Well I think @Jengie Jon’s analogy is closer than yours, which may be because we differ about the nature and purpose of preaching.
To change the analogy, in some respects the preacher is like a group leader preparing a party for a walk. She has studied the map in advance. She points out some likely viewpoints and the presence of a spring where water bottles can be refilled. She suggests a route, and indicates where there is a choice between a rocky scramble or a walk through a forestry road in a fir plantation.
Nothing she has to say is more important than what the map has to show, but she draws connections between the potentialities of the map and the capacity of the group members.
She has also noted that one town has a market fair in progress that day, and suggests a different location if the group wants to finish at a quiet pub.
The group are all capable of reading the map, with greater or lesser degrees of comprehension and fluency. They are quite capable of noticing if she has got her contours back to front and what she has marked out as a likely viewpoint is in fact a small valley, or to venture alternative suggestions about route and destination. But she is the one who has studied and prepared with a view to enabling the group to make best use of the map for the outing they are planning.
The correct term for Reformed Ministers are ordained as Ministers of Word and Sacrament. 'Minister' means servant. As someone once said a servant is not greater than his master.
The correct term for Reformed Ministers are ordained as Ministers of Word and Sacrament. 'Minister' means servant. As someone once said a servant is not greater than his master.
The school I went to was then Presbyterian, and after the big merger became Uniting. In Dlet's day, there were 2 new chaplains installed. One was to be Minister of the Table and the Word, but the younger to be Minister of the Word only - in Anglican terms, a deacon. He had decided that that was the ministry he wanted.
Well I think @Jengie Jon’s analogy is closer than yours, which may be because we differ about the nature and purpose of preaching.
To change the analogy, in some respects the preacher is like a group leader preparing a party for a walk. She has studied the map in advance. She points out some likely viewpoints and the presence of a spring where water bottles can be refilled. She suggests a route, and indicates where there is a choice between a rocky scramble or a walk through a forestry road in a fir plantation.
Nothing she has to say is more important than what the map has to show, but she draws connections between the potentialities of the map and the capacity of the group members.
She has also noted that one town has a market fair in progress that day, and suggests a different location if the group wants to finish at a quiet pub.
The group are all capable of reading the map, with greater or lesser degrees of comprehension and fluency. They are quite capable of noticing if she has got her contours back to front and what she has marked out as a likely viewpoint is in fact a small valley, or to venture alternative suggestions about route and destination. But she is the one who has studied and prepared with a view to enabling the group to make best use of the map for the outing they are planning.
....... but while denying the group access to the actual map without the leaders personal interpretation?
Well I think @Jengie Jon’s analogy is closer than yours, which may be because we differ about the nature and purpose of preaching.
To change the analogy, in some respects the preacher is like a group leader preparing a party for a walk. She has studied the map in advance. She points out some likely viewpoints and the presence of a spring where water bottles can be refilled. She suggests a route, and indicates where there is a choice between a rocky scramble or a walk through a forestry road in a fir plantation.
Nothing she has to say is more important than what the map has to show, but she draws connections between the potentialities of the map and the capacity of the group members.
She has also noted that one town has a market fair in progress that day, and suggests a different location if the group wants to finish at a quiet pub.
The group are all capable of reading the map, with greater or lesser degrees of comprehension and fluency. They are quite capable of noticing if she has got her contours back to front and what she has marked out as a likely viewpoint is in fact a small valley, or to venture alternative suggestions about route and destination. But she is the one who has studied and prepared with a view to enabling the group to make best use of the map for the outing they are planning.
....... but while denying the group access to the actual map without the leaders personal interpretation?
I'm pretty sure all Reformed churches advocate universal literacy, ready availability of Bibles in local languages and regular private reading of said Bibles.
Well I think @Jengie Jon’s analogy is closer than yours, which may be because we differ about the nature and purpose of preaching.
To change the analogy, in some respects the preacher is like a group leader preparing a party for a walk. She has studied the map in advance. She points out some likely viewpoints and the presence of a spring where water bottles can be refilled. She suggests a route, and indicates where there is a choice between a rocky scramble or a walk through a forestry road in a fir plantation.
