Rogation and Ember days

I hadn't posted today's daily office more than five minutes before I got a message asking, "What on earth are 'Rogation' days?"

Rogation Days (Latin rogare - 'to ask') are for many of us in the Church of England part of the old order of things, especially if you're not in a rurally blessed place, as they are days when fields are blessed and God's mercy is called upon all creation ask we get out there and 'ask' God.

I remember, as a choirboy, walking the boundaries of the parish and fields being blessed (with beer for the adults afterwards) as we 'beat the bounds'. There are some churches who still do this but it's business and indusry rather than agriculture that is the focus of the prayer for many. One of the odd bits of the 'beating the bounds' thing comes in the shape of hitting various markers (stones, trees and the like) with a stick and in some places, gently bopping a chorister's head, them being held upside down by the ankles, against a rock or marker stone. I remember asking one of the 'old' choristers (must have been in his forties) what it was all about. His response was that it taught us bits where the bounds of the parish were and got us to get out and pray in 'the patch'. Perhaps this is something we should be revisiting and making ours as that's not such a bad idea.

There are four Rogation Days: April 25th (St Mark's day) and the three days preceding the Ascension (which is always a Thursday so it's the Monday to Wednesday of Ascension week). The April rogation day is the 'major' rogation', the remainder are the 'minor'rogations. The period between April 25 and Ascension is referred to as 'rogationtide'.

Ember Days
These are the days when we as Church, pray (and fast) for those approaching ordination or priesting. This is especially vital in times approaching Petertide and Michaelmas - the main ordination persons - but I keep these days to pray especially for all engaged in training and for those testing their vocations.

Of late I find people use the ember days to pray for all who are engaged in church ministry and they also pray for vocations in the Church to become manifest.

Ember days are kept on the Wednesday, Friday and Saturday of the weeks before Petertide (29th June) and Michaelmas (29th September) and also in the week preceding the third Sunday of Advent and the second Sunday of Lent.

Zechariah 8.19
"Thus says the LORD of hosts: The fast of the fourth month and the fast of the fifth and the fast of the seventh and the fast of the tenth shall be to the house of Judah seasons of joy and gladness and cheerful feasts. Therefore love truth and peace."

I recall a liturgy lecture where the above passage was linked to Ember days - makes sense I guess.

Whatever you do - don't drop me!

(Mis)Appropriation in liturgical settings

Where we are we have decided that we need to stop singing things that come from other experiences and cultures.

This will begin as we enter into the Easter season by us no longer singing 'when I survey the wondrous cross' as a quick poll of the church members revealed that actually none of them (although being Anglican it was a close run thing) was actually there to have surveyed it first hand. The clincher came when someone pointed out that since none of us have Jewish ancestry we also had to stop doing the Seder meals!

Having read the marvellously entitled 'Should we be singing this?' by J Gilbert Sullivan, the church council has decided to also take put aside the singing of all 'spirituals' - the reason being we are all white British! When we sing an African-American spiritual during worship does that act honor another culture or is it cultural misappropriation?

This is just the first step in our journey of looking at how we use words and symbols from other cultures, for how can we hope to win people when we are misusing their stuff?

And it goes deeper than this, for we are looking at the new hymnbooks and removing from them any hymns where the words have been changed! A Scottish visitor to the church recently pointed out that 'The Lord's my Shepherd' should contain the phrase 'yet will I fear none ill' and yet our hymnbook contained instead the word 'no' - the fact that the hymn had been taken from his Scottish Psalter and anglicised made him even more keen for the day when the two nations separated.

Words can divide and destroy. And it includes changing 'man' to 'people' and 'master' to 'God' - all honest attempts to minister to, of cater for, the wounds, attitudes and preferences of others - but it seems that this has to stop.

Personally I'm pleased because having neither hailed from the South Seas, nor spoken Creole - we can at last stop singing Kum Bah Yah :-)

People not paper

That's what matters most and today has been full of people and Communion. It's been another fag paper day and things were again running tight, but they all fitted together and I found myself ended and back home by around six pm. Made the conscious decision to draw stumps by sea and call it a day, walking away from the study and watching the TV for a change, snuggled up and chilling to a comedy play and then an action film before making it to bed.

What has been most amazing today is the fact that I have managed to engage with so many people on a one-to-one basis in the one day. I love it when a day becomes filled with people and to listen to their stories about families, church and life is such a privilege. To extend the spiritual walls and to celebrate the love of a God who cares and came to save us from ourselves in our simple Passover meal never loses it's appeal of effect.

There are a number of people I'll at the moment and as the snow falls silently outside, covering the scars and the ugliness of our creation it is hard to to think of how God covers our sins and redeems us, turning an ugliness into beauty, using an awful event to create something beautiful in and for us.

The joy of seeing, and having confirmed, the real changes experienced in lives through the move of God's Holy Spirit. So often we ask, or are asked, for things empirical and yet when it is seen, how often to we stop to applaud, give thanks and be just a little moved by it? Lord, I love the way You influence lives and bring the most amazing changes through the simplest act of prayer and the affirmation of belonging that the presence of another confers.

The key to being Christian is totally wrapped up in incarnacy. God becomes fully man to reconcile us to Himself and it is in this that we are redeemed. In Jesus, the Christ, we see obedience; the putting first the many rather than self and it is here that the key is found. It is the breaking of bread and  making the Christ known which turns that key and it is in being engaged and actively involved with the person before us, that image of the invisible God made visible, which sees the door open and the light rush in to even the darkest of places.

It's not 'if you build it they will come' but rather 'if we are with them they will have arrived'!

The Word became flesh and dwelt among us - and people respond to that coming among them. Too often we make Church about coming to see the show, begging them to see, hear, feel, and enjoy having their ears tickled with what they want. We feed the very same consumer society that we claim to separate ourselves from. Church, if we are honest, is for many of us (clergy and lay), about brining a 'popular' church. Senior staff have never asked me about how blessed, prayerful or engaged with the community we are in our iteration of Christ's Bride. They ask about numbers and crave the 'how many and how much' that permits them to measure their success to those around them (and especially perhaps those above - can I say that? Should I say that?).

Church is about being successful not being sacred. Our liturgy is failing and becoming limp as we seek to make it accessible and shorten it and fall into the trap that it and worship are two different things; and having condemned our liturgy to the label words, we reach for our Rend Collective songbook and play our tambourines for the masses in the hope they will dance!!! (I like Rend Collective by the way - not a knock at them)

Lord for those with whom I have been Church today, I thank You.

For those who have met with God and been touched by His presence and all that confers, and all that this affirms, today. I bless Your holy name.

