homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Sudden CofE Baptism? (Page 2)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Sudden CofE Baptism?
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
logistics (family members travelling long distances unable to make early service time; small regular congregation likely to be swamped by large additional group, and so on.) I've usually tried to arrange these for shortly after the main service so that at least one or two of the regulars might represent the church community

We've started to do that too.
Hmm. Interesting.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Corvo:
[QUOTE]O The priest cannot refuse if this is done (save for the purpose of instruction) and the parents can/should complain to the bishop if he delays.

And what will the Bishop do?
Read the response from BroJames immediately above your post
Are there any instances recorded of
- a family taking it forward (how many, when rejected, will think "I'll get a second look at this?")
- a bishop doing anything
- a child, once refused, ending up being baptised

[ 09. June 2015, 21:04: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]

Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Oscar the Grouch

Adopted Cascadian
# 1916

 - Posted      Profile for Oscar the Grouch     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
In my fairly recent experience, there has been a slight move back towards 'separate' baptisms; not for reasons of theology but logistics (family members travelling long distances unable to make early service time; small regular congregation likely to be swamped by large additional group, and so on.)

In my experience in the South of England, this has been a reality for many years. It didn't matter what the official line was about baptisms happening during the main Sunday morning service; in many cases the families concerned had relatives scattered all over the place and a morning baptism was just unrealistic.

For good or for ill, baptisms in the C of E were hardly ever "just" about the religious thing. There were always elements of family celebrations and so on involved. I thought that it was ill-considered of C of E high-ups to be so dismissive of these aspects of Baptism (as many high-ups were). There was actually something good to be tapped into - something about belonging and about celebrating the good times of life in church.

How on earth do we expect people to consider coming to a C of E church if, when they want their children baptised, they are told "do it OUR way and at a time convenient to US, or we're not interested." Not surprisingly, many people decided that they would go elsewhere.

I'm not advocating a complete free-for-all - simply that the rather simplistic ideals of the Common Worship Baptismal Service need to be tempered with a certain degree of realism and (dare I say it) compassion.

--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu

Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Oscar the Grouch

Adopted Cascadian
# 1916

 - Posted      Profile for Oscar the Grouch     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Are there any instances recorded of
- a family taking it forward (how many, when rejected, will think "I'll get a second look at this?")
- a bishop doing anything
- a child, once refused, ending up being baptised

In my experience, I think that this question is difficult to answer. Often there will be a quiet, informal resolution which will probably involve the child being baptised in a neighbouring parish, by someone more accommodating. Unless you are directly involved, you will never know about it.

I think it is true to say that bishops will usually not take direct action against a priest. There's enough wriggle room in the Canons that it is rare for a priest to be directly in contravention of them. In my experience, bishops will know who the "problem priests" are and will negotiate 'get arounds' as indicated above. I'm not sure that I know of a situation where a child has NOT been baptised in the end - unless the parents have given up in disgust and despair. There's always a way....

(Although the priest of the parish has to give his/her goodwill for a baptism to take place elsewhere, even the most recalcitrant of priests is highly unlikely to refuse to give this. Most of them are quite happy for the family to go elsewhere and stop bothering them.)

--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu

Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I do wish that the Bishops would, and could, come down hard in these cases. There are fundamental questions of ecclesiology and church discipline here. If you accept a cure of souls within the Church of England, you should not be able to pick and choose between your obligations. If you cannot sign up to those obligations you should seek another context for your ministry.

(That said, I do recognise that there may be very rare cases where there is good reason not to baptise. The Vicar at the Church of my Yoof said that he had only refused infant baptism once: that was in a previous parish where he had reason to believe that the parents were Satanists and wanted a baptised child to use in their rituals. He was, BTW, a very level headed man and not one to make such claims lightly.)

[ 10. June 2015, 10:13: Message edited by: Albertus ]

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The point I'm making is this: anything less than a warm welcome and you won't see that family (and almost certainly their extended family and friends, ever again).

Forget about complaint procedures - it isn't worth the bother.

And, yes Albertus I know someone refused baptism in the local Anglican Church (MOTR) back in 1958 because his parents didn't attend. Mind you, the parish concerned had a track record for that sort of thing: in 1838 the Vicar refused to bury a dead child who'd been dedicated at the Congregational Church. The body went back and forwards to the grave 5 times.