Nothing she has to say is more important than what the map has to show, but she draws connections between the potentialities of the map and the capacity of the group members.
She has also noted that one town has a market fair in progress that day, and suggests a different location if the group wants to finish at a quiet pub.
The group are all capable of reading the map, with greater or lesser degrees of comprehension and fluency. They are quite capable of noticing if she has got her contours back to front and what she has marked out as a likely viewpoint is in fact a small valley, or to venture alternative suggestions about route and destination. But she is the one who has studied and prepared with a view to enabling the group to make best use of the map for the outing they are planning.
....... but while denying the group access to the actual map without the leaders personal interpretation?
That comment appears not to have taken account of this part of my analogy
The group are all capable of reading the map, with greater or lesser degrees of comprehension and fluency. They are quite capable of noticing if she has got her contours back to front and what she has marked out as a likely viewpoint is in fact a small valley, or to venture alternative suggestions about route and destination.
And, I would add, the greater the extent to which those involved have engaged with the text before they hear it read and preached on, the greater their ability to critique the preacher’s take on it.
The correct term for Reformed Ministers are ordained as Ministers of Word and Sacrament. 'Minister' means servant. As someone once said a servant is not greater than his master.
Here, there is a big effort to be sure that there is an "s" on the end of the last word.
Technically in Reformed terms he was not a Minister/Presbyter but a Doctor which is a different ministry within the five fold Reformed tradition and I would struggle to see how the minister of Word differed from a Lay Preacher/Reader who is also an Elder
Well I think @Jengie Jon’s analogy is closer than yours, which may be because we differ about the nature and purpose of preaching.
To change the analogy, in some respects the preacher is like a group leader preparing a party for a walk. She has studied the map in advance. She points out some likely viewpoints and the presence of a spring where water bottles can be refilled. She suggests a route, and indicates where there is a choice between a rocky scramble or a walk through a forestry road in a fir plantation.
Nothing she has to say is more important than what the map has to show, but she draws connections between the potentialities of the map and the capacity of the group members.
She has also noted that one town has a market fair in progress that day, and suggests a different location if the group wants to finish at a quiet pub.
The group are all capable of reading the map, with greater or lesser degrees of comprehension and fluency. They are quite capable of noticing if she has got her contours back to front and what she has marked out as a likely viewpoint is in fact a small valley, or to venture alternative suggestions about route and destination. But she is the one who has studied and prepared with a view to enabling the group to make best use of the map for the outing they are planning.
....... but while denying the group access to the actual map without the leaders personal interpretation?
Eh? The readings are read, a good Reformed person has their Bible in front of them, how are they denied access to the map during a sermon? Go through my posts I use words like 'dialogical' and 'hermenueutical community' these are not just meaningless phrases they have specific theological understandings and you would do well to get your head around them before you start critiquing the Reformed understanding of the Word. To use a popular analogy the action of the Word happens somewhere between the speaker's mouth and the listener's ear but there is no saying where.
Alan29 some years ago I was in a Bible quiz on the URC team with a prominent liberal Anglican church and a very much educated middle class Methodist church. The URC is held to be a liberal denomination. This was in a suburb close to a university and a teaching hospital. All right if we had known in advance that the quiz was on Biblical knowledge we would not have fielded the a lecturer in Biblical Studies. That was the Methodists change feeling that it would be home territory for them. However the other team members was an elder and me, neither of which had a biblical or theological qualification at the time nor were we lay preachers. The Methodist Church fielded a team of local preachers. I think the Anglican may have had the vicar but I do not recall. The weakest member on our team was the same level as the top scoring Methodist lay preacher and the Anglican came below the Methodists. I would say that in the normal URC congregation about 10% of members have that level of Biblical literacy. They are not always middle class, and some never ever attend a formal course on Biblical Studies even at lay preaching level. I do not think the URC is exceptional among Reformed churches in this. If that is your congregation/partners-in-the-breaking-of-the-Word you cannot get away with not using the Bible.
Nope! That would be like a priest supposing their role in the Eucharist was more important than Christ's.
Or, as was once commented after an opponent of the ordination had being going on and on about the importance of how the priest represented Christ at the Eucharist,
'Funny. I thought that was what the bread and the wine did.'
