
I don't know if that's true; but, if it is, it reflects the different emphasis between the two traditions: ne on the Parish, the other on the Congregation.
With more and more CofE churches (at least in towns) becoming "gathered" communities, this distinction may be disappearing.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, I think that distinction is disappearing in towns and cities and in suburban and even semi-rural areas too.
--------------------
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
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I do think that it is somehow possible to combine 'intentionality' and the sense of the church as a 'gathered community' with a sense of 'openness' too -- but I'm not sure I have the recipe for that ... it's a difficult balance to pull off.
If there was a 'choice' between having an intentional community and an amorphous, vaguely defined one then I'd go for the intentional one every time ... it all depends on how tightly we wind the elastic though.
--------------------
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
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
I thought the OP was about something -- maybe I'm inaccurately picking up two different topics on this thread. One, very practical discussion of use of space and use of church resources for community service, fund raising, all all other this world needs and functions of a church midweek; but the other:
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
...A place of prayer has an atmosphere all of its own, one which may carry through generations... I wonder why some have it and some don't....
Sometimes you (well, I) walk into a space and you can feel it in the atmosphere that in this space God is worshiped: regularly, deeply, for many years. I don't know if everyone feels it or just some people, I don't know if some people always feel it or just occasionally. I don't know why some churches have that atmosphere it and many don't, or why an individual feels it in one church but not in most.
It's, ah, just sit and bathe in that atmosphere is, I don't know the word, soothing, refreshing, soul touching; has nothing to do with the style of architecture or the decoration or lack of it or the denomination.
While one might (briefly) sense the presence of God anywhere, the felt spiritual sensing that God inhabits this place through years of exclusive use for worship, is rare. I have trouble imagining that atmosphere in a cafe, whether or not the cafe is inside a church building. Not because there's anything wrong about a cafe, but because there can be something spiritually different about a space dedicated to use only for worship.
Don't ask me about the theology, I know tiny tidbits of the broader reality, brief experiences, not how it all fits together.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Well yes, I'd go along with that too ... and interestingly enough, a very liberal vicar friend says something very similar -- only in relation to whether a church community is friendly and outward looking or not.
He reckons he can tell that sometimes by wandering around or sitting in a church building - again, irrespective of churchmanship or denomination - simply by the atmosphere and the way things might be laid out ... he believes that if a building is 'loved' then it's also likely that people will be loved and welcomed too.
Obviously, that's not the only criteria and it would certainly be possible to put more effort into 'plant' than into people ...
Meanwhile, it looks as if Raptor Eye who posted the OP has departed this thread, so we are all posting in his shadow ...
--------------------
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
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
No, I'm still around Gamaliel, thank you for your continued interest in the thread.
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I thought the OP was about something -- maybe I'm inaccurately picking up two different topics on this thread. One, very practical discussion of use of space and use of church resources for community service, fund raising, all all other this world needs and functions of a church midweek; but the other:
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
...A place of prayer has an atmosphere all of its own, one which may carry through generations... I wonder why some have it and some don't....
Sometimes you (well, I) walk into a space and you can feel it in the atmosphere that in this space God is worshiped: regularly, deeply, for many years. I don't know if everyone feels it or just some people, I don't know if some people always feel it or just occasionally. I don't know why some churches have that atmosphere it and many don't, or why an individual feels it in one church but not in most.
It's, ah, just sit and bathe in that atmosphere is, I don't know the word, soothing, refreshing, soul touching; has nothing to do with the style of architecture or the decoration or lack of it or the denomination.
While one might (briefly) sense the presence of God anywhere, the felt spiritual sensing that God inhabits this place through years of exclusive use for worship, is rare. I have trouble imagining that atmosphere in a cafe, whether or not the cafe is inside a church building. Not because there's anything wrong about a cafe, but because there can be something spiritually different about a space dedicated to use only for worship.
Don't ask me about the theology, I know tiny tidbits of the broader reality, brief experiences, not how it all fits together.
Thank you Belle Ringer, this aspect seemed to either be misinterpreted as criticism or ignored, but it does feed into this too.
I'm not looking to find that spiritual sensing, it always comes as a blessing, but it is certainly found in some churches more than others. It doesn't need quiet, but silence seems to heighten it.
I don't expect anything, other than to feel as if it is OK, that I'm welcome to sit and pray somewhere in an open church whatever is going on. On reflection, it wasn't only that the atmosphere was more of a cafe than of a church, but also that I felt as if I was not welcome to sit and pray.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
I think it would be considered bad form to walk into a non-conformist church and sit down to pray whilst another activity was going on.
