@Gamma Gamaliel I'm truly grateful for your good wishes, thank you. Btw you have a place in my prayers.
There is a baptist option on our shortlist but i don't want to start derailing the thread by droning on about our "situation"!
I've heard the "god is deaf theology" quip used to refer to the volume of worship bands (generally when I've been playing!). The way that stage craft inappropriate to the size of venue can be attempted very much crosses the sacred secular divide as the regular punters at the open mic night at the dog and duck could no doubt testify!!
I'm thinking that the more folk who are competently and appropriately involved on a Sunday morning the healthier the church culture as a rule of thumb.
The Easter Vigil in Orthodox parishes can be quiet loud. Lots of shouts of 'Christ is Risen!' 'He is Risen indeed!' in lots of different languages and people ringing handbells and so on. But we're all expecting it so it doesn't come as a shock or surprise.
Note that use of handbells seems to be local to the Patriarchate of Antioch. You would not find it in our Russian tradition Orthodox church within the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Nor have I encountered it in Greek Orthodox churches.
Among my people (American Presbyterians), “liturgist” is used for the person(s) assisting in the service, as by reading some of the lessons, saying or leading some prayers, etc. The liturgist is never presiding, but rather assists the one presiding.
We'd call those people the 'lector' and 'intercessor'.
And I’d much prefer designations like that. But alas, I was not consulted.
@Heavenlyannie, I like hearing about your church and particularly how it transcends some of the stereotypes people would assume about such settings. I'm an unrepentant charismatic and I've been here since God was a boy (or at least since Simon had his first tot of rum) so don't feel you are on your own! I love the breadth of people I meet on the Ship.
I can't remember whether we used the term 'service leader' in my previous church but we did have different people who effectively filled that role. Sometimes it was the vicar or curate, sometimes one of our staff and sometimes someone from the congregation (there was a rota, it wasn't just random people!) Basically their role was to stand up at the beginning, welcome people, make the usual announcements (toilets are over there, what to do if the fire alarm goes off, please feel free to stay for coffee afterwards, let's now pray together...) and then lead a prayer when the children went out for their activities, and introduce the people who were doing readings, prayers, preaching etc.
FWIW despite the pending realignment I still whole heartedly identify as evangelical, reformed and charismatic. There are many positive things I take from my 25 year involvement in our soon to be ex-church and network.
@Ex_Organist - thanks, I didn't know that. I quite like the handbell thing. I don’t use a big school-bell but a horse-brass type that my late wife used to use when she was dying of cancer and needed to summon my daughters or myself for assistance.
That may sound macabre but I feel she'd approve and that there's something about using that same bell to celebrate the Resurrection.
@Gill H and @Twangist - even though I've changed address big style, I certainly wouldn't write off everything from my charismatic evangelical days nor my Protestant days more generally.
I still have an appreciation for what we might call the 'charismatic' dimension but expressed in a rather different way. God is 'present everywhere and filleth all things.'
So on one level I'd see almost everything in church life (and beyond) as 'pneumatic' or potentially so.
There's more to the ministry of God the Holy Spirit than apparently charismatic gifts.
I think it may of originated in historic Nonconformity in the UK and maybe in Puritan America. However, churches with a pastor/minister are unlikely to come across it. If a congregation has a pastor/minister most of the time they will be de facto service leader. In the absense of a pastor/minister then normally visiting preachers cover the roll. However, in an emergency, the leading of worship falls to the elders. Now it might be that there is an elder who on twenty minutes notice can lead worship, but what is more likely is that team of elders will take collective responsibility. So one take responsibility for prayers, may be another for finding a "Word" and a third might come up with something for the children. If the hymns are unknown then someone will pick those in a hurry and similarly for Bible readings. However, you need someone basically to hold the whole thing together and that person would be the "worship leader". They are leading the congregation through worship while not actually being responsible for any of the elements in it.
By extension when teams are leading worship they often need to have someone in the worship leadership role. It can be combined with other roles in worship or even its words can be handed over to others. I once led worship without saying a word, but if anything had gone wrong e.g. someone forgets to say the words that hands over to the next person, I was there and ready to step in.
In most RC, Orthodox and Anglican liturgies there is a book which basically tells all followers of that rite what to do or say. For most of the worshippers there will be some sort of familiarity with the outline of the service and also with those words and phrases which are regularly used.
However in occasionally more complex liturgies such as a Pontifical High Mass which might be celebrated on such a Sunday as Pentecost ,there is then a Master of Ceremonies whose job is to know who should be doing what, where and when. He is ,if you like, the 'service leader' who puts everything together, even although he may not ever open his mouth.
