Adding in to say that your bizarre guy reminds me of a man I once met, father of a friend, who having noticed a similarity in the beginnings of Genesis and of John's gospel had decided that every chapter 1 in Scripture was on the same theme really (even if that was not immediately apparent) and the same went for every chapter 2 and so on. I guess he thought that the later Psalms, all those after 66 (see Isaiah) were on unique themes! He had worked all this out for himself (you bet) and was immensely proud of his conclusions!
So today was Groundhog day at our church. Preacher was back. Preaching on the parable of the sower again. Making the innumerate and theologically dubious claim that it means only a quarter of churchgoers are saved. Again. I did at least find out the reason - he was ordained as an evangelist and doesn't (if I understood him right) have any theological study under his belt. And thinks "devices" are all about living in a fantasy world so presumably thinks googling is sinful. I don't know whether the Church of Scotland continues this practice of ordaining people without educating them first but I hope not. He also enlightened us of his opinion, stated as fact, that Charles Spurgeon was the greatest preacher in Britain ever. The main topic today was about how wonderful testimony is. Having heard a fair amount when the Faith Mission come to visit I'm... not convinced. Genuine stories of God at work in people's lives? Sure. Formulaic "I was a terrible sinner but I had a conversion experience and now my life is wonderful" speeches from people it turns out were raised in Christian households and conditioned to expect their "conversion" experience? Not so much.
If you don't mind my saying, there's something else that strikes me a as bit odd about what you've just described.
For the rest of us, today is Pentecost/Whitsun. We've had readings and sermons about the Holy Spirit.
For a rip-roaring evangelist, even if he's not a specifically charismatic one, some of us might have expected him to take the opportunity to preach something on the lines of 'you're all sinners who need to stop resisting and respond to the Holy Spirit'.
I think you’re failing to factor in old style Presbyterianism in the Hebrides, Enoch. Observation of any aspect of the liturgical year beyond Christmas and Easter is a recent development in Presbyland—basically my lifetime in the States, and there are still many conservative Presbyterian churches here where Pentecost will get little if any mention on this particular day. I can imagine that is even more the case where @Arethosemyfeet is.
I did wonder the same thing myself, Enoch. There is a tradition within parts of the Church of Scotland that the liturgical calendar is something that happens to other people. Like Papists and other Heretics. I should point out that observing Christmas is a fairly recent development in this part of Presbyland. This same preacher eyed the advent candles last year like they were going to leap out and say Hail Marys at him.
Perhaps other shipmates might not see anything faulty about that.
I can do better (or worse). Also some twenty-something years ago I attended a wedding at which the Scripture reading was the story of Jesus meeting the woman at the well and the text the preacher took for his evangelistic message wedding address was, and I kid you not,
The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband.
You could see people eyeing the nearest exits.
I have heard something like that repeated as a joke - the joke being that the intended text was 1 John 4:18 (i.e. first Epistle of John), 'There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love' - but the 1 got missed off, leaving instead John 4:18 (i.e. Gospel of John), which you quote above.
This was in a book of clerical jokes from the 1970s - a case of life imitates art???
“The Ecclesiastical Joke Book” by any chance? I had most of it memorised before I understood half the jokes.
For the rest of us, today is Pentecost/Whitsun. We've had readings and sermons about the Holy Spirit.
For the Orthodox, Pentecost is next Sunday.
This year. It's not always exactly one week after the West.
The context concerned this year. For reference, it will be one week after in 2020, 2022, and 2023; four weeks after in 2021; five weeks after in 2024; and coincide in 2025.
(However, the important role of youth worker carries no compulsory education or checks and balances....)
No working with children check even? Compulsory by law here and I'd have assumed so in most places where the Ship sails.
There will be all the usual checks for working with children. But, assuming all steps have been taken to reduce the risks of your children being in danger of sexual abuse etc, the question is why do so many churches leave the spiritual welfare of children in the hands of people without any formal training nor anyone checking that what they're teaching the children is theologically sound. In most congregations there'll be people who will be able to spot dodgy theology preached from the pulpit, and hopefully the church will have measures where those people can raise their concerns about the message being presented (in our case, the responsibility for worship stops with the elders and we would listen to concerns about what's been preached). How many 10 year olds would be able to spot something seriously dodgy in their classes?