I recall many years ago being in a congregation when someone was physically carried out of the building because he was present at, but not engaging with, the service.
Whilst I can't imagine that this would happen if a person was quietly sitting and minding-their-own-business, I think it would/might be considered to be pretty strange and disrespectful.
I think this is quite definitely a culture difference. Churches with open-door policies expect people to be wandering in. Churches which only open for specific activities expect people who come in to engage with the activities.
Expecting anything else seems to me to misunderstand the nature of the churches in question.
[ 24. July 2015, 10:13: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
mr cheesy: I think it would be considered bad form to walk into a non-conformist church and sit down to pray whilst another activity was going on.
I recall many years ago being in a congregation when someone was physically carried out of the building because he was present at, but not engaging with, the service.
Is a minimum amount of hand-waving required? ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Expecting anything else seems to me to misunderstand the nature of the churches in question.
The nature of a church is surely inextricably bound with prayer. I am astounded that it might be considered disrespectful to pray in a church.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Is a minimum amount of hand-waving required?
I think he was masturbating. Nuff said.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
The nature of a church is surely inextricably bound with prayer. I am astounded that it might be considered disrespectful to pray in a church.
I don't think it is the "prayer" that is the problem, I think the problem is that people in these kinds of churches want to have a level of control about what happens in their building.
One can walk into a Cathedral and sit down to pray without disturbing anyone, because there is a lot of space and this is a common behaviour.
When you're talking about a Baptist church which is only open for services, then I think the expectation is that visitors are there for services.
I appreciate this is hard to understand from both directions.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sure - I think that's the case - although in the 'Nuff said' instance you cite, if the bloke was wanking at the back of the service then it's hardly surprising he was physically removed ...
I was once on a London bus - in the days of bus conductors - when the bus conductor physically removed a bloke who was engaged in said activity on the upper deck.
If you are being literal, I wouldn't expect anyone attending a non-conformist service and not joining in to be physically expelled - unless they were doing something that was unacceptable in a public place or disrupting the service in some way.
At worst, I suspect they'd mostly get the odd askance look.
But I take your point about the cultural difference.
It all depends on context. If someone attended a Pentecostal service, say, and started crossing themselves or swinging a thurible they'd get funny looks and might even be asked to desist.
Equally, if someone were start waving their arms around and 'speaking in tongues' in a cathedral service (other than one specifically geared up for charismatics) they might be politely asked to stop.
The late Douglas McBain, the Baptist renewalist, complained in one of his books that he could rarely find a Free Church building that was open for quiet contemplation and that he regularly used RC or Anglican church buildings for that purpose.
As for the instance that Raptor Eye cites, I'm now getting the impression that there was some kind of service - perhaps 'cafe style' - in progress and that he somehow felt excluded from that.
It strikes me that whatever style of church or service we're talking about, first time visitors or those unfamiliar with the tradition or the way things are done are going to feel somewhat out-on-a-limb - at least initially.
I was in a full-on charismatic church for 18 years and a mildly charismatic one for another 6 - and the parish I attend now has wannabe charismatic pretensions ... I didn't 'take' to charismatic style worship straight-away - indeed, when I first encountered it, I was repelled by it ...
Gradually, I became accustomed and acclimatised to it. The same when I first attending 'High Church' services occasionally - I found them repellent initially - but gradually I've grown accustomed to and comfortable with that particular style the more I've been exposed to it and the more I've tried to understand it and get to grips with what it's all about ...
I'm not saying that one is better than the other - simply that whatever style of worship or churchmanship it is - we are 'socialised' into it over time.
I have no idea whether there are people in that cafe-style church who go in for quiet contemplation and private prayer -- presumably, if they felt this was important corporately, then they would make space for that. Otherwise, they would probably leave it to individual members to seek that sort of thing out if they wanted it.
--------------------
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
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Is a minimum amount of hand-waving required?
I think he was masturbating. Nuff said.
So he was handwaving, just not in the approved manner?
--------------------
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
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
If this was the hymn being sung, then I guess it was appropriate.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
As for the instance that Raptor Eye cites, I'm now getting the impression that there was some kind of service - perhaps 'cafe style' - in progress and that he somehow felt excluded from that.
No, it was not a service, simply a cafe in a church, serving teas etc. I didn't sit near to it, I don't think I was intruding in any way.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I think it would be considered bad form to walk into a non-conformist church and sit down to pray whilst another activity was going on.
Interestingly, I can imagine attending a black Pentecostal church and sitting in an attitude of fervent prayer for the whole service, but to do so in a Methodist church would feel disrespectful towards the preacher, and bizarre to the congregation.
