While I take Bosch's point about listening rather than reading, wouldn't this mean us having to have a precentor "lining out" hymns so we could sing them, unless it was known that they were very familiar to everyone.
Not necessarily. In other essays, Bosch was very approving of the Lutheran hymnals-service books.
@Baptist Trainfan, I went back and looked at the full essay that @pease quoted from. Earlier in the essay, Bosch says this, which both answers your question (I’ve bolded that part) and gives a little more context to where he was coming from, and maybe even a hint or two that he was being intentionally provocative rather than completely serious:
I hear you asking: What’s wrong with providing worshipers with printed lections every week? With putting Bibles in the pew racks? With printing out the peoples’ participation in prayers and litanies each Sunday? With beaming prayers and scripture texts from electronic projectors onto overhead screens? I'll tell you. Here’s what’s wrong. Three reasons.
1) The first argument is ecclesial. When we provide printed texts in any form for worshipers to use, we're freezing out four populations of people who might regularly be worshiping among us: the blind, the aged with poor eyesight, the fully illiterate and the functionally illiterate, and little kids who haven't yet learned to read. It's as if we're sending the signal that we expect our worshiping assemblies to consist exclusively of literate, adult, able-bodied middle class elites. No others need apply.
Am I being too harsh? Too melodramatic? (Me? Melodramatic? Far be it from my heart, the thought thereof!) Discounting my passion and my melodrama, I nevertheless see it as a real risk. It’s as if we're saying, “If you want to participate in worship here, you'll have to be able to read.” I could never say that.
But, I hear you saying, Some people are more visually than aurally oriented. They learn and comprehend better through the eye than through the ear. What of them? Yes, yes, yes. I’ve heard that argument. And I respect it. Perhaps for these folks we’d be compelled to provide a kind of black-market print-piece: Not simply the Day’s scripture lessons, but also, while we’re at it, the text of the Collect for the Day, an outline of the preacher’s sermon, and the texts of the Prayers of the People, the Offertory prayer, the Eucharistic Prayer, and the Post-Communion Prayer. In large print. To be requested by a surreptitious whisper in an usher’s ear. I’d actually allow that, as a compromise accommodation for the aurally challenged.
See, I'm not all that hard-nosed.
2) The second argument is sociological. When we insist on providing printed resources for every worshiper every Sunday—hymns perhaps excepted—we're sending a second unfortunate signal. We're saying, “This is going to be difficult, folks.”
I do think Pr. Bosch was being intentionally provocative and a bit tongue in cheek. I suspect he didn’t expect his thoughts to be treated as gospel, but rather as springboards for questioning The Way We’ve Always Done It.
In thinking about what Paul Bosch wrote, it might be helpful to take a look at this obituary. You can see that he was Dean of the Chapel and professor of Liturgics and Spirituality at Waterloo Lutheran Seminary (now part of Martin Luther University College, I think).
I took note of this in the obituary:
“We are grateful for the many ways Paul influenced our students and faculty. He taught so many to be thoughtful in their approach to worship through his instruction of liturgy as a vehicle of the gospel.” said Kristine Lund, principal-dean at Luther. “Always a teacher, Paul was committed to equipping everyone to participate fully and creatively in worship.”
That reinforces my suspicion that his approach was more about prompting questions and sparking discussion than about always being taken at face value.
Bosch seems to be ignoring the effects of Specific Learning Disabilities which some congregants may experience.
He specifically mentioned accommodation for those who “learn and comprehend better through the eye than through the ear” in what I quoted.
I don’t think he’s ignoring things like the effects of Special Learning Disabilities. As I’ve said, I think he’s trying to get people thinking and questioning.
I felt as if he he was taking the piss in that passage. "oriented" is quite different from experiencing a learning disability.
Yes, it seemed quite privileged and condescending to me.
I can easily see how it comes across that way. But having read lots of his stuff, I don’t think that was intended. I think it was intended as tongue in cheek.
I've heard of Mike Betts but can't remember the context.
Under Terry Virgo Mike was a New Frontiers regional leader but when Terry Virgo reiired one of his moves was to release a few people to set up their own networks. Which Mike has done. And City Church Cambridge is one of the churches in his group.
As you know I had issues with New Frontiers under Terry Virgo’s leadership, but I did like Mike Betts. Despite our theological differences. I know quite a few people in New Frontiers or spin-off groups who I also like. I’m pretty ecumenical in my friendships!
I'm sure it was; I just couldn't resist laughing at a piece of "low tech" that requires an entire city block full of people and factory space to manufacture from end to end. And that didn't include the author!
I've heard of Mike Betts but can't remember the context.
Under Terry Virgo Mike was a New Frontiers regional leader but when Terry Virgo reiired one of his moves was to release a few people to set up their own networks. Which Mike has done. And City Church Cambridge is one of the churches in his group.
As you know I had issues with New Frontiers under Terry Virgo’s leadership, but I did like Mike Betts. Despite our theological differences. I know quite a few people in New Frontiers or spin-off groups who I also like. I’m pretty ecumenical in my friendships!
Likewise.
I have friends in New Frontiers settings although I haven't had a great deal of contact with them or NFI recently.
I recently met a few former New Frontiers folk who are now Orthodox which was interesting.
I always liked hearing Terry Virgo preach when he used to visit the Dales Bible Week many years ago.
Quite, hence wondering if scrolls qualified as low technology.
The amount of work and skill involved in creating papyrus or parchment in a suitable length, crafting smooth rollers to take the sheet from one side to the other, plus the manufacture of ink and pens. No, I think clay tablets is probably the most we can consider "low technology".
More seriously, on the matter of what is read from: I tend to print the readings in as large a type as will fit on the page, unless called upon at short notice in which case I'll use my phone. My church has a pulpit Bible, but it is old, fragile, and AV. There are some pew Bibles but they have tiny print and are NIV or GNB. If I want a decent translation that is readable without squinting then printouts are the best option. I've seen too many people squinting at their Bible and stumbling over the reading to think that's a good idea. I'd prefer a new pulpit Bible of an acceptable translation and good-sized print but, aside from the cost, I really don't want to deal with the blank looks from Kirk Session when I have to explain why the ESV is not a good idea.