The person in question in 1958 was me.

Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Which is surely not a problem for you, ExclamationMark, as a credo-baptist?

Although, I can well understand the pain and the poor impression it would have given your parents and family back in 1958.

--------------------
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      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
What you describe, EM, was utterly wrong for a CofE parish church then and it would be utterly wrong for a CofE parish church now. The business about burials of nonconformists in churchyards was I know a longstanding bone of contention in the C19- that's where Lloyd George made his name- but FWIW I would firmly uphold the right of any parishioner to be buried in the churchyard of his or her parish church, if there is a functioning churchyard there.

And you're dead right about the need for a warm welcome, BTW. Do you, as a Baptist minister, ever get requests for infant baptism from families who don't realise that that's not something Baptists do? Rarely if ever, I would imagine, but I bet that if you did, you'd bend over backwards to offer them whatever you could short of baptism and to let them know how pleased you were that they had sought you out.

[ 10. June 2015, 12:53: Message edited by: Albertus ]

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
The business about burials of nonconformists in churchyards was I know a longstanding bone of contention in the C19.


Ah, the delights of the Akenham Burial Case - upon which one of my URC colleagues wrote an MA dissertation.

quote:
Do you, as a Baptist minister, ever get requests for infant baptism from families who don't realise that that's not something Baptists do?
Yes ... and we are very happy to give a "thanksgiving" and a "blessing" for every child who comes. FWIW we do offer two different sets of questions depending on whether the parent(s) wish(es) to make explicit affirmations about bringing up the child in the Christian faith, or only to declare their intention of good parenting.

I have to say that my experience over many years is that, despite the most welcoming words and careful explaining, most non-church families don't "get" the idea of no water being used and don't wish to proceed further when they discover that fact.

[ 10. June 2015, 13:29: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]

Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
...FWIW we do offer two different sets of questions depending on whether the parent(s) wish(es) to make explicit affirmations about bringing up the child in the Christian faith, or only to declare their intention of good parenting...

I like that.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thanks. These words are not "authorised" in any way (we don't go in for that). But they do avoid parents having to make promises that they know they won't keep, while welcoming the family into the Church fellowship.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
There's an honesty there, and a sense of meeting people where they are.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
What you describe, EM, was utterly wrong for a CofE parish church then and it would be utterly wrong for a CofE parish church now. The business about burials of nonconformists in churchyards was I know a longstanding bone of contention in the C19- that's where Lloyd George made his name- but FWIW I would firmly uphold the right of any parishioner to be buried in the churchyard of his or her parish church, if there is a functioning churchyard there.

And you're dead right about the need for a warm welcome, BTW. Do you, as a Baptist minister, ever get requests for infant baptism from families who don't realise that that's not something Baptists do? Rarely if ever, I would imagine, but I bet that if you did, you'd bend over backwards to offer them whatever you could short of baptism and to let them know how pleased you were that they had sought you out.

The burial case I refer to was in Cambridgeshire. It was - and is - still known as the case of the unburied child. To this day, the URC and Parish Churches do nothing together. Old wounds run deep and there's never been any apology or expression of regret for this expression of gracelessness and abuse.

Thankfully my parents were able to get me baptised but in another parish. The real irony was that my grandparents were regular attenders (my grandmother was even the church cleaner) and yet my baptism was still refused. It's something my father found so embarrassing and hurtful that he didn't talk about it for many years. He only told me this year - 57 years down the line. A subsequent vicar also refused to come and see my grandmother when she was dying: I suppose he had his hands full in that small parish with visiting rich landowners not dying farm workers' wives. Interestingly enough, the Minister of the Congregational Church was only too happy to turn out on his bike. You do begin to see how, in some ways, the church has been the author of some of its misfortunes.

I do get asked for Christenings and, like BT, offer thanksgiving and dedication services. I like to find ways of welcoming the community not slamming the door in their faces. The number I've done would run into double figures certainly in both churches I've been in.

I tailor the promises to those the parents and sponsors feel happy with: I' glad to say that in several cases reaching out in that way has brought families into the church. In one case it led to 3 adult baptisms and a new deacon a few years down the line.

Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Ah, the delights of the Akenham Burial Case - upon which one of my URC colleagues wrote an MA dissertation. [QUOTE][qb]

No not Akenham but this one http://www.peterjacksonroyston.co.uk/RoystonFHS/JournalPages/2010Journal/unburiedchild.html

Did you notice that the Bishop declined to enforce compliance with the law? The body went back and forth to the grave 5 times.

I've read the original sources and court records and can vouch for the veracity of the web link.

The Vicar remained in post for another 16 years, dying in post. He had a young family himself at the time of the dispute.

[ 11. June 2015, 12:47: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]

Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Which is surely not a problem for you, ExclamationMark, as a credo-baptist?

Although, I can well understand the pain and the poor impression it would have given your parents and family back in 1958.

Anything's a problem for me where the church doesn't extend the kind of welcome that Christ would expect.

My example is simply that: example. What I find it hard is that I do have to cross a few bridges from time to time to undo the hostility I meet which is the result of people's own real life experience. It's nice when someone says "we can talk to you - you're not like other priests" but it shouldn't be like that.

The church used to shaft itself big time (and that includes baptists and their nepotism), now it justs shafts itself enough to keep itself on the margins when it could be at the centre.

Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The problem seems to be that parents looking for an infant baptism often take the 'welcome' as an inalienable right, even if they don't respect the beliefs or doctrines of the religious institution in question.

I'm not surprised that some CofE vicars get cross about this. But their job seems to require being all things to all men, so they should probably just accept the situation and cheerfully offer what is requested of them. Either that, or switch to a denomination that doesn't work on a 'belonging before believing' basis.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
daisymay

St Elmo's Fire
# 1480

 - Posted      Profile for daisymay     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
We went to Dingwall Club (up the north of Scotland) to camp and there we went on Sunday to the baptist Church, which was really excellent and spoke and sing well.

--------------------
London
Flickr fotos

Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yeah, I get that ExclamationMark ... but I'm not quite sure how the church can ever be 'at the centre' in a post-Christendom environment ... although clergy and ministers and so on not being arsey to people would certainly help ...

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815

 - Posted      Profile for Gee D     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
And, yes Albertus I know someone refused baptism in the local Anglican Church (MOTR) back in 1958 because his parents didn't attend. Mind you, the parish concerned had a track record for that sort of thing: in 1838 the Vicar refused to bury a dead child who'd been dedicated at the Congregational Church. The body went back and forwards to the grave 5 times.

A dreadful track record - in 1838 and again 120 years later.

There may be something arising from the C of E's status as the established church, but why should the church have had an obligation to bury someone not one of its members? Surely in 1838 any obligation was on the local Congregational minister. The same with your baptism: who were the godparents to be and how serious would have been their promise to bring you up in the faith of the church (by which I mean the universal church, not just the C of E branch of it)? On the face of it, both seem examples of someone seeking the advantages of membership without belonging.

[ 13. June 2015, 22:39: Message edited by: Gee D ]

--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican

Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
Curiosity killed ...

Ship's Mug
# 11770

 - Posted      Profile for Curiosity killed ...   Email Curiosity killed ...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The position of the CofE means that the parish priest is required to baptise, marry and bury anyone who lives within the parish, churchgoer or not. Marriage requires some checking to make sure that the couple are legally allowed to marry. Burials and baptism can require checking of parish boundaries. I have dealt with people fancying burial in the only open graveyard of a team of churches and not being eligible as they didn't live in the right parish.

If there is a request to baptise someone who does not live in the parish and is not a regular church member, it is normal to talk to their parish priest. But informal arrangements are not unknown - should a minister only want to credo-baptise, then they may discuss the options with other ministers.

With the cuts in clergy, I am not sure how viable church funerals or minister led funerals at the crematorium are going to continue to be, as if there is no-one available (as they are already doing three funerals that day), it's not that easy to find a substitute in some areas.

--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat

Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815

 - Posted      Profile for Gee D     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
CK, thanks for that advice. It certainly is not the case here that a parish priest is required to baptise/marry/bury anyone who comes along. While we cheerfully baptise children from the local Salvation Army congregation - or indeed from any other Christian group that did not provide a ministry of the sacraments - we would want assurance as to the real willingness of godparents generally to honour their undertaking to see that the child is brought up as a Christian.