I think perhaps this is because Pentecostal worship has a stronger emotional and individualistic component. It's quite normal for private prayers to take place amidst a hive of activity. Methodist worship is carefully put together so that each element illustrates a particular point, so willfully tuning any of that out would make little sense.
Regarding keeping churches open for private prayer outside of worship times, though, I'm inclined to think that this is what we in England have the CofE for. Other churches have a different calling. Churches have to prioritise what they spend their funds and manpower on.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Ok - but surely the same thing would apply, Raptor Eye, if you were to enter a church building for some quiet prayer and contemplation and found that the electricians were in fixing the wiring or that the cleaning rota team were mopping or hoovering ... ?
I've only once been inside the Anglican shrine at Walsingham - steeling myself to do so given my very strong Protestant sensibilities at that time ... I had my then 6 year old daughter with me (my wife refused to come in and stayed outside with our youngest). My 6 year old showed admirable reverence and respect, bless her ...
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Once I'd recovered from the shock and acclimatised myself to the atmosphere, I was quite taken to see a lady in a pinny brushing away behind the main sanctuary bit - with the big 'doll' or statue of Mary - while people were kneeling and praying etc. I thought that added a homely touch and I gave a wry smile.
Nobody who was there doing the Marian devotional bit seemed in the least perturbed that the cleaning lady was doing her stuff at one and the same time.
Ok, so I've not visited this particular church that you mention - I'm not sure what my reaction would be if I did. I suppose it would very much depend on what my reason was for being there.
In the Walsingham instance, I wasn't there to pray or join-in - I was simply there as a tourist - and out of interest as to what people get up to inside a Marian shrine.
I suspect my attitude in the instance you cite would depend on whether I was going there for a coffee or to spend some time in quiet and contemplation - the two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. I'd imagine a whole range of factors might come into play - including background, culture, personality type and much else besides.
Some people might feel entirely comfortable sat at a coffee tale with a latte and engaging in some kind of prayer/meditation at the same time. Others would consider that inappropriate ... it all depends on perspective, expectations and 'conditioning' in terms of how we've been 'socialised' - and we're all socialised into whatever position or tradition/expression that we happen to have adopted or been brought up in.
--------------------
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
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I'm not saying that one is better than the other - simply that whatever style of worship or churchmanship it is - we are 'socialised' into it over time.
I have no idea whether there are people in that cafe-style church who go in for quiet contemplation and private prayer -- presumably, if they felt this was important corporately, then they would make space for that. Otherwise, they would probably leave it to individual members to seek that sort of thing out if they wanted it.
Exactly. further, I think there is an element of personality type involved-- or one might say "spirituality type". And we all have a tendency to extrapolate from our own experience to others. So someone who is hard-wired to experience God mostly through quiet contemplation is going to extrapolate that to others-- this is just "the way it is". And churches that facilitate that-- lots of quiet spaces, etc.-- are going to be experienced as more of a "house of prayer" than those who don't. People who are hard-wired to experience God more through communal worship are similarly going to extrapolate that to others-- you'll hear complaints about "rote" worship, "no Spirit there", etc.-- that really just reflect those sorts of personality/ spirituality differences.
That being said, I do think that while there are very different sorts of spirituality (much has been written about these different "types" and how to pursue that) and different churches that facilitate that, there are churches that are more or less "authentic" in each of those areas. There are churches where the contemplative liturgical services feel authentic, genuine, deep, significant-- and those where it feels rote and meaningless ritual. There are churches where loud charismatic worship feels like an authentic and exuberant response to God's greatness and grace-- and those where it feels like a crassly manipulative show. So you do get that "feel" thing others have talked about, even if it's impossible to measure. And of course, God can meet us individually even in churches that are less authentic.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, I think that's right and I'd also suggest that the same thing can happen within those settings at one and the same time ... ie. a charismatic gathering may very well experience an authentic and spontaneous exuberance in one meeting, only to find themselves saddled with a crassly manipulative one the next ...
Conversely, the same 'rote' liturgy in a more sacramental setting can one day feel like a 'thin-place' where the veil between heaven and earth feels well ... thin ... and the very next week it could feel turgid, stilted and lifeless.
I don't think there's any 'recipe' or join-the-dots solution or way of 'legislating' for these things ...
It's a bit like having a social gathering with the same people one weekend and having a tremendous time and holding the same event a week later and somehow not re-capturing the same 'magic'.
I think it's partly just the way things go ...
But yes, I agree that all those factors you list come into play.