When I am due to read I am sent an email link to the reading. I doctor it, removing verse numbers, maybe creating more paragraphs, and change to as large a font as required whilst still fitting on to one page, then print.
Recently my printer was not working, but I was delighted to find a large print Bible in the vestry. I had to carry it with me as I could not rely on the previous reader leaving it at the right place on the lectern.
To me it makes no difference what form the reader uses: what is important is that they read aloud intelligently and audibly.
Also, wrt hearing issues - it's not just the kind of hearing problems that require a hearing aid, but auditory processing issues which are common for many neurodivergent people. Hearing what people are saying can be difficult without the words to follow along, doubly so for any chanted or sung responses. Both kinds of hearing issues can happen at any age and shouldn't be dismissed as something only happening to older people (not that it would make it less of a legitimate issue if it was).
… I went back and looked at the full essay that @pease quoted from. Earlier in the essay, Bosch says this, which both answers your question (I’ve bolded that part) and gives a little more context to where he was coming from, and maybe even a hint or two that he was being intentionally provocative rather than completely serious …
Thanks (for adding context). I think it can be both, as might be the case with hyperbole. And I particularly noted the immediate context:
1 I write these words at 4:00 a.m. on a Wednesday morning. I've awakened at this unholy hour and can't get back to sleep, tossing and turning in body and in my fevered mind, recalling and reliving a spirited conversation of several hours ago at the monthly meeting of our parish Worship Committee, on which I sit as one among several other laypeople.
As others have observed, his tone isn't great. I think this is pertinent, as this essay was actually his re-issue in 2022 of one he first published in 2004, which he describes as a "Golden Oldie". Given that he chose to republish "nearly un-edited" something he wrote as a younger man, after ample opportunity for reflection and re-evaluation, I conclude that he remained reasonably committed to what he was saying. To quote one of his main points:
19 It's worship leaders, after all – the pastor and assisting ministers and lectors – whom we can rightly expect to be the literate ones on a Sunday morning. They're the ones to handle the printed texts.
20 No one else in the worshiping assembly should need to read in order to participate fully. (Again, with hymns, and the compromise accommodation cited above, as possible exceptions.) All the rest of us outside the chancel should be asked simply to be engaged in what's going on in our midst.
I believe he was writing out of a genuine concern for increasing participation, as he envisaged and understood it. But as I reflect on the comments on this thread, basing this on his own preferences relating to the use of text and technologies in worship (which aren't too far from my own) starts to look like a somewhat privileged view of inclusion.
A friend who has become deaf in her old age has a transliterator on her cell phone which she uses at church to follow the sermon. She tells me the currents apps are much better than what they used to be. I know from time to time we will have deaf people attend. It is good to know they can put these apps on their phones rather than we having to go through the expense of hiring a signer.
My church is trialling phone translation as an aid for members of the congregation whose first language is not English.
The other thing that concerns me about the congregation not have written words, and from what pease has just quoted, is that it suggests that the congregation is expected to just believe what a preacher says without questioning. I want to see the words for myself to confirm whether I agree with what has been said.
My church is trialling phone translation as an aid for members of the congregation whose first language is not English.
The other thing that concerns me about the congregation not have written words, and from what pease has just quoted, is that it suggests that the congregation is expected to just believe what a preacher says without questioning. I want to see the words for myself to confirm whether I agree with what has been said.
They do have not taking apps that are good for that too.
I think context of worship style probably needs to be taken into account. As a Lutheran, Pr. Bosch comes from the more liturgical end of the spectrum (and I don’t know, but maybe he’s on the more liturgical end of the Lutheran spectrum), and he is, I think, writing primarily to a Lutheran audience. I think that may play into preferences and expectations.
I mean, what he describes about the congregation not having all the texts is very much the norm in Catholic churches, at least in my experience. Those in the assembly, with the exception of some visitors, know the prayers and responses said by the assembly by memory. Variable responses in the psalm or the intercessions are taught/prompted in the moment. For the most part, no one in the pews uses a book (other than for hymns) or service sheet. It’s all from memory and listening.
Of course, also at the liturgical end of the spectrum is the Anglican BCP service where (at least in the Episcopal Church here), everyone can follow every word of the service, save readings and homily, in the prayer book. Everything is there.
The norm in American Presbyterian churches, at least in my experience, is that the congregation has hymnals and a bulletin/service sheet with any prayers and responses the congregation will say, but no prayers, readings or the like that only one person says or reads. There might be pew Bibles for those who want to use them.
All of which is to say expectations will be shaped not just by liturgical/worship traditions as well as congregational culture.
I think context of worship style probably needs to be taken into account. As a Lutheran, Pr. Bosch comes from the more liturgical end of the spectrum (and I don’t know, but maybe he’s on the more liturgical end of the Lutheran spectrum), and he is, I think, writing primarily to a Lutheran audience. I think that may play into preferences and expectations.
I mean, what he describes about the congregation not having all the texts is very much the norm in Catholic churches, at least in my experience. Those in the assembly, with the exception of some visitors, know the prayers and responses said by the assembly by memory. Variable responses in the psalm or the intercessions are taught/prompted in the moment. For the most part, no one in the pews uses a book (other than for hymns) or service sheet. It’s all from memory and listening.
Of course, also at the liturgical end of the spectrum is the Anglican BCP service where (at least in the Episcopal Church here), everyone can follow every word of the service, save readings and homily, in the prayer book. Everything is there.
The norm in American Presbyterian churches, at least in my experience, is that the congregation has hymnals and a bulletin/service sheet with any prayers and responses the congregation will say, but no prayers, readings or the like that only one person says or reads. There might be pew Bibles for those who want to use them.
All of which is to say expectations will be shaped not just by liturgical/worship traditions as well as congregational culture.