--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican

Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
Zacchaeus
Shipmate
# 14454

 - Posted      Profile for Zacchaeus   Email Zacchaeus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
CofE celrgy are only allowed to dealy a bapotism for the purposes of preparation - they cannot refuse a parishioner
Posts: 1905 | From: the back of beyond | Registered: Jan 2009  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
The position of the CofE means that the parish priest is required to baptise, marry and bury anyone who lives within the parish, churchgoer or not.

Which is precisely the argument that Nonconformists (Baptists, at any rate!) have with it. To us, baptism marks "the entry to the Church" - but being "in the Church" is not co-terminous with "being a member of the English State". It requires a personal commitment and belief.

We're usually happy to marry anyone, or take their funeral though.

[ 14. June 2015, 08:14: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]

Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Jengie jon

Semper Reformanda
# 273

 - Posted      Profile for Jengie jon   Author's homepage   Email Jengie jon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
And, yes Albertus I know someone refused baptism in the local Anglican Church (MOTR) back in 1958 because his parents didn't attend. Mind you, the parish concerned had a track record for that sort of thing: in 1838 the Vicar refused to bury a dead child who'd been dedicated at the Congregational Church. The body went back and forwards to the grave 5 times.

A dreadful track record - in 1838 and again 120 years later.

There may be something arising from the C of E's status as the established church, but why should the church have had an obligation to bury someone not one of its members? Surely in 1838 any obligation was on the local Congregational minister. The same with your baptism: who were the godparents to be and how serious would have been their promise to bring you up in the faith of the church (by which I mean the universal church, not just the C of E branch of it)? On the face of it, both seem examples of someone seeking the advantages of membership without belonging.

I suspect Gee D the answer is simple. The Congregational Church was built before it was permitted to bury people and as such did not have a graveyard, it may even be they still were not permitted to. 1838 is about the time of municipal graveyard, this is in part Non-Conformist provision to cope with the fact that they did not usually have graveyards attached to their buildings.

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
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815

 - Posted      Profile for Gee D     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The delights of being the established church. I assume that Zacchaeus's reference to a parishioner has its own definition as well. Here and most other places it would mean a member of the church, of the congregation.

--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican

Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
Corvo
Shipmate
# 15220

 - Posted      Profile for Corvo   Email Corvo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
The delights of being the established church. I assume that Zacchaeus's reference to a parishioner has its own definition as well. Here and most other places it would mean a member of the church, of the congregation.

Parishioner means someone who lives in the geographical parish. So in several English parishes most parishioners are Muslim or Jewish.
Posts: 672 | From: The Most Holy Trinity, Coach Lane, North Shields | Registered: Oct 2009  |  IP: Logged
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815

 - Posted      Profile for Gee D     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thank you all for this tangent - some more trivia to store away even if I cannot contemplate the day when it may become relevant. I still have difficulty in seeing how 2 incidents 120 years apart constitute a track record, though perhaps Johnny Moyes could think of some parallel.

--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican

Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged
Adam.

Like as the
# 4991

 - Posted      Profile for Adam.   Author's homepage   Email Adam.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Corvo:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
The delights of being the established church. I assume that Zacchaeus's reference to a parishioner has its own definition as well. Here and most other places it would mean a member of the church, of the congregation.

Parishioner means someone who lives in the geographical parish. So in several English parishes most parishioners are Muslim or Jewish.
This is the official understanding of all Roman Catholic geographic parishes too (we do have some personal parishes, which you only become a member of by some definite act).

--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog

Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
The position of the CofE means that the parish priest is required to baptise, marry and bury anyone who lives within the parish, churchgoer or not.

Just curious: Is the expectation/requirement similar in the Church of Scotland? As I recall it is also organized along the traditional parish model (parish as a geographical area rather than simply as a synonym for "congregation").

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Corvo:
Parishioner means someone who lives in the geographical parish. So in several English parishes most parishioners are Muslim or Jewish.