Lord, help me to be the man You call me to be; the man for whom the Christ died, and never count the cost. To never wear a watch that I might be ruled by time rather than the need before me but to wear instead a smile and to affirm others (even in those stories heard perhaps again and again) with love and compassion.

For the many needs before me today I look to You, the God who answers by fire, and who speaks into our lives in the gentlest of whispers. Be God in the lives of those who sit in solitude, who recline in pain and confusion, who walk in the shadow of death.

Lord, I love you.

Running total (this is something I've been asked to do for an average week by someone looking at their own call - it is neither a boast or a complaint but merely just what it is)

Comm: 75
Hrs 44
telephone: 114
Texts: 94
Email: 143

Everything was going so well, and then . . .

Being Mr efficient, I purchased the Advent Candles months back and had them all ready and waiting in the church, all that was needed was to to walk in and plonk them in the candle holder. So, an hour and a half before the service I pop into run through the music and do the candles - where's the Advent  wreath thing?

Bottom line is that at 10:25 everything is ready and I've used an alternative candle holder as ours is nowhere to be found! I didn't get to practice the songs and I hate this as it is always good to have a play and get into a bit of personal prayer and reflection before the service and without my getting lost in playing and removing myself from people I feel dragged into the places rather than entering ready to meet with God - and today is Advent Sunday! Aaargh!

So we start and it's a day of missed cues and muddled messages - I'm not down to preach (thank goodness for the 'Can't make it to church'  bit on the blog which allows me write a sermon in my head and post it regardless). Meanwhile the wife is doing a service elsewhere and I pray that she is being a blessing and is blessed (and it seems that she and it were - Thank You Lord).

The joy of having so many people take part in a service (there were eleven people involved in some aspect of the service yesterday (13 if you count the Sunday school) is immense - I go to places where everything is done by the person taking the service and that makes for a contiguous, polished (at times), performance from a one man band - but where are are many, the potential for interesting things is infinitely before us! Still, no one other than me did the absolution, there were missed bits (which we studiously also ignore on the PowerPoint) a final song with at least three different version (but we ended in the right chord and laughed as a family at the mayhem), somehow I ended up doing the intercessions (which was an amazing privilege as always) and by the time the day was done.

I struggle at the art of performance that I encounter in some places. The 'Worship' band (I think they mean 'Music Team' because surely the whole service is 'Worship') which is so polished and needs to be marched through the service as if it were a drill display and woe upon them should a note be wrong or a beat missed (which is odd because both are usually present despite somewhere despite their practising!). I rejoice in the bumps we encounter on the road that is our service; sometimes it's the things that fall off the wagon that remind us of the reason we are in the place as Church.

I'm wondering about the places where the service is a one man band - is this making church a spectator sport: worse still, is this something that supports the increasing sadness that is consumerism in the church? Some things for prayer and reflection (with loads of potential conversations too, which has to be good)?

But back to St Francis' and the encounters, the opportunities for fellowship. And the like. I love us still hanging around for so long after the service - its always, "No!" when people ask, "Don't you,wish they'd go home?" 

Last week a couple of visitors remarked that 'weren't church'. They unpacked it by saying that it was relaxed, there were no masks and there was so much else in the place. That's my persistent prayer; that he church might contain true Church - people who can open themselves to one another in safety and in the knowledge that there would be love - if we have that then it can't be bad, can it?

As much as I like to be collegial and share the ministry, there are times when I wish I was more so. Yesterday was one as I cut and folded 1,000 cards to stick through the letterboxes of a neighbouring church. Problem is that The printing wasn't 'edge to edge' and so needed multiple cuts and a crisp fold. Talk about practical evangelism of a different sort, but as I cut and folded I prayed that each seed would bring forth fruit - so, as ever, there was a silver lining. Next year, if they do it again, there will be a more accurate print run with the prayer  and but one fold and one cut still needed!

So here we are - bed beckons and Advent has arrived - even so Lord Jesus, come soon :-)

epiclesis: a voyage of Epic proportions

I have a feeling this will be a rather long blog entry worthy of liturgical anorak status, but I do think that this is an important issue - so here goes:

Having raised the issue of baptism in my 'church growth strategies' I have found myself engaged with, and by, a number of people regarding three main issues (but here we deal with but two):

1. Who can do the baptism service - laity, deacon or priest?

2. Something even more passionately taken up - the place of the epiclesis, and

3. The 'overly long' prayer over water (their words, not mine) - outside the remit of this blog entry - perhaps another day..

1. Who can do it? 
In some dioceses the view is taken that a deacon*  can conduct a baptism (and I have even heard of weddings too, but that is for another day) whilst in another diocese the person 'doing' the service needs to be a priest (one who has been priested - that is become presbyteros). 

My training, and personal choice (mine, not the choice I would impose that means) was that the epiclesis was something I didn't do until priested. Others may hold a different view of course.


2. The epiclesis
The reason that whoever does the epiclesis needs to be a priest finds its focus in the understanding of the word: (Gk: ἐπίκλησις) - a most wonderful word indeed that relates to the 'invocation' or 'calling down' in the form of transformation or blessing by God's Holy Spirit.  One of the keys to recognising this in a service is that it is often accompanied by priest making the sign of the cross**  

The discussion surrounding epiclesis has been lively - and not without passion and fire - which coming from clergy surely merits a 'Hallelujah'!

In the discourse which follows, the [+] denotes the place where the sign of the cross (and therefore the epiclesis) are (according to popular view) generally to be found.

In the baptism service it has been argued (politely) yea we find an epiclesis occurring during the exorcism (the bit after the sign of the cross has been made on the candidate's head using oil - the chrismation):

May almighty God [+] deliver you from the powers of darkness, restore in you the image of his glory, and lead you in the light and obedience of Christ. 

An epiclesis appears to occur again during the prayer over water::

Now sanctify [+] this water that, by the power of your Holy Spirit, they may be cleansed from sin and born again.

And, of course, at the end with the sending out and the blessing itself:

The God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ Jesus, 
establish, strengthen and settle you in the faith; 
and the blessing of God almighty, [+] the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, be among you and remain with you always. Amen.

The three epicleses lead me to the position whereby the person doing that part of the service should be a priest, BUT, I have always tried to ensure that the person preparing candidates is involved in the service and so have tried to do the baptism in partnership with them - and 'them' being a licenced lay minister means that they can tog up too (bargain!). 

Now although I know that some are happy to have a lay member or deacon do the service, I am happy to give my time to do another service ('Oh no!,' said a colleague, 'Not another one!'). The question here has to be do we let lay ministers or deacons do the service so that we can be doing less or are we letting others do it because we have a theological reason (and a collegial outworking too perhaps)?

The ASB (p,163) tells us: If the ministry of a bishop or priest cannot be obtained, a deacon may preside at a public baptism. 

It gives us the Exorcism as: 'May almighty God deliver you from the powers of darkness, and lead you in the light and obedience of Christ.'
and the 'prayer over water: [+] Bless this water, that your servants who are washed in it may be made one with Christ in his death and in his resurrection, to be cleansed and delivered from all sin.

Common worship gives us the following notes (p.101) to savour:

Holy Baptism is normally administered by the parish priest in the course of public worship on Sunday ‘when the most number of people come together’ (Canon B 21).

1. 1  Minister of Baptism
   Where rubrics speak of ‘the president’, this indicates the parish priest or other minister authorised to administer Holy Baptism. When the bishop is present he normally presides over the whole service. Parts of the service not assigned to the president may be delegated to others. 
   

(Canon B21 Indicates desirability of Baptism taking place on Sunday in the context of public worship.)

So is the ASB the root of our epiclesis saga? 
Let's have a quick look at baptism pre 1980  (after a squint at emergency baptism that is).


The 'emergency' baptism
When it comes to baptism, it is obvious that without the three epicleses being present the necessity of a priest is removed. One of the most popular reasons people have given for the validity of lay administered baptism comes in the form of the 'emergency' baptism. 'After all,' they say, 'If baptism is valid in an emergency, why does it become invalid when the service is planned and in calmer conditions?

The reason for this is the epiclesis of course - and if there isn't one, then it is obvious that anyone can conduct the service. Simple stuff this - all about what we say and don't say!

Emergency Baptism (ASB p.164)
In case of emergency, any person present may administer baptism according to the following form.
Using the given name of the one to be baptised (if known), pour water on him or her, saying,


I baptise you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

The Lord’s Prayer is then said.
Other prayers, such as the following, may be added.

Heavenly Father, we thank you that by water and the Holy Spirit you have bestowed upon this your servant the forgiveness of sin and have raised him/her to the new life of grace. Strengthen him/her, O Lord, with your presence, enfold him/her in the arms of your mercy, and keep him/her safe for ever. Amen.

The person who administers emergency baptism should inform the priest of the appropriate parish, so that the baptism may be properly registered.
If the baptised person recovers, the baptism shall be recognised at a public celebration of the sacrament. The person baptised under emergency conditions and his or her sponsors shall take part in all parts of the baptismal liturgy, except for the baptism in water itself. 

Emergency Baptism (CW p.105)

1 In an emergency, a lay person may be the minister of baptism, and should subsequently inform those who have the pastoral responsibility for the person so baptised.

2 Parents are responsible for requesting emergency baptism for an infant. They should be assured that questions of ultimate salvation or of the provision of a Christian funeral for an infant who dies do not depend upon whether or not the child has been baptised.

3 Before baptising, the minister should ask the name of the person to be baptised. When, through the absence of parents or for some other reason, there is uncertainty as to the name of the person, the baptism can be properly administered without a name (so long as the identity of the person baptised can be duly recorded). 

Let's visit the BCP and the:



The 'traditional' view
I have been told by those who are old enough to have been conducting baptisms using the Book of Common Prayer (i.e. before the 1980 Alternative Service Book - The ASB - came into being) that they do not recall an epiclesis ever being part of the service - this is supported by the tone taken in Canon xxx. Mind you, I don't know anyone who has been around any later than the fifties with regard to ministry!!!

Not only was there no place for apparent epiclesis in the BCP baptism but I am also led to believe that the font would have been filled and used for more than one baptismal service over a period of weeks rather than refilled each and every service.

It seems that things changed quite markedly in the ASB (but the notes and references in it show it to more than a kneekerk or ill-considered (theologically or otherwise) document despite the critics of it). Common Worship continues along the path set by ASB to the place we find ourselves today.

A Conclusion of sorts
Were the epicleses removed form the service I cannot see any reason why a deacon or lay person (licensed or otherwise) cannot conduct a baptism service. The words would have to be tinkered with a little to tie up the liturgical and theological ends but that would be relatively simple I imaging.

But of course there is the requirement for a subsequent 'public celebration' - but this could be satisfied by a thanksgiving in the next Sunday service after the event. 

Regardless - I am not sure that the epicleses need to be in the service (but I'd very much like to keep them) but if they are retained then they need to be the province of the priest - but doing the service with two (or more) voices would be rather nice I reckon, so why not?


This has been quite a ramble for me as I've considered the liturgy, rubric and experiences of some of my colleagues in my desire to have a fuller understanding of who might conduct baptisms and how, should we return to the BCP approach for instance, the epiclesis did not feature as it does now. Is this a sign of clericalism or the current trend towards lay ministers doing the service a reflection of anticlericalism (or just being too skint to pay a stipend perhaps?).

Thanks for your perseverance (if you have persevered) and if you didn't, my apologies for this snaking consideration of epiclesis and baptism. I hope it has been of some use.

_____________________________________

1. * deacon: Someone ordained into the diaconal order. This is not merely a stage on the path to becoming a priest and there are many people who are exceptional permanent (or distinctive) deacons whose ministry supports that view.

   
   

   ** 'sign of the cross: or nor depending upon your churchmanship - not all Christians (as a colleague put it) 'do the cross thing'! The sign is made over the object being 'blessed' i.e. invoked upon rather than on oneself which as I understand it is more of a claiming for ourselves or assisting ourselves with the Christ.

XXX.      The lawful Use of the Cross in Baptism, explained.

WE are sorry that His Majesty’s most Princely Care and Pains taken in the Conference at Hampton-Court, amongst many other Points, touching this One of the Cross in Baptism, hath taken no better Effect with many, but that still the Use of it in Baptism is so greatly stuck at and impugned. For the further Declaration therefore of the true Use of this Ceremony, and for the removing of all such Scruple as might any ways trouble the Consciences of them who are indeed rightly Religious, following the Royal Steps of our most worthy King, because he therein followeth the Rules of the Scriptures, and the Practice of the Primitive Church; We do commend to all the true Members of the Church of England, these our Directions and Observations, ensuing.

First, It is to be observed, That although the Jews and Ethnicks derided both the Apostles, and the rest of the Christians, for Preaching and Believing in him who was Crucified upon the Cross; yet all, both Apostles and Christians, were so far from being discouraged from their Profession by the Ignominy of the Cross, as they rather rejoyced and triumphed in it. Yea, the Holy Ghost by the Mouths of the Apostles, did honour the Name of the Cross, (being hateful among the Jews) so far, that under it he comprehended not only Christ Crucified, but the Force, Effects, and Merits of His Death and Passion, with all the Comforts, Fruits and Promises, which we receive or expect thereby.