--------------------
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
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
Good point-- totally agree. Reminds me of an amazing prayer service I led once where there was a real tangible sense of the Spirit's presence and some actually healings. So of course the next month I tried to do everything exactly the same way as the month before. And it was ... fine. But not like the prior week. You can't just bottle up the Spirit and require him to show up on schedule.
All of which probably argues for a bit more grace as we're assessing other people's worship services/ experiences.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Well yes ... not to knock these august boards, but I think that kind of grace can be more apparent out there in 'real life' than it is on-line ...
I remember an Orthodox priest telling me once about a Pentecostal minister who attended one of their services. He'd just come back from a revivalist conference where he'd felt caught up in fervour and in the presence of God.
This old chap became very cross and grumpy during the Orthodox service and stormed out towards the end. The priest, who wasn't officiating but present at the service, knew the chap and caught up with him afterwards and asked why he'd had such a reaction - was he objecting to the more 'catholic' feel, the incense, the iconography and so on ...
'No,' said the Pentecostal minister, 'I felt the presence of God there just as powerfully with you as I had at the conference I'd just come from - and that's not supposed to happen!'
--------------------
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
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
I'm obviously not Pentecostal, but is that the Holy Spirit's job? To give us good feelings during church services?
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Good point-- totally agree. Reminds me of an amazing prayer service I led once where there was a real tangible sense of the Spirit's presence and some actually healings. So of course the next month I tried to do everything exactly the same way as the month before. And it was ... fine. But not like the prior week. You can't just bottle up the Spirit and require him to show up on schedule.
I've been healed - and prayed for others who were instantly healed - with no sensing of God's presence. I've been immersed in the felt presence of God yet no healing (or specific personal prophecy or anything else concrete) happened. These may be quite independent of each other, separate gifts that occasionally coincide.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
I'm obviously not Pentecostal, but is that the Holy Spirit's job? To give us good feelings during church services?
The clergy in mainstream Protestant churches often talk about how the Holy Spirit is meant to challenge us rather than make us feel good.
[ 24. July 2015, 19:03: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
I'm obviously not Pentecostal, but is that the Holy Spirit's job? To give us good feelings during church services?
I don't think anyone here was suggesting that.
I will say that what I love about Pentecostalism is the sense of expectation-- the realization that the Holy Spirit is HERE, the expectation and openness to the idea that something unexpected and uncontrollable can and probably will happen. The yearning simply for God's presence.
And what irks me is the persistent belief that it can only be found within our own tribe.
Both of which were addressed in Gamaliel's post.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
But perhaps I can be comforted by knowing that we're apparently not alone in that failing:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
I'm obviously not Pentecostal, but is that the Holy Spirit's job? To give us good feelings during church services?
The clergy in mainstream Protestant churches often talk about how the Holy Spirit is meant to challenge us rather than make us feel good.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I'm not Pentecostal and if anything am kind of post-charismatic ... which isn't the same as being ex-charismatic or anti-charismatic ...
But I agree with Cliffdweller that one of the strengths of Pentecostalism - if not THE main strength - is that sense of the immanence of God.
Other traditions have that too, of course, but it isn't always brought to the forefront as much - and it's expressed in different ways -- for the RCs it might be something that is almost literally 'reserved' for the 'reservation and exposition of the Blessed Sacrament' - for 'Benediction' and so on ...
For the Quakers it might be the sense of a 'gathered silence' ...
In the instance I cited, the Pentecostal minister wasn't taking about happy and joyful feelings so much as a sense of awe, a sense of the numinous, a sense of 'how awesome is this place, this none other than the house of God, the very gate of heaven ...' (Genesis 28:17)
At its best, I'd say that this is what Pentecostalism brings to the party - and it goes beyond joyful or clappy and exuberant choruses. It may start there -- but it doesn't stop there.
I don't see that as being in any way incompatible with the sense that the Holy Spirit challenges us or convicts us of wrong-doing or gives us more of a sense of compassion and concern or power for living a holy life and so on ...
There's all that to it as well. It's another of these both/and not either/or things.
--------------------
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
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Gamaliel
That's all true, but some churches are better at some bits than others. It's hardly surprising if some ministers or laypeople tend to emphasise the importance of those bits that are important to their own tradition and minimise the helpfulness of the bits that they don't do so well.
Of course, some people (such as yourself) experience a whole variety of faith traditions and pick useful spiritual influences and emphases from each. That's probably very helpful, but I imagine that many (British?) Christians don't get to do that to any great depth. But perhaps necessity or the postmodern condition is making this kind of journeying more likely. If we want access to a 'House of Prayer' in the future we'll just have to take what we can get
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Regarding paying for cathedral entry, it's more that I am on a very low income and so just can't afford it. I don't object to it in principle. Interesting to hear that Coventry has such high running costs, surely heating and lighting must be cheaper in a newer building?