I have recently started partaking of the Holy Mysteries at 8am in a MoR CofE establishment. The locally printed service booklet is entitled "Common Worship Order Two - A service of Holy Communion according to the 1662 Book of Common Prayer", presumably in a spirit of comprise and/or camouflage .
One very peculiar anomaly for me is the position of the Sermon. After the Creed, an offertory sentence is read, the 'collection' of alms taken in silence, the elements placed upon the Holy Table, the chalice filled and the Lavabo performed. Then the Sermon is preached, and hands are not washed further . The rubric says "A homily (sermon) may be given here or after the Offertory".
Is this a common practice within the BCP tradition?
I have never heard of anything like this, but I wouldn't be surprised that something like this existed. In Norway I've seen some who celebrate the Eucharist before the sermon (so that the children may partake before they are sent to their respective places, i.e. Sunday schools).
In Common Worship, order two, the sermon is placed just before the Offertory. There are only two rubrics that has a bearing otherwise. No.13 (p.332), which principally applies to order 1, but may be applied to order 2, states that a sermon "should normally be preached at all celebrations on Sundays and Principal Holy Days" (which means that at a midweek mass, it can be removed). No. 26 (p.335, which applies only to order 2) says: "At the discretion of the priest, the sermon may precede the Creed." Nowhere does it say that it can be moved after the Offertory and the Lavabo.
Nope! That would be like a priest supposing their role in the Eucharist was more important than Christ's.
Or, as was once commented after an opponent of the ordination had being going on and on about the importance of how the priest represented Christ at the Eucharist,
'Funny. I thought that was what the bread and the wine did.'
Well, the priest represents Christ. The Eucharistic elements are Christ.
Nope! That would be like a priest supposing their role in the Eucharist was more important than Christ's.
Or, as was once commented after an opponent of the ordination had being going on and on about the importance of how the priest represented Christ at the Eucharist,
'Funny. I thought that was what the bread and the wine did.'
Well, the priest represents Christ. The Eucharistic elements are Christ.
The altar also represents Christ, so does the assembled people (the body of Christ according to Paul) and of course the Bible is the living Word of God.
I would have thought having the Bible available to all was not intended to remove the need for sound preaching but to help guard preachers against error by giving their flock the means to challenge them.
That would be more-or-less my point of view. I also take the view that the various confessions of fait are there to stop clergy and laity getting too far off into the long grass with their interpretations of Scripture. However, I can only really deal with confessional statements if they have a clear Biblical basis.
I also get a bit frustrated with the moonlight and mystery end of Anglicanism that seems to think their is something magical about priests. Most of us are fairly ordinary chaps and chapesses with our share of problems who have been called to the Ministry of Word and Sacraments. That responsibility is enough to carry without a huge burden of unrealistic expectation being heaped upon it.
Back several decades when I was in my first parish we had a mid week Eucharist. Yes, at times the priest would offer some commentary on the lessons (always 3). But, perhaps blending traditions of clergy interpretting the word, and individuals reading and making up their own mind, we would at times ask the small congregation what they'd heard, what they'd thought the lessons were saying. Sort of a mini Bible study group in place of one person's words. It was refreshing, especially to hear some deep throughts from those one never expected to speak.
The Bible is the living Word of God? Surely it's the written word, that points to the living Word?
But when read aloud ........
Well first there is interpretation going on in the reading of the passage. Even when the individual has just got up to read and looked at the passage. Yes I have done it, no it is not my preference and I would much prefer to prepare prayerfully for doing this.
Secondly, I really do believe in the power of pastoral visiting and prayer for the congregation and see these as essential parts of sermon preparation. Remember the Word in the Bible is like the Church i.e the universal church, the Word in the sermon is like this church i.e. the particular church. In other words the hearers of the Sermon should have the question "What is the Word saying to me and this Congregation?" while listening to the sermon. The idea that just reading the Bible somehow will make up for those parts of sermon preparation seems to me dubious.
Zappa wrote a long post on January 4th, commencing: "I must say I get sick of constant whingeing about "the sermon." ...". Can I just say, "Amen" to it! Thank you.
