Thread: Eccles: Metropolitan Community Church Worship Board: Limbo / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=000735

Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
In Purgatory their has been some discussion on the MCC Church. A bit of the chat has been on worship so I thought I'd introduce chat on MCC Church worship here.

quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
quote:
Originally posted by Laetare:
Thats a good point Anglican Brat.

Sandushinka was talking about the culture of his/her church not suiting LGBT folk. Can anyone say what the culture of MCC is like?

Instead of singing Immortal, Invisible, they sing this

Enjoy [Big Grin]

What is MCC worship like?

What does it give the wider church?

Any experiences?

[ 16. February 2010, 08:57: Message edited by: Think² ]
 
Posted by TubaMirum (# 8282) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Laetare:
In Purgatory their has been some discussion on the MCC Church. A bit of the chat has been on worship so I thought I'd introduce chat on MCC Church worship here.

quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
quote:
Originally posted by Laetare:
Thats a good point Anglican Brat.

Sandushinka was talking about the culture of his/her church not suiting LGBT folk. Can anyone say what the culture of MCC is like?

Instead of singing Immortal, Invisible, they sing this

Enjoy [Big Grin]

What is MCC worship like?

What does it give the wider church?

Any experiences?

I've gone to a few services, but it was long ago - in the 80s. The worship was Evangelical, which is I think because the founders of MCC were themselves Evangelical.

It gave gay people - people who grew up Evangelical, especially - a place to go to worship in those days, when there was really no other place you could go without having to hide. I didn't stay, myself, but quite a number of my friends did, in those days.

I guess it still fulfills that same function, in fact, because not much has changed in the "wider church." I think it's gone worldwide now, and I get hits on my blog on a post about it from Malaysia and other places.

[ 09. August 2009, 18:53: Message edited by: TubaMirum ]
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
Yes I thought the worship would be evangelical. But maybe with its own slant as well.

I found a mystery worship report and its here. Its an MCC church in Manchester, UK where apparantly they wont say 'Father' in the Our Father in the liturgy because its sexist.

Thats not main stream evangelical. [Smile]
 
Posted by TubaMirum (# 8282) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Laetare:
Yes I thought the worship would be evangelical. But maybe with its own slant as well.

I found a mystery worship report and its here. Its an MCC church in Manchester, UK where apparantly they wont say 'Father' in the Our Father in the liturgy because its sexist.

Thats not main stream evangelical. [Smile]

You're right, it's not. I don't think it was that way when I went, but perhaps it was; I can't really remember the particulars.

It was a college town, and a lot of the members were friends of mine from A.A., so that might affect how things were done, too.

I wasn't really very interested in the church in those days, but they had asked me to play some music for them before the service (classical guitar), so I was happy to do that. I guess they were probably trying to convert me, now that I think of it, but it was pretty low-key.

And they were my friends, so I was completely comfortable in that respect. It was very, very welcoming, and relaxed. I just had no interest at all, I'm afraid....

[ 09. August 2009, 19:06: Message edited by: TubaMirum ]
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
MCC has to be Communion every Sunday. The rite is fairly standard - penitence, scripture, preaching, intercessions, the peace, offertory, eucharistic prayer, breaking of the bread, sharing of communion (wafers intincted, reflecting HIV concerns), thanksgiving, blessing and dismissal.

One unusual practice is a very long, personalised prayer over each communicant. Some find this deeply moving. I find it deeply embarrassing.

Anyone is allowed to preside (if trained to 'do communion'), not just an ordained pastor. This reflects their deeply held belief in 'the priesthood of all believers.
 
Posted by TubaMirum (# 8282) on :
 
I remember that "praying over people" now that you mention it, at the altar rail (not that there was actually a rail).

I didn't realize that it was Communion every week, though. The service I went to was at 5 p.m., I remember now - probably because of the "college town" aspect....
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
Now Catholics give an emphasis on Mass, Anglicans (mostly) have a distinct tradition, methodists and hymn singing etc.

So what is MCC church's contribution to the larger than them world of worship?

Maybe its this gender neutral way of speaking about God. Is there another church that does this in the majority of its churches?
 
Posted by TubaMirum (# 8282) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Laetare:
So what is MCC church's contribution to the larger than them world of worship?

Well, I guess you could say that it gives gay people a place to worship without being hounded, so that the rest don't have to bother themselves with that.
 
Posted by TiggyTiger (# 14819) on :
 
It encourages diversity, tolerance and openness. Not everyone who goes there is gay. Some just like it because of the above reasons and that they feel safer there than in a lot of other churches. They don't have to pretend to believe things they don't or pretend to be someone they're not.
 
Posted by TiggyTiger (# 14819) on :
 
Oh and though our one is a very small church, we provide education to a boy in Africa and contribute money towards local charities. We have a sister church in South Africa and raise awareness of issues of persecution of gay people in other countries.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
Do the MCC Church have a set liturgy or are they more 'Protestant' in feel, with a locally / individually devised form?
 
Posted by LQ (# 11596) on :
 
I've not yet been to either of the MCC congregations in Toronto, but those who have tell me that it's a bit all things to all people. The footage I've seen would seem to indicate a mainline Protestant flavour, but with e.g. weekly Eucharist for the ex-Catholics, and some charismatic-type singing for those of that background. But for the most part, it seemed very similar to the United church I spent time in as a child.
 
Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :
 
Then, of course, there's this humorous video account of a visit to a local MCC church (after a visit with the Jehovah's Witnesses).

[ 10. August 2009, 14:26: Message edited by: Oblatus ]
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
[Smile] Thanks, Oblatus.

I can't find a MCC church liturgy online, or their hymn book. I bet the hymn book and liturgy is different because of not calling God Father. Quite a few hymns will have to be altered a bit I guess.
 
Posted by CorgiGreta (# 443) on :
 
LQ,

Having visited the "Mother Church" twice, I would agree with your friends' assessment.

Whether one's background is Anglican, Lutheran, Mainline Protestant, Pentecostal, Evangelical, and possibly even Roman Catholic, there is something in the service that will be familiar.

That may be (for better or worse) MCC's special contribution to the wprship world. It displays the ultimate blended worship.

Greta

[ 10. August 2009, 22:59: Message edited by: CorgiGreta ]
 
Posted by Intrepid Thurifer (# 77) on :
 
For our more catholic gay brothers and sisters there is this church web page
 
Posted by toaster (# 14811) on :
 
Laetare, if you're so interested, I'd say just go along to a service and see what it's like. Your profile says that you're in London, where there are three MCCs: North London, South London and East London. (Not to be confused with MCC London in London, Ontario.)
I don't know, but I'd guess the three services/congregations/styles will vary but the general themes of inclusivity and community, plus an open communion will be common to both. I'm sure you would be welcomed to any or all if you went along.

You could even be a Mystery Worshipper...

Generally, as has been said by others, MCC services vary quite a lot depending on the congregation's background. My experiences there have been overwhelmingly positive.

There isn't a specific MCC hymn book, IME hymns are selected from many sources, and some may be modified to make the language more inclusive, and then projected during the service so there's no need for any books (certainly not the only church to do this). Again, I think it depends on the congregation.

The church Bylaws are all online here and aren't all that long if you fancy a read through them.

I'd like to post a longer reply but I don't have time now.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
Thanks toaster for the advice. I may well attend, it seems in some ways at least a congenial space [Biased]

But its good to chat here about their worship to, is it not [Smile]
 
Posted by LQ (# 11596) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by toaster:
(Not to be confused with MCC London in London, Ontario.)

Wow, you mean there are queer people in London? I thought they were all in exile in Toronto.
 
Posted by toaster (# 14811) on :
 
Oh, and also, at the MCC I've spent the most time at, there was no 'praying over people' so it's not a universal thing. The bread and wine are blessed by the celebrant and then passed from one to the other through the congregation. Prayer is available after the service for those that choose to seek it though.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
The celebrant of communion, toaster, is anyone who is allowed - is that right.

Lay people can do it, as MCC has no priesthood restrictions - all are priests. Have I got that right?

Do they have there own communion prayer?
 
Posted by toaster (# 14811) on :
 
Yes I believe so. I think the pastor, board and potential celebrant discuss suitability for the role and then there is some relevant training provided.

There is a strong belief in the priesthood of all believers and many lay members take leadership positions in the church. Typically during the service there will be different people leading, preaching, celebrating communion and leading prayers. Some, or none of these may be ordained clergy.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by communion prayer. Do you mean the whole celebration? I think this, as with so much, is congregation specific, but in my experience is fairly standard: confession, absolution (said to and for one another), shared peace, communion hymn, introduction (open invitation to Christ's table), consecration (with congregational response), thanksgiving prayer.

I'm no ecclesiastical expert though, I'm just speaking from my own experiences not the letter of the law.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
'The communion prayer' is what many evangelicals call the eucharistic prayer/prayer of consecration.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
Yes I used Communion Prayer 'cos I don't think the MCC church would say Eucharistic Prayer. What I was wondering is if they have there own or if the person just says a prayer they like over the bread and wine.

the problem is if they use someone elses they'd need to cut out the bits that call God father.
 
Posted by toaster (# 14811) on :
 
Sorry, I am showing my ignorance of matters ecclesiastic here (maybe I shouldn't be on this board). Sitting in the congregation I don't necessarily know what each particular section of the liturgy is called. It's not a case of what would the MCC church say, it's just that I don't know which bit you mean exactly.

What is the C of E/Methodist/Church of Scotland etc. communion prayer for example? Is there only one? Used in all churches, every time there is communion? Would it be a problem to use someone else's prayer? Would it be a problem not to?

IME at MCC the words and prayers used during communion are usually the same regardless of celebrant and I don't think Father is used at all in that bit (God, Heavenly Parent etc might be used as replacements). Whether it's the same as another church's, I don't know. It's certainly fairly similar to other mainstream UK Protestant denominations I've been to.

On a more general point on inclusive language, it's not necessarily the case that Father is never used in anything, particularly in hymns where inclusifying can only go so far before the song no longer scans, or it's so well known hymn that people will sing what they know anyway. But I think that where that is the case, elsewhere in the service, there will typically be a metaphor/reference to God as female.
Inclusification(?) should be done intelligently (not that it always is though we are only human after all!).
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
On Inclusive language:

Are there other churches than the MCC church which say don't call God Father, but prefer creator or rock or whatever. This seems quite a big thing to me, and I bet some people in churches would have a strong opinion about it.

It must be hard to avoid saying 'he' or 'him' about God.
 
Posted by ken (# 2460) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by toaster:
What is the C of E/Methodist/Church of Scotland etc. communion prayer for example?

Prayers like this (CofE) used in services
like this (Methodist)

quote:

Is there only one?

Most denominations that have them have more than one, though not hundreds.

quote:

Used in all churches, every time there is communion?

By Roman Catholics, yes. Anglicans and Methodists sort-of yes-in-theory. Probably almost everywhere almost everytime in the CofE, a little bit less fixed in the Methodists. Presbyterians and the like tend to tread the written liturgies more as suggestions than as scripts.

quote:

Would it be a problem to use someone else's prayer?

In the Church of England its against the rules not to use the authorised prayers. But in practice loads of people don't. A few - I'd guess about five percent - CofE parishes use one of the Roman Catholic prayers. Some of the more liberal parishes might make their own up. Just about everybody has minor local variations, Evangelicals probablkuy sticking to the book more closely than Anglo-Catholics.

Methodists are probably even more variable than that. Some will all but improvise, as you might in a Baptist church. Others will go by the book. A few might use old Anglican BCP prayers (though I doubt if any would use the current ones) and there might even be one or two who used Catholic prayers. You probably wouldn't get that in a Presbyterian church! Though I did see a Catholic Missal and a lectionary on the bookshelf of a Presbyterian elder in Glasgow once...

The trouble with Christians not calling God Father, is that its one of the few things just about everybody agrees that Jesus actually told us to do! And if the poitn of Christianity is knowing God in Jesus Christ, it seems a bit odd not to do what he said.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
Evangelical Anglicans are LESS likely to stick to the book that those of us with a more catholic bent. I know of evangelical communion services where the 'communion prayer' makes no mention of the words of institution.