I certainly recall being in church a few years ago and seeing the priest trying to figure out how to react when the time came for the Sunday School to tell us what they'd been working on and it turned out they'd be learning about "mother nature"!
On holiday, I once attended a conservative-evangelical community church over Easter and the preacher gave his daily sermons on Zechariah, from Good Friday to Easter Sunday. He was not interested in messianic prophecy in Zechariah, only in the comparison between Haggai and Zechariah. Haggai with his more cautionary approach was the better man, we were told. Our preacher also believed that a bout of indigestion gave rise to the eight visions experienced by Zechariah during a single night. The important thing for any believer, we were assured, is to avoid spicy or fatty foods and sleep soundly.
The funny thing was that nobody had told the organist anything about a change of topic, so we sang all the usual Good Friday and Easter hymns.
When asked why he had decided to preach on Zechariah over Easter, the preacher said simply that he thought it would make a nice change. He himself did not care much for Zechariah but felt it was his duty to do Something A Little Different.
I understood the no checks and balances to include what surely would be essential checks.
As an aside, a few years ago I had reason to look at Anglican theological college training in England and several of the Aust states. The low academic standard of the education in England surprised me. Nothing to do with churchmanship, just the level of teaching
Why do so many churches leave the spiritual welfare of children in the hands of people without any formal training nor anyone checking that what they're teaching the children is theologically sound.
An excellent question! In our church, as it happens, the issue is lessened as the young people come back into church towards the end of the service and the leaders (in whom I have great confidence) briefly present what they've been doing. IMV the biggest dangers aren't "wrong" theology but "twee" theology which prettifies the Bible (eg talking about Noah as basically a story about a cuddly old bearded man and lots of friendly animals while ignoring the bigger issues); or else telling Bible stories as if they are fairy tales and never linking them back to the childrens' RL experience.
In most congregations there'll be people who will be able to spot dodgy theology preached from the pulpit, and hopefully the church will have measures where those people can raise their concerns about the message being presented.
I certainly welcome people who raise questions with me afterwards, if they do it in a "gentlemanly" way. Indeed I deliberately try to provoke thought and ask open-ended questions at times. Not everyone likes this!
More to the point, my experience is that people get more het-up about "the wrong tune" for a hymn, or the colour of the preacher's hair, than theology - except in the most conservatively evangelical churches where theological accuracy can trump even the living voice of God's Spirit.
Endured a fairly horrendous Pentecost service at the local ELCA church. The pastor inadvisably had the confirmands write and deliver their own faith statements from the pulpit, one by one, and they all consisted of generalities like "I believe God wants us to ask questions", "I believer in helping my community." One "faith statement" actually included the phrase "maximize your potential." Now, I can't really blame any of these teenagers but rather the poor catechesis that apparently left no impression as to what the gospel actually is. The Apostle's Creed was recited at the end but it felt like a pure formality at that point.
More to the point, my experience is that people get more het-up about "the wrong tune" for a hymn, or the colour of the preacher's hair, than theology
Or, from the opposite side, it seems most times I preach it seems the biggest comment is thanks for selecting good hymns. Almost as though I could preach any old crap, just as long as I pick the hymns they like.
And, by the way, living in Glasgow in 1976 I found it impossible to find a daytime Good Friday service. It didn't seem to be a holiday and many people were at work.
I think some of the city Piskie churches might have a day time service for Good Friday, but otherwise it is always in the evening, if there is one. And it is not a national holiday, though it is a Bank Holiday. (But that increasingly means only banks - not just on Good Friday but on other Bank Holidays). It might be a local holiday, depending on the locale!
Good Friday at St Mary's Episcopal Cathedral Glasgow routinely runs thusly:
09:30 Veneration of the Cross
12:00-15:00 Three hours devotions
19:30 usually something else; content varys
For eg, 2019 at 19:30 was singing & reading the Passion Icelandic style, 2018 was IIRC Stainer's Crucifixion, other years have had stations of the cross etc etc.
A few years ago I played for a wedding taken by a priest friend of the bride's family.
Not only did they seem to think the occasion didn't require them to stick to any kind of approved script or even a combination of approved service wording, but they also decided to add a running commentary on what was going on as if explaining something to a dim e year old.