The Bible is the living Word of God? Surely it's the written word, that points to the living Word?
But when read aloud ........
Well first there is interpretation going on in the reading of the passage. Even when the individual has just got up to read and looked at the passage. Yes I have done it, no it is not my preference and I would much prefer to prepare prayerfully for doing this.
Secondly, I really do believe in the power of pastoral visiting and prayer for the congregation and see these as essential parts of sermon preparation. Remember the Word in the Bible is like the Church i.e the universal church, the Word in the sermon is like this church i.e. the particular church. In other words the hearers of the Sermon should have the question "What is the Word saying to me and this Congregation?" while listening to the sermon. The idea that just reading the Bible somehow will make up for those parts of sermon preparation seems to me dubious.
I agree. Pastors should have their people in mind when preparing the sermon.
The Bible is the living Word of God? Surely it's the written word, that points to the living Word?
But when read aloud ........
Well first there is interpretation going on in the reading of the passage. Even when the individual has just got up to read and looked at the passage. Yes I have done it, no it is not my preference and I would much prefer to prepare prayerfully for doing this.
Secondly, I really do believe in the power of pastoral visiting and prayer for the congregation and see these as essential parts of sermon preparation. Remember the Word in the Bible is like the Church i.e the universal church, the Word in the sermon is like this church i.e. the particular church. In other words the hearers of the Sermon should have the question "What is the Word saying to me and this Congregation?" while listening to the sermon. The idea that just reading the Bible somehow will make up for those parts of sermon preparation seems to me dubious.
I agree. Pastors should have their people in mind when preparing the sermon.
I'd imagine there are very few who don't think they do.
The Bible is the living Word of God? Surely it's the written word, that points to the living Word?
But when read aloud ........
Reading the Bible aloud doesn't make the Bible magic.
There are several times where Scripture talks about Scripture being alive. I take that to refer to the extraordinary way in which God uses the written word. Those times when a passage seems directed straight at you, even though you know it's hundreds of years old, and millions of others have read the same words before. (And bearing in mind all the potential pitfalls.)
The Bible is wonderful because God chooses to speak to us through it. It isn't magic, and its not on a par with God's full revelation of himself - the incarnate Word.
Please would someone help me track down the score for the Salve, Regina?
I have looked and looked and only been able to find the simple version but I'm looking for the more beautiful version that I've come across a few times. All I have been able to find is this, which is a variation on the one I know but different enough to be very jarring.
I have it in a version adapted to French, (which is very beautifully harmonised) but I'm looking for the original version for the Latin text, so I can apply the same harmonies.
Thank you, @Robertus L . I am familiar with this but it it is this one that I'm after, sung at one of the parishes of my jurisdiction (in French) here.
Thanks for this, @Alan29 . This looks like the same version I was able to find on Gregobase (linked above). I had never heard it until your link, nor had I realised it is the version in the Liber. I assume, then, that this is the more commonly-known version and is the variant I'm likely to find online.
I might write to the German monastery linked above and ask if they can send me a scan or photo.
I have emailed the monastery but I'm still searching online. It seems there are a number of variations on the more solemn melody (none of them so far the one that I want). In my searching, I came across this beautiful troped version, which I thought I would share.
Lent begins for some of us tomorrow (Ash Wednesday). How many of you will be having a (possibly Eucharistic) service with Ashing during the day?
We are having just a 730pm Mass (with hymns, and Imposition of Ashes), but at least two other local Anglican churches are holding their services during the morning, at 930am/10am. Our Cathedral is offering a said Eucharist at 1pm, and a sung Eucharist at 530pm (in the Evensong slot!).
I ask because ISTM that Ash Wednesday is a rather arbitrary day on which to begin Lent (yes! I know it has a long history, but Lent itself has not always been of the same length). I wonder whether there is any legitimate reason not to begin Lent on the First Sunday, when attendance is likely to be higher than during the week.
Such a service (which need not be Eucharistic, if a priest is not available) would include the now-customary Imposition of Ashes, along with the penitential material provided by Common Worship in the C of E.
I daresay that there are rural/multi-church benefices, where such an arrangement is necessary, and IIRC the red book Lent, Holy Week, and Easter (1986) made suitable provision.