Secondly, The Honour and Dignity of the Name of the Cross, begat a reverend Estimation even in the Apostles Times (for ought that is known to the contrary) of the sign of the Cross; which the Christians shortly after used in all their Actions, thereby making an outward Show and Profession even to the Astonishment of the Jews, that they were not ashamed to acknowledge him for their Lord and Saviour, who died for them upon the Cross. And this Sign they did not only use themselves with a kind of Glory, when they met with any Jews, but signed therewith their Children when they were Christned, to dedicate them by that Badge to his Service, whose Benefits bestowed upon them in Baptism, the Name of the Cross did represent. And this Use of the Sign of the Cross in Baptism was held in the Primitive Church, as well by the Greeks as the Latins, with one Consent and great Applause. At what time, if any had opposed themselves against it, they would certainly have been censured as Enemies of the Name of the Cross, and consequently of Christ’s Merits, the Sign whereof they could no better endure. This continual and general Use of the Sign of the Cross, is evident by many Testimonies of the ancient Fathers.

Thirdly, It must be confessed, that in process of Time, the Sign of the Cross was greatly abused in the Church of Rome, especially after that Corruption of Popery had once possessed it. But the Abuse of a thing doth not take away the lawful Use of it. Nay, so far was it from the purpose of the Church of England to forsake and reject the Churches of Italy, France, Spain, Germany, or any such like Churches, in all things which they held and practised, that as the Apology of the Church of England confesseth, it doth with Reverence retain those Ceremonies which do neither endamage the Church of God, nor offend the Minds of sober Men; and only departed from them in those particular Points, wherein they were fallen both from themselves in their ancient Integrity, and from the Apostolical Churches which were their first Founders. In which respect, amongst some other very ancient Ceremonies, the Sign of the Cross in Baptism hath been retained in this Church, both by the Judgment and Practice of those Reverend Fathers, and great Divines in the Days of King Edward the Sixth, of whom some constantly suffered for the Profession of the Truth: and others being exil’d in the Time of Queen Mary, did after their return, in the beginning of the Reign of our late dead Sovereign, continually defend and use the same. This Resolution and Practice of our Church, hath been allowed and approved by the Censure upon the Communion Book in King Edward the Sixth’s Days, and by the Harmony of Confessions of later Years; because indeed the Use of this Sign in Baptism was ever accompanied here with such sufficient Cautions and Exceptions against all Popish Superstition and Error, as in the like Cases are either fit or convenient.

First, The Church of England since the abolishing of Popery hath ever held and taught, and so doth hold and teach still, That the Sign of the Cross used in Baptism, is no Part of the Substance of that Sacrament: For when the Minister dipping the Infant in Water, or laying Water upon the Face of it (as the manner also is) hath pronounced these Words, I baptize thee in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, the Infant is fully and perfectly Baptized: So as the Sign of the Cross being afterwards used, doth neither add any thing to the Vertue or Perfection of Baptism, nor being omitted, doth detract any thing from the Effect and Substance of it.

Secondly, It is apparent in the Communion Book, that the Infant Baptized is by Vertue of Baptism, before it be signed with the Sign of the Cross, received into the Congregation of Christ’s Flock as a perfect Member thereof, and not by any Power ascribed unto the Sign of the Cross. So that for the very remembrance of the Cross, which is very precious to all them that rightly believe in Jesu Christ, and in the other respects mentioned, the Church of England hath retained still the Sign of it in Baptism: following therein the Primitive and Apostolical Churches, and accounting it a lawful outward Ceremony and honourable Badge, whereby the Infant is dedicated to the Service of him that died upon the Cross, as by the words used in the Book of Common Prayer it may appear.

Lastly, The use of the Sign of the Cross in Baptism, being thus purged from all Popish Superstition and Error, and reduced in the Church of England to the primary Institution of it, upon those true Rules of Doctrine concerning things indifferent, which are consonant to the Word of God, and the Judgments of all the ancient Fathers: We hold it the part of every private Man, both Minister and other, reverently to retain the true use of it prescribed by publick Authority, considering that things of themselves indifferent, do in some sort alter their Natures, when they are either commanded or forbidden by a lawful Magistrate; and may not be omitted at every Man’s pleasure contrary to the Law, when they be commanded, nor used when they are prohibited.

1.  

Getting ready for Ordinary time?

Well here's a little tip: DON'T!

Over the past few years I have noticed that Pentecost aside, many of the Christians I get to meet seem to live their lives by reclining in a Christian hammock supported by the twin pillars of Christmas and Easter. What happens between the two of them is pretty much a doze in which people are shaken awake by Lent and Advent but otherwise they exist in some 'mark time' somnambulistic, zombie-like state and this is, if you don't mind me saying so, where many of the problems with Church and growing it are to be found.

In my book Easter Day is the most important day in the Church's calendar. This is the day when the only power that sin has (death) is broken and so with the resurrection sin loses any power it might have had over us. It is the day when full and engaged reconciliation with God is made not only real but ours! 

Christmas is a joyful day because it marks the start of the journey to the cross but Easter is the day upon which the whole of our Christian year pivots and this, I think, is where, for many, the problems begin. For it appears that there are many who regard the remainder of the year as looking away from Easter and towards Christmas and once that's done they look back towards towards Easter again.

It's a bit like our little skateboarder below. The peaks are Christmas and Easter and after those two events it all goes down hill until things are at their lowest and then it's all uphill as the other Feast is approached and then down and agin and so on until we all die of boredom!

And there's more besides - Let's keep on going a step further shall we?
This year, by popular demand, our little church did communion on the first Thursday of the year - which was also New Year's Day - and I was surprised by the surprise many expressed that we had, 'Done a service on a Bank Holiday.' Because, 'It's supposed to be a day off!'  And so it is, if you happen to be a bank! But of course we aren't a bank - we are supposed to be Church - and on the first of January one of the things Church has done for many years is celebrate the naming and circumcision of Jesus.

In my travels I regularly hear of clergy and church members alike who seem to think that keeping feasts and festivals is something from 'days gone by' rather than something for today. I meet people who tell me that Lent is not something biblical and the keeping of it is questioned and derided as being wrong practice and yet many of these same people are happy to engage in shallow theology and trite songs (which they assume is 'worship') whenever the opportunity to 'celebrate' appears. Now as someone who has a music team and is definitely in a low evangelical expression of Church to write as I do is assumed by some to mean that I am 'high church' - but obviously I'm not.

But I am authentically Anglican and fiercely orthodox and wonderfully evangelical and passionate about living in the fullness of what being Christian really means. And it means 365 days a year, each with 24 hours within them to worship, love, live and celebrate the love of a God who through the sacrificial obedience of one who is truly man brings me into relationship with that same God and enables me by the power of His (that same God's) Holy Spirit.

We don't just live for the parties - we travel through the highs and lows, the triumphs and the tragedies - Easter and Christmas are wonderful but there's so much more to be touched and changed by. So let's get off our Christian hammock and live to the full until he comes or we have run our race.

Sounds like a plan to me ;-)

Dear Santa - this year I'd like (4): THE Pulpit

This is something many have wished they could have in their place of worship: THE Pulpit!

We've all been there I'm sure; that moment when you're in full swing and the Bible reference or the killer quote that would wow the congregation and leave you looking like you've actually prepared slips away from you.

just click on the image to see more

That's no longer a problem for at the touch of a button and touchscreen and that quote, or any other reference, fact or even joke, is there on the screen as you seamlessly switch from sermon to Bible to quotes and more. No longer do the prayers need to bumble around for the news can be there and the prayers are up to the minutes - you can even get sport channels (optional upgrade) and more. Internet, Freeview, satellite and more are all available at the touch of a button!

And for those people you know are asleep or playing '2048' during the sermon - now they're banged to rights as you zoom in with the crowd cam. Great for those little nudges during the sermon as you look almost into their should and heap condemnation upon them.

Order yours today - you know you want one!

More than 'Just a service' - Sundays

There is a great danger for those who are engaged in the delivery of church services to find oneself caught in a trap whereby Sunday becomes the  'must do' focus of the week. Add to this the triplet that is the rotating basis of services set by the liturgical calendar (we've just started year B) and there is a great temptation to not only make Sunday 'The show' but to look back to four years past and draw on that!

As a teenager I found myself sitting through services delivered by an extremely old cleric. At each and every Remembrance he would regale us with combat stories and of how he'd shot Germans (not sure whether it was first or second world war to be honest) but it was one particularly amusing anecdote that I'd heard before that made me realise something: I'd heard it all before!

I wasn't aware of the three years cycle until then but over the coming weeks, as I listening more closely, I realised that I was hearing the same sermon as before. It had been reheated and there were some topical references, but there was no doubt about it, it was 'same again' sermons. So, naively, I mentioned it to one of the Wardens who told me that the Vicar had a set of card index boxes with the readings, hymns and sermons on them. All he had to do was look at the liturgical date (i.e. Advent 3), pull out the 'Advent 3' card and that was everything done!

The problem with the whole thing then was that although all the boxes were ticked and  Church appeared to be done, it wasn't; and this is as much a problem for us today as it was then.

For most of us Sunday is still the main service of the week and this requires - no it demands - our fullest attention. We need to be reading and studying and thinking about the scriptures before us (and more besides) and working to open them to those who will be hearing our sermons. First and foremost we need to be opening the scriptures to our congregations, not delivering party political broadcasts or campaigning for whatever cause defines us - after all, it should be Jesus doing that!

Then knowing what we are looking at in terms of the Word, we need to make sure that the musical bits (all of the service is 'worship') are building something congruent. Now in my ancient Vicar's day this was simple because all there was on offer was a psalm (remember them, they seem to have vanished from many services), an anthem and a few hymns but not today. Today we have so many songs and other musical offerings that choosing what we will have for the service is perhaps the most challenging thing Sunday brings.

And then there's the shape of the service. Liturgy is something to be worked at and thought about. The trap that sees us doing the same old, same old, each week because, 'It's the right way!' with the rationale that the familiar gives the people the opportunity 'to see past the familiar'. This doesn't mean change for changes sake or the introduction of novelty items but it does mean we can vary the Eucharistic elements and can engage creatively with the intercession and prayers.

The danger of 'just' doing Sunday rather than working towards it as the pinnacle of our week's Christian walk and presenting something crafted and purposeful is ever present. But we have to remember that Sunday is more than 'just' a service.

The Paschal Candle - when should you use it?

Now, for those of you who wonder what on earth I'm on about this is a very special candle what we have in our church buildings. It's large and it's upfront because we get a new candle every year and to make the point it usually has the date on it. The new candle appears on Easter Sunday and so this year's candle looks a bit like the candle on the right:

Now this candle represents the light of Jesus, the Christ, and we light it during the services of Easter (or Paschaltide - paschal  meaning Passover which is, of course, Easter for the Last Supper was the Passover meal) and when we do baptism (some high church types might also light it at the funeral service where the light of Christ and the resurrection have a meaning too!).

It should be found by the font as that's the 'Go' of the Monopoly board that is the Christian faith in that it is the start point of our faith journey and it is lit because the third of the three elements of baptism

Chrism - anointing with oil,
Baptism - the wet bit, and
Light - the candle bit where the candle is given to the baptised person (or someone standing for them) to symbolise passing from darkness into light of Christ.

It's simple really - we light it during Paschaltide (Easter) and during the baptism (and if it's your flavour - funerals) and that's basically it. It represents the light of Christ and the lighting of the baptismal candle from it is a nice bit of symbolism - especially as all baptismal candles are lit from the same source and so it speaks of unity and oneness in Jesus, the Christ. To quote the Common Worship Baptismal service:

'God has delivered us from the dominion of darkness and has given us a place with the saints in light. 
You have received the light of Christ; walk in this light all the days of your life.
Shine as a light in the world to the glory of God the Father. 

Go in the light and peace of Christ.
Thanks be to God.'

Simple innit?

Well it should be but I find a number of churches where the blessed Paschal candle finds itself placed in front of the pulpit (for reasons I have no idea of other than the someone is being liturgically dim!) or in the sanctuary (because it's 'special!') and one place I know enjoys having it lit in front of, and in the middle of the table (AKA 'the altar') on it's blinking great stand when it's a festival, Saint's day or some other occasion because (yeah, you've got it) "It's special!

Now I'm writing this in response to a question from someone who thought they were doing something 'special' when they lit the candle - because that was what they thought it meant, "Look everyone, this is a special service because I've lit the great big candle up the front/back/in front of the pulpit/by the font!' They asked me what the candle meant and so I have written this brief explanation in the hope it help them (and others) with regard to the liturgical use of the thing.

I await their response in eager anticipation because it's an area many of us are (or have been) confused by (I know, I was because I was taught by someone equally confused by it all too) and yet, when the right meaning is understood it's use becomes even more meaningful - or so I reckons.

Pax

Church is family - a place of fun not rigid ritual!

Many years ago, when the earth was young, I was a member of a church that gathered on a Sunday evening for an informal service. It was absolutely great but:

 It wasn't because of the clergy (although we always have a sneaky feeling it is, don't we?)

It wasn't because of the liturgy (which being back in ASB time had its challenges)

It wasn't because of the choir or the settings (there wasn't one and there weren't any!)

But it was all about the people who went and the joy, love and relationships that existed in the group and between one another. When things went wrong, we laughed. When things went right, we laughed. When needs were present we prayed for each other and still found time to love, laugh and be family.

One Sunday evening we'd been going through a fairly standard evening service when we came to a song about the wedding banquet. A song we'd sung many, many times (along with 'Tell out my soul as a permanent Magnificat variant) but on this fateful evening the person leading got their 'mords  wuddled' such that the correct version:

I cannot come. I cannot come to the banquet, don’t trouble me now. 
I have married a wife,  I have bought me a cow. 
I have fields and commitments that cost a pretty sum, 
Pray, hold me excused, I cannot come.

Was transposed into:
I cannot come. I cannot come to the banquet, don’t trouble me now. 
I have bought me a wife,  I have married a cow!
I have fields and commitments that cost a pretty sum, 
Pray, hold me excused, I cannot come. 

The place erupted and the laughter brought the service to a glorious close as people fought for breath and tears streamed down faces. This is what Church is about - not being bound up in the strictures of a starched shirt and Brycreemed faith that put me off when I was a child - being willing to laugh at ourselves and taking Jesus seriously.

Oddly, today, with this thought in my mind the 09:30 communion pulled away from the station and onto a journey where wrong readings, misplaced bit and general chaos were all viewed through the carriage windows. And we laughed and we enjoyed it all and God was honoured and the joyous full-colour faith that is Christianity (as opposed to the joyless black and white existence of some) was met.

We had a family party and each, and all, brought what they could to it and took from the table the elements of unity, Grace and joy in the communion.

Now That's What I call Church :-)

Advent Four - let's talk Liturgy

Here we are at last - it's The last Sunday in Advent and it seems like an age since we were celebrating 'Christ the King'.

For those who struggle with the liturgical year, and even the word 'liturgy', here's a short introduction to it in the hope you might see that it is not the 'vain babbling of the heathen' as some might (perhaps sneeringly) assume it to be.

The word 'liturgy' might best be thought of as 'the work that the people do'.
You will, I hope, have noticed the bold emphasis on the word 'the' because first and foremost we must understand that it's not ALL the people who are doing this work - it is only some - and this is a most important (for me anyway) part in that to understand liturgy you need also to understand who those who perform it are and why they perform it.

Liturgy (leitourgia) is the work undertaken by a citizen of a nation as part of their duty to it. It is not 'the words bit' as one of my colleagues from another expression of Church glibly dismissed it as being (mind you, they assumed the music was the worship bit) - poor soul! The problem is that the daily work routine are written out for us and stuck in a book (or on websites) to help us do the right thing at the right time. When trying to explain it recently, I tried the following tack:

If we take the world of farming as the nation we are working for the we can see that there are things that need to be done on a daily basis - every day of the year - things that happen at particular times every year - as something seasonal - and things that happen as and when the need arises - occasional jobs.

The work we do as citizens of a heavenly Kingdom fall into exactly the same categories:

Daily - morning prayer, evening prayer, night prayer and the Eucharist (or Communion).

Seasonal - Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Lent, Easter, Pentecost, Trinity, Ordinary time, Christ the King.

Occasional - Baptism, Marriage, Funerals.

Each day we might also contain celebrations and commemorations. Those special days which have their parallel with family birthdays and other celebrations and acts of remembrance we keep in our own lives regardless of national allegiance or occupation. We call these, in the Kingdom of God known as 'Christian', feasts and festivals.

So here you have it - liturgy in a nutshell. Hopefully you can now see that it is merely the description of what needs to be done, with space for us to add the musical bits to flavour the whole as our own particular taste and fancy demands.

Pax

Christingle on Powerpoint

One of the things I find the season of Advent calls me to use a great many times is a projected version of the Christingle Orange, ribbon, candle and cocktail sticks,

So I made my own a few years back and this has, slightly modified over the time, served me well - and so I offer it to anyone who might find it useful as a resource.

Here's the first and final images:

and the powerpoint file for them (and the stages between) can be found HERE

Feel free to share this with anyone you feel might benefit from it and help to support the Children's Society this Advent.

Here's a short clip to show the graphics in use:

Pax

Postscript
Following a few requests I have added a simple Christingle service powerpoint file to the folder. You can find it and the component slides (and all the funeral hymns too oddly!) here

Five days to Advent and ...

All around me I'm finding people with Christmas trees in their windows, lights flashing as if to say, 'Stuff Advent' it's Argostide already get with it! Further down the road there are people with houses already sparkling with icicle lights and festoons proclaiming something just twenty-nine days too early!

The season of Advent has apparently been gazumped and as children prepare to remove the chocolate from their December Calendars (the calendars formerly known as 'Advent') we know that we've moved straight into the Christmas season. A season which formerly began on Christmas Eve once upon a time.

Now Christmas gets earlier and earlier and no sooner has Boxing day been and gone than the lights vanish and the trees are discarded or consigned back into garage, shed or attic. The twelve days of Christmas have become thirty-one days and people are already moaning about (and I jest not) 'The Church types trying to hijack the season!'

Losing Advent is one of the biggest losses of the Church year for the journey of preparation of the penitential kind and the clearing up the house that is us in readiness for Jesus, the Christ, God's chosen and anointed one is important and necessary. It's taking away the twice yearly spiritual health check and repair sessions and replacing it with a 'gimme, gimme, gimme' mentality that makes us all just a little worse each year.

So whilst this might sound like a 'bah, humbug' session it's not.

What this is is a call for those who lead churches to move away from the popularist 'let's fill the church building for a month with people who won't hear the Christmas message or understand the truth of Jesus as the salvific and atoning act of Grace and celebrate how popular we can be!'

I don't care about being popular - that was never the call upon us (was it?).

I don't care about the fact that one cleric I have met is boasting of thirty-three carol and Christingle services - a new record.

What I care about is that the same people who cram into their church building won't have a clue about Jesus or His divinity or His sacrifice or the journey from Isaiah to Bethlehem's stable and from there to Calvary.

What I care about is being more than a seasonal attraction alongside Santa's Grotty - after all, if there's one thing we need to be making known, it is this:

Common Worship Eucharist - A simple Key

Following on from last night's 'Eucharistic Bingo' I started thinking about the Eucharist and how I could explain simply the way to navigate one's way around the service and came up with this.

Hopefully it's simple - I've checked and someone who has never tried to navigate their way around found that it proved quite simple and effective. So with that in mind, here is what I hope might just be a fairly useful aid to liturgical confidence and competence in delivering (or following) the Common Worship Eucharist with proper seasonal elements in the right places.

Let's hope so :-)

Eucharistic Bingo - A game for all the Church?

Last night I was privileged to play a new game that made the Common Worship Eucharistic service (Eucharistic Prayer A) take on a whole new, and rather exciting, form as I realised that we were playing an hitherto unknown (well at least to me it was unknown) form of bingo.

Beginning with the greeting (Page the first) which formed a tacit 'Eyes down, look in' we moved into the the prayer of preparation and the summary of the Law before the 'Invitation to Confession' arrived. Of course, being 'Christ the King' this came from somewhere others than page the second (or 168 if you have the black book!) and there was a rustling of pages as people attempted to find the words I was using.

That done I lured them into a sense of (false) security as the numbers fell back into line (they expected the Collect to be somewhere else)  until I threw in a seasonal Gospel Acclamation for the day (Christ the King, try and keep up) - of course the fun bit had just passed as the Old Testament was followed by a reading of the New Testament and the Gospel in one; leaving the question, 'What should I do now?' Well of course I read an abridged Gospel (last paragraph) and got on with the sermon.

Moving on with the credal component (page 7 or 173 - try and keep up) we came to the peace -another seasonal offering which resulted in more page flicking from the pews as they sought to find from whence I was reading it (or was I merely 'making it up' as had been claimed one day with my collect to St Roke and his talking Monkey). And from here we headed into the Eucharistic prayer, which of course seeing it was going to be 'A' and because it was the day itself (Christ the King - have you forgotten that already?) I did the wonderfully long preface with all the sexy 'kingdom' bits towards the end (How I love that) and realised that, once again, people were looking for the source of my words.

They all went to page 19 (or 185 if you have the full book) and then started flicking, and some were still flicking by the time we reached the mystery of faith (or page 20 [186] to you) and probably hadn't found it when we were back at page 12 (178) and the Lord's Prayer; where it became apparent that some cheeky types hadn't moved from and rather than flicking the pages had been slyly waiting for us to 'catch up' with them and the place they'd been waiting at.

Of course there's still fun to be had  as a few (page 15 [181]) were not being presumptuous as I, and the majority began to approach a merciful Lord!

By the time everyone had been communicated, being on the downwind leg, they merely acquiesced to the post Communion prayer, which being 'Christ the King' (have you got that bit now?) and remained at the page they had pre-selected (16 [182]) and waited to see where I be going with it. We went for being sent out in the power of His Spirit  and topped and tailed it with the blessing for 'Christ the King' before dismissing them.

And so they left thankful for the sacrament and tired from trying to keep up with me.

Me? I realised that when it came to feasts and festivals that it would perhaps be a great idea to bring along some tailored order of service (yes, I know I was merely visiting) and hand them out to make the experience a little less intense in terms of page manipulations.

Still - let's look on the bright side - it wasn't using the ASB :-)

As for the bingo?

Now winner so I took the fifty pence piece home with me for another day!!!

Collars? Something to get hot under!

A friend wrote, 'I'm always amazed at how often people get 'hot under the collar' about this issue,' and they were right because I had a few comments* that fit that description, and many that didn't.

Anon writes, 'There are times when I choose to wear my collar and times when I have to wear my collar but generally I don't because I don't want to be labelled or pidgeon holed by people around me because of the job I do. I think you've got it all wrong with what you have said and feel quite attacked and angry by it.'

I think that we all have times when we choose not to wear our collars, that said I find that I probably wear it more than I don't these days because I think the 'Taxi' analogy is valid and so feel that when I'm out with it on am fair game to be stopped and engaged with. The fact that I am stopped and engaged with so much seems to confirm this thinking. But we have, and make, our own choices and unless it says 'don't do it' in the big Black Book (BBB), all are valid.

I wasn't trying to pour burning oil on people's heads, but was merely trying to get some of those I engage with on the journey of exploration of vocations to think about the role being more that just a job and to explain that there are a number of factors (which I listed in the original post) that we need to consider across a number of areas - and the piece of plastic that adorns our necks is just one of them.

Many of those who don't generally wear collars have told me that they wear them when it's appropriate, by which they mean occasional offices, but otherwise they are to be found in the study. Again, this isn't an issue, I wasn't saying you must, or you should, but I was saying what I thought and how this relates to me. Mind you, I have wondered since the 'only  appropriate' comment which places might be deemed to be inappropriate and my weird mind has had a bit of field day - but I'll spare you that.

A few have told me that the collar doesn't work these days, the pick of the crop being:

'In this day and age, the wearing of the clerical collar is outdated and outmoded. To wear it is to invite being ignored and avoided: So I don't and make relationships as me and wait for them to ask about the God side and if they don't then I've won a friend even if not a parishioner.'

And to be honest, I was disturbed by this because as nice as it is to make friends, I was under the perhaps deluded idea that I was to make family; to make disciples who understood and lived in the ways that God, through the Cross, required us to live. It's a bit like the people I met who 'want to be friends, not parents' with their children. Just as I am a parent first and hopefully a friend later, the same is true with the priestly role.

I have many friend who being into New Wine (like me) wear the alternative clerical outfit of check shirt (open-necked), brown shoes, hornrimmed glasses and flannels or cords and have the view that clerical garb of any form is outmoded, popish and to quote one, 'So yesterday!' The problem is that much of the negativity they perceive towards them and their message is towards them and their message rather than the kit they wear. That said, one chap said that by not wearing anything that said 'Vicar' they found they could get closer to people before they rejected them - which I really like!

I think the same applies to wearing of cassock albs and the like during the services. When I started where I am now I decided that I wouldn't wear 'tat' during the service for the first few weeks and see where the congregation wanted to go. I wore a clerical shirt and black trousers and shoes but that was it, opting for cassock alb on feast days, festivals and holidays. After a couple of months I asked the congregation what they wanted and how they felt about the way we did our services and as a response altered what I did. Now I wear the clerical shirt rig until we reach the Eucharist and then, coming as President from the people, I put on the cassock alb and preside. After the Eucharist I take it off again and return to the people - seems to fit what I see as the NT way.

Now I don't expect everyone to like what I do, but it works and seems to fit the bill. This is the same for clerical collars - at the end of the day we do what we do and whilst we may get it wrong at times, that's our prerogative.

So please don't read what I'm writing as a criticism or putdown (unless it is - and you will know when that happens) because it;s not - it's me taking stuff from my brain and putting it somewhere where I, and others, might dialogue with it.

All comments are welcome and for any I may have inadvertently offended - apologies.

Pax










*I am amazed that Blogger appears to be such a tough  place to leave comments - many write to me because they cant successfully leave a comment - something that needs fixing methinks :-)

Things I struggle with (3): The exclusively KJV position

Stopping at some traffic lights recently and as I looked around waiting for them to change I happened to spot a church's wayside pulpit (AKA 'a poster') asking the question 'what think ye of Christ?*' and it got me thinking - which has to be good!

My first thought was not concerned with Christ but why one earth anyone would seek to portray the Church as something firmly entrenched in the early 1600s? Change? Well the traffic lights did but the Church, if we advertise like the one I was rapidly moving away from did, appeared not to be... And that got me thinking (always dangerous).

I think the King James Version (KJV) and the New KJV are excellent reads and have an honoured and well-deserved place on my bookshelves but I have to say that when it comes to using it as an everyday source, I think there are issues. Issues in terms of accuracy and legacy issues and in terms of currency and the message it communicates to those outside of the Church.

Legacy - Good
Now I have to say whilst I am totally enamoured with the poetic nature of the KJV and love the fact that this is THE source of so much of the richness that is the English language. Influenced the Bard (and so many other literary greats during the golden age of English) and is wonderful for being the source of such expressions as:

scapegoat  Leviticus 16.8

out of the mouths of babes and sucklings Psalm 8.2

long-suffering Psalm 86.15


A fly in the ointment Ecclesiastes 10.1

casting your bread on the water  Ecclesiastes 11.1

No peace for the wicked Isaiah 57.21

Wheels within wheels Ezekiel 10.10

Feet of clay Daniel 2.33

The blind leading the blind Matthew 15.13

Turning the world upside down Acts 17.6

The powers that be Romans 13.1

Filthy lucre 1 Timothy 3.3


So there we are - I do like the KJV and value, respect and enjoy its beautiful language. BUT

Legacy & Accuracy - Bad
I an rather tired of having to defend my corner because despite the inspired translation of the extant texts before the KJV crew, the somewhat limited language (English) and the tools they had do lead me into places that eventually become just a little tiresome in their apologetical demands. A for instance here is to be found in Exodus 20.13, which goes like this:

Thou shalt not kill.

Now as one who works with members of the armed forces from time to time I have to say that this causes grief for those who join and for those who love and care for them. 'You can't be a Christian and be in the army,' they cry, 'Because the Bible says 'you shalt not kill!'

Actually, the demands of Exodus 20.13 is that 'You must not commit murder,' that is to say that you must take life feloniously (that is 'against the law') which means that killing a combatant in a war setting is exactly that - killing - as is engaging in capital punishment. The exodus passage goes a little further (as I understand it) to tell us that manslaughter, causing death by poor and shoddy workmanship and other acts which take life are also considered 'murder'.

This is just one example but I think it will suffice for now (unless you want the prooftexters dream passage where 'for the lack of a vision the people perish' but only in the KJV - but hey, that's the same for every version - there are always passages that read better (meaning the way you want) in other versions).

Currency and Communication
I have strong recollections of a committed and perhaps just a little mad person who would walk up and down outside Liverpool Street Station (along Bishopsgate) with a sandwich board upon which appeared a variety of KJV passages. The general populace assumed he was a bit strange and oddly, so too did most of the Christian I knew too!

One day I stopped the bloke and engaged him in conversation regarding his choice of version and his reply was, 'The King James' is the original Bible'! Oddly, I meet many who seem to think it is the version that Jesus used as a lad and they continue to promote it because it's the version Calvin (before he met Hobbes I presume) used too. The problem is that the Thee's and Thou's, as cool as the language is (and don't forget I'm a bit of a Shakespeare fan too), don't hang too well with the people around us today.

I love the KJV and whilst these days I will look to the ESV (English Standard Version) for accuracy and the NLT (New Living Testament) for accessibility and readability, I will always find myself coming back to the KJV and NKJV for the poetic.

But please - think about how we communicate to those who struggle to get by with an average reading age of a nine year old (God bless you Mr Gove, you're a toff) and realise that some of the stuff we have in our big black books (yours is black isn't it - it has to be black and have the word 'Holy' written on it  - I'll tell you the story some day soon) is pretty hard to gasp in accessible language and cloaking it in archaic, barely post-Elizabethan, language and portraying it as the 'only' authoritative version is totally unhelpful (about equal with people who claim Darwin was an ex-Christian or Galileo was punished by the Church because of his belief in science and his discoveries).

So there it is - I'm sure I'll make few friends with my views - but then again it's integrity that counts, especially when coupled with facts - and the fact are, I think, present!

Pax



*Matthew 22:42 KJV

Church: Dedicated, blessed and continuing

Today is one of the days set aside to celebrate the dedication of those church buildings where the proper date is unknown. I say 'days' because the rubric says it can be done on the Last Sunday after Trinity (three weeks time - 27th Oct) and, interestingly, any other locally chosen and acceptable date.

What makes this special for me is the collect - that special prayer that once brought the people together before the service and set the scene for what was to happen - giving rhyme and reason, direction and purpose to what follows. Today's collect is a superlative piece of prayer for our congregations and the task we take upon ourselves:

Almighty God,
to whose glory we celebrate the dedication of this house of prayer:
we praise you for the many blessings you have given to those who worship you here:
and we pray that all who seek you in this place may find you,
and, being filled with the Holy Spirit,
may become a living temple acceptable to you;
through Jesus Christ your Son our Lord,
who is alive and reigns with you,
in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, now and for ever. Amen

I often find myself praying this collect (omitting the second line) as I visit other places and when rejoicing in our own.

The key is to count the 'many' blessings in the place you worship rather than bemoan that which you don't like - do this and you'll be another blessing to be counted.

May today be a happy, blesséd and profitable Sunday

Church and technology

I struggle with all the people who tell me that Church should be less high tech. An observation I received this week went like this: 'So many people pull out their iphone and open their Bible. Why can't they use proper Bibles?' There was only a few obvious responses and so I asked the more interesting question, 'So where's your Bible?'

The problem was that I knew the answer before I even realised I was going to ask it, for I've seen the person in a number of settings and even though we have Bibles on offer in our (and the other places I'd seen them) I don't think I've ever seen them with one! So I have to say that I'm happy for people to pull out an electronic device and 'open' their Bible on it.

A while back I visited a church where the congregation were campaigning to keep their OHP (overhead projector) rather than get 'one of those computer things' and I guess the people who came before them moaned about the demise of the 'fuzzy felt'. But the reality is that Church is in the communications business and this means that whatever we can use to make our message more inviting, accessible and engaging has to be embraced - this doesn't mean that we need to be sensational or divert from the message because of the medium we are choosing of course!

I love the idea of twittering and being able to respond to the questions, observations and challenges during a sermon - but when the technology (or the tweets) push the Gospel into second place than I have to cry 'Enough!'

Technology for technology's sake is not always wrong but being bleeding edge for the sake of it, especially when leading edge is sufficient to communicate well - that use of technology that pushes the primary stuff into the background as we worship technology - I'm sure you know what I mean (and that's been something I have been guilty of in my own life too).

So, how do you do yours?

What is good technology and what (if you consider there to be such a thing) is bad?

Happy Friday