Crowning moment was the sermon: rambled on for a full 15 minutes on his incomprehension about how women choose which dress to buy, how nervous he was doing a service in a church not his own, and the groom's haircut. Final 6 minutes were basically saying that with the divorce rate at roughly 40% of all marriages ending in divorce we should all enjoy this occasion and remember it so we could compare with any future nuptials of the bride or groom.
Our CWs sent in a report to the Archdeacon - I'm not sure what, if anything, the AD did.
A few years ago I played for a wedding taken by a priest friend of the bride's family.
Not only did they seem to think the occasion didn't require them to stick to any kind of approved script or even a combination of approved service wording, but they also decided to add a running commentary on what was going on as if explaining something to a dim e year old.
Crowning moment was the sermon: rambled on for a full 15 minutes on his incomprehension about how women choose which dress to buy, how nervous he was doing a service in a church not his own, and the groom's haircut. Final 6 minutes were basically saying that with the divorce rate at roughly 40% of all marriages ending in divorce we should all enjoy this occasion and remember it so we could compare with any future nuptials of the bride or groom.
Our CWs sent in a report to the Archdeacon - I'm not sure what, if anything, the AD did.
At one wedding I attended, the couple wrote their own vows. Although they'd been asked to submitted the words in advance - which they did - they "felt lead" the night before to completely re-write them.
The combination of naivety, over-enthusiasm and 80's youth evangelical culture was hideous.
The husband basically promised not to wander about the house in his vest and pants. The wife would be smited if she so much as gave him the side-eye.
At the next leaders meeting, it was agreed that no one would ever be allowed to write their own wedding vows again.
In both these cases, did they use the "legal vows" as well? If they didn't, they're technically not married!
I think in the case of the CofE, so long as you get to the end of the year without anyone challenging it parliament declares all marriages carried out to have been done properly to avoid precisely such issues (at least that's what I recall being told when I was getting married and there was some uncertainty about precisely how many sets of banns we needed to get married in the university chapel).
The issue is not the same for banns as it is for the words used to make the marriage. Basically the banns are only about whether you are legally free to marry.
In both these cases, did they use the "legal vows" as well? If they didn't, they're technically not married!
I think in the case of the CofE, so long as you get to the end of the year without anyone challenging it parliament declares all marriages carried out to have been done properly to avoid precisely such issues (at least that's what I recall being told when I was getting married and there was some uncertainty about precisely how many sets of banns we needed to get married in the university chapel).
This is one of the charming but naive beliefs that still exist in the UK.
If a wedding service happens in a CofE church then it has to take place according to an approved text. When the registers are signed the Priest signs that the couple have been married "according to the rites and ceremonies of the Church of England" so if people have gone off-piste and decided to do their own thing then they have not been so married, the registration is not correct and so, technically, the marriage hasn't taken place.
Rest assured, there is no occasion in the parliamentary calendar when CofE clergy are de facto handed a free pass to cover all and any mistakes they have made pertaining to weddings in their church.
BTW Unless your university chapel was licensed for weddings according to CofE Canon Law then you didn't need to get any banns called, what was required was a Licence.
BTW Unless your university chapel was licensed for weddings according to CofE Canon Law then you didn't need to get any banns called, what was required was a Licence.[/quote]
Well we ended up getting three sets and no licence (one for my home parish, one for my wife's home parish and one for the parish containing the chapel). I'll have to tell Mrs Feet we're not really married .
When the registers are signed the Priest signs that the couple have been married "according to the rites and ceremonies of the Church of England" so if people have gone off-piste and decided to do their own thing then they have not been so married, the registration is not correct and so, technically, the marriage hasn't taken place.
Random legal question: Is the defect cured by creation of a common law marriage if the couple hold themselves as married for a prescribed length of time?
When the registers are signed the Priest signs that the couple have been married "according to the rites and ceremonies of the Church of England" so if people have gone off-piste and decided to do their own thing then they have not been so married, the registration is not correct and so, technically, the marriage hasn't taken place.
Random legal question: Is the defect cured by creation of a common law marriage if the couple hold themselves as married for a prescribed length of time?
Old style 'common law marriage' doesn't really exist in the UK (where I presume TheOrganist lives).
When the registers are signed the Priest signs that the couple have been married "according to the rites and ceremonies of the Church of England" so if people have gone off-piste and decided to do their own thing then they have not been so married, the registration is not correct and so, technically, the marriage hasn't taken place.