As for 'Father' one our Anglican eucharistic prayers describes God, in very scriptural terms, as a mother: As a mother tenderly gathers her children,
you embraced a people as your own. http://www.cofe.anglican.org/worship/liturgy/commonworship/texts/hc/prayerg.html
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
quote:
As for 'Father' one our Anglican eucharistic prayers describes God, in very scriptural terms, as a mother: As a mother tenderly gathers her children,
Yes, indeed Leo, thats a very good point, although I bet that prayer doesn't start 'Almighty Mother...'.

But, I don't think thats quite the MCC church issue. They don't like gender specific words for God, so Mother wouldn't do, you see.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
We will have to wait until Common Worship 2020!

AS for gender specific talk of God, I used to get told off if I used such language and I went along with it until someone pointed out that God is Being not doing (as in creating, sustaining and what not).

Contrary to what I said in reply to Ken on a different strand, I think inclusive language has gone too far and I find MCC liturgy a step too far.

I believe MCC has a special witness but I am glad that I am able to be part of the wider, mainstream, much though it annoys me at times.
 
Posted by Hooker's Trick (# 89) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Evangelical Anglicans are LESS likely to stick to the book that those of us with a more catholic bent.

Depends which book you're talking about...
 
Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hooker's Trick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Evangelical Anglicans are LESS likely to stick to the book that those of us with a more catholic bent.

Depends which book you're talking about...
Well, any I'd guess. If you're talking about the C of E. Even the Bible doesn't get much of a look-in in some evo churches (less so than in those that follow the lectionary and have three readings plus a psalm every Sunday.)
 
Posted by TiggyTiger (# 14819) on :
 
God is Being not doing

I thought God was a verb, i.e non static. Was it Rosemary Reuther who wrote about God as 'verb'?

It's funny, I always like being and not doing myself, but I would prefer to see God as having some movement - otherwise He seems sterile.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
I prefer Aquinas to Reuther.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
I thought the MW report was good when it said:

quote:
Which part of the service was like being in heaven?
I particularly liked the open communion – anyone who was "looking for God" was welcome to partake.

And which part was like being in... er... the other place?
The political correctness in over-using inclusive language. I struggled with the idea of starting the Lord's Prayer with "Loving God in heaven", rather than "Our Father". If Jesus referred to God as his Father, that's good enough for me, and I felt that changing the biblical account was unhelpful.

This was about the Manchester MCC church, but I guess its like others.
The report is here.

I like the open communion idea, but like the MWer am v unhappy about not saying 'Father' in the Our Father.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
I would be interested to know thoughts on this idea of not calling God, father that the MCC church have.

I found the manchester Mystery Worshipped MCC church with info on this no 'Our Father' thing, now I wonder iff other MCC churches have been mystery worshiiped.
 
Posted by Hermeneut (# 11066) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I prefer Aquinas to Reuther.

In order to help with the reduction of my ignorance, I wonder if you might be so kind as to unpack that? I'm sure St. Th. Aquinas's works are amongst the classics that I should have read, but...

[Hot and Hormonal]
 
Posted by TiggyTiger (# 14819) on :
 
originally posted by Leo

I prefer Aquinas to Reuther.


Well each to their own! :-)
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hermeneut:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I prefer Aquinas to Reuther.

In order to help with the reduction of my ignorance, I wonder if you might be so kind as to unpack that? I'm sure St. Th. Aquinas's works are amongst the classics that I should have read, but...

[Hot and Hormonal]

Thomas Aquinas is THE theologian of the Western Church and his work covers every aspect of systematic theology. With reference to the debate on this thread, he stated that God is pure being, 'is-ness'. God cannot, therefore, be reduced to a function e.g. 'creator, sustainer' etc. My remark was addressed to Tiggy Tiger who thought that God was adverb, not a noun. That is heresy.

Rosemary Radford Reuther is a feminist theologian. She has several insights that men need to take on board. However, she is a single-issue theologian and sees everything through feminist eyes. Much as I support Feminist theology (and Liberation, Minjung and Queer theologies), the Christian faith is much bigger than a version of it peddled by a single-issue group.
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
I went to the Manchester MCC service once. It was OK. I thought it was identical to a methodist service. It was very much like a club though, people knew each other and broke up quickly into tight little circles chatting away.

One odd thing. A guy was there who I was told was 'the pastor' he was big and quite loud. He wore vestments like a Church of England priest - alb and chasuble. BUT he didn't do much. Someone else preached and someone else said words over the bread and (awful tasting) wine. I thought that was bit odd. The pastor all dressed up with nothing to do. I got the impression he rather liked being dressed up!
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
I can't think why a pastor would be dressing up like that! It seems dead odd if he wasnt actually the celebrant, I've not come across that - but they're not a Catholic church are they - like they don't have Bishops or priests or deacons just pastors.

Maybe they just borrow robes from whatever tradition they feel like, or what they think there members will like.

One idea could be for the lay person saying the prayer over the bread to wear the chasuble for the prayer maybe. That would show were all priests if you get me.

Mind you if the pastor likes dressing up he wouldnt like to share his clothes with others

[Smile]
 
Posted by Fr Cuthbert (# 3953) on :
 
I don't know much about lay celebration, and the example quoted does raise a lot of questions. Why would the 'pastor' wear eucharistic vestments if not actually celebrating. It gives a very mixed message to those attending.

Certainly I have not come across this thing before. Usually non celebrating clergy wear a cassock and surplice or cotta with or without a stole.

It would be interesting to know about other lay celebration settings and who wears what.
 
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :
 
I imagine it suggests he sees the chasuble as being like the stole - rather than of significance to the eucharist only.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
I guess so. But no other church does it that way as far as I know.

Anyone else know if there are churches where the chasuble is worn but not by the person that says the Eucharistic prayer?

But the MCC church doesn't have priests or a tradition much being so new so I guess they are just borrowing bits and pieces from other churches.
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
The mixed message to those attending that Fr Cuthbert mentions in relation to MCC is a very good point, and one I thought of when I went to their Manchester branch.

The saying of the prayer over the bread and wine by a guy casually dressed was OK but it certainly showed that MCC in their theology don't see that as very important. The guy who dresses up seems to be important but did very little except give out notices and be a bit loud.

A rather louche guy with significant embonpoint was at a keyboard, I asked a lady about him as he seemed important. I was told he was 'the power behind the throne!'

That is another example of the mixed message. Mind you I guess in other free churches the powerful people aren't necessarily
those who dress up in the liturgy, and some laity are more in the know than others and have a strong influence over the pastor.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
Apparently MCC do mass gay blessings. It says here the MCC pastor did 70 in one go.I wonder what liturgy was used for that!
 
Posted by beachpsalms (# 4979) on :
 
I've been to MCC Toronto a few times. I find Brent Hawkes to be an engaging preacher, and I enjoy the relaxed and welcoming feeling of worship (and the vestments). The worship is similar enough to United Church that I feel quite comfortable, and different enough that I don't spend the whole service critiquing it.

So far, I've found myself in tears each time I've gone, and left with a refreshed spirit, and some things to think about.
 
Posted by Laurie17 (# 14889) on :
 
I have only attended one MCC church.

It was the most theologically literate and active congregation I have ever experienced, including my time at a university church ! Many members led the worship and preached amazingly theologically well-informed sermons.Also very relevant.

A flexible eucharist liturgy with structure and plenty of room for experiment and variety.

Also the congregation ran and did most things. It really was impressive.

It was in London, UK.

[ 03. September 2009, 22:57: Message edited by: Laurie17 ]
 
Posted by TiggyTiger (# 14819) on :
 
The saying of the prayer over the bread and wine by a guy casually dressed was OK but it certainly showed that MCC in their theology don't see that as very important.

I don't see the connection there. People don't always dress up for things they consider important. Most people go casually dressed to church and at MCC churches the laity serve communion. It doesn't mean the congregation don't see it as important. I would say at our one we see it as very important.
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TiggyTiger:
The saying of the prayer over the bread and wine by a guy casually dressed was OK but it certainly showed that MCC in their theology don't see that as very important.

I don't see the connection there. People don't always dress up for things they consider important. Most people go casually dressed to church and at MCC churches the laity serve communion. It doesn't mean the congregation don't see it as important. I would say at our one we see it as very important.

Tiggytiger, I think I maybe did not put my point clearly. I support lay celebration, I wish the Church of England did more of it. I don't mind what folk wear.

What was unusual and odd I thought was that one guy dressed like an anglican vicar with white robe and chasuble and was big and a bit loud, but all he did was talk before the services and say notices! BUT he was dressed like a vicar. The presider at the communion was in casual dress. That muddled dress code to me made the notices seem more important than the communion. See what I mean?

Basically I couldnt see any point in the big guy dressing up as a vicar just to read the noitces.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Long Mire:
I support lay celebration, I wish the Church of England did more of it.

More? It is illegal so there shouldn't be any.
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
Leo, your comment raises a lot of interesting questions, and the whole question of lay celebration is, I think, a very interesting one.

However, it would need anpother thread for discussion of it. Maybe I should start one.

Here though my comments were specifically about the MCC, and the strange vesture involved. Thinking about it later I did wonder what the pastors of MCC in England wear for worship. I think the guy I met may be a loner in his style!
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
There is no rule about vesture in the MCC.

Pastors have often been ordained in other denominations and then joined the MCC later - often because they have 'come out' and had a bad reception. They tend to vest in the way they are accustomed.

There is a high church/low church variation much as there is in the C of E - though a better comparison is with Medthodists where you can get everything from cassock-alb and stole 'down' to open shirt and jeans.
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
I wasn't asking about MCC rules of vesture Leo! I was more interested in the practice - what do the pastors or worship leaders wear in worship. The answer seems to be anything.

One MCC church has an explanation about their worship. This is the Newcastle branch of the Church. They say the service is in three parts:


I was surprised to see The Collection given such a central role, rather than a sermon or Bible reading.

However, the Communion as described by this church seems very open and welcoming. Fruit Juice is used instead of wine to allow all to receive.

The church says:

quote:
At MCC Newcastle we practice open communion. You do not have to be a member of our church, or any other church, to take part. All we ask is that you are sincerely seeking God’s truth. After the special prayer of blessing, we pass the bread and wine to one another, along the rows. Some people say ‘the body of Christ’ or ‘the blood of Christ’ as they pass on the bread or wine, but you do not have to say this if you are not comfortable with it. You may take the bread or the wine, both or neither, then simply pass the plate or cup to the next person.
Isn't that welcoming and generous to people, sensitive to what those attending are comfortable with. Non believers who would also feel included.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
Fruit Juice instead of wine? [Frown]

Trouble is with any à la mode thing like that is that it isn't actually as inclusive as it tries to be.

I, for one, would not want to receive non-alcoholic wine at Communion.

Also in these days of worrying about infection fruit juice isn't the best thing to put in a shared cup is it?
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Long Mire:
I wasn't asking about MCC rules of vesture Leo! I was more interested in the practice - what do the pastors or worship leaders wear in worship. The answer seems to be anything.

You were! - my post followed your words: Here though my comments were specifically about the MCC, and the strange vesture involved. Thinking about it later I did wonder what the pastors of MCC in England wear for worship. I think the guy I met may be a loner in his style!
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
Sorry, Leo, I didn't. You've got hung up on a rule / law outlook. What I was wondering was about the PRACTICE of MCC ministers. That is what they actually wear to take services etc. I was NOT asking about any MCC RULES!

Its like the C of E the rules say one thing but the actual PRACTICE can differ greatly from that. In my C of E church the minister wears casual dress to take the service, not often a dog collar even. I know some of the old brigade will cry 'Illegal' 'Shame on him' but we like it, its a good worship service, its relaxed and not stuffy, God is worshipped etc etc. Jesus says you shall be known by your fruits - not how you follow old fashioned rules on dress code.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
Now you are saying that you did NOT say what you DID say.

Your stuff here and about lay celebration is making me wonder 'where you are coming from'.
 
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :
 
If this going to get personal, take it to hell please.

Thanks,

Doublethink
Eccles Host
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
Thanks for that Doublethink. I'm here to discuss MCC worship, not where I may or may not be coming from.

The point I am making here is that I believe the celebrant of Communion - the person that says the central prayer, should not be out dressed by someone else present at the communion. Thats my understanding. But it seems its not MCCs and thats what I am interested to discuss and consider here.