IOW, I'm probably not going to be at our 730pm Mass tomorrow, mainly for health reasons, but will make for a morning or lunchtime service elsewhere instead. I'd rather be with our own congregation, but...
Depending on what happens tomorrow, FatherInCharge may decide to make some alterations next year!
Lent begins for some of us tomorrow (Ash Wednesday). How many of you will be having a (possibly Eucharistic) service with Ashing during the day?
In these parts, it’s common for Catholic and Episcopal (and some other) churches to have three services on Ash Wednesday—one early in the morning that people can go to on their way to work, another at lunchtime (which often draws folks who aren’t members of that parish but who work nearby), and then one in the evening.
We have just the evening service, which this year will be a joint service with a sister congregation and the local Presbyterian campus ministry group. In the past, when I knew getting to the evening service at our church would be difficult for me due to family schedules and obligations, I’ve gone to the lunchtime Eucharist at the Episcopal church a block from my office.
We will be having Penitential Office and Communion at 5:30pm, which seems to work for my folks. Somewhat reluctantly I do ashes because we do palms on Palm Sunday, and the ex-RCs and ex-Piskies expect them. Attendance will, in all likelihood, be close to what we get at the main service on a Sunday.
Well, I did suggest to FatherInCharge that he might do well to have a lunch-time service (no hymns), but I think he wanted to see how the evening service went this year.
It seems Right and Proper to hold at least one (said) service on Ash Wednesday, but would the sky fall in, or would we have to spend an extra million years in Purgatory, if we did away with Ash Wednesday, and had all the stuff with ashes on the following Sunday?
Yes, under such circumstances, doubtless we would do the same.
Which sort of underlines my point - is Ash Wednesday really necessary? I agree that, with having it on a weekday, more opportunities to attend church/be ashed are possible, even if one attends a church other than one's own - the more, the merrier!
There are four (Anglican) churches in our Local Ministry Group, and the practice is for one to host an Ash Wednesday service. The churches are all within a couple of miles of each other. Last year, Our Place held a Eucharist with imposition of ashes mid morning. This year, another church is holding an evening service. This is advertised as a Eucharist, but no mention of ashes so I will have to see what happens on the night.
@ BishopsFinger. Yes!
Several years ago I filled in on Lent I for an ill colleague at a neighboring parish. He'd planned the full penitential rite as the entrance rite. I thought it odd, but it actually seemed a smoother flow, and allowed more people to participate. Ashes were not included, but were optional after the postlude for those who must have them. I've encouraged the Lay Reader at the parish I serve twice a month to give that a try -- penitential rite, readings, comment on lessons, prayers and dismissal.
It seems not uncommon nowadays for neighbouring churches to hold joint services on Ash Wednesday, and/or Ascension Day, but we're not in a Group, Team, or Cluster (yet!).
In all fairness, we do try to avoid clashing with each other as to various services and events, but ISTM that there is scope for Our Place, along with the four other local C of E parishes, to do something similar to what @Darda describes. We have a long-established, but now rather tired, tradition of joint evening worship on the Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, of Holy Week, but, frankly, this only really results in peeps being 'churched out' by Maundy Thursday!
@Nick Tamen Well, yes, Ash Wednesday allows us to have 40 days of Lent and can echo Jesus' time of prayer and temptation and the 40 years of wandering of the Hebrew people after the Passover and flight from Egypt.
I can feel a real and strong value in that -- the echo of 40 and 40 and 40 again links us with both of those events. So our journey in the spirit may resonate with that freedom from bondage, and Jesus' temptation to a different bondage. But, IMHO it takes well prepared preaching and careful education to make that resonance really sing in the life of the congregation. That thought that "their journey is my journey" has real power, and offers hope. But, seldom have I heard that preaching or education, or provided it myself, (mea culpa) to create that resonance for the people I walk with. And so "why 40 days" becomes a valid question, as Bishops Finger notes.
@Nick Tamen Well, yes, Ash Wednesday allows us to have 40 days of Lent and can echo Jesus' time of prayer and temptation and the 40 years of wandering of the Hebrew people after the Passover and flight from Egypt.
I can feel a real and strong value in that -- the echo of 40 and 40 and 40 again links us with both of those events. So our journey in the spirit may resonate with that freedom from bondage, and Jesus' temptation to a different bondage.
Totally agree. with what I have extracted from your post and add Moses' 40 days on the mountain.
Back a few posts, St Sanity will have 3 services with ashing - early morning, midday and then evening. The midday will cater for those working nearby. Not many at the early morning, a reasonable number at midday and varying numbers in the evening. As the forecast is for thunderstorms later in the day, probably not that many this year for the evening service.
Well, I did suggest to FatherInCharge that he might do well to have a lunch-time service (no hymns), but I think he wanted to see how the evening service went this year.
It seems Right and Proper to hold at least one (said) service on Ash Wednesday, but would the sky fall in, or would we have to spend an extra million years in Purgatory, if we did away with Ash Wednesday, and had all the stuff with ashes on the following Sunday?
Us wee piskies are authorised to move the imposition of ashes to the Sunday (or indeed any of the intervening days) under the new "experimental" rites. There is also provision for ashing to be conducted by a lay person in the context of a service of the word. Both provisions reflect the fact that in much of Scotland the distances required for priests to travel between congregations make the timing of Eucharistic worship a matter of flexibility. https://www.scotland.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/A-Rite-for-the-Beginning-of-Lent-B.pdf
St Quacks is having an evening service. (Full sung Mass). Fr Duck has cancelled the usual Wednesday morning low Mass, to get people to come out, and tbh the core congregation tend to do so. For me though evening services are rather awkward because I'm normally on bedtime duty.
We had a service of Healing and Reconciliation tonight, which was a bit of an innovation, and Mr Dragon informs me it went quite well. (It was then followed by pancakes.) I was at home with the Dragonlets.
Frs Duck and Duckling will be at the railway station (which is in the parish) tomorrow from about 7.30 to offer ashes to anyone who wants them when they are passing through.
I'm not sure what the other Anglo-Catholic parishes locally are doing: there may be a morning service, but atm we have the problem that St Quack's is the only one with an Incumbent, so it involves getting the local retired clergy to come out. (And none of them are really doable on public transport from us.) Checking the websites of the various local churches informs me that I am basically out of luck on suitable service options, as they're all either in the evening or clash with work.
Comments
Nope! That would be like a priest supposing their role in the Eucharist was more important than Christ's.
That’s certainly not the attitude, even a wee bit, of ministers I’ve encountered, and I’ve encountered lots of ministers.
Once again, @Jengie Jon has it.
No that would be like the priest omitting the words of institution and epiklesis because he had something more interesting to say instead.
To change the analogy, in some respects the preacher is like a group leader preparing a party for a walk. She has studied the map in advance. She points out some likely viewpoints and the presence of a spring where water bottles can be refilled. She suggests a route, and indicates where there is a choice between a rocky scramble or a walk through a forestry road in a fir plantation.
Nothing she has to say is more important than what the map has to show, but she draws connections between the potentialities of the map and the capacity of the group members.
She has also noted that one town has a market fair in progress that day, and suggests a different location if the group wants to finish at a quiet pub.
The group are all capable of reading the map, with greater or lesser degrees of comprehension and fluency. They are quite capable of noticing if she has got her contours back to front and what she has marked out as a likely viewpoint is in fact a small valley, or to venture alternative suggestions about route and destination. But she is the one who has studied and prepared with a view to enabling the group to make best use of the map for the outing they are planning.
The school I went to was then Presbyterian, and after the big merger became Uniting. In Dlet's day, there were 2 new chaplains installed. One was to be Minister of the Table and the Word, but the younger to be Minister of the Word only - in Anglican terms, a deacon. He had decided that that was the ministry he wanted.
....... but while denying the group access to the actual map without the leaders personal interpretation?
I'm pretty sure all Reformed churches advocate universal literacy, ready availability of Bibles in local languages and regular private reading of said Bibles.
Here, there is a big effort to be sure that there is an "s" on the end of the last word.
Eh? The readings are read, a good Reformed person has their Bible in front of them, how are they denied access to the map during a sermon? Go through my posts I use words like 'dialogical' and 'hermenueutical community' these are not just meaningless phrases they have specific theological understandings and you would do well to get your head around them before you start critiquing the Reformed understanding of the Word. To use a popular analogy the action of the Word happens somewhere between the speaker's mouth and the listener's ear but there is no saying where.
Or, as was once commented after an opponent of the ordination had being going on and on about the importance of how the priest represented Christ at the Eucharist,
'Funny. I thought that was what the bread and the wine did.'
In Common Worship, order two, the sermon is placed just before the Offertory. There are only two rubrics that has a bearing otherwise. No.13 (p.332), which principally applies to order 1, but may be applied to order 2, states that a sermon "should normally be preached at all celebrations on Sundays and Principal Holy Days" (which means that at a midweek mass, it can be removed). No. 26 (p.335, which applies only to order 2) says: "At the discretion of the priest, the sermon may precede the Creed." Nowhere does it say that it can be moved after the Offertory and the Lavabo.
The altar also represents Christ, so does the assembled people (the body of Christ according to Paul) and of course the Bible is the living Word of God.
That would be more-or-less my point of view. I also take the view that the various confessions of fait are there to stop clergy and laity getting too far off into the long grass with their interpretations of Scripture. However, I can only really deal with confessional statements if they have a clear Biblical basis.
I also get a bit frustrated with the moonlight and mystery end of Anglicanism that seems to think their is something magical about priests. Most of us are fairly ordinary chaps and chapesses with our share of problems who have been called to the Ministry of Word and Sacraments. That responsibility is enough to carry without a huge burden of unrealistic expectation being heaped upon it.
But when read aloud ........
Well first there is interpretation going on in the reading of the passage. Even when the individual has just got up to read and looked at the passage. Yes I have done it, no it is not my preference and I would much prefer to prepare prayerfully for doing this.
Secondly, I really do believe in the power of pastoral visiting and prayer for the congregation and see these as essential parts of sermon preparation. Remember the Word in the Bible is like the Church i.e the universal church, the Word in the sermon is like this church i.e. the particular church. In other words the hearers of the Sermon should have the question "What is the Word saying to me and this Congregation?" while listening to the sermon. The idea that just reading the Bible somehow will make up for those parts of sermon preparation seems to me dubious.
I agree. Pastors should have their people in mind when preparing the sermon.
Reading the Bible aloud doesn't make the Bible magic.
There are several times where Scripture talks about Scripture being alive. I take that to refer to the extraordinary way in which God uses the written word. Those times when a passage seems directed straight at you, even though you know it's hundreds of years old, and millions of others have read the same words before. (And bearing in mind all the potential pitfalls.)
The Bible is wonderful because God chooses to speak to us through it. It isn't magic, and its not on a par with God's full revelation of himself - the incarnate Word.
I have looked and looked and only been able to find the simple version but I'm looking for the more beautiful version that I've come across a few times. All I have been able to find is this, which is a variation on the one I know but different enough to be very jarring.
I have it in a version adapted to French, (which is very beautifully harmonised) but I'm looking for the original version for the Latin text, so I can apply the same harmonies.
I'd be grateful for any help.
http://gregorian-chant-hymns.com/hymns-2/salve-regina-simple.html
Thank you, @Robertus L . I am familiar with this but it it is this one that I'm after, sung at one of the parishes of my jurisdiction (in French) here.
Thanks for this, @Alan29 . This looks like the same version I was able to find on Gregobase (linked above). I had never heard it until your link, nor had I realised it is the version in the Liber. I assume, then, that this is the more commonly-known version and is the variant I'm likely to find online.
I might write to the German monastery linked above and ask if they can send me a scan or photo.
We are having just a 730pm Mass (with hymns, and Imposition of Ashes), but at least two other local Anglican churches are holding their services during the morning, at 930am/10am. Our Cathedral is offering a said Eucharist at 1pm, and a sung Eucharist at 530pm (in the Evensong slot!).
I ask because ISTM that Ash Wednesday is a rather arbitrary day on which to begin Lent (yes! I know it has a long history, but Lent itself has not always been of the same length). I wonder whether there is any legitimate reason not to begin Lent on the First Sunday, when attendance is likely to be higher than during the week.
Such a service (which need not be Eucharistic, if a priest is not available) would include the now-customary Imposition of Ashes, along with the penitential material provided by Common Worship in the C of E.
I daresay that there are rural/multi-church benefices, where such an arrangement is necessary, and IIRC the red book Lent, Holy Week, and Easter (1986) made suitable provision.
IOW, I'm probably not going to be at our 730pm Mass tomorrow, mainly for health reasons, but will make for a morning or lunchtime service elsewhere instead. I'd rather be with our own congregation, but...
Depending on what happens tomorrow, FatherInCharge may decide to make some alterations next year!
We have just the evening service, which this year will be a joint service with a sister congregation and the local Presbyterian campus ministry group. In the past, when I knew getting to the evening service at our church would be difficult for me due to family schedules and obligations, I’ve gone to the lunchtime Eucharist at the Episcopal church a block from my office.
It seems Right and Proper to hold at least one (said) service on Ash Wednesday, but would the sky fall in, or would we have to spend an extra million years in Purgatory, if we did away with Ash Wednesday, and had all the stuff with ashes on the following Sunday?
Which sort of underlines my point - is Ash Wednesday really necessary? I agree that, with having it on a weekday, more opportunities to attend church/be ashed are possible, even if one attends a church other than one's own - the more, the merrier!
Several years ago I filled in on Lent I for an ill colleague at a neighboring parish. He'd planned the full penitential rite as the entrance rite. I thought it odd, but it actually seemed a smoother flow, and allowed more people to participate. Ashes were not included, but were optional after the postlude for those who must have them. I've encouraged the Lay Reader at the parish I serve twice a month to give that a try -- penitential rite, readings, comment on lessons, prayers and dismissal.
In all fairness, we do try to avoid clashing with each other as to various services and events, but ISTM that there is scope for Our Place, along with the four other local C of E parishes, to do something similar to what @Darda describes. We have a long-established, but now rather tired, tradition of joint evening worship on the Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, of Holy Week, but, frankly, this only really results in peeps being 'churched out' by Maundy Thursday!
I can feel a real and strong value in that -- the echo of 40 and 40 and 40 again links us with both of those events. So our journey in the spirit may resonate with that freedom from bondage, and Jesus' temptation to a different bondage. But, IMHO it takes well prepared preaching and careful education to make that resonance really sing in the life of the congregation. That thought that "their journey is my journey" has real power, and offers hope. But, seldom have I heard that preaching or education, or provided it myself, (mea culpa) to create that resonance for the people I walk with. And so "why 40 days" becomes a valid question, as Bishops Finger notes.
Totally agree. with what I have extracted from your post and add Moses' 40 days on the mountain.
Back a few posts, St Sanity will have 3 services with ashing - early morning, midday and then evening. The midday will cater for those working nearby. Not many at the early morning, a reasonable number at midday and varying numbers in the evening. As the forecast is for thunderstorms later in the day, probably not that many this year for the evening service.
Us wee piskies are authorised to move the imposition of ashes to the Sunday (or indeed any of the intervening days) under the new "experimental" rites. There is also provision for ashing to be conducted by a lay person in the context of a service of the word. Both provisions reflect the fact that in much of Scotland the distances required for priests to travel between congregations make the timing of Eucharistic worship a matter of flexibility.
https://www.scotland.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/A-Rite-for-the-Beginning-of-Lent-B.pdf
We had a service of Healing and Reconciliation tonight, which was a bit of an innovation, and Mr Dragon informs me it went quite well. (It was then followed by pancakes.) I was at home with the Dragonlets.
Frs Duck and Duckling will be at the railway station (which is in the parish) tomorrow from about 7.30 to offer ashes to anyone who wants them when they are passing through.
I'm not sure what the other Anglo-Catholic parishes locally are doing: there may be a morning service, but atm we have the problem that St Quack's is the only one with an Incumbent, so it involves getting the local retired clergy to come out. (And none of them are really doable on public transport from us.) Checking the websites of the various local churches informs me that I am basically out of luck on suitable service options, as they're all either in the evening or clash with work.