A friend is from a free evangelical (originally FIEC but then charismatic from uni onwards) background and when he was living just outside Canterbury we went to the cathedral. The cathedral having a shop really bothered him and to him was a sign of being a 'secular' building and not a proper church. To me this seems a strange attitude because I can't see a huge difference between a Vineyard or NFI church running a cafe and a cathedral having a shop.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
I don't know the details of Coventry, but a lot of stuff that went up in the 50s and 60s is not very energy-efficient and uses matarials that aren't ageing very well.
It sounds to me like your free evangelical friend was confirming his instinctive response to the cathedral (polite term for 'prejudices about it') rather than responding afresh to it.
[ 25. July 2015, 07:33: Message edited by: Albertus ]
--------------------
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
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think that's a position a lot of people are in already, SvitlanaV2 - taking what's available wherever they are or else not bothering with it at all ... in some ways we've got a multiplicity of choice but in other places far less
--------------------
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
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
A few years ago Coventry did indeed have to replace the heating at a high cost. Last year they also resolved to reduce entry fees because they had less visitors and this is their main source of income.
Most Cathedrals have small congregations and get limited support from diocese.
If donations are too small, charging fees to visitors is one of the few ways to get funds. Of course this is a delicate balance, but that is they way it is. The same thing is happening to museums outside of London. Which is unfortunate if you have limited funds, but basically unavoidable. These buildings are not free to run.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
A few years ago Coventry did indeed have to replace the heating at a high cost. Last year they also resolved to reduce entry fees because they had less visitors and this is their main source of income.
I can see both sides. These places are expensive to maintain; and often have small congregations.
As a tourist on a limited budget, the high price some churches charge for what will be a 15 minute visit is unaffordable, especially when you visit a cluster of moderate churches all of which want 5 pounds, and you've run through 20 pounds in less than an hour!
But one can't expect every church keep the doors open 7 days a week just in case some tourists want to drop in, without finding a way to pay for the extra costs of security, literature, and a fair share of the general upkeep of the place the tourists want to see as tourists, not as God-seekers. I don't know what is a fair price; I have sometimes turned away instead of paying what was too high a price for me at that time.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
I don't have any problem with historic churches charging whatever the market will bear for those who are visiting purely as tourists. If you want to sell postcards or refrigerator magnets or snowglobes with the likeness of the cathedral, sure, whatever the market will bear.
The problem I think we've identified here is how to distinguish those who are merely tourists, wanting to ooh and aah over lovely architecture (not that there's anything wrong with that) and spiritual pilgrims who are coming to pray or to worship. It would be ironic if the beauty of a cathedral, intended to draw worshippers into an experience of the glory of God, resulted instead in such a push of tourism that they are unable to accommodate those sorts of spiritual pilgrims, but I can see where in some cases that might have to happen. As with California's missions, at that point the best option might be to decommission and turn it into solely a tourist venue, with a different facility for prayer and worship.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
But one can't expect every church keep the doors open 7 days a week just in case some tourists want to drop in, without finding a way to pay for the extra costs of security, literature, and a fair share of the general upkeep of the place the tourists want to see as tourists, not as God-seekers.
I genuinely think (in Britain at least) that loads of folk think that the buildings are supported by the local Council/English Heritage/the denominations which are "rolling in money". They simply don't think of who is bearing the financial burden.
Equally true of many community groups who want to use the church (or hall) for free or a very small fee: at best they think of paying for lighting and heating but not maintenance, insurance, renewals, caretaking etc. As far as they're concerned, the church is "just there" for them.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
The problem I think we've identified here is how to distinguish those who are merely tourists, wanting to ooh and aah over lovely architecture (not that there's anything wrong with that) and spiritual pilgrims who are coming to pray or to worship. It would be ironic if the beauty of a cathedral, intended to draw worshippers into an experience of the glory of God, resulted instead in such a push of tourism that they are unable to accommodate those sorts of spiritual pilgrims, but I can see where in some cases that might have to happen.
Yes. And saying, "It's free during services" doesn't help - I know of one Cathedral where tour guides deliberately brought groups in during service times. Everyone lost out: the worshippers who were disturbed by the noise, and the tourists who couldn't see round the whole place. I also had a nasty suspicion that the guides did well by pocketing money given to them for the entrance fees which didn't need to be paid ...
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