It would seem from my experience of MCC, and what MCC Newcastle write, that actually saying the prayer of communion (the 'eucharistic prayer') is only of equal importance as the collection, or the peace.
 
Posted by beachpsalms (# 4979) on :
 
Grape juice instead of wine is established practice in a number of denominations with temperance movement roots, and is a practice of inclusivity for folks who struggle with alcoholism.

As for germs - wine is safe in a common cup IF the cup is silver, and is wiped between communicants, according to the last Ministry of Health bulletin I read. For juice, the best practice is the trays of wee cups, which is how my congregations do it currently. (We have done common cup intinction, but many of our folks don't like it, and I don't think it's a good idea with H1N1 floating around.)
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Long Mire:
The point I am making here is that I believe the celebrant of Communion - the person that says the central prayer....

The celebrant is s/he who presides over the WHOLE event not just one who says a single prayer. S/he may delegate reading, interceding, even preaching (though this is desirable since the breaking of the word should not be divorced from the breaking of the bread.

To understand eucharistic presidency as saying a few words over bread and wine is to depart from reformed, protestant and catholic ecclesiology and liturgical practice.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by beachpsalms:
Grape juice instead of wine is established practice in a number of denominations with temperance movement roots, and is a practice of inclusivity for folks who struggle with alcoholism.

As for germs - wine is safe in a common cup IF the cup is silver, and is wiped between communicants, according to the last Ministry of Health bulletin I read.

Really?

Scientific advice confirms that the guidance given in 1987 continues to be generally correct. However, it indicates that neither the alcoholic content of wine nor the antiseptic qualities of noble metals will provide any protection against a pandemic flu virus.....it has been established that some bacteria can be transferred to a common cup and survive on its surface for a significant period. A note of caution has also been sounded, suggesting that while the common cup represents a minimal risk for healthy adults it may present a greater risk for those whose immune systems have been compromised. ‘A Report Concerning the Risk of Transmission of Contagion via the Common Cup and Other Liturgical Acts’ Diocese of Toronto ,Anglican Church of Canada, 2003
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Long Mire:
The point I am making here is that I believe the celebrant of Communion - the person that says the central prayer....

The celebrant is s/he who presides over the WHOLE event not just one who says a single prayer. S/he may delegate reading, interceding, even preaching (though this is desirable since the breaking of the word should not be divorced from the breaking of the bread.

To understand eucharistic presidency as saying a few words over bread and wine is to depart from reformed, protestant and catholic ecclesiology and liturgical practice.

Thanks for the lesson Leo [Smile]

The point I make remains, however, for I do not expect the President fully robed to delegate evrything to others, including saying the prayer over the bread and wine and the preaching, but not saying the notices. Thats what happened when I went to a MCC service and that is what I found odd. However, if the eccesiological view is that presidency means simply presiding over what others do then I guess its not so odd to others.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
No - s/he cannot delegate the absolution or the eucharistic prayer, blessing and, arguably the sermon.

For lay people to feature prominently in a quasi-ordained role is to evacuate lay ministry of its true focus i.e. the secular world.

It is somewhat ironic that churches that make a bit issue (rightly) of social justice end up clericalising lay people rather than empowering them for their ministries in the outside world.
 
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :
 
Speaking the truth in Hostly love ON

Long Mire and Leo, persistent sarcasm and sniping violate the 4th commandment. Don't do it - take it to hell. (And yes I will be repeating this warning on the lay communion thread.)

Moreover, the rightness or not of lay communion is not a topic proper to ecclesiantics. The aspects of lay communion proper to ecclesiantics already has its own thread - so use it.

Speaking the truth in Hostly love OFF

Doublethink
Eccles Host
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
First of all, to Doublethink and others who have posted here, I apologise if in the argument I broke the rules. It is just to easy for me to press 'send' without pausing. I apologise.

My thoughts here were about perspectives and foci in worship. My reflection on the MCC service was that the main focus was not on the prayer over the bread and the wine, that was only one focus. Other, equal, foci, were the notices, the collection, the singing (modern but v e r y s l o w!)

This different balance is something I have not encountered in worship in other places. I'm told its basically a Protestant emphasis, whatever that may mean. It is definitely different.

I think a point I'd wish to make is that this is how it appeared to a worshipper, and thois can be different to what is written in the book. So, for example, to repeat my point, when a lay person comes forward and reads the prayer over the bread and juice and another lay person reads a sermon but a robed minister gives out the notices it appears to give undue emphasis on the notices.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
I was thinking earlier about going along to an MCC church in London for worship to see how they do it and see if I like it, but now this thread has gone on I think I'm changing my opinion. They sound a bit off the wall, and cliquey - at least the one described here does.

I realise they are a prot. church - they don't have bishops or the mass. They use fruit juice instead of wine.

But this emphasis on the notices and the collection sounds right whacky to me. One of their websites bats on about 'parent God' and I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in a church that makes me say 'Our Parent which art in heaven.'
 
Posted by RevAndy (# 4017) on :
 
Hi folks,

there has been lots of comments about the worship of Metropolitan Community Churches and these have focused around

inclusive language
eucharistic prayers
vesture of ministers
lay celebration.

I will try and give a little detail of our ecclesiology. I am the pastor of our church in Manchester.

First you should realise that MCC is basically a congregational church. There are very few rules about what we have to do in local churches. Our rules are concerned more with standards local churches, and clergy, have to adhere to. Our polity is more akin to the United Reformed Church than the CofE or RC.

Inclusive Language

Since 1985 MCC has tried to use "inclusive language" in its services and songs. What this means varies from congregation to congregation and from country to country. At its very least it means not using "mankind" to mean "humanity" or "man" to mean "men and women". We are careful not to always use "black" as a synonym for "evil" etc and wouldn't refer to the congregation as "brothers" when women are present!

Most MCCs also try to use inclusive language about God which gets a little more controversial. Some use gender free references to God the Father, others used balanced images. My own congregation in Manchester probably uses "inclusive language" less than we used to and much less than many other MCCs. We use simile more than metaphor "God like a mother you embrace us as your own" "God like a father you run to welcome home the estranged" etc. We tend not to change the words of the creeds or the Lords prayer but will say "for us and for our salvation" instead of "for us men and for our salvation" but I hardly think we are alone there.

As for the version of the Lord's prayer in MCC Manchester referred to in the report of the Mystery Worshipper - it was a song and the words were written for that particular tune. We normally say the Lord's Prayer in either traditional or modern form but don't change "Our Father".

Eucharistic Prayers

MCC celebrates Holy Communion every Sunday. We tend to use non-alcoholic wine in common with many free churches. The practice for how Holy Communion is celebrated and distributed varies from congregation to congregation. Many MCCs have a simple eucharistic prayer which is little more than St Paul's account of the Last Supper from 1 Corinthians. This is the pattern also in many Free and Pentecostal churches. Others, including Manchester, have a more Anglican or Catholic feel with preface, sung Sanctus, Eucharistic prayer and sung Agnus Dei. We collect Eucharistic prayers from many traditions and have some we've written ourselves.

Some MCCs offer a personal prayer to each person receiving Holy Communion. Many find this very moving, others - myself included -find it rather irritating. Some MCCs pass the elements around the congregation in Free Church style, others distribute Holy Communion in Anglican or CofE style. It's about the preference and tradition of the congregation concerned.

Vesture

Many, but not all, MCC ministers vest when leading worship. The normal attire is alb and stole but sometimes a preaching gown might be worn or simply a suit and clerical collar or more casual attire and a clerical collar. An alb, chasuble and stole might also be worn if the pastor is celebrating Holy Communion.

Lay Celebration

For many years MCC has allowed the Lay Celebration of Holy Communion believing that all the baptised share in the priesthood of all believers. Lay people who wish to celebrate are trained and authorised to do so by their local church. Pastors in MCC are responsible for teaching and spiritual leadership of a congregation and are "professional ministers of the Word and Sacrament" but, as in many Free Churches lay people can also be ministers of Word and Sacrament.

As for our distinctive contribution to the Wider Church I think it might be too early to say - we were only founded in 1968. My best guess is that our contribution is mostly around providing a place for lgbt folks to worship and engage in a lively expression of church (mainly from an evangelical background) without having to worry or fight battles around sexuality. In Manchester we don't really talk much about sexuality but try and get on with being a church committed to helping people grow as disciples of the Lord Jesus.

Hope this helps.

Andy
www.mccmanchester.co.uk
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
Ah well! There's a long post from the 'horse's mouth' as it were. Good to hear from that MCC Church pastor. From what is being said MCC church seems basicaly a Evangelical Free / Protestant Church, despite how the pastors may dress up!

But this pastor for me leaves a load of questions unanswered I think, like why the collection and notices are given equal value to communion. Why the pastor robes even when not doing communion. Why the pastor has to do the notices even when she isnt doing the communion.

It seems from whats being said that the MCC church just simply pick and choose from other churches what to do and don't have much of an ID themselves. It seems a lot depends on what the pastor wants and thats not very congregational to me. It must make it difficult to move from one MCC church set up to another.
 
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by RevAndy:
Hi folks,

there has been lots of comments about the worship of Metropolitan Community Churches and these have focused around

inclusive language
eucharistic prayers
vesture of ministers
lay celebration.

I will try and give a little detail of our ecclesiology. I am the pastor of our church in Manchester.

Welcome to the ship [Smile] Do feel free to post on the introductions thread in All Saints, and have a ramble around the boards.

Very clear outline of your church practice. How big are you as a denomination in the UK ? My impression had been the MCC was a biggish movement in the USA.
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
Yes Hi Pastor Andy!

It is good to have your comments.

It would be good to have you join in more in this thread.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Long Mire:
Yes Hi Pastor Andy!

It is good to have your comments.

It would be good to have you join in more in this thread.

Yes, welcome aboard.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
quote:
Very clear outline of your church practice. How big are you as a denomination in the UK ?
Clear, perhaps, but it also showed that the churches of the MCC church just do as they please and their seems no consistency in it. In this they seem like the Open Episcopal Church or the Ecumenical Catholic Church. I suspect they are very similar in ethos to these groups.

How big in the UK? It would be good to have an answer to that - but they only seem to have about 10 or 12 churches and membership seems to me from there websites to be about 6 - 30. So, giving the benefit of saying 30 in all there churches - makes 300 - 400 people in total, i.e. the size of a single large church in the C of E, or an average size for an RC church.

Having said all that fringe stuff can be very interesting I think, and I have been interested in these tiny breakaway groups.
 
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Laetare:
quote:
Very clear outline of your church practice. How big are you as a denomination in the UK ?
Clear, perhaps, but it also showed that the churches of the MCC church just do as they please and their seems no consistency in it. In this they seem like the Open Episcopal Church or the Ecumenical Catholic Church. I suspect they are very similar in ethos to these groups.

Well, if they are congrationalist the consistency maybe in how they choose what to do, rather than what it is that they do.
 
Posted by Amiyah (# 11989) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Laetare:
Ah well! There's a long post from the 'horse's mouth' as it were. Good to hear from that MCC Church pastor. From what is being said MCC church seems basicaly a Evangelical Free / Protestant Church, despite how the pastors may dress up!

Laetere, sorry to dole out unsolicited advice but I would urge you, like some other people on this thread, to go along to an MCC service as a visitor and as a one-time-only experiment and see what you think about it. You seem to be really fascinated by the MCC, so why risk missing out on something from which you might learn and gain something, just on the basis of the answers to the questions you've had on this thread (on which, incidentally, several people have enthused about their experiences of MCC churches). At the very least you might satisfy your curiosity. They won't steal you and try to make you convert to MCCism, you can safely return to your usual church the week after!

My girlfriend and I are both Anglicans (since childhood in my girlfriend's case) and we've been to two MCC services in Manchester, including one yesterday - hi Andy, how nice to see you here, thanks very much for your really enlightening post.

To us, the MCC in Manchester seems like a very warm and loving community church. The worship moved both of us yesterday and the preaching was engaging.

quote:
But this pastor for me leaves a load of questions unanswered I think, like why the collection and notices are given equal value to communion. Why the pastor robes even when not doing communion. Why the pastor has to do the notices even when she isnt doing the communion.
In relation to your first question here (in my opinion, fwiw which is probably not much as I've visited one MCC church twice), at the two services I went to, I wouldn't say that the collection and notices were given 'equal value' to communion. I am not sure how you can tell exactly how much value is given to each part of a service in any event. This is a slightly bizarre thing to discuss. Communion took longer than the collection and a lot longer than the notices, if that is any indication of its value. Which it isn't! If it is just a subjective question of how valuable the different things feel to worshippers, I can only answer for this worshipper, and Communion felt to me of profound importance, in an entirely different sense from the obvious practical necessity of the collection and notices.
In relation to your second and third questions, I have no idea and to me, it doesn't matter, as long as there is nothing sinister behind these things which really and truly I'm sure there isn't.

quote:
It seems from whats being said that the MCC church just simply pick and choose from other churches what to do and don't have much of an ID themselves. It seems a lot depends on what the pastor wants and thats not very congregational to me. It must make it difficult to move from one MCC church set up to another.
How have you drawn the conclusion that 'a lot depends on what the pastor wants' and that the congregation don't tend to contribute to decisions about the pattern of worship?

Also, I don't think you can infer from the fact that MCC churches don't have a common liturgy that they don't have 'much of an identity' or that any particular MCC church doesn't have much of an identity. Why not go to one of the three MCCs in the city where you live and see if it feels like it has one?
 
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Laetare:
quote:
Very clear outline of your church practice. How big are you as a denomination in the UK ?
...

How big in the UK? It would be good to have an answer to that - but they only seem to have about 10 or 12 churches and membership seems to me from there websites to be about 6 - 30. So, giving the benefit of saying 30 in all there churches - makes 300 - 400 people in total, i.e. the size of a single large church in the C of E, or an average size for an RC church.

Having said all that fringe stuff can be very interesting I think, and I have been interested in these tiny breakaway groups.

Interestingly, that is about, or maybe only slightly less than, the sorts of sizes that some scholars are suggesting the churches to which Paul wrote were. If the MCCs have the impact on history over the next two millenia that Paul's churches had over the last two, things could be most enlightening!
 
Posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras (# 11274) on :
 
Laetare, I think it's really specious to compare the MCC to the vagantes groups you've named: the Open Episcopal Church and the Ecumenical Catholic Church. The MCC in America is a well-established denomination that has an important ministry to its constituency. It's understandable that it would be small in the UK, due to a number of factors that have to do with the overall state of Christianity in the UK and the role of the CoE as a body that can at least ambivalently accomodate many gay laity and quite a few gay clergy. In the USA I suspect that most MCC members came out of various evangelical free churches, since if one if an Episcopalian or a member of many of the larger mainline protestant denominations there's little need to leave your native denomination for the MCC (though gay persons may certainly feel a need to migrate to a maximally gay-friendly congregation within their own denominations -- at least outside the most conservative areas of the country there will usually be such welcoming congregations pretty readily available if not ubiquitous).
 
Posted by RevAndy (# 4017) on :
 
Ah, more questions.....

thanks for the welcome folks....

Size Matters......

We have around 230 recognised congregations in the world and 20 or so church plants. In the UK we have congregations in

Glasgow (Church Plant)
Edinburgh
Newcastle
Manchester
Birmingham
Bath,
North, South and East London
Torbay
Dorchester
Bournemouth,
Brighton.

So we are small.

For some reason Laetare infers we are a "breakaway" group like the Open Episcopal Church. We're not, other than the sense that any Protestant Church is a breakaway from the RC!

Our roots are in Pentecostalism in America but we moved beyond those roots some time ago. Unlike the Open Episcopal Church we thoroughly train our clergy who must have a degree in theology and do an array of practical ministerial courses after this. The process for training takes around two years after the degree and is based in both academic study and practical work. I think I explained in my first post that our polity is similar to the URC or the Congregational Federation.

As for what's more important in a service......we a church of Word and Sacrament and try to give equal prominence in our worship to both sermon and Holy Communion. Not all pastors robe, I do.

We tend to attract people who wish to explore Christianity in a church where they won't be discriminated against and a growing number of our congregation are new to the Christian faith - including some who have converted from Islam. Those who come to us from Christian backgrounds come from two main groups - Catholics and Evangelicals, as these are the two traditions which are often most antagonistic to lgbt people.

High Church Anglicans seem to have the most problems with us:)

best wishes

Andy
www.mccmanchester.co.uk
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
As a 'High Church Anglican' myself (though I prefer 'anglo-catholic as a label) I am a strong supporter of MCC. In the past, when it was new to our area, I supported it by occasional attendance and by financial giving (despite my having hang ups about lay celebration, non-alcoholic wine and the style of music), partly out of shame for the way in which the Church of England treats LGBTs.

My church hosts the local LGCM group so we had a bit of imput when someone from MCC was investigating the viability of forming a church here. He decided that, in the light of our inclusive policy, he would start a church in the next, very close, city instead.

A friend of mine has been doing some courses by correspondence at ?Samaritan College? - a theolgy graduate myself, I am very impressed by its standards and syllabus. Whoever compared MCC to those cranky churches like the Open Episcopal and the Ecumenical Catholic doesn't realise this. This is why MCC is a full member of many 'Churches Together in...' groups whereas the two cranky ones aren't.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
Ah I see I'd not realised MCC was a breakaway group from Pentecostalists, thats interestinmg as speaking in tongues and other pentecostal ministries havent been mentioned yet in the MCC set up.

Yes, I take the point about visiting. But as I've said before its OK to discuss and question and find out and puzzle over things ghere, aint it, I mean thats part of why Ecclesiantics is here is nt it?

The Pastor wrote

quote:
we a church of Word and Sacrament and try to give equal prominence in our worship to both sermon and Holy Communion.
I thought 'Word' when folk talked of Word and Sacrament was the Bible, not the sermon [Biased]

The thing about Notices, Collection and Communion having equal value came from above when a guy wrote:

quote:
MCC Newcastle write, that actually saying the prayer of communion (the 'eucharistic prayer') is only of equal importance as the collection, or the peace.
Now that sort of thing says something about an outlook on Communion and its part of MCC isnt it.

I'm also very interested in the gay blessings liturgy used in MCC, that must be pretty unique to them.
 
Posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras (# 11274) on :
 
Laetare, I really would suggest you quit thinking of the MCC in terms of being a "break-away". The minister who was instrumental in founding the denomination, the Revd Troy Perry, had been a minister in an American pentecostalist denomination. However, I don't think anyone has thought of the MCC in terms of being a break-away from anything for a long time now, if indeed it ever really was seen in that light. It would be more accurate to see the MCC as falling pretty squarely within the congregationalist free church tradition. They aren't even particularly unique amongst such groups in terms of observing the Lord's Supper on a weekly basis -- in North America both the Churches of Christ (not to be confused with the United Church of Christ) and the Disciples of Christ are examples of such denominations.
 
Posted by CorgiGreta (# 443) on :
 
If I am not mistaken, the pentecostal church with which Troy Perry was originally affiliated observes the Lord's Supper every Sunday. Troy was simply continuing the practice when he founded the MCC.

Greta
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
LSK said:

quote:
Laetare, I really would suggest you quit thinking of the MCC in terms of being a "break-away".
OK not breakaway. But growing out of. I heard a sermon the other day and got a copy of it and the priest quoted:

quote:
Look to the rock from which you were hewn,
And to the hole of the pit from which you were dug.

Its from Isiaih in the Old Testament.

Thats what I was more meaning in relation to the MCC church and Pentecostals. The MCC church grows from Pentecostals and so there is bound to be bits theyve taken from their parent church and as pentecostals are about speaking in tongues and such I'm sure the MCC church have a part for that too.

The pastor says:
quote:
we thoroughly train our clergy who must have a degree in theology
Thats a very Prot. thing to say isn't it? Saying you must pass theology degree to be a minister. Good job some of the holy saints weren't in Prot. churches!

In this year of the priest think of the patron saint of priests: see here.

"his knowledge was extremely limited, being confined to a little arithmetic, history, and geography, and he found learning, especially the study of Latin, excessively difficult."

Not much hope for him in the ministry of Prot. churches like the MCC church and others!

Now one thing the MCC church seems to do that I dont think other churches do is do whatever communion worship you like on a Sunday, with no fixed liturgy and no dress code for the people who take part. (I say the people who take part cos it seems to me the minister is like all the laity - cos he has no special liturgy function).
On top of that the majority of the people will be LGBT.

That with there Pentecostal prot. flavour is maybe what is special about the MCC church worship, to answer a earleir question. (Asked by me!)
 
Posted by toaster (# 14811) on :
 
Also, in reading the link to the MCC Newcastle website which is where this stuff about the collection having equal importance as communion came from, this is from a document which seeks to explain the different parts of the service, for those who possibly may never have set foot in a church before (where the things we do are not always obvious). I don't think it says anywhere that these were listed in order of priority. It's a guide to what happens for those who are new, not a long theological discourse for theologians.

The notices are just another part of the service, it may be that the person who knows most about the events reads them out so that they can explain them but does it really matter so much what that person is wearing?

I'd have thought that if a similar discussion were held about an Anglican service by non-Anglicans you could come up with some pretty weird practices which might not make sense, or be in the books, but which aren't a big deal, either to you as a visitor, or to the congregation you visited.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
quote:
The notices are just another part of the service, it may be that the person who knows most about the events reads them out so that they can explain them but does it really matter so much what that person is wearing?
I got the point made before about this as being that the guy at the Manchester MCC church who was all tatted up did nothing except read the notices, and people in ordinary dress did everything else.

I have to say if I'd been there I'd have thought that as very odd, and seeming to say you had to dress up to do the notices.

Maybe in a church where all are welcome (and a good thing that is too) those who want to dress up like priests can do so and be given a bit to do - there's inclusivity for you [Biased]

I bet some of the folk who go dress up in a big variety of ways, and more varied than in the usual C of E set upo, lol.
 
Posted by toaster (# 14811) on :
 
Not everyone in MCC is from a Pentecostal background though. Since each congregation is different, so the influences and the rocks from which the services (and individuals within the church) are hewn vary.
 
Posted by toaster (# 14811) on :
 
How about services where there is a minister attending but who is not involved in the service? Would one then assume that because they were wearing a dog collar (or perhaps something more elaborate as well) and sitting in the third pew from the front, that you had to wear a dog collar and be ordained to sit in the third pew from the front? I just don't see the big deal.
 
Posted by Hermeneut (# 11066) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by toaster:
Not everyone in MCC is from a Pentecostal background though. Since each congregation is different, so the influences and the rocks from which the services (and individuals within the church) are hewn vary.

Although the adaptivity to local exploration and experience has - perhaps - a charismatic feel that is concordant with pentecostal roots?

I have often wondered if the charismatic movement is, uniquely, the one tradition that most naturally lends authority to innovation and variety? Seeing MCC practise as sitting within that tradition seems to make sense...?

[BUT: I am no expert on charismatic / pentecostal churches, so please do forgive me if the comments above are obtuse...]

[x-posted, so to add: I agree that it's no big deal about dress. In my 'home' Anglican shack, visiting ministers usually dress in their clericals as they feel appropriate].

[ 07. September 2009, 22:23: Message edited by: Hermeneut ]
 
Posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras (# 11274) on :
 
In terms of the matter of scholarly preparation for Holy Orders, let me remind you, Laetare, that it was once said of the CoE clergy that "the learning of the English clergy stupifies the world".

This thread has been going on for a long time now and TBH, Laetare, the relentlessly nagging tone of your posts - trying to find something grievously wrong with the MCC it would seem - has been annoying me almost from the beginning.

[ 07. September 2009, 23:38: Message edited by: Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras ]
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Laetare:
The pastor says:
quote:
we thoroughly train our clergy who must have a degree in theology
Thats a very Prot. thing to say isn't it? Saying you must pass theology degree to be a minister.
Are you really suggesting that Roman Catholic and Orthodox priests don't have to have theology degrees?
 
Posted by Cyprian (# 5638) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mamacita:
quote:
Originally posted by Laetare:
The pastor says:
quote:
we thoroughly train our clergy who must have a degree in theology
Thats a very Prot. thing to say isn't it? Saying you must pass theology degree to be a minister.
Are you really suggesting that Roman Catholic and Orthodox priests don't have to have theology degrees?
If that's what he's suggetsing, then he's right, at least in the latter case, and certainly as recently as a half century ago, there was the sacerdos simplex in the Catholic church. I don't know whether it is now required for a Catholic bishop to insist on a degree before priestly ordination but it would seem to be the norm.

I think the point that Laetare was making is that, in a Catholic understanding, the nature of priesthood doesn't have any relation to academic ability or qualification. It comes through ordination, which is understood as a mystical conferring of a charisma for exercise within the church. Theological education is desirable in most cases because of the practical work of the priest but it is by no means essential to the nature of priesthood. This can be seen from the Catholic sacerdox simplex of former times, where a priest who was not considered to have the necessary book-learnin' would be ordained but not permitted to preach or hear confessions. It is also in evidence in the Greek practice of granting the palitza, (a vestment proper to the bishop, but often granted to priests as a sign of honour after some particular notable service to the people of God), to all priests who are permitted to preach and hear confessions, in order to make them easily distinguishable from those priests who do not have the pastoral and academic training for those roles. The Greek church started doing that under Ottoman persecution, when training priests was often difficult, so many were simply taught the services and ordained.

Churches with a more reformed understanding tend not to have the same understanding of priesthood. There often isn't a distinctive priesthood to which there is sacramental ordination but there is a pastoral, educational, and leading ministry to which a person is called, often by the local congregation, and for which the person receives the necessary training and preparation. Some churches still refer to ordination while others prefer the term commissioning or something similar. Many from reformed or protestant traditions would perhaps not use the word priest to refer to this person. These differences in terminology and practice all stem from differences in understanding.

RevAndy (good to see you posting again, Andy! [Smile] I hope you're well) has explained the MCC's understanding:

quote:
For many years MCC has allowed the Lay Celebration of Holy Communion believing that all the baptised share in the priesthood of all believers. Lay people who wish to celebrate are trained and authorised to do so by their local church. Pastors in MCC are responsible for teaching and spiritual leadership of a congregation and are "professional ministers of the Word and Sacrament" but, as in many Free Churches lay people can also be ministers of Word and Sacrament.

So, while I would distance myself from the disparaging tone, I don't think the substance of what Laetare said was inaccurate.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Laetare:
I thought 'Word' when folk talked of Word and Sacrament was the Bible, not the sermon [Biased]

The sermon is 'the breaking of the word'; the sacrament includes the breaking of the bread.
 
Posted by beachpsalms (# 4979) on :
 
Dear Lord.

Rev Andy's explanations affirm my own experiences that MCC and my own denomination (United Church of Canada) are similar in many ways. Certainly the worship is familiar: both in liturgical form and congregational diversity.

I had an MCC classmate in theology school, and know a few clergy who have moved between MCC and UCCan. In Ontario many congregations are on the smallish side, with the big Toronto congregation who has their own building (a former United church).

And while their/own liturgies may not be set, we are both still liturgical churches (in my opinion). I was thoroughly entertained at my local ministerial meeting last spring, when I brought a fairly simple liturgical worship to the table, and only the Lutherans and United church clergy managed to follow the highlighted text. (Hightlighted! Honestly! And my colleagues still struggled)

In some churches gowning is simply not standard across the board. When I'm sharing leadership with someone, I try and have a conversation about whether we're wearing albs/geneva gowns/collars/"regular" clothes... But honestly, it's not the most important thing in the world to me. Perhaps you'd find it jarring to come to my rural church, with our grape juice and little cups, and clergy woman in capris and sandals and a large tattoo.

However, when I get the odd Sunday off in Toronto, I like to go to MCC to be reminded that God loves me just as I am, without hiding anything. I sometimes run into other United church folks there. The flexibility that seems to bother some feels like home to me.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
Thank you, Cyprian. A very interesting and helpful post.
 
Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :
 
Actually having at least a degree is not necessarily a protestant stance. In the URC they have to have at least two years training.

I am not sure how many do degree courses for that training but there has always been those who haven't. Initially in England because non-conformists could not get degrees, you HAD to be Anglican or at a push go up to Scotland or onto the continent. Later because for some people it is simply inappropriate, e.g. they'd not fulfil the academic entry requirements, the investment by the denomination would not bring the return due to age or background favoured other training*. There are no URC, Methodist or Baptist bodies who can award degrees in England. People are required to do some theological training but that might well only be at certificate level.

Jengie

*the classic case would be an already ordained person who which to switch to the URC ministry. The training given would have a heavy emphasis on the Reformed tradition from a very pro-denominational stance. This type of course is incompatible with English University style validation.

[ 08. September 2009, 15:59: Message edited by: Jengie Jon ]
 
Posted by Geneviève (# 9098) on :
 
I have worshipped in an MCC church in the past and they used the BCP as the basis for their liturgy. So ISTM that a variety of forms of worship might be seen....which is the case in TEC as well though we do subscribe to the BCP.
And the clergy vested in alb and stole.

Quite frankly, I see no reason at all to knock the MCC church and a great many reasonso be in its debt. When most mainline churches (except for the stray rebels) were rejecting gays and lesbians--not mention bi or transgendered folks--as unworthy to even be in the same room, the MCC was preaching and acting out the message that all are beloved children of God.

[ 08. September 2009, 16:18: Message edited by: Geneviève ]
 
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Laetare:
Thats a very Prot. thing to say isn't it? Saying you must pass theology degree to be a minister. Good job some of the holy saints weren't in Prot. churches!

(Extract from one of a number of similar posts, not going to quote them all)

Speaking the truth in Hostly love ON

Laetere, I draw your attention to commandment 2, if you stop to look at the posts you're making it should be pretty obvious they are dismissive in tone and language - if you want to take the piss out of 'prot' churches rather than have a meaningful discussion, take it to hell. Eccles will not succeed in becoming an inclusive space if people's traditions are belittled as soon as they arrive.

Speaking the truth in Hostly love OFF

Doublethink
Eccles Host
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
Thanks very much Cyprian for saying what I was thinking but more fully and more kindly.

As I understand it Reformed Protestant churches put more emphasis on learning and degrees than churches of the catholic tradition. Its interesting how many Protestant clergy put there degree initials after their name, thats not something I find many Roman or Anglo or I guess Orthodox clergy doing. I guess its sayoing there authority comes from their study of the Bible more than given by the Church.

Nowm having said that please - I apologise for irritating people on this thread by using too loose language.

I find the subject of Gay church worship very interesting, and thats why I started the chat and why I keep joining in.
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
I wonder if I could raise another area for discussion.

I raised the question of the appropriateness or otherwise of the pastor of the MCC church wearing robes.

Reflecting further on this I think what surprised me was that in an inclusive setting there was such a clear mark of heirachy and authority. I had expected an LGBT church to play down that, in favour of a more inclusive and radical position.

Further to this, I wonder what liturgical arrangements are favoured by MCC gatherings for Communion.

Do the worshippers sit around the table?

Is there specific symbolism which draws together the community?

Mention was made of lighting the AIDS candle. I'm not sure if all MCC groups do that but I don't recall it happening when I attended. If all did it, it could be an act of recognition of worship style within the church of the MCC.

Whatever, many denominations have a 'typical' lay out style (I am aware there can be variety). I wonder what that norm is in MCC.

[ 08. September 2009, 21:44: Message edited by: Long Mire ]
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
In the thread on the Ecumenical Catholic Church Fr Paul of their Parish of the Holy Angels in Portsmouth mentioned same Sex blessings and said:

quote:
The rite used for same-sex weddings is an ammended version of the anglican rite.
That puzzled me a bit. I didn't know that there is a anglican rite of same sex blessings. I'd love to see it if their is one.

And what of the MCC church where do they get that service from. It could be that the ECC and MCC are related, they seem to share a similar outlook, and one worth listening to, I say.
 
Posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras (# 11274) on :
 
Related how? Apart from both being liberal Christian ecclesial communities.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
Related in the sense that they are gay friendly, do gay weddings, have a similar outlook, and so may share ideas and worship practices and resources.

I asked particualrly because I was interested to know about how same sex blessings are done in there churches. That seems a good step forward and worth sharing with us, and learning about.
 
Posted by toaster (# 14811) on :
 
I'll try to answer your questions Long Mire from my own experiences.

In most cases, the pastor at Newcastle usually just wears a dog collar, and, as I said is not always involved in the service. So there aren't necessarily any visible signs of hierarchy. I know we also try as much as possible to have a balance of men and women in visible roles during the service.
When the person celebrating communion first approaches the table for communion they put on a simple stole which they then take off afterwards.

At the moment MCC Newcastle ususally meets in a URC church hall. There is a table and lectern at the front, and several rows of seats set out. We occasionally have services in the main church for special events, and there is ongoing discussion as to whether we should move there permanently (pros and cons for both staying and going).
I know of one other MCC which has a similar layout to this, and most do meet in church buildings. MCC Journey in Birmingham has it's own building, underneath a railway arch, but I don't know about the layout.

There are some pictures on the MCC Newcastle website which might be helpful. The first is a Christmas carol service (I think) in the main church so this is more formal than usual.
The second is a close up of the AIDS candle, which is lit during intercessionary prayers each week. I'm not sure if this is a universal MCC practise either I'm afraid, but the church does have a Global HIV/AIDS ministry, and this has always been a focus of ministry.
The fourth picture down shows the more typical set up, in the church hall, with the celebrant wearing a red stole (the pastor is in the green in the front row).

Again, I'd guess practises in the US, where congregations are larger may vary. And also in smaller congregations - MCC Newcastle used to meet in a small upstairs room in the church they're now in, but as they grew, moved down to the hall.

I'm not sure if there is a specific symbolism which draws the MCC community together, I think it's more the inclusivity and welcome which is common to all. As has been mentioned previously, members come from many different traditions, and none, so opinions on liturgy vary. Some people also attend another church in the mornings (ours is an evening service), which for them might have a different liturgical importance (eg RCC mass).
 
Posted by thousandmillion (# 14524) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
MCC has to be Communion every Sunday.(wafers intincted, reflecting HIV concerns),

WHAT????!!!Even some of the most ultra-conservative/homophobic churches got over this one years ago and recognised that the shared chalice offers no risk of HIV transmission. Shouldn't MCC be leading by example on this?
 
Posted by beachpsalms (# 4979) on :
 
That could be concerns about transmitting germs to members with suppressed immune systems, not transmitting HIV.
 
Posted by Fr Paul (# 15109) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Laetere:
It could be that the ECC and MCC are related, they seem to share a similar outlook, and one worth listening to, I say.

[Code fix & attribution - DT Eccles Host]

[ 11. September 2009, 21:54: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
 
Posted by Fr Paul (# 15109) on :
 
Sorry, I clicked before I was ready! [Confused]
I should have said in the posting about same-sex weddings that I use the Anglican Rite of Marriage - I don't think they have a specific one for same-sex couples. The reason for this is that UECC teaches that all seven of the sacraments are open to everyone, and so the marriage rite is the same for all couples.

Can I also state very clearly that there is no connection between the UECC and the MCC, other than that which exsists between all of us as members of the body of Christ.
Love and blessings.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
Oh thats really nice of you Fr Paul to expalin that. The relationship then between UECC and MCC Church is one of shared aims [Biased] and good aims they are too. It sounds as if UECC is more a Catholic church and MCC church we've heard is more Pentecostal.

Its really good to hear your views and contributions. I was interested to know that you use the Anglican marriage rite with some changes for same sex weddings. Thats interesting.

When you do the weddings do you have any extra ceremonies. I've heard, for example, about some peopl having wedding candles in the ceremony, and some places sharing a drink in the ceremony.

I'm hoping we'll here soon from the MCC church about how they do the same sex weddings as well.
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
No - s/he cannot delegate the absolution or the eucharistic prayer, blessing and, arguably the sermon.

For lay people to feature prominently in a quasi-ordained role is to evacuate lay ministry of its true focus i.e. the secular world.

It is somewhat ironic that churches that make a bit issue (rightly) of social justice end up clericalising lay people rather than empowering them for their ministries in the outside world.

I think in MCC such delegation of who absolves etc. can take place.

However, I agree (and I surprise myself to write this!) with Leo. That the effect of involving laity in the way MCC do tends to clericalising. I suspect the minister in MCC and whoever else is / are the power/s behind the minister's throne, have a grasp on what is to be said and sung in their liturgy far more than in the Anglican Church and the Church of Rome, where a central authority moderates liturgy.

My fear is that it is not in lay appointed authority or church appointed ministry in such cases where liturgical authority lies but rather in a cabal of mates. That was rather confirmed to me when I was informed that the minister and one other person 'the power behind the throne' ruled the roost at the MCC I attended.
 
Posted by Laetare (# 3583) on :
 
But it seems to me that MCC don't have the Mass - they don't want to have the Mass, they don't believe in priests as a special ministry, and so surely anyone can take any of their services if they want them to. If thats so then naturally there will be some in the church that will lead more than others and some will be friendly with the pasta a bit more, and so make a group, maybe even an in crowd group. I've seen it happen in other places.
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
I met someone who used to worship with the MCC up this way and had an interesting conversation. He told me that he had made suggestions about worship, and offered help but had been ignored. He felt there was an 'in' group and he said he found the pastor a bully.

I can see that such groups, with people who often feel hurt and marginalised may have leaders who protect and nurture the vulnerable that attend, and sometimes their lack of experience will risk that manner being bullying in nature.

When such groups have worship which is 'free' and changing it is interesting to observe who actually makes the changes, and whose ideas are listened to. In some cases I suspect such cases can be run tyrannically by a pastor or a small group, and this man's experience of worship at MCC supports this.

A solution would be to allow different sections of the membership to lead at different times, and maybe even give them carte blanche. For example on one occasion worship could be lesbian led.
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
I guess churches like this can suffer from leaders who are big fishes in little ponds.

I'm still a bit doubtful about a church whose origins or atmosphere is defined by sexuality. That does seem to have got priorities a bit odd. Oh dear! I can't quite explain what I mean by this, but inside I know! Maybe someone can try and help me on this. [Smile]

It does seem though that issues of sexuality etc. must colour greatly the worship / liturgy of the MCC Church, and some will find that uncomfortable, or one tracked.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
I know what you mean but an analogy would be the black-led Churches in the UK.

Many Anglican people from Jamaica found that they weren't welcome in English parish churches in the 1960s so they started their own churches or joined small existing ones which grew massively.

Some white people attend these churches because of the lively atmosphere and evangelical preaching but the main appeal is to do with 'race'.
 
Posted by Matariki (# 14380) on :
 
In an ideal world Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered Christians would all feel safe, welcomed and affirmed in a wide range of churches.
Sadly this is not the case and the MCC is a lifeboat for GLBT Christians from accross a range of traditions of worship. I know an independent majority GLBT congregation where worship alternates accross a spectrum over the course of a month from a 'high' celebration of the Eucharist to extempore worship. While messy it honours the spirituality of the whole range of its members. Celebrants and preachers are drawn from sympathetic clergy across a range of denominations.
 
Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eddy:

I'm still a bit doubtful about a church whose origins or atmosphere is defined by sexuality. That does seem to have got priorities a bit odd. Oh dear! I can't quite explain what I mean by this, but inside I know! Maybe someone can try and help me on this. [Smile]

Well... I'd posit that many churches quite clearly declare themselves to be based around heterosexuality. What's sauce for the goose...
 
Posted by Amiyah (# 11989) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eddy:
It does seem though that issues of sexuality etc. must colour greatly the worship / liturgy of the MCC Church, and some will find that uncomfortable, or one tracked.

Look up the thread Eddy. Rev Andy says "In Manchester we don't really talk much about sexuality but try and get on with being a church committed to helping people grow as disciples of the Lord Jesus" and I think that's true. Just because the people gathered are mainly LGBT it doesn't mean that the worship and liturgy are all about the sexuality of the congregation.
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
But thats not what I said.

I was talking about the roots of the MCC church. Its roots are in the LGBT community they say that. Mainstream churches don't advertise and say there roots are in a group defined by its sexuality.

I can see the problem, and know what christians can do to gays. BUT there are many many churches which welcome gays, have gay officers, or LGBT priests ministers or pasters. These are mainstream churches. The Church of England has LGBT friendly places so do Methodists RCs etc.

Has the MCC church actually anything extra / special to offer in worship or liturgy or is it as has been said a bit of a place where big fish like to swim in a small pool.

I don't know and I'm asking. I'm saying what my concern about a LGBT church is. I also think the tension about different beliefs within the church can be good, and better than splitting off.
 
Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on :
 
But - as I said - de facto, most churches are based on the heterosexual orientation. Just because it isn't in their mission statements doesn't make it so!

And finding a dark corner of one of these denominations in which things are fairly tolerant as long as you keep your head down does not - necessarily - improve matters that much.
 
Posted by beachpsalms (# 4979) on :
 
It's a privilege thing... the mainstream churches don't need to declare their roots in heterosexual culture, because that culture is so dominant as to be seen as "normal".
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
DJO said:

"And finding a dark corner of one of these denominations in which things are fairly tolerant as long as you keep your head down does not - necessarily - improve matters that much."

Thats not my experience of the Church of England - its not dark corners that are tolerant - they are quite bright colorful places!

Maybe I need to revisit my discomfort with this MCC church thing. It seems I'm not quite putting my finger on the reason for my discomfort.
 
Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on :
 
Honestly, I do understand it as well. Of course, a church shouldn't have to define itself in terms of its sexuality! Nevertheless, some Christians have come to the conclusion that this is the best way for them to be able to worship God with integrity. I would suggest that, regardless of their precise worship practices, this means that the MCC fulfill a 'gap in the market' if one wishes to be crude...
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eddy:
there are many many churches which welcome gays, have gay officers, or LGBT priests ministers or pasters. These are mainstream churches. The Church of England has LGBT friendly places so do Methodists RCs etc.

Has the MCC church actually anything extra / special to offer in worship or liturgy or is it as has been said a bit of a place where big fish like to swim in a small pool.

There aren't that many LGBT-friendly Anglican churches. In this diocese there are only three and they are in the same city. One of MOTR, the other two are bells and smells. So what do you do if you are evangelical and/or you live several miles out of the city?

MCC offers preaching that resonates with LGBT concerns e.g. see http://www.hrc.org/Scripture (not specifically MCC but many of its contributors are)
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
The point is Leo that there are three LGBT accepting churches in that one city, and how many MCC churches are there?

Nowadays LGBT people are often quite used to travelling for their jollies.

I'd understand MCC church a bit more if they had something special and distinctive to offer in their worship, like RCs have Mass, Methodists hymn singing, Quakers silence etc.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
The MCC is in the next city but this city has a flourishing LGCM group that meets in my church.

However, even though we are signed up to the inclusive Church agenda, there are some in the congregation who do not agree with this and they certainly wouldn't want lots of sermons related to LGBT issues (I have only mentioned the subject three times, as far as I can remember - twice in the wider context of the problems with the Anglican Communion and once to say that I did NOT think David and Jonathan were lovers).

LGBT Christians who are still in a coming out phase need feeding with the word that speaks to them directly, not just a few crumbs from the rest of us.
 
Posted by Fr Cuthbert (# 3953) on :
 
I suspect there are many churches like yours of the sign up to inclusivity but don't talk about it, Leo.
At least the signing up step has been taken.

One hopes that in years to come the necessity for a Metropolitan Community Church to exist will have gone. However, with all breakaway churches they tend to develop as distinct denominations and it is in their self interest to continue to exist. This is especially true of churches with paid clergy - to work towards closure could mean declaring one's self redundant!

I don't know much about the Metropolitan Community Church but I suspect they exist by drawing life from other denominations - hymns, songs, liturgy etc. and indeed members. After all none of its members, i suspect, will be born into that church.

I suspect there will be an emphasis on gender neutral language, and little tradition of their own.
 
Posted by Anglican_Brat (# 12349) on :
 
I was at my local seminary a few weeks ago, and the worship service was led by a MCC minister. The liturgy was standard mainline Protestant, only the minister (who wore just a stole over her plain clothes), sang the Eucharistic Prayer:

God be with you
And also with you

Lift up your hearts
We lift them to God

Let us give thanks to God
It is right to give God thanks and praise.

To my utter dismay, the Institution was jointly said by the ordained minister and a lay woman.
 
Posted by CorgiGreta (# 443) on :
 
I am sure that there are any number of people born into the MCC.

There are members of the MCC who are heterosexual and bisexual. They often breed. Lesbians, with or without male partners, can and do have babies.

In addition, many gay and lesbian parents now adopt, a situation which is akin to cradle membership.

This leads me a question, though. Does the MCC practice infant baptism? In fact, I would be curious as to their baptismal practice generally.
It's too late for me to do reaserch tonight. Perhaps someone has the answer at hand.

Greta

Greta
 
Posted by Think² (# 1984) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
I was at my local seminary a few weeks ago, and the worship service was led by a MCC minister. The liturgy was standard mainline Protestant, only the minister (who wore just a stole over her plain clothes), sang the Eucharistic Prayer:

God be with you
And also with you

Lift up your hearts
We lift them to God

Let us give thanks to God
It is right to give God thanks and praise.

To my utter dismay, the Institution was jointly said by the ordained minister and a lay woman.

Why to your utter dismay ?
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Cuthbert:
I suspect there are many churches like yours of the sign up to inclusivity but don't talk about it, Leo.
At least the signing up step has been taken.

One hopes that in years to come the necessity for a Metropolitan Community Church to exist will have gone. However, with all breakaway churches they tend to develop as distinct denominations and it is in their self interest to continue to exist. This is especially true of churches with paid clergy - to work towards closure could mean declaring one's self redundant!

I don't know much about the Metropolitan Community Church but I suspect they exist by drawing life from other denominations - hymns, songs, liturgy etc. and indeed members. After all none of its members, i suspect, will be born into that church.

I suspect there will be an emphasis on gender neutral language, and little tradition of their own.

The MCC doesn't poach people - it tends to attract people who are so disillusioned with 'mainline' church that they have stopped attending and they go on to find something in MCC that draws them back.I know of people, also, who attend mainline churches but go to MCC in addition, as a sort of 'top us'. This is not unlike some of our young servers who occasionally attend an evangelical independent church for the boost of a large number of similar aged folk or my occasionally attending a solemn mass with all the trimmings.
 
Posted by Anglican_Brat (# 12349) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Think²:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
I was at my local seminary a few weeks ago, and the worship service was led by a MCC minister. The liturgy was standard mainline Protestant, only the minister (who wore just a stole over her plain clothes), sang the Eucharistic Prayer:

God be with you
And also with you

Lift up your hearts
We lift them to God

Let us give thanks to God
It is right to give God thanks and praise.

To my utter dismay, the Institution was jointly said by the ordained minister and a lay woman.

Why to your utter dismay ?
I'm not a fan of lay presidency, and I can only see a possible justification of it if there is no ordained clergy present. If an ordained minister is present, then she should preside over Holy Communion, that is the role of ordained clergy.

I guess I'm too catholic for the MCC.
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
Leo wrote:

" know of people, also, who attend mainline churches but go to MCC in addition, as a sort of 'top us'. This is not unlike some of our young servers who occasionally attend an evangelical independent church for the boost of a large number of similar aged folk or my occasionally attending a solemn mass with all the trimmings."

I can see that, Leo, and I'm grateful for the point myself. LGBT people at times benefit from good safe space. I can see that maybe MCC church worship helps.

But why does it need to be a seperate church to do this. Why a splinter group? Why not a movement within churches or an ecumenical weekday group say like LGCM?

The trouble I'm feeling is that to continue in existence the MCC church has to keep on saying LGBT guys are persecuted by churches so come to us. Thats not actually very friendly to other churches. Its true sometimes but not really in many churches - if people are careful about which they go to.

So I can guess MCC church worship could have a feel of the bunkered in about it.
 
Posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras (# 11274) on :
 
Eddy, instead of hypothesising about the MCC and its worship/worship experience, why don't you just visit an MCC congregation? I've never felt the need to do so myself, but you are clearly fascinated with the MCC. I think that as Anglicans we are pretty advantaged to have accepting, inclusive clergy and congregations, so there tends to be less felt need for something like the MCC. People I have known who were into the MCC or other predominantly gay ecclesial communities had come either from the RCC or from various evangelical, fundamentalist denoms, so you can understand why they might have left those churches for a more accepting place. Unfortunately, not all Anglican dioceses (even provinces) and parishes are inclusive places, so for some people a move to the local array of Anglican parishes isn't going to be a solution and our liturgical traditions may also feel too foreign and odd for some people who've come out of evangelical sects (I know it can be hard to accept that some people don't find liturgical worship and ceremonial attractive, but that's the fact of the matter). So I think there's a place for the MCC.

[ 24. October 2009, 21:46: Message edited by: Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras ]
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
MCC New York has some fantastic ministries.

They seem to have stuff which emphasises the queer message to the Church - like: Bible Study is described as "A queer reading of the Bible incorporating art, videos, debates & books."

Thats what I was expecting MCC worship to be about and to be proud to be. Say "A queer liturgy for LGBT people" but actually from whats being said it sounds at least in England to be a bit in the corner protestant service.
 
Posted by Think² (# 1984) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
quote:
Originally posted by Think²:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
I was at my local seminary a few weeks ago, and the worship service was led by a MCC minister. The liturgy was standard mainline Protestant, only the minister (who wore just a stole over her plain clothes), sang the Eucharistic Prayer:

God be with you
And also with you

Lift up your hearts
We lift them to God

Let us give thanks to God
It is right to give God thanks and praise.

To my utter dismay, the Institution was jointly said by the ordained minister and a lay woman.

Why to your utter dismay ?
I'm not a fan of lay presidency, and I can only see a possible justification of it if there is no ordained clergy present. If an ordained minister is present, then she should preside over Holy Communion, that is the role of ordained clergy.

I guess I'm too catholic for the MCC.

I guess that I thought saying it with the priest meant it wasn't lay presidency - just a bit odd.
 
Posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras (# 11274) on :
 
Eddy, I imagine there is greater diversity of worship styles in the MCC in the States than in the UK. While that might seem self-evident based on the larger population of the US and the fact that the MCC is much better established here, I think the congregational autonomy thing may really be what is at work. Actually I understand that some MCC congos in the US are fairly liturgical and I believe this would be true of the Cathedral of Hope in Dallas, even though it's actually no longer MCC, having left the denom and affiliated with the United Church of Christ. That also brings up the question of baptismal practice again, since the UCC normally practise paedobaptism.

I think there'd be little point in the MCC copying Anglican liturgy and ceremonial, since anyone attracted to Anglican liturgy could usually (though not always or everywhere) find an inclusive Anglican parish.

Perhaps the MCC has also been less successful in the UK due to the greater apathy and contempt toward Christianity by so many in the UK, in contrast to the greater number of believers in the USA.
 
Posted by Amiyah (# 11989) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
Eddy, instead of hypothesising about the MCC and its worship/worship experience, why don't you just visit an MCC congregation?

I couldn't agree more. The current thread would seem to be a remarkably inefficient and profitless way to explore/research the worship of the MCC. Eddy presents hypotheses/makes assertions based on no experience of the church, and lots of people who have actually been to the MCC or at least know something about it post (often) to disagree with that assertion/hypothesis. Just as Eddy can't quite put his finger on what disquiets him about the MCC whilst finding it fascinating, I can't put my finger on why the pattern of this thread is so irritating to me, yet I can't stop reading it.
 
Posted by Wottinger (# 13176) on :
 
Some time ago MCC worshipped in our building on a weekly basis. I attended and preached a few times.

They were friendly and relaxed in worship. I think the style of their gatherings will depend a lot on the pastor, and key leaders. There is no fixed liturgy.

With us they were pretty mainstream in style. Music was very important to them, and seemed to be a significant part of their liturgy preparation. Because of having no fixed liturgy they could draw on a variety of sources - and Iona, Common Worship and one or two others seemed to crop up often.
 
Posted by Fr Cuthbert (# 3953) on :
 
I have been thinking about liturgy, LGBT issues and churches, and the MCC.

It's interesting that MCC has no fixed liturgy or style. Most churches do. Even if there is not a suggested liturgy there are often guidelines, or styles. The fact that MCC draws on other churches so much, and has no definite house style of its own suggests to me it is more a gathering of varied LGBT people for worship than a church in the traditional sense.

This interesting church is very interesting. Here within their gatherings they have differing styles from time to time, reflecting the different origins of the members. It suggests that the LGBT people and others who are members go for something extra to their own churches / denominations which they attend regularly. I can see this and would support this far more than breaking away and setting up a small denomination by itself such as MCC. After all to exist MCC as a denomination would deliberately draw in people from other churches and not encourage attendance or giving to churches other than themselves.

The Auckland church seems more like a movement, which owns to draw from different traditions and welcomes them. Interestingly this Christian Community left MCC because they felt they were being pushed too hard down one approach to church order, and wished to be a freer more open group than MCC.

My current thought is that MCC clearly lacks liturgical identity.

The Auckland church does not claim to be a seperate denomination and understandably encourages clergy of many churches to come and celebrate their liturgy within it.

The difference between the two groups may appear at first subtle but I suspect it is a profound difference.

[ 29. October 2009, 18:39: Message edited by: Fr Cuthbert ]
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
Fr Cuthbert writes
quote:
My current thought is that MCC clearly lacks liturgical identity.
I think thats very true because they seem to vary from church to church as to what they do. They are a congregational style church, led its being said by So if you went from one to another there isnt much except the AIDS candle thing which would identify there worship as being of the same church.

Now I guess some would say that about the C of E, but actually I reckon most C of E use Common Worship and have a hymn book that people know as being C of E.

PS MCC Nottingham is in 'Queens Walk' - makes me wonder what other addresses fit with the church thats in them [Biased]
 
Posted by Oremus (# 13853) on :
 
It makes me wonder why this Auckland gay Church feels the need to have a seperate service why they meet in what is clearly a very "inclusive" church which would surely welcome them to its regular services.
 
Posted by Mark Wuntoo (# 5673) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Oremus:
It makes me wonder why this Auckland gay Church feels the need to have a seperate service why they meet in what is clearly a very "inclusive" church which would surely welcome them to its regular services.

(tangent alert)

I think that's an interesting point. It reminds me of a somewhat similar situation with London's 'black' pentecostal churches. Many were established many years ago and I have no problem with them. But there are still small breakaways that start-up and meet outside of any (black or white) denominational links. In London, many of the 'white' denominations have black congregations where all are welcome. So why the need to start up your own group?
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Because it's more fun being a big fish in yer own small pond, rather than a small fish in someone else's bigger pond?

I cast no nasturtiums........but that is the impression given by some of the leaders of these breakaway groups.

Ian J.
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
I agree with Bishops Finger on this one. Some people move from a bigger church to a smaller one to be a big fish, if you get me.

It does seem from what Longmire wrote earlier that the MCC church he knows about has a group of big fish in its little pond.

Sometimes I think those who failed to become ministers or priests in one church move to another to get what they want.
 
Posted by Mark Wuntoo (# 5673) on :
 
I agree, too. Although there is sometimes the fact that the 'welcoming' church is not welcoming. [Ultra confused]
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
It does seem that the MCC church uses lots of different styles in their worship and activity. This MCC church offers "programs exploring varied paths to the holy."

Hindu Tantra is being taught. The MCC church encourages this way, saying it is "a set of principles, practices, and attitudes that include the mind, heart, and whole body on the path to enlightenment. Far more than a way to improve your sex life, Tantra offers us the potential of experiencing our erotic energy as spiritual "rocket fuel"!"

Its interesting how they connect sex life and spirituality. Perhaps this is a special contribution they are making to the church?
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Hmm. Sounds a bit like our old friends the Agapemonites, Hugh Prince, Smyth-Pigott et al......

....and look what happened to them!

Ian J.
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
Can u say a bit more on that topic Bishop's Finger - what did happen to them [Smile]

It seems in this MCC church set up anything goes and you can wear what you like, do what you like in worship, say what you like, as long as you are gay friendly! (Which I think churches should be, of course)

Maybe theMCC Church could develop along there path and they could become an inter faith gay church, that would be a very interesting sign to offer.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
The Agapemonites all died out........

Here's what Wikipedia has to say (usual disclaimers apply):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agapemonites

Ian J.
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
Thats a interesting group Bishops Finger, you certainly have a wide knowledge. I guess there are groups like that that fade away thru time and it could be some churches of today like the URC Church or MCC church fade away soon.

I was wondering about the MCC church and if they have special Gay Saints or LGBT saints in their Kalendars. I mean like Harvey Milk or so on, or do they just keep a watered down church Kalendar, or maybe not at all as they are mainly protestant in worship and style.
 
Posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras (# 11274) on :
 
I hardly think you can draw any sort of comparison between the MCC and the Agapemonites! I doubt the MCC is going anywhere anytime soon in the USA at least. I could imagine that at some point toward the end of the present century they might merge with the United Church of Christ, which by then may have also been merged with the Disciples of Christ. Or perhaps as United Methodists continue to evolve, the MCC will merge with the UMs (though I doubt it because of their quite different polities; a merger with the UCC would be far more likely). However, until all institutional discrimination against GLBT persons in the USA substantially ends, I think you'll see a continuing MCC presence.

Eddy, I can't get over a sense that you look at the MCC as some sort of freak phenomenon to be studied as a curiosity, rather than as a legitimate Christian church. I'm an Anglican, but I find your tone regarding the MCC offensive.
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
Thats not fair LSK and I'm sorry you think that. As a gay man I wouldnt want MCC church'[s mission to ber devalued. I am interested in them and what Gay christians bring to worship.

I don't patronise them.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
It was I who compared the MCC with the Agapemonites, though I did so with my tongue firmly in my cheek!

Personally, I can see that the MCC (however it organises itself and its liturgy) will probably have a part to play in the life of the Church at large for many years to come......

Ian J.
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
I think thats true BF and thats why I wish they had a bit more liturgy to offer the church and some more distinctiveness. This would help show LGBT have something to give the church. As it is they seem to draw on other folk, and be stuck in a protestant style rut.
 
Posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras (# 11274) on :
 
I'm no lover of the protestant hymn sandwich. Yet I would repudiate the idea that ecclesial communities like the MCC are "stuck in a protestant style rut". It's not a rut for them; it's the way they do church. They didn't develop from a liturgical church tradition but from a very non-liturgical one.
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
LSK you do seem to jump on my posts on this topic.

I admire many protestant style worship - like some of the Iona stuff, or some Reformed stuff in a modern vein. But some, and not all, I reckon is stuck in a rut, just like some Anglican stuff is, just like some RC or Anglo C stuff is.

I ain't read anything here that suggests MCC church have special offering to make in the field of liturgy. They draw on others it seems. Thats OK but it does ometimes I get stuck in a rut.

LGBT folk often have something to contribute to art, literature etc... what to liturgy I ask. MCC church does not provide the answer.
 
Posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras (# 11274) on :
 
One problem,I think, is that in most larger cities the more liturgically and artistically oriented gay folk would go to an Anglican church (or in the USA also to a parish of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America). I'm afraid the cream has already been skimmed off the top by the time the MCC gets its constituency.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
OK, folks, there has been an unpleasant undertone in the last few posts that bears pointing out. This would be a good time to remind everyone that Commandment 5 says "Don't easily offend, don't be easily offended." Mark and inwardly digest that, please.


Eddy, I've reread all 156 posts on this thread and can safely say that at least half a dozen different people have asked you the same question: If you are curious about the MCC church, why don't you pay them a visit? I would have hoped that by now it would be clear to you that this thread is not going to satisfy your curiosity about the MCC. A few people with actual experience of that denomination have helpfully passed through this conversation over the last few months, but they have moved on, and at any rate, even their expertise can't take the place of the direct experience of worship.

And while civil debate is expected in Eccles, I can honestly understand how others can become a bit exasperated at the seeming fruitlessness of this thread.

Finally, your question about whether LGBT folk have a particular contribution to make to liturgy may be one that's worthy of its own thread. Feel free to start one.

Mamacita, Eccles Host

[ 15. December 2009, 05:39: Message edited by: Mamacita ]
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
Thats a really helpful comment Mamacita, thanks. It has made me think about my posts here on the MCC church. I take the point about going along and I am hoping to go to there East London branch sometime over the holiday season. I'll find out worship times and directions and try to get a mate or two to go with me.

But I still am not sure why its necessary to visit a church before you can talk about it and its ways and outlook. There seem plenty of folk her who give opinions but dont go to the churches they go on about. In fact some of the comments are really strong.

If you feel strongly about something it can be difficult to put it in the right words. If I offend on this MCC church discussion sorry.

What intrigues me is that worship forms a church doesnt it - like the Mass or the style is how some people identify a church, but that does not seem to be true for the MCC church. That has made me you see wonder and ask what forms and identifies this church then. I wondered about sexuality, and whether the LGBT make up gives it a special and distinctive feel which shows something to the bigger church.

I do think you see that 'Queer lifestyle' may have something to give to the church, and challenge too, and maybe one area is in liturgy and worship. I need to think more on this one.
 
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on :
 
I was wondering on the Church Calendar thread about MCC and Harvey Milk.

Does anyone know which Calendar the MCC church keeps? I guess its just a simple western one. and does it have its own heroes that it remembers collectively? Or maybe, being a protestant church it doesnt bother with saints.
 
Posted by RevAndy (# 4017) on :
 
Hi folks,

I haven't been following this discussion - life is too short - but we had an email from someone who asked us to contribute again so here goes.

I think the basic inability to comprehend MCC comes from a broadly Anglican background. I've experienced this again and again over my 20 years as an MCC minister and have never quite understood why. Roman Catholics and Protestants generally seem to find it easier to understand us than Anglicans. Maybe there is a PhD thesis there. It's something to do with an attitude about "proper churches" and, presumably "improper" ones.

As I believe I have already said, MCC worship style varies from congregation to congregation and, within our larger churches, from service to service (with a variety of styles offered on a Sunday). We are by no means unique in this; look at the URC. In Manchester we meet in one URC church with a distinctive style best described as "thoughtful Presbyterian" the neighbouring URC - less than a mile away - has a totally different style which I can't quite define but is less structured. Yet they are served by the same minister and are part of the same denomination.

So, to the questions which seem to be exercising some of your minds....

What's distinctive about MCC's worship.

I'm not sure. I'm not sure what's distinctive about Baptist worship (it varies from charismatic evangelical to minister led liberal lectures). I'm not that sure what is distinctive about Anglican worship as in Manchester one can attend "catholic" style CofE which doesn't allow women priests, "catholic" style which does, "pentecostal" style and "liberal" style. (all within a few square miles) They are all Anglican but certainly all don't use the same liturgical resources; indeed the catholic style congregations seem to borrow material from another Communion.

Hallmarks of our worship would be around the shared ministry of clergy and laity, the Eucharist being the main Sunday service, and all being welcomed to receive Holy Communion. I am sure, however, that these hallmarks are common to many denominations.

Many, but not all, MCCs light a candle as an aid to prayer and reflection for people living with or affected by HIV and AIDS, many use gender balanced language about humanity and God (but not all do this about God), many, but not all, offer a personal prayer of blessing at Holy Communion.

There is a "family resemblance" around MCC worship but it's difficult to define and, ultimately, doesn't matter. Unlike other churches we don't really worry too much if we worship in different ways. My own congregation has been described as a blend of "evangelical exuberance" and "catholic order". The describer was an Anglican priest so I am not totally sure what he meant!

Breakaway Church....

Fr Cuthbert is concerned about "breakaway" churches, their long term future and assumes that MCC actively poaches people. He also assumes we don't have biological growth.

There is a point about breakaway churches and I presume that one day the Methodists will return to the Anglicans, and the Anglicans to the Catholics who will, of course, reunite with the Orthodox:)

MCC didn't really break away from anything else. Wesley founded an Anglican society but the "break" happened when he ordained ministers because the bishops wouldn't ordain his people. The CofE doesn't see itself as a "breakaway" church but, being raised as a Catholic, I was taught a different history.......

MCC was founded to offer a church home to all who felt excluded and to reach those the other churches weren't interested in. Our founder, Troy, had been ordained as a Pentecostal minister but had been out of ministry for several years prior to founding the first MCC congregation in LA in 1968. He simply put an advert in a paper and waited to see who showed up - 12 did. Most had church backgrounds but didn't attend their churches anymore because of their sexuality, others were seekers and had not made a Christian commitment.

Growth

We don't poach people, or preach about the unfriendliness of other churches (we don't really need to even if we wanted to!).

We open our doors, advertise through the web, gay press, and pride festivals as well as invite people through personal contact. We welcome those who come along and seek to integrate them into our life and ministry as they return and become regulars.

Some have backgrounds in other Christian churches; many have no real church involvement before MCC, a significant minority in my own congregation have come to faith in the Lord through our ministry either from no faith background or from Islam.

The truth is that often the other Christian churches really help us grow. We saw a lot of people last year come along to us, all over the UK, exasperated by the debate in the Anglican Communion. They may not have been regular worshippers at Anglican churches but were increasingly fed up with the debate about our right to be Christian within that church. Benedict only has to say something silly about us for more people to find us, or other accepting churches, and conclude that working for change in the established churches is not a battle they want to fight.

We do have a small amount of biological growth through same sex parenting, adoption, children from previous relationships and from our heterosexual members. It would be fair to say, however, that we have significantly less children than most other denominations.

To Stay or Go

There has been a little undercurrent about whether it is "right" to found a church around an issue of human sexuality. Leaving aside whether the CofE was founded on issues of Henry VIII's marital difficulties, I don't think it any more odd than founding a church on the basis of a particular view of baptism, of the connection between Church and State or on race. It's a fact of life and whether it's right or wrong is, ultimately, a fruitless question.

There is a debate within the Christian lgbt community about whether we should stay within traditional churches to work for change or whether such work is so difficult, painful and debilitating that it's not worth the struggle (and really why should "we" work to change "your" mind?). Interestingly the current CEO of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement is an MCC pastor.

The debate mirrors that of black people and the foundation of black-led churches. I wonder if those who wonder about the contribution of MCC to the wider Church's liturgical life are also interested in the contribution of the Black Led churches in the UK.

Baptism

Someone asked about our baptismal practice. Like the URC it's varied from congregation to congregation. Many pastors will baptise infants, a few prefer to offer a dedication service. Some MCC pastors will re-baptise a person who requests it; I won't. Increasingly adult baptism (either by pouring or immersion) is offered to those who have come to faith in Christ through our ministry.

Fish and Ponds and Bullying Pastors

MCC attracts all sort of people; occasionally they offer us their, no doubt well thought out, views on our worship. Often they want us to become a mirror of where they have been (but left).

We find it rather rude for a visitor to comment about what they think we do wrong; if I went to a Catholic church and said to the priest that I didn't like those prayers to Our Lady, or went to a Baptist church and said I disagreed with the concept of adult baptism or non-liturgical worship I'd be very politely told to find somewhere else to worship!

It's not happened to us in Manchester for a long time (that isn't an invitation!) but when it happened it always puzzled us that a visitor (invariably one who *knew* what the "right" way to do church was) felt they were entitled to comment and then felt annoyed if we didn't then march to their beat. No doubt that lays us open to accusations of being, as Longmire noted, as being bullies, but we will work hard not to sink under the weight of the disappointment.

Those who offer themselves for training for ordained ministry in MCC have to go through a rigorous selection and training process and we are very wary of those who have been rejected by other communions. The system isn't perfect and we make mistakes.

I hope this, over-long, post helps with some of your questions and perceptions, but I am tempted to think that for some the joy is the questioning not the answers.

Andy Braunston
MCC Manchester
www.mccmanchester.co.uk
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
Your post may be long but it is very informative and echoes my experience as an occasional visitor to MCC.
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
Yes, a long and rather verbose post, yet very informative, but not, for me, in the way intended.

Some curious phrases:

"a broadly Anglican background" meaning?

"The describer was an Anglican priest so I am not totally sure what he meant" Because Anglican priests are always incomprehensible?

One suspects that the MCC minister has problems with Anglicans - me thinks he protesteth too much about Anglicans.

"MCC didn't really break away from anything else." Really - they broke away from mainstream churches and their founder broke away from his Pentecostal church.

"interested in the contribution of the Black Led churches in the UK. " There is far more interest in black led churches and their contribution than there is in churches like MCC. This area has been, and continues to be, well researched. (To name Hollenweger as just one researcher in this area).

"We find it rather rude for a visitor to comment about what they think we do wrong" We the royal (Queen's) we...or is the post the product of more than one person?

Why is it rude for a visitor to comment on what they found uncomfortable or 'wrong'? The Mystery Worshipper project gives positives and negatives about visits. I'd have thought such comments were helpful.

It is sad that MCC seem to base so much on what they are not, rather than a more positive approach. Having said which, the MCC minister does helpfully show the doctrinal and liturgical variety of MCC churches, and shows clearly that MCC liturgy is derivative rather than creative.
 
Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
I also appreciated RevAndy's return to the conversation. A few reactions to LongMire's post, off the top of my head:

quote:
Originally posted by Long Mire:
One suspects that the MCC minister has problems with Anglicans - me thinks he protesteth too much about Anglicans.

I think it's more the situation that RevAndy was responding to questions posed (for the most part) by Anglicans, in an Anglican context.

quote:
"MCC didn't really break away from anything else." Really - they broke away from mainstream churches and their founder broke away from his Pentecostal church.
If I understand it correctly, the distinction is that MCC did not have its roots in a wholesale break (with entire congregations or groups of people who were already associated) from a previous denomination. Myriad people coming together from different backgrounds is quite a different phenomenon from, say, Wesley's followers moving from the C of E to Methodism, or (in a more modern context) a diocese deciding to realign itself with the Southern Cone. Those would be more accurately described as breakaways.

quote:
Why is it rude for a visitor to comment on what they found uncomfortable or 'wrong'?
I suppose this depends entirely on the visitor and the tone and nature of the comment. Personally, I would find a comment like "I couldn't hear the lectors" or "no one greeted me" to be constructive feedback; "I don't like the liturgy" -- not so much. It seemed to me that RevAndy had a particular experience or experiences in mind when writing the post above.

quote:
It is sad that MCC seem to base so much on what they are not, rather than a more positive approach.
Again, the poster was writing specifically in response to several questions and statements from members of this community (not all of which were especially friendly).

quote:
Having said which, the MCC minister does helpfully show the doctrinal and liturgical variety of MCC churches...
Yes, which I think we agree was very helpful.

quote:
... and shows clearly that MCC liturgy is derivative rather than creative.
Well, I think one could make a case that most liturgy is derivative, but that's probably a topic for another thread.
 
Posted by Long Mire (# 13780) on :
 
I've been thinking further on this interesting topic and the discussion so far.

From what is being said MCC is not particularly a liturgical church. By this I mean it has no fixed liturgy and local congregations can do as they please.

Nor, would it seem to be a church united in its doctrines. There is no unifying oversight doctrinally it would seem. By this I mean in methodism or Anglicanism or even in Orthodoxy or catholicism there is an overseeing body which guards doctrines. (And I know, of course, that local churches do all sorts of things!)

Yes, MCC lies in its teaching within Protestantism, but actually its teachings also appear to vary from congregation to congregation. Some churches will re-baptise. Others will not. Some perform blessings of three-somes, others do not. Many have new age style teachings, some move towards a more traditional protestant doctrinal position. Some profess the uniqueness of Christ, others do not.

This leads me to think that the uniting factor is gay or lesbian people wanting to meet in a relaxed religious or quasi religious setting, where a variety of beliefs and practices can be held together. I can see the merit in this. Whether or not it is 'church' as that term has been traditionally know is, perhaps, open to question. I would see it more as a movement. This explains the 'clubby' nature of MCC as I experienced it.

Given this fringe nature of MCC the question of liturgy is especially interesting, if one pursues it from the line - What have mainstream churches to learn from fringe liturgies or gatherings of christians and others on the boundaries. Or to be more specific, what have mainstream churches to learn, in terms of liturgy, from MCC? It would be interesting to have comment on this question from MCC memebrs.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
It's not so much that MCC 'broke away' from any church. More that people were 'kicked out' or, at least, made to feel uncomfortable in 'mainline' denominations.
 


© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0