Random legal question: Is the defect cured by creation of a common law marriage if the couple hold themselves as married for a prescribed length of time?
Old style 'common law marriage' doesn't really exist in the UK (where I presume TheOrganist lives).
Thanks. They don’t in the (US) state where I live either, but they do in some other states, so I didn’t know what the situation might be in England.
In both these cases, did they use the "legal vows" as well? If they didn't, they're technically not married!
Yes, they did the legal bit then the Minister introduced the self written promises. The version he had in front of him - which they'd worked on together - was a lot shorter and a great deal more sensible.
His face was a total picture when they started free styling. Poor guy. Because once that happens, what can you do? There's no good option.
When the registers are signed the Priest signs that the couple have been married "according to the rites and ceremonies of the Church of England" so if people have gone off-piste and decided to do their own thing then they have not been so married, the registration is not correct and so, technically, the marriage hasn't taken place.
Random legal question: Is the defect cured by creation of a common law marriage if the couple hold themselves as married for a prescribed length of time?
Old style 'common law marriage' doesn't really exist in the UK (where I presume TheOrganist lives).
No "really" about it. It doesn't exist except in popular imagination. No such thing -- you're not married unless you follow a legal ceremony before a registrar with two witnesses. Doesn't matter what you say to each other or however many broomsticks you jump over.
Without a formal ceremony all kinds of problems can occur with wills and property and the like. Unless married a partner doesn't automatically inherit.
As for unusual vows - well you can have them but they have to be used in addition to, not instead of, one of the prescribed forms. That's true wherever you marry - civil and/or religious services alike.
His face was a total picture when they started free styling. Poor guy. Because once that happens, what can you do? There's no good option.
Just out of interest, what would you have done?
No good option but stopping them making idiots of themselves is the best policy. LOUD VOICE now we move onto ….
But there's a better way to sort it. In no uncertain terms leave them in no doubt before the service what is expected and what you will do. Incidentally I always have a rehearsal if only to drill it into the joker sin the wedding party that I won't have any nonsense around someone saying they object to the wedding, as a laugh.
His face was a total picture when they started free styling. Poor guy. Because once that happens, what can you do? There's no good option.
Just out of interest, what would you have done?
No good option but stopping them making idiots of themselves is the best policy. LOUD VOICE now we move onto ….
But there's a better way to sort it. In no uncertain terms leave them in no doubt before the service what is expected and what you will do. Incidentally I always have a rehearsal if only to drill it into the joker sin the wedding party that I won't have any nonsense around someone saying they object to the wedding, as a laugh.
That's what Rev T would have done as well and for exactly the same reasons. The post-honeymoon conversation would be totally popcorn worthy.
There are some other reasons why that might have been more challenging in this instance, but sharing them risks identifying the couple and the Minister. Which wouldn't be fair.
Technically, I believe, additional ‘vows’ are permissible so long as they don’t appear to contradict the legal ones.
As far as banns are concerned, if the bishop had licensed the university chapel for weddings, then banns as described by @Arethosemyfeet would be correct. A Special Licence is needed for premises or places not licensed for marriages.
If banns were not properly published then unless the couple knowingly and wilfully entered into marriage in those circumstances (i.e. knowing that banns hadn’t been published and should have been) then I think that the marriage is not void. (The Marriage Act clearly states that if it is knowingly and wilfully entered into then it is void.) I don’t know whether it would be voidable (only at the instance of one of the parties to the marriage, and only within three years of the marriage), or merely irregular, but it is still a legal marriage. (IANAL etc.)
When the registers are signed the Priest signs that the couple have been married "according to the rites and ceremonies of the Church of England" so if people have gone off-piste and decided to do their own thing then they have not been so married, the registration is not correct and so, technically, the marriage hasn't taken place.
Random legal question: Is the defect cured by creation of a common law marriage if the couple hold themselves as married for a prescribed length of time?
Old style 'common law marriage' doesn't really exist in the UK (where I presume TheOrganist lives).
No "really" about it. It doesn't exist except in popular imagination. No such thing -- you're not married unless you follow a legal ceremony before a registrar with two witnesses. Doesn't matter what you say to each other or however many broomsticks you jump over.
Without a formal ceremony all kinds of problems can occur with wills and property and the like. Unless married a partner doesn't automatically inherit.
As for unusual vows - well you can have them but they have to be used in addition to, not instead of, one of the prescribed forms. That's true wherever you marry - civil and/or religious services alike.
Marriage by habit and repute (effectively common law marriage) was legal in Scotland until 2006, so it's well within living memory that it existed in parts of the UK.
Marriage by habit and repute (effectively common law marriage) was legal in Scotland until 2006, so it's well within living memory that it existed in parts of the UK.
Even if it existed in some form before, which is unclear, it hasn't existed in England and Wales since Lady Day 1754.
I remember a moment of foolishness in a former parish, when I tried to honour the priesthood of a bombastic old priest in the parish by giving him, on two occasions, because I'm a slow learner, the altar and pulpit.
On the first he apparently rambled on for about twenty minutes about the best way to cook a leg of lamb. As far as I know there was no reference to the Lamb of God.
The second time he preached on the need to smack little boys more often. I did not permit him altar or pulpit again after that, and he complained to the bishop about my excluding from his rights. He kept said bishop well supplied with jams, pickles and chutneys. His bishop liked his jams, pickles and chutneys. His bishop ceased to like me.
Some years after I left I heard he (lamb cooking, bottom smacking priest, not the bishop) had been named as a sexual predator. Sadly he died before he was charged.
My troubles in a more recent parish began when a retired colleague preached a sermon describing the resurrection as nonsense. I admit I failed in not challenging him properly - he was a supercilious bugger - but I did not permit him to preach again after that. Unfortunately he had a small fan club that, in a nasty case of deja vu, also included the bishop. The rest is, at least in my small world, history.
I had a problem in a Parade Service shortly before Christmas. It was our custom to have a charity appeal in the run-up to the season, and on this year we had a chosen a Well-Known Missionary Society doing some interesting work. They sent a representative to speak, in fact someone whose salaried job it was to tell churches about their work. I told them, well ahead of time, what the congregation would be like and that the speaker would have 10 minutes.
Well, she was awful: not heretical, but she was lifeless, dull, could not deviate from her slides and script, didn't relate at all to the young people, and went on for over 20 minutes. After that I had to work furiously to claw back some time as these services were always full of content. Afterwards people were very cross about her and extremely sympathetic to my predicament.
The following year we had a speaker from a local charity. I told him he could have 8 minutes, expecting he would over-run slightly. Of course he was brilliant, had us eating out of his hand, and kept to time perfectly!
My troubles in a more recent parish began when a retired colleague preached a sermon describing the resurrection as nonsense.
I presume this wasn't the late Bishop of Durham who, although somewhat noncommittal about the physical nature of the resurrection, did not say that it was "a conjuring trick with bones" but rather the opposite! http://tiny.cc/xqq57y
On the first he apparently rambled on for about twenty minutes about the best way to cook a leg of lamb. As far as I know there was no reference to the Lamb of God.
P'haps he fancied himself as a latter day Robert Capon.
I think some of the city Piskie churches might have a day time service for Good Friday, but otherwise it is always in the evening, if there is one. And it is not a national holiday, though it is a Bank Holiday. (But that increasingly means only banks - not just on Good Friday but on other Bank Holidays). It might be a local holiday, depending on the locale!
My Mum (from Glasgow) and Dad (from Edinburgh) got married on an Easter Monday.
They often told us that it was a holiday in Glasgow, but not in Edinburgh (who had the holiday on the Friday) but no-one on Mum's side (or Dad himself) had realised when organising, so lots of Dad's family and friends had to take an extra day off.
Two memories dredged up. One visiting preacher announced his wife had just had the sixth or seventh or similar baby. He said proudly he was “armed and dangerous.” The pastor removed him from the platform but by that stage there was much laughter and some there who were totally horrified.
THe second involved a speaker from China who brought his own interpreter to the service. If speaker waved right hand, so did the interpreter. If he shouted, interpreter shouted. Every move was copied. No one listened to what was said. More interest was shown in trying to guess the next moves by the two.
I had a problem in a Parade Service shortly before Christmas. It was our custom to have a charity appeal in the run-up to the season, and on this year we had a chosen a Well-Known Missionary Society doing some interesting work. They sent a representative to speak, in fact someone whose salaried job it was to tell churches about their work. I told them, well ahead of time, what the congregation would be like and that the speaker would have 10 minutes.
Well, she was awful: not heretical, but she was lifeless, dull, could not deviate from her slides and script, didn't relate at all to the young people, and went on for over 20 minutes. After that I had to work furiously to claw back some time as these services were always full of content. Afterwards people were very cross about her and extremely sympathetic to my predicament.
The following year we had a speaker from a local charity. I told him he could have 8 minutes, expecting he would over-run slightly. Of course he was brilliant, had us eating out of his hand, and kept to time perfectly!
Two horror stories:
One speaker from a charity that supports the persecuted church talked at length about families, including children, being beheaded for being Christians. Which would have been fine if he'd waited until after the children had left. There were plenty of tearful children in my group and quite a few had nightmares for weeks.
He wasn't asked back.
We also had a speaker from a church working with teenagers from the Bosnian civil war. They'd settled in the UK when they were much younger and were now nearly 18. The Home Office now wanted to send them back to a home that no longer existed.
They'd never done a talk about their work before and it showed. Their presentation lasted over an hour and was totally confusing. It was a total shame as the work they were doing was excellent.
When I was in college the TEC chaplain asked a retired priest to help him with the Easter service. (In those days only a priest was allowed to distribute the elements.) The chaplain meant he wanted help in distributing the elements, but the priest immediately said, "You want me to preach." The chaplain didn't have the heart to say no, so this man preached.
Although he had been told the sermon should only last five minutes, he preached for forty-five. Afterwards we speculated that since he retired he had written a sermon every Sunday. At this Easter service, he gave us one sentence from each. After everyone had stopped trying to follow it, he suddenly jolted the congregation by bellowing the word LOVE. From then on, everyone struggled to contain their giggles.
A few years ago, our not-dearly-missed former p-in-c, Fr Fuckwit, preached a homily at our annual Memorial Service.
Now quite common in the UK, this is a simple service, attended by numerous bereaved and grieving peeps, and (at Our Place) arranged through two local funeral directors. IOW, the congregation consisted mostly of families they had dealt with over the past year or two. Names of the deceased were read out, with family members lighting a candle as each was mentioned - quite an emotional occasion for many, and I would guess that a goodly number of those present were not particularly religious.
A brief synopsis of Fr F's homily:
1. I lost my Dear Wife through cancer, so I know EXACTLY (!) how you are all feeling.
2. But I am such a good Christian, so blessed by God for keeping his laws, that he has seen fit to bless me yet further by making me fall in Love with my Lovely Wife. I declared my Love for her over there, by the statue of our wonderful Patron Saint.
3. If you love God as I do, you too could find happiness once more.
I've exaggerated slightly, but Madam Sacristan and I were so appalled at the way the homily was going that we very nearly walked out. As we were in official robes, and in the chancel, we forebore, but...
Bed-Bugs have more pastoral sensitivity than Fr F, who still strolls around in an unburstable bubble of smug self-satisfaction.
Comments
For the rest of us, today is Pentecost/Whitsun. We've had readings and sermons about the Holy Spirit.
For a rip-roaring evangelist, even if he's not a specifically charismatic one, some of us might have expected him to take the opportunity to preach something on the lines of 'you're all sinners who need to stop resisting and respond to the Holy Spirit'.
Or has he only got one sermon?
For the Orthodox, Pentecost is next Sunday.
This year. It's not always exactly one week after the West.
“The Ecclesiastical Joke Book” by any chance? I had most of it memorised before I understood half the jokes.
No working with children check even? Compulsory by law here and I'd have assumed so in most places where the Ship sails.
The context concerned this year. For reference, it will be one week after in 2020, 2022, and 2023; four weeks after in 2021; five weeks after in 2024; and coincide in 2025.
The funny thing was that nobody had told the organist anything about a change of topic, so we sang all the usual Good Friday and Easter hymns.
When asked why he had decided to preach on Zechariah over Easter, the preacher said simply that he thought it would make a nice change. He himself did not care much for Zechariah but felt it was his duty to do Something A Little Different.
As an aside, a few years ago I had reason to look at Anglican theological college training in England and several of the Aust states. The low academic standard of the education in England surprised me. Nothing to do with churchmanship, just the level of teaching
I certainly welcome people who raise questions with me afterwards, if they do it in a "gentlemanly" way. Indeed I deliberately try to provoke thought and ask open-ended questions at times. Not everyone likes this!
More to the point, my experience is that people get more het-up about "the wrong tune" for a hymn, or the colour of the preacher's hair, than theology - except in the most conservatively evangelical churches where theological accuracy can trump even the living voice of God's Spirit.
And, by the way, living in Glasgow in 1976 I found it impossible to find a daytime Good Friday service. It didn't seem to be a holiday and many people were at work.
09:30 Veneration of the Cross
12:00-15:00 Three hours devotions
19:30 usually something else; content varys
For eg, 2019 at 19:30 was singing & reading the Passion Icelandic style, 2018 was IIRC Stainer's Crucifixion, other years have had stations of the cross etc etc.
Not only did they seem to think the occasion didn't require them to stick to any kind of approved script or even a combination of approved service wording, but they also decided to add a running commentary on what was going on as if explaining something to a dim e year old.
Crowning moment was the sermon: rambled on for a full 15 minutes on his incomprehension about how women choose which dress to buy, how nervous he was doing a service in a church not his own, and the groom's haircut. Final 6 minutes were basically saying that with the divorce rate at roughly 40% of all marriages ending in divorce we should all enjoy this occasion and remember it so we could compare with any future nuptials of the bride or groom.
Our CWs sent in a report to the Archdeacon - I'm not sure what, if anything, the AD did.
At one wedding I attended, the couple wrote their own vows. Although they'd been asked to submitted the words in advance - which they did - they "felt lead" the night before to completely re-write them.
The combination of naivety, over-enthusiasm and 80's youth evangelical culture was hideous.
The husband basically promised not to wander about the house in his vest and pants. The wife would be smited if she so much as gave him the side-eye.
At the next leaders meeting, it was agreed that no one would ever be allowed to write their own wedding vows again.
I think in the case of the CofE, so long as you get to the end of the year without anyone challenging it parliament declares all marriages carried out to have been done properly to avoid precisely such issues (at least that's what I recall being told when I was getting married and there was some uncertainty about precisely how many sets of banns we needed to get married in the university chapel).
This is one of the charming but naive beliefs that still exist in the UK.
If a wedding service happens in a CofE church then it has to take place according to an approved text. When the registers are signed the Priest signs that the couple have been married "according to the rites and ceremonies of the Church of England" so if people have gone off-piste and decided to do their own thing then they have not been so married, the registration is not correct and so, technically, the marriage hasn't taken place.
Rest assured, there is no occasion in the parliamentary calendar when CofE clergy are de facto handed a free pass to cover all and any mistakes they have made pertaining to weddings in their church.
BTW Unless your university chapel was licensed for weddings according to CofE Canon Law then you didn't need to get any banns called, what was required was a Licence.
Are they not told about such matters in Vicar School?
(Rhetorical question - the answer may well be Yes, but they, as so often appears, fail to appreciate that Canon Law actually applies to them.)
BTW Unless your university chapel was licensed for weddings according to CofE Canon Law then you didn't need to get any banns called, what was required was a Licence.[/quote]
Well we ended up getting three sets and no licence (one for my home parish, one for my wife's home parish and one for the parish containing the chapel). I'll have to tell Mrs Feet we're not really married
Old style 'common law marriage' doesn't really exist in the UK (where I presume TheOrganist lives).
Yes, they did the legal bit then the Minister introduced the self written promises. The version he had in front of him - which they'd worked on together - was a lot shorter and a great deal more sensible.
His face was a total picture when they started free styling. Poor guy. Because once that happens, what can you do? There's no good option.
Just out of interest, what would you have done?
No "really" about it. It doesn't exist except in popular imagination. No such thing -- you're not married unless you follow a legal ceremony before a registrar with two witnesses. Doesn't matter what you say to each other or however many broomsticks you jump over.
Without a formal ceremony all kinds of problems can occur with wills and property and the like. Unless married a partner doesn't automatically inherit.
As for unusual vows - well you can have them but they have to be used in addition to, not instead of, one of the prescribed forms. That's true wherever you marry - civil and/or religious services alike.
As far as banns are concerned, if the bishop had licensed the university chapel for weddings, then banns as described by @Arethosemyfeet would be correct. A Special Licence is needed for premises or places not licensed for marriages.
If banns were not properly published then unless the couple knowingly and wilfully entered into marriage in those circumstances (i.e. knowing that banns hadn’t been published and should have been) then I think that the marriage is not void. (The Marriage Act clearly states that if it is knowingly and wilfully entered into then it is void.) I don’t know whether it would be voidable (only at the instance of one of the parties to the marriage, and only within three years of the marriage), or merely irregular, but it is still a legal marriage. (IANAL etc.)
(Cross-posted with Exclamation Mark and Tubbs)
On the first he apparently rambled on for about twenty minutes about the best way to cook a leg of lamb. As far as I know there was no reference to the Lamb of God.
The second time he preached on the need to smack little boys more often. I did not permit him altar or pulpit again after that, and he complained to the bishop about my excluding from his rights. He kept said bishop well supplied with jams, pickles and chutneys. His bishop liked his jams, pickles and chutneys. His bishop ceased to like me.
Some years after I left I heard he (lamb cooking, bottom smacking priest, not the bishop) had been named as a sexual predator. Sadly he died before he was charged.
My troubles in a more recent parish began when a retired colleague preached a sermon describing the resurrection as nonsense. I admit I failed in not challenging him properly - he was a supercilious bugger - but I did not permit him to preach again after that. Unfortunately he had a small fan club that, in a nasty case of deja vu, also included the bishop. The rest is, at least in my small world, history.
That priest too has died since.
Well, she was awful: not heretical, but she was lifeless, dull, could not deviate from her slides and script, didn't relate at all to the young people, and went on for over 20 minutes. After that I had to work furiously to claw back some time as these services were always full of content. Afterwards people were very cross about her and extremely sympathetic to my predicament.
The following year we had a speaker from a local charity. I told him he could have 8 minutes, expecting he would over-run slightly. Of course he was brilliant, had us eating out of his hand, and kept to time perfectly!
P'haps he fancied himself as a latter day Robert Capon.
My Mum (from Glasgow) and Dad (from Edinburgh) got married on an Easter Monday.
They often told us that it was a holiday in Glasgow, but not in Edinburgh (who had the holiday on the Friday) but no-one on Mum's side (or Dad himself) had realised when organising, so lots of Dad's family and friends had to take an extra day off.
THe second involved a speaker from China who brought his own interpreter to the service. If speaker waved right hand, so did the interpreter. If he shouted, interpreter shouted. Every move was copied. No one listened to what was said. More interest was shown in trying to guess the next moves by the two.
Two horror stories:
One speaker from a charity that supports the persecuted church talked at length about families, including children, being beheaded for being Christians. Which would have been fine if he'd waited until after the children had left. There were plenty of tearful children in my group and quite a few had nightmares for weeks.
He wasn't asked back.
We also had a speaker from a church working with teenagers from the Bosnian civil war. They'd settled in the UK when they were much younger and were now nearly 18. The Home Office now wanted to send them back to a home that no longer existed.
They'd never done a talk about their work before and it showed. Their presentation lasted over an hour and was totally confusing. It was a total shame as the work they were doing was excellent.
Although he had been told the sermon should only last five minutes, he preached for forty-five. Afterwards we speculated that since he retired he had written a sermon every Sunday. At this Easter service, he gave us one sentence from each. After everyone had stopped trying to follow it, he suddenly jolted the congregation by bellowing the word LOVE. From then on, everyone struggled to contain their giggles.
Now quite common in the UK, this is a simple service, attended by numerous bereaved and grieving peeps, and (at Our Place) arranged through two local funeral directors. IOW, the congregation consisted mostly of families they had dealt with over the past year or two. Names of the deceased were read out, with family members lighting a candle as each was mentioned - quite an emotional occasion for many, and I would guess that a goodly number of those present were not particularly religious.
A brief synopsis of Fr F's homily:
1. I lost my Dear Wife through cancer, so I know EXACTLY (!) how you are all feeling.
2. But I am such a good Christian, so blessed by God for keeping his laws, that he has seen fit to bless me yet further by making me fall in Love with my Lovely Wife. I declared my Love for her over there, by the statue of our wonderful Patron Saint.
3. If you love God as I do, you too could find happiness once more.
I've exaggerated slightly, but Madam Sacristan and I were so appalled at the way the homily was going that we very nearly walked out. As we were in official robes, and in the chancel, we forebore, but...
Bed-Bugs have more pastoral sensitivity than Fr F, who still strolls around in an unburstable bubble of smug self-satisfaction.