I have always been given a service sheet in RC church services, including non-Eucharistic services like Vespers - I have never been to any RC service where it's entirely from memory and I would find that very odd, and very unfriendly to visitors. Also, the use of missals is of course historically very normal in RC churches. The service sheets I've been given for RC services are essentially print-outs of the liturgy as given in the missal. In my experience it's given alongside the week's bulletin, which also often contain the seasonal prayers and responses.
That is very different from my own church’s style of proceedings. Not least that we would normally have a sermon of at least 30 minutes length and the majority of the congregation would follow the reading in their bible, and probably the sermon. Many people would take notes, some may brings words to the congregation later in the service which relate to what they have read and heard and the preacher would expect to be engaged with questions afterward the service.
I think context of worship style probably needs to be taken into account. As a Lutheran, Pr. Bosch comes from the more liturgical end of the spectrum (and I don’t know, but maybe he’s on the more liturgical end of the Lutheran spectrum), and he is, I think, writing primarily to a Lutheran audience. I think that may play into preferences and expectations.
I mean, what he describes about the congregation not having all the texts is very much the norm in Catholic churches, at least in my experience. Those in the assembly, with the exception of some visitors, know the prayers and responses said by the assembly by memory. Variable responses in the psalm or the intercessions are taught/prompted in the moment. For the most part, no one in the pews uses a book (other than for hymns) or service sheet. It’s all from memory and listening.
Of course, also at the liturgical end of the spectrum is the Anglican BCP service where (at least in the Episcopal Church here), everyone can follow every word of the service, save readings and homily, in the prayer book. Everything is there.
The norm in American Presbyterian churches, at least in my experience, is that the congregation has hymnals and a bulletin/service sheet with any prayers and responses the congregation will say, but no prayers, readings or the like that only one person says or reads. There might be pew Bibles for those who want to use them.
All of which is to say expectations will be shaped not just by liturgical/worship traditions as well as congregational culture.
I have always been given a service sheet in RC church services, including non-Eucharistic services like Vespers - I have never been to any RC service where it's entirely from memory and I would find that very odd, and very unfriendly to visitors.
While I agree that it’s unfriendly to visitors, and while Catholic hymnals do typically have the order of Mass in them (and some places will use seasonal missalettes), my experience is that the vast majority of people at Mass participate almost exclusively by memory.
The bulletins I’ve encountered are primarily announcements, with no separate service sheet. The bulletin may have the psalm of the day in it and the hymns and readings listed, but that’s about it. I’ve been to some Catholic parishes where the bulletin is distributed after Mass, not before.
That is very different from my own church’s style of proceedings. Not least that we would normally have a sermon of at least 30 minutes length and the majority of the congregation would follow the reading in their bible, and probably the sermon. Many people would take notes, some may brings words to the congregation later in the service which relate to what they have read and heard and the preacher would expect to be engaged with questions afterward the service.
That’s what we do. It’s very nonconformist. We check on the texts used and also the ideas and concepts drawn from them. No swallowing wholesale! It’s not disrespectful but can be quite challenging to a speaker to know that’s going on.
But don’t get me wrong either. Truly listening is not the same as listening for what we see as mistakes. You can actually do both but truly listening is most important. It’s certainly engagement, but not passive.
I tell the story from an experience at the Promenade Concerts. It’s 60 years old, this but still resonates with me. It was the night before the last night and I was listening to and totally engaged by a performance of Beethoven’s 9th symphony. I was standing on the floor in the Royal Albert Hall. Totally emotionally and aesthetically engaged. The out of the corner of my eye I saw a man reading the score, shaking his head and tut-tutting. He was listening for mistakes. I thought he totally missed what was going on. His eagle eye and eagle ear were engaged in anything which he saw as a departure from perfection. Maybe I was too critical but his critical observation triggered a counter-criticism in me.
Now that can get in the way. I guess also that modern technology and issues of style can do that. Be distracting. Prevent engagement.
By contrast, truly listening with full engagement may be a window into the heart of God. Which is the prime purpose of worship. It’s different from checking up on how good it is. I do find when singing that my engagement with the songs and hymns does draw me away from observation towards participation. Helps me with that prime encounter.
Some people worry that can get too emotional. I’ve never seen anything wrong with getting emotional in our communal worship. Being moved can be very helpful.
Of course, also at the liturgical end of the spectrum is the Anglican BCP service where (at least in the Episcopal Church here), everyone can follow every word of the service, save readings and homily, in the prayer book. Everything is there.
When I was growing up in the CofE the then-standard Alternative Service Book bound together not only the orders of service and psalter but the lectionary readings as well.
I don't have an issue with lengthy sermons and note taking and engaged in both in my evangelical days.
I do miss that to some extent but in Orthodoxy we tend to have short homilies that relate to the theme of the Gospel reading and Epistle for the day with talks/discussions etc reserved for study groups etc.
These can be a challenge when there are people whose first language is other than English or, in the case of the enquirers and catechumens we are getting these days who have very little background knowledge of the Christian faith or have imbibed whacky ideas online.
There is a similar challenge in reverse in those parishes where Greek, Romanian or other languages are used rather than English. I visited a very friendly and welcoming Greek Orthodox parish in Australia which had a number of non-Greek speaking converts and enquirers. The services were entirely in Greek apart from.onr or two prayers. I pretty much knew where I was as I'm familiar with the shape of the Liturgy and on my second visit I was given an English translation so I could follow it from a book. That was fine except for some seasonal material inserted at various points which didn't appear in the book. I'd have to play 'catch-up' when I heard something I recognised.
The converts and enquirers didn't seem particularly bothered by this and attend a regular mid-week Bjble study. I'm not sure I'd find it easy attending a church where services were conducted in a different language.
In our parish some non-native English speakers follow the services in books written in their own language or on mobile phones.
A Bulgarian friend who speaks excellent English still follows the services in his Bulgarian prayer book.
We have large print copies of the Creed and pre-communion prayers available but not many people seem to use them.
As with the RCs, most of the regulars know the bulk of the services by memory.
I think there's a lot more that we could do and by and large we aren't 'seeker-friendly' or 'visitor-friendly' in terms of easing people in telling people what's going on.
When my father learned to swim the lads were simply taken up the mountain told to strip and lined up along the edge of the reservoir.
The schoolmaster then went along the line pushing them in one by one.
'In West Mon School the golden rule is up and play the man ...'
Yikes!
We tend to simply get on with the services and if people 'get it', then fine...
But I think there's a lot more we could do in context where we can no longer take familiarity for granted, as they do in majority-Orthodox countries.
It's all down to the style and context of the church in question.
In more liturgical and sacramental churches the liturgical activity is meant to convey and transmit a 'message' as well as the homily or sermon. In less formally liturgical settings there is more emphasis on the sermon and, these days, Q&A or discussion.
I've not seen these done particularly well in evangelical Anglican settings I know and in one instance one of the small groups people had broken down into to discuss the sermon fed back some complete and utter heresy which the vicar neither challenged nor sought to correct.
I'm sure these things can be managed appropriately though.
But there are pros and cons and potential pitfalls anywhere.
… in one instance one of the small groups people had broken down into to discuss the sermon fed back some complete and utter heresy which the vicar neither challenged nor sought to correct.
That’s really important. One of the challenges and opportunities arising from allowing immediate congregational response is that the sermon presenter and/or church leadership have to be prepared to confront nonsense. There are diplomatic ways of course but sometimes one needs to be direct. “I’m afraid that’s not right. Would you like to come and see me to talk that over?”
Uncritical acceptance can actually be harmful and undermining. A corollary is you need to know your stuff.
It may be that new technology provides an easier basis for such conversations. They can also happen without that. There’s a scripture about correcting gently and with love. It’s good to recognise that can be difficult.
I think context of worship style probably needs to be taken into account. As a Lutheran, Pr. Bosch comes from the more liturgical end of the spectrum (and I don’t know, but maybe he’s on the more liturgical end of the Lutheran spectrum), and he is, I think, writing primarily to a Lutheran audience. I think that may play into preferences and expectations.
I mean, what he describes about the congregation not having all the texts is very much the norm in Catholic churches, at least in my experience. Those in the assembly, with the exception of some visitors, know the prayers and responses said by the assembly by memory. Variable responses in the psalm or the intercessions are taught/prompted in the moment. For the most part, no one in the pews uses a book (other than for hymns) or service sheet. It’s all from memory and listening.
Of course, also at the liturgical end of the spectrum is the Anglican BCP service where (at least in the Episcopal Church here), everyone can follow every word of the service, save readings and homily, in the prayer book. Everything is there.
The norm in American Presbyterian churches, at least in my experience, is that the congregation has hymnals and a bulletin/service sheet with any prayers and responses the congregation will say, but no prayers, readings or the like that only one person says or reads. There might be pew Bibles for those who want to use them.
All of which is to say expectations will be shaped not just by liturgical/worship traditions as well as congregational culture.
I have always been given a service sheet in RC church services, including non-Eucharistic services like Vespers - I have never been to any RC service where it's entirely from memory and I would find that very odd, and very unfriendly to visitors.
While I agree that it’s unfriendly to visitors, and while Catholic hymnals do typically have the order of Mass in them (and some places will use seasonal missalettes), my experience is that the vast majority of people at Mass participate almost exclusively by memory.
The bulletins I’ve encountered are primarily announcements, with no separate service sheet. The bulletin may have the psalm of the day in it and the hymns and readings listed, but that’s about it. I’ve been to some Catholic parishes where the bulletin is distributed after Mass, not before.
Ireland RCC is usually like that - no sheet for the liturgy, you have to know what is going on - and Poland exclusively so, though I wouldn't know what I was reading anyway and rely on my mate whispering the reading 'it's the one about...' and maybe one or two sermon ideas, when I go with him :-) Our local RC parish tends to use a sheet or sometimes a missal, but you sometimes need to find your own way around it.
Our church has NIV pew bibles, and so we tend to read from the NIV. It's not my favourite, but it's OK as IMV it's better to use the one that people have in their laps.
As we shrink towards extinction, I think our elderley Caribbean congo has finally got the hang of just asking those who can and will, to do. In fact the 'will' is more normally 'can be be persuaded'. More refined issues or sensitivities don't really come into it, amongst our ageing remnant of the former inner-city.
The other thing that concerns me about the congregation not have written words, and from what pease has just quoted, is that it suggests that the congregation is expected to just believe what a preacher says without questioning. I want to see the words for myself to confirm whether I agree with what has been said.
This aspect had also occurred to me - the scenario hands all the control to the leaders, who have the books, which become de facto signs of authority.
Of course, also at the liturgical end of the spectrum is the Anglican BCP service where (at least in the Episcopal Church here), everyone can follow every word of the service, save readings and homily, in the prayer book. Everything is there.
This is one of the liturgical contexts with which I was familiar. Actual use of (and desire to use) the BCP (or the ASB) varied widely.
One dynamic that appears to persist in some rural parish churches is for congregants to see incumbents (clergy office holders) not as leaders in any meaningful sense, but as appropriately qualified service providers. Whether one gets on with a particular incumbent or not, the "ecclesiastical contract" requires both parties to abide by the established norms, until such time as the incumbent moves on and is eventually replaced. For congregants who adopt this perspective, I suggest the BCP can serve as a sign that all those assembled, regardless of their formal position, are acting under a higher and more enduring authority.
Interesting that English RC places at least (I only have experience of English RC churches) seem to give more info to potential visitors than elsewhere - maybe in England there's been some cross-pollination from Anglicans et al. Certainly I've been in both RC and Anglican churches where print-outs of lectionary readings have been distributed along with the order of mass.
Certainly a lot of people attending an RC mass know the liturgy by heart - Catholic grannies say the rosary at breakneck pace! - but there are still printed copies available. Most RC masses I've attended have been said masses - in fact I have only very rarely heard any music in RC churches.
In our RC church we have on a table at the back of the church a good number of Mass books with the Readings for Sundays. We used to give them out or at least offer them to those who came to Mass and then we would take them back at the end of the service.
It is easier now just to leave them for those who wish to take them and also let people put them back. When the Massgoers have gone we then tidy up a little the pile of books.
Most people use the books for reading along with the texts of the Readings,Psalm and Gospel but otherwise just listen and contribute from memory.
We also have a number of texts of The Ordinary of the Mass' with the words of the Gloria and Credo. These disappear regularly and the parish priest has said that he is not going to buy any more as he thinks,and I agree, that they are just taken away without any thought.
If anyone wants to challenge the message conveyed by the preacher of the short homily I think they would do it outside the church where the celebrant will greet the people informally at the end of Mass.It would not be done in the church during the service.
It is,of course, a bonus for the priest that not everyone will actually be paying close attention to his sermon.
Does it rest with us as individual worshippers? With a priestly caste or 'eldership'? With the whole congregation collectively in some way?
If we'd been to a service on Lindisfarne when the highly expensive Gospel Book - worth the equivalent of multiple Ferraris - had been carried in procession and read from by one of the few individuals who could actually read - then the source of authority would be obvious.
Those of us with a Big T view of Tradition - whether RC, other Catholic or Orthodox would see the whole service itself as 'authoritive' in some way. It's been authorised by Big C Church authorities, as it were.
That doesn't mean that the Liturgies themselves are 'holy writ' in the way that scripture is deemed so - although most traditional liturgies contain oodles of scripture of course.
But the Liturgies are seen as part of Holy Tradition just as the iconography, prayers and other aspects are - and indeed Holy Scripture too - although we do recognise a heirarchy within Tradition of course - and even a heirarchy of sorts within the scriptures themselves with the Gospels having pre-eminence - but that may be something for another thread.
So, from a Big T point of view we aren' there to pick things apart but to submit to Tradition - which doesn't mean we leave our brains in the narthex.
On the subject of discussion groups and Q&As and so on, whether these take place within a church service itself, or separately as in our case among the Orthodox, these do have to be handled appropriately and well.
In the instance I cited, the vicar was genuinely taken aback and didn't really know how to respond. He later told me that he didn't want to correct the feedback or close things down as he didn't want to frighten newcomers away. A laudable intention.
However, given the nature of the feedback, I do think he should have given a gentle correction.
The feedback was as follows:
'In our group we agreed that we can approve Jesus because although he is like God he isn't God ...'
Even more disturbing were the nods of assent that came from some of the other groups - and this in an evangelical Anglican parish.
Doh!
We don't have to be Pope Francis or the Ecumenical Patriarch or the Moderator of the Free Church of Scotland to see how that shouldn't have been allowed to pass without comment.
At the other extreme, at another evangelical Anglican parish I remember a discussion session during a sermon by a visiting and very conservative Anglican vicar from Northern Ireland which phrased the discussion questions in a way that allowed for no debate and suggested pre-determined outcome.
These were:
1) That PSA is the chief (and actually only proper way) to understand the atonement.
2) That other religions contain hardly any truth whatsoever, if any.
3) A third point which I've forgotten.
I was in a group with a much esteemed curate who is now a vicar locally. I voiced some more nuanced views with which she agreed - but it was clear that the visiting vicar was having none of it.
Where should the 'authority' have lain in that instance?
That is very different from my own church’s style of proceedings. Not least that we would normally have a sermon of at least 30 minutes length and the majority of the congregation would follow the reading in their bible, and probably the sermon. Many people would take notes, some may brings words to the congregation later in the service which relate to what they have read and heard and the preacher would expect to be engaged with questions afterward the service.
That’s what we do. It’s very nonconformist. We check on the texts used and also the ideas and concepts drawn from them. No swallowing wholesale! It’s not disrespectful but can be quite challenging to a speaker to know that’s going on.
I am interested in what seems, to me at least, an implication that if one isn’t following along with some printed text, be it the reading or sermon notes or the lack, and perhaps taking notes, one is swallowing what the preacher says wholesale. Coming from a tradition where listening without text, and where some might take some notes during the sermon, but most don’t, that’s definitely not my experience. I’ve had way too many Sunday lunch discussions of the sermon, including a few dinners of roast preacher.
There’s no dealing wholesale, just a different method of listening, processing and evaluating.
The Judeo-Christian tradition is highly disputatious.
The Rabbis were always arguing about the interpretation and application of the Torah. None of the great Church Councils or individual church/denominational synods/councils etc have been free of controversy or debate.
With no slight intended towards our Quaker friends, an Anglo-Catholic priest once told me how he was accosted by a rather unfriendly young Friend on a train who took exception to him wearing clerical garb and dog-collar.
'You lord it over the people in your congregation and they accept your word without question!'
'If only that were so,' the priest smilingly replied.
Gamaliel is right, I was trying to express a more nuanced view. I don’t know about other places but we don’t get the text of the sermon. We’ll get a title and scripture texts along the way. Sometimes with a visual display.
Actually I’m not a note taker.I have a very good memory and in any case the talks are recorded. And those who do take notes will often make a note of something they found helpful.
The English preacher/teacher J John spent a lot of time in his early years. in a nonconformist church after conversion, writing notes. He said his most common note relating to any exhortation word was “YBH?”.
Shorthand; Yes but How? That’s a good note.
We listen and process and reflect. I don’t know about anyone else but sometimes I get an immediate and challenging or helpful trigger. Sometimes a delayed trigger goes off in the afternoon or later in the week.
It’s very rare for me to leave a church service, either my local church or when visiting without some kind of trigger event or thought I’ve never had before. That’s after 50 years. I listen expectantly. I think it’s seek and you shall find.
Don't get me started on J John ... (m..must..practice...r.r.restraint ...).
But then he was very young when I met him. As was I.
But the principle is sound.
Some of our Eastern Europeans record our priest's homilies on their phones, presumably to run through some translation software later.
A Romanian academic who attends our parish with his family told me how much he appreciates our priest's sermons and how they are better than those he heard back in Romania. I was surprised. There must be a low bar back there ...
Our priest wouldn't win a preaching award.
He told me that the sermons he'd heard there were overly 'moralistic.' I've no idea whether that's the case.
I agree with @Barnabas62's point about active and expectant listening and that applies whichever kind of church we are involved with.
In RC churches of continental Europe where many tourists are expected you will usually find the texts(readings and Gospel passages) in several languages especially in English which is more or less a lingua franca.
You won't normally find a plurality of languages in ordinary parish churches unless you happen to be in an area where more than one language is commonly spoken (such as for example in South Tyrol which is officially Italian but much German is spoken)
You won't find many Catholics reading a copy of the Bible at Mass simply because the texts for the Scripture Readings of the day are given in the Missal.
Someone mentioned that it is difficult for some people to find their way around the Missal and I would not dispute that if one is not familiar with the Missal.
It is equally difficult to find one's way around the Bible itself unless one has already some knowledge of the way that it is put together.
If I go to an RC mass it is nearly always in north Brittany. There is a service sheet with the readings, psalm and hymns, but everything else you have to do from memory, which is a bit of a struggle in French.
In May I went for the “grand pardon” of a local saint, which involved a long procession between the cathedral and another church while saying the Rosary. The organisers decided this year they would alternate decades of the rosary between French, Latin and Breton (with no sheets given). French was manageable and Latin I know from the Bruckner setting, but Breton was a bit of a challenge. It’s similar enough to Welsh for me to work out which word is which when written down, but not just when listening. The non-Breton French participants also struggled.
Comments
I do think Pr. Bosch was being intentionally provocative and a bit tongue in cheek. I suspect he didn’t expect his thoughts to be treated as gospel, but rather as springboards for questioning The Way We’ve Always Done It.
I took note of this in the obituary:
That reinforces my suspicion that his approach was more about prompting questions and sparking discussion than about always being taken at face value.
I don’t think he’s ignoring things like the effects of Special Learning Disabilities. As I’ve said, I think he’s trying to get people thinking and questioning.
Is outrage!
😉
I had wondered whether Bosch was being deliberately hyperbolic.
The book was a major technological development when it first appeared.
Imagine, all that information conveniently sandwiched between two covers!
The candle was also a major technological development.
Imagine, you could read the new-fangled book even after dark!
Under Terry Virgo Mike was a New Frontiers regional leader but when Terry Virgo reiired one of his moves was to release a few people to set up their own networks. Which Mike has done. And City Church Cambridge is one of the churches in his group.
As you know I had issues with New Frontiers under Terry Virgo’s leadership, but I did like Mike Betts. Despite our theological differences. I know quite a few people in New Frontiers or spin-off groups who I also like. I’m pretty ecumenical in my friendships!
Likewise.
I have friends in New Frontiers settings although I haven't had a great deal of contact with them or NFI recently.
I recently met a few former New Frontiers folk who are now Orthodox which was interesting.
I always liked hearing Terry Virgo preach when he used to visit the Dales Bible Week many years ago.
The amount of work and skill involved in creating papyrus or parchment in a suitable length, crafting smooth rollers to take the sheet from one side to the other, plus the manufacture of ink and pens. No, I think clay tablets is probably the most we can consider "low technology".
More seriously, on the matter of what is read from: I tend to print the readings in as large a type as will fit on the page, unless called upon at short notice in which case I'll use my phone. My church has a pulpit Bible, but it is old, fragile, and AV. There are some pew Bibles but they have tiny print and are NIV or GNB. If I want a decent translation that is readable without squinting then printouts are the best option. I've seen too many people squinting at their Bible and stumbling over the reading to think that's a good idea. I'd prefer a new pulpit Bible of an acceptable translation and good-sized print but, aside from the cost, I really don't want to deal with the blank looks from Kirk Session when I have to explain why the ESV is not a good idea.
Recently my printer was not working, but I was delighted to find a large print Bible in the vestry. I had to carry it with me as I could not rely on the previous reader leaving it at the right place on the lectern.
To me it makes no difference what form the reader uses: what is important is that they read aloud intelligently and audibly.
The other thing that concerns me about the congregation not have written words, and from what pease has just quoted, is that it suggests that the congregation is expected to just believe what a preacher says without questioning. I want to see the words for myself to confirm whether I agree with what has been said.
They do have not taking apps that are good for that too.
I mean, what he describes about the congregation not having all the texts is very much the norm in Catholic churches, at least in my experience. Those in the assembly, with the exception of some visitors, know the prayers and responses said by the assembly by memory. Variable responses in the psalm or the intercessions are taught/prompted in the moment. For the most part, no one in the pews uses a book (other than for hymns) or service sheet. It’s all from memory and listening.
Of course, also at the liturgical end of the spectrum is the Anglican BCP service where (at least in the Episcopal Church here), everyone can follow every word of the service, save readings and homily, in the prayer book. Everything is there.
The norm in American Presbyterian churches, at least in my experience, is that the congregation has hymnals and a bulletin/service sheet with any prayers and responses the congregation will say, but no prayers, readings or the like that only one person says or reads. There might be pew Bibles for those who want to use them.
All of which is to say expectations will be shaped not just by liturgical/worship traditions as well as congregational culture.
I have always been given a service sheet in RC church services, including non-Eucharistic services like Vespers - I have never been to any RC service where it's entirely from memory and I would find that very odd, and very unfriendly to visitors. Also, the use of missals is of course historically very normal in RC churches. The service sheets I've been given for RC services are essentially print-outs of the liturgy as given in the missal. In my experience it's given alongside the week's bulletin, which also often contain the seasonal prayers and responses.
The bulletins I’ve encountered are primarily announcements, with no separate service sheet. The bulletin may have the psalm of the day in it and the hymns and readings listed, but that’s about it. I’ve been to some Catholic parishes where the bulletin is distributed after Mass, not before.
That’s what we do. It’s very nonconformist. We check on the texts used and also the ideas and concepts drawn from them. No swallowing wholesale! It’s not disrespectful but can be quite challenging to a speaker to know that’s going on.
But don’t get me wrong either. Truly listening is not the same as listening for what we see as mistakes. You can actually do both but truly listening is most important. It’s certainly engagement, but not passive.
I tell the story from an experience at the Promenade Concerts. It’s 60 years old, this but still resonates with me. It was the night before the last night and I was listening to and totally engaged by a performance of Beethoven’s 9th symphony. I was standing on the floor in the Royal Albert Hall. Totally emotionally and aesthetically engaged. The out of the corner of my eye I saw a man reading the score, shaking his head and tut-tutting. He was listening for mistakes. I thought he totally missed what was going on. His eagle eye and eagle ear were engaged in anything which he saw as a departure from perfection. Maybe I was too critical but his critical observation triggered a counter-criticism in me.
Now that can get in the way. I guess also that modern technology and issues of style can do that. Be distracting. Prevent engagement.
By contrast, truly listening with full engagement may be a window into the heart of God. Which is the prime purpose of worship. It’s different from checking up on how good it is. I do find when singing that my engagement with the songs and hymns does draw me away from observation towards participation. Helps me with that prime encounter.
Some people worry that can get too emotional. I’ve never seen anything wrong with getting emotional in our communal worship. Being moved can be very helpful.
When I was growing up in the CofE the then-standard Alternative Service Book bound together not only the orders of service and psalter but the lectionary readings as well.
I do miss that to some extent but in Orthodoxy we tend to have short homilies that relate to the theme of the Gospel reading and Epistle for the day with talks/discussions etc reserved for study groups etc.
These can be a challenge when there are people whose first language is other than English or, in the case of the enquirers and catechumens we are getting these days who have very little background knowledge of the Christian faith or have imbibed whacky ideas online.
There is a similar challenge in reverse in those parishes where Greek, Romanian or other languages are used rather than English. I visited a very friendly and welcoming Greek Orthodox parish in Australia which had a number of non-Greek speaking converts and enquirers. The services were entirely in Greek apart from.onr or two prayers. I pretty much knew where I was as I'm familiar with the shape of the Liturgy and on my second visit I was given an English translation so I could follow it from a book. That was fine except for some seasonal material inserted at various points which didn't appear in the book. I'd have to play 'catch-up' when I heard something I recognised.
The converts and enquirers didn't seem particularly bothered by this and attend a regular mid-week Bjble study. I'm not sure I'd find it easy attending a church where services were conducted in a different language.
In our parish some non-native English speakers follow the services in books written in their own language or on mobile phones.
A Bulgarian friend who speaks excellent English still follows the services in his Bulgarian prayer book.
We have large print copies of the Creed and pre-communion prayers available but not many people seem to use them.
As with the RCs, most of the regulars know the bulk of the services by memory.
I think there's a lot more that we could do and by and large we aren't 'seeker-friendly' or 'visitor-friendly' in terms of easing people in telling people what's going on.
When my father learned to swim the lads were simply taken up the mountain told to strip and lined up along the edge of the reservoir.
The schoolmaster then went along the line pushing them in one by one.
'In West Mon School the golden rule is up and play the man ...'
Yikes!
We tend to simply get on with the services and if people 'get it', then fine...
But I think there's a lot more we could do in context where we can no longer take familiarity for granted, as they do in majority-Orthodox countries.
It's all down to the style and context of the church in question.
In more liturgical and sacramental churches the liturgical activity is meant to convey and transmit a 'message' as well as the homily or sermon. In less formally liturgical settings there is more emphasis on the sermon and, these days, Q&A or discussion.
I've not seen these done particularly well in evangelical Anglican settings I know and in one instance one of the small groups people had broken down into to discuss the sermon fed back some complete and utter heresy which the vicar neither challenged nor sought to correct.
I'm sure these things can be managed appropriately though.
But there are pros and cons and potential pitfalls anywhere.
That’s really important. One of the challenges and opportunities arising from allowing immediate congregational response is that the sermon presenter and/or church leadership have to be prepared to confront nonsense. There are diplomatic ways of course but sometimes one needs to be direct. “I’m afraid that’s not right. Would you like to come and see me to talk that over?”
Uncritical acceptance can actually be harmful and undermining. A corollary is you need to know your stuff.
It may be that new technology provides an easier basis for such conversations. They can also happen without that. There’s a scripture about correcting gently and with love. It’s good to recognise that can be difficult.
Ireland RCC is usually like that - no sheet for the liturgy, you have to know what is going on - and Poland exclusively so, though I wouldn't know what I was reading anyway and rely on my mate whispering the reading 'it's the one about...' and maybe one or two sermon ideas, when I go with him :-) Our local RC parish tends to use a sheet or sometimes a missal, but you sometimes need to find your own way around it.
Our church has NIV pew bibles, and so we tend to read from the NIV. It's not my favourite, but it's OK as IMV it's better to use the one that people have in their laps.
As we shrink towards extinction, I think our elderley Caribbean congo has finally got the hang of just asking those who can and will, to do. In fact the 'will' is more normally 'can be be persuaded'. More refined issues or sensitivities don't really come into it, amongst our ageing remnant of the former inner-city.
And also with reference to: This is one of the liturgical contexts with which I was familiar. Actual use of (and desire to use) the BCP (or the ASB) varied widely.
One dynamic that appears to persist in some rural parish churches is for congregants to see incumbents (clergy office holders) not as leaders in any meaningful sense, but as appropriately qualified service providers. Whether one gets on with a particular incumbent or not, the "ecclesiastical contract" requires both parties to abide by the established norms, until such time as the incumbent moves on and is eventually replaced. For congregants who adopt this perspective, I suggest the BCP can serve as a sign that all those assembled, regardless of their formal position, are acting under a higher and more enduring authority.
Certainly a lot of people attending an RC mass know the liturgy by heart - Catholic grannies say the rosary at breakneck pace! - but there are still printed copies available. Most RC masses I've attended have been said masses - in fact I have only very rarely heard any music in RC churches.
It is easier now just to leave them for those who wish to take them and also let people put them back. When the Massgoers have gone we then tidy up a little the pile of books.
Most people use the books for reading along with the texts of the Readings,Psalm and Gospel but otherwise just listen and contribute from memory.
We also have a number of texts of The Ordinary of the Mass' with the words of the Gloria and Credo. These disappear regularly and the parish priest has said that he is not going to buy any more as he thinks,and I agree, that they are just taken away without any thought.
If anyone wants to challenge the message conveyed by the preacher of the short homily I think they would do it outside the church where the celebrant will greet the people informally at the end of Mass.It would not be done in the church during the service.
It is,of course, a bonus for the priest that not everyone will actually be paying close attention to his sermon.
Where does it rest and where should it rest?
Does it rest with us as individual worshippers? With a priestly caste or 'eldership'? With the whole congregation collectively in some way?
If we'd been to a service on Lindisfarne when the highly expensive Gospel Book - worth the equivalent of multiple Ferraris - had been carried in procession and read from by one of the few individuals who could actually read - then the source of authority would be obvious.
Those of us with a Big T view of Tradition - whether RC, other Catholic or Orthodox would see the whole service itself as 'authoritive' in some way. It's been authorised by Big C Church authorities, as it were.
That doesn't mean that the Liturgies themselves are 'holy writ' in the way that scripture is deemed so - although most traditional liturgies contain oodles of scripture of course.
But the Liturgies are seen as part of Holy Tradition just as the iconography, prayers and other aspects are - and indeed Holy Scripture too - although we do recognise a heirarchy within Tradition of course - and even a heirarchy of sorts within the scriptures themselves with the Gospels having pre-eminence - but that may be something for another thread.
So, from a Big T point of view we aren' there to pick things apart but to submit to Tradition - which doesn't mean we leave our brains in the narthex.
On the subject of discussion groups and Q&As and so on, whether these take place within a church service itself, or separately as in our case among the Orthodox, these do have to be handled appropriately and well.
As @Nick Tamen points out.
In the instance I cited, the vicar was genuinely taken aback and didn't really know how to respond. He later told me that he didn't want to correct the feedback or close things down as he didn't want to frighten newcomers away. A laudable intention.
However, given the nature of the feedback, I do think he should have given a gentle correction.
The feedback was as follows:
'In our group we agreed that we can approve Jesus because although he is like God he isn't God ...'
Even more disturbing were the nods of assent that came from some of the other groups - and this in an evangelical Anglican parish.
Doh!
We don't have to be Pope Francis or the Ecumenical Patriarch or the Moderator of the Free Church of Scotland to see how that shouldn't have been allowed to pass without comment.
At the other extreme, at another evangelical Anglican parish I remember a discussion session during a sermon by a visiting and very conservative Anglican vicar from Northern Ireland which phrased the discussion questions in a way that allowed for no debate and suggested pre-determined outcome.
These were:
1) That PSA is the chief (and actually only proper way) to understand the atonement.
2) That other religions contain hardly any truth whatsoever, if any.
3) A third point which I've forgotten.
I was in a group with a much esteemed curate who is now a vicar locally. I voiced some more nuanced views with which she agreed - but it was clear that the visiting vicar was having none of it.
Where should the 'authority' have lain in that instance?
There’s no dealing wholesale, just a different method of listening, processing and evaluating.
I'm sure @Barnabas62 isn't saying that though.
The Judeo-Christian tradition is highly disputatious.
The Rabbis were always arguing about the interpretation and application of the Torah. None of the great Church Councils or individual church/denominational synods/councils etc have been free of controversy or debate.
With no slight intended towards our Quaker friends, an Anglo-Catholic priest once told me how he was accosted by a rather unfriendly young Friend on a train who took exception to him wearing clerical garb and dog-collar.
'You lord it over the people in your congregation and they accept your word without question!'
'If only that were so,' the priest smilingly replied.
Gamaliel is right, I was trying to express a more nuanced view. I don’t know about other places but we don’t get the text of the sermon. We’ll get a title and scripture texts along the way. Sometimes with a visual display.
Actually I’m not a note taker.I have a very good memory and in any case the talks are recorded. And those who do take notes will often make a note of something they found helpful.
The English preacher/teacher J John spent a lot of time in his early years. in a nonconformist church after conversion, writing notes. He said his most common note relating to any exhortation word was “YBH?”.
Shorthand; Yes but How? That’s a good note.
We listen and process and reflect. I don’t know about anyone else but sometimes I get an immediate and challenging or helpful trigger. Sometimes a delayed trigger goes off in the afternoon or later in the week.
It’s very rare for me to leave a church service, either my local church or when visiting without some kind of trigger event or thought I’ve never had before. That’s after 50 years. I listen expectantly. I think it’s seek and you shall find.
But then he was very young when I met him. As was I.
But the principle is sound.
Some of our Eastern Europeans record our priest's homilies on their phones, presumably to run through some translation software later.
A Romanian academic who attends our parish with his family told me how much he appreciates our priest's sermons and how they are better than those he heard back in Romania. I was surprised. There must be a low bar back there ...
Our priest wouldn't win a preaching award.
He told me that the sermons he'd heard there were overly 'moralistic.' I've no idea whether that's the case.
I agree with @Barnabas62's point about active and expectant listening and that applies whichever kind of church we are involved with.
You won't normally find a plurality of languages in ordinary parish churches unless you happen to be in an area where more than one language is commonly spoken (such as for example in South Tyrol which is officially Italian but much German is spoken)
You won't find many Catholics reading a copy of the Bible at Mass simply because the texts for the Scripture Readings of the day are given in the Missal.
Someone mentioned that it is difficult for some people to find their way around the Missal and I would not dispute that if one is not familiar with the Missal.
It is equally difficult to find one's way around the Bible itself unless one has already some knowledge of the way that it is put together.
In May I went for the “grand pardon” of a local saint, which involved a long procession between the cathedral and another church while saying the Rosary. The organisers decided this year they would alternate decades of the rosary between French, Latin and Breton (with no sheets given). French was manageable and Latin I know from the Bruckner setting, but Breton was a bit of a challenge. It’s similar enough to Welsh for me to work out which word is which when written down, but not just when listening. The non-Breton French participants also struggled.