So baptise the lot of 'em!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376

 - Posted      Profile for Forthview   Email Forthview   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
As far as I know the Church of Scotland offers its services to all who live within the different parishes.
With the many schisms in the 1700s and particularly 1843 plus the return in 1920s of some but not all it is difficult to know exactly how the earlier system of parish churches fit in to the kaleidoscope of Presbyterian churches over Scottish territory.

Usually there is one in a town which will be called the (Old)Parish church.

Some parishes are roughly the same as the old pre Reformation parishes,others are called parishes 'quoad sacra' .

The Scottish Episcopal church does not have religious parishes as such.

The Catholic church organisation is divided into territorial parishes (purely within the framework of the Catholic dioceses).

Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
With the cuts in clergy, I am not sure how viable church funerals or minister led funerals at the crematorium are going to continue to be, as if there is no-one available (as they are already doing three funerals that day), it's not that easy to find a substitute in some areas.

In this area more than 70% of funerals are humanist or secular. There may not be the Priests but there's also much less of a demand.

I tend to get most of the non conformist ones (as well as those who have no ones) as the undertakers all know that we don't charge. The humanists won't do that.

Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061

 - Posted      Profile for Brenda Clough   Author's homepage   Email Brenda Clough   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Un the US there is something called celebrants, which are essentially people who can run a funeral/wedding/whatever for you without any religious component.

--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page

Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376

 - Posted      Profile for Forthview   Email Forthview   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
'Celebrant' is,of course, a word taken from the Catholic liturgical language, for the priest who presides at a religious office,such as Mass or Evening Prayer.

It is a word which, at least in Protestant circles here in Scotland, would have rarely been heard of,until it was taken over by secular'celebrants',failing another suitable word to describe their 'ministry'.

We have,here in Scotland, also 'independent celebrants' who will do whatever the client wishes,with or without a religious component.

Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Zacchaeus
Shipmate
# 14454

 - Posted      Profile for Zacchaeus   Email Zacchaeus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
The delights of being the established church. I assume that Zacchaeus's reference to a parishioner has its own definition as well. Here and most other places it would mean a member of the church, of the congregation.

It sure does have a definition.

Basically the parish has defined geographical boundaries. The whole of Endland is supposed to be covered by a system of parishes and so everybody belongs to a geographical parish. The vicar/rector/whatever their title, is responsible for anybody in their parish unless of course they choose to go to another church.

So if a person has no active church membership and needs to be hatched matched or dispatched it falls to the priest in whose parish they reside.

Posts: 1905 | From: the back of beyond | Registered: Jan 2009  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
In this area more than 70% of funerals are humanist or secular. There may not be the Priests but there's also much less of a demand.

Wow, that's interesting. I didn't realise the demand for humanist/secular funerals was so large already. I wonder how that compares with the rest of the country.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
A dreadful track record - in 1838 and again 120 years later.

There may be something arising from the C of E's status as the established church, but why should the church have had an obligation to bury someone not one of its members? Surely in 1838 any obligation was on the local Congregational minister. The same with your baptism: who were the godparents to be and how serious would have been their promise to bring you up in the faith of the church (by which I mean the universal church, not just the C of E branch of it)? On the face of it, both seem examples of someone seeking the advantages of membership without belonging.

In 1838 there was only one burial ground. Nowhere else to go. In 1958 the Godparents were all regular communicants.

What particular advantage would membership bring?

Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thanks Forthview.

quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Un the US there is something called celebrants, which are essentially people who can run a funeral/wedding/whatever for you without any religious component.

Since marriage generally falls within the purview of states rather than the federal government, and since laws vary from state, such people may be available in some states but not in all. In my state, the only people who can preside over weddings are those authorized by their religious community to do so or magistrates. Provision is also made for the Quaker tradition, where there isn't any presiding official.

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by Corvo:
Parishioner means someone who lives in the geographical parish. So in several English parishes most parishioners are Muslim or Jewish.

So baptise the lot of 'em!
If that were their wish, it would be the incumbent's duty to do so.

--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by Corvo:
Parishioner means someone who lives in the geographical parish. So in several English parishes most parishioners are Muslim or Jewish.

So baptise the lot of 'em!
If that were their wish, it would be the incumbent's duty to do so.
That would be fine. Moslem and Jewish parents know perfectly well that by asking for their children to be baptised, they are choosing to make them Christians. [Yipee]

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools