Ship of Fools: Knees-up in Canterbury

Thread: Knees-up in Canterbury Board: Ecclesiantics / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=008455

Posted by american piskie (# 593) on :

I do hope that a Mystery Worshipper is to tell us all about it.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

[Confused]

Posted by Ian Climacus (# 944) on :

"it" is a link.

"the Church Service to celebrate the Tercentenary of the formation of English Freemasonry"

Or did I misunderstand your [Confused]

Posted by american piskie (# 593) on :

I only ask because I see some of Our Ecumenical Partners take this as one more sign that the C of E is irredeemably lost.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

I do apologise - I simply didn't see that 'it' was in red!

I'll have a look at the link later, but for the time being, I thought English Freemasonry went back much further than 300 years....

[Hot and Hormonal]

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

....and a lot of them were probably involved in building Canterbury Cathedral.

That said, I'm never quite at ease with the idea of Freemasonry and Christianity, though I can't really define why.

Wasn't there a thread about this subject recently? The service might well be worth MWing, but I suspect one would need to be Mason (and therefore perhaps not entirely unbiased) to get in.

IJ

Posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop (# 10745) on :

In my experience, the secrecy within Freemasonery, is not always that secret.

I am a non-mason and I cannot say whether admission into the Cathedral for the service, is open, or closed.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

The Cathedral website indicates that the Nave & Quire are closed 'for a private service' until 1pm, with only the crypt being open to visitors.

Masonic secrecy rules, presumably, at 'the heart of the worldwide Anglican Communion'.

[Disappointed]

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
[QB] ....and a lot of them were probably involved in building Canterbury Cathedral.

Not to mention a certain number of them sitting as Supreme Governor.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by american piskie:
I only ask because I see some of Our Ecumenical Partners take this as one more sign that the C of E is irredeemably lost.

As the CoE has been holding all sorts of services related to Masonry since forever and as many prelates over the centuries have been Masons, I suspect that as irredeemably-lost indicators go, this one registered a long time ago or not at all. And perhaps I forgot to mention that most of the Supreme Governors of the CoE have been Masons.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
The Cathedral website indicates that the Nave & Quire are closed 'for a private service' until 1pm, with only the crypt being open to visitors.

Masonic secrecy rules, presumably, at 'the heart of the worldwide Anglican Communion'.

IJ

Are private, ticket-only services all that uncommon at cathedrals? My old school used to have its annual Commemoration and Carol Services in Canterbury Cathedral, and I can't remember whether these were ticket-only events or not. It wouldn't surprise me if they were, or at least the special centenary Commemoration we had there in '81.

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :

The last Archbishop of Canterbury to have been a freemason was Fisher; AFAIK the only current bishop 'on the square' is Jonathan Baker.

Although initiated into a 'navy' lodge after WWI George VI was not an enthusiastic member of the craft and Prince Philip has not attended a lodge since his initiation in 1952.

None of the Queen's sons are masons.

Posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop (# 10745) on :

quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
The last Archbishop of Canterbury to have been a freemason was Fisher; AFAIK the only current bishop 'on the square' is Jonathan Baker.

Although initiated into a 'navy' lodge after WWI George VI was not an enthusiastic member of the craft and Prince Philip has not attended a lodge since his initiation in 1952.

None of the Queen's sons are masons.

+Jonathan Baker - not any more. He gave up Freemasonery on becoming a bishop.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

While I gather that Prince Charles is not a mason, here is a lodge named after him, should he decided to join up.

Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
The Cathedral website indicates that the Nave & Quire are closed 'for a private service' until 1pm, with only the crypt being open to visitors.

Masonic secrecy rules, presumably, at 'the heart of the worldwide Anglican Communion'.

IJ
Are private, ticket-only services all that uncommon at cathedrals? My old school used to have its annual Commemoration and Carol Services in Canterbury Cathedral, and I can't remember whether these were ticket-only events or not. It wouldn't surprise me if they were, or at least the special centenary Commemoration we had there in '81.

On a slight tangent, a jaunt up to town this weekend took me to the early said HC at one of the more high profile churches on the fringes of clubland this morning. I was a little disconcerted to see handwritten signs on the end of some pews reading "VIP zone".... I couldn't help thinking that such a zone was probably better reserved (pun intended) for the altar.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Sounds like a new version of the old pew-rents system...

(The free seats for the poor and unwashed presumably being in the furthest aisles, the remotest gallery - perhaps not, in case they are tempted to expectorate onto the Gentry - or at the very back of the church.)

[Disappointed]

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Sounds like a new version of the old pew-rents system...

(The free seats for the poor and unwashed presumably being in the furthest aisles, the remotest gallery - perhaps not, in case they are tempted to expectorate onto the Gentry - or at the very back of the church.)

IJ

I'm not so sure.

I've been to a number of ticket admission services over the years (including the last Canadian gathering of the Burma Star Association), state funerals, and other stuff. Knowing a bit about the organizing of things, it is often just a matter of: a) crowd control, and b) getting people to focus on attending (if they need to get a ticket, they will be more likely to turn up). As well, certain categories of VIP get security coverage (even the most obscure prince will have a detail) and ticket admission gives much comfort to those concerned with this stuff.

I tend to feel that it's not as necessary as they think, but I'm a bit bolshie and spontaneous in such matters.

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :

IME ticketing for any event in a church can be a potential minefield.

One of the things churches need to do is check whether or not they have been in receipt of charitable funds that places restrictions on ticketing. One church where I played in my youth had a plaque in the vestry from a charity that specifically stated that funds had been given to enlarge the church with wording along the lines of "so that all services can be free of any admission charge or other restriction including pew rent".

Posted by Rosa Gallica officinalis (# 3886) on :

Ticketing admission doesn't necessarily mean that payment is required. It simply enables people who plan to go to something likely to be over subscribed to get a ticket which guarantees them a seat, and saves turning up queuing and getting sent home because it's full.

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

The difficulty with free tickets is that, not having paid anything, ticket-holders don't always bother to come. That's OK if you have a "stand-by" system in operation for those who are prepared to "take a chance" on the day, not so good if you've told potential punters to stay away - and then end up with lots of empty seats.

FWIW some local Councils have ticketed, but free, car parks. That sounds silly; but it means that they can monitor the length of vehicles' stays, with penalties for exceeding the time permitted.

[ 23. February 2017, 16:48: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Gallica officinalis:
Ticketing admission doesn't necessarily mean that payment is required. It simply enables people who plan to go to something likely to be over subscribed to get a ticket which guarantees them a seat, and saves turning up queuing and getting sent home because it's full.

That's been my experience with ticketed church services. The last couple of times we've consecrated a Bishop, for example, tickets were divided among all the parishes in the Diocese so that the people who live nearest the Cathedral wouldn't get all the seats and the people driving several hours wouldn't be left out. Shortly before the service any empty seats were made available first-come-first-served. There was absolutely no money involved.

Posted by Al Eluia (# 864) on :

I'm surprised no one has already posted this: Monty Python Mason sketch

We had a now-deceased bishop whose first job out of seminary was, IIRC, in Nevada (in the early 50s). He was forced out by parishioners who were upset that he wouldn't become a Mason.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0