The question was suggested by a visit to an 'evangelical' Anglican service in Melb.Vic.Aus. Mother's day, and after what seemed to me for a while to be nothing more than a feel-good message about being good and caring for people, the vicar got on to the text from the readings, which made me feel more engaged and at home. I think on non-mothers-day he gets into the text earlier.
But the vicar only preached the message. Everything else was done by somebody else. I appreciate what a load that must be -- preparing the message is hard enough without having to run the service -- but it was a surprise to me. The man who stood up at the beginning, did the introduction and then ran the service -- introduced the readers, and the hymns, and the prayers, and the children's speaker and the vicar and everything else -- was a very casually dressed bloke who was perhaps (I can't remember) a church warden, but in discussion they were clear that wasn't required -- they agreed that the vicar had ultimate authority to supervise and permit anyone to be the "service leader"
So I thought that was interesting, and I was going to ask about it, but before asking the question I happened to be reading Mystery Worshipper, and saw this (Baptist):
1043: Metropolitan Tabernacle, Elephant & Castle, London
and this (Anglican)
1051: St Pancras New Church, Euston, London
(I can't figure out how to do links)
Which seemed to suggest to me that having someone else run an Anglican service was common,
A vaguely cohesive ramble about my experiences with this type of position in my experience with various flavors of American Protestantism:
In the sort of Reformed traditions I was raised in (Presbyterian, the historically Dutch Reformed denominations), liturgist, as @Nick Tamen said, usually refers to a layperson who leads the intercessory prayers, reads the scripture, or does a responsive portion of the service that would be what most people from those denominations consider "liturgy." In my experience, the average person in a Reformed/Calvinist/"medium-low" denomination think of liturgy as when you add a fancy bit to the hymn sandwich before and after the sermon or communion that involves a responsive recitation of something or a prayer/scripture reading interspersed with some sung refrains. So, in that context, a liturgist isn't really a "presider/celebrant" in the high church sense, but rather a lector/intercessor who maybe has some extra bits. Another phenomenon I've noticed in these traditions is that sometimes guest/substitute ministers will just do the sermon and celebrate Communion if it is a communion Sunday, so a liturgist in that case might be an elder or an associate pastor who leads the whole service so the guest only has to preach the sermon.
In the non-denom/evangelical/BaptiCostal/rock band churches that I (fortunately, imho) have had comparatively little experience with, the service leader is usually the leader of the worship team who will lead the congregation up to the sermon, as, in those sorts of churches, the order of service is usually singing with maybe some prayers interspersed for the first half, followed by the sermon with maybe a couple songs afterwards for the second half.
In my high church (Lutheran/Episcopal/etc.) experience, there isn't an equivalent except for lay readers, intercessors, etc.
Lay leaders were certainly A Thing when I was growing up, and they would start the service at the town church to give the vicar time to draw breath getting from the village church in the same benefice into town (9:30 in the village, 10:45 in town, communion at both), leading anything up to the whole ministry of the word but often handing over earlier, at the absolution or the Gospel reading.
In my TEC experience, it's not all that uncommon to have a guest preacher. In general, the regular priest will preside, but there's a visitor who preaches. We've had visiting preachers who have been visiting friends or family members who are parishioners, and are themselves priests in a different country or different tradition, for example.
Whereas if our priest is present but not presiding, it probably means the Bishop is here.
I will note that in the period where we were between priests, and so had temporary clergy showing up on a Sunday, it was our habit for a warden to stand up at the start of a service, welcome the parishioners and thank them for joining us for worship, and then introducing the visiting priest before inviting them to lead the service.
I thought that was quite a nice gesture, and a subtle reminder that until a new vicar or rector is appointed, the ecclesiastical authority in the parish rests on the wardens.
In the early days of my exploring Episcopal parishes with the thought of swimming whatever river separates Rome from Canterbury, I experienced parish Sunday Morning Prayer as the principal service before this gave in to weekly Eucharist. I remember being a little confused as to who was clergy and who wasn't, as the man who led things up to the sermon was in a cassock and surplice and seemed authoritative but was a layman as it turned out, a licensed lay reader. The rector had a tippet on and did the announcements and then the sermon and the prayers after that. I've seen the lay leader in Lutheran churches called the "liturgist."
In my high church (Lutheran/Episcopal/etc.) experience, there isn't an equivalent except for lay readers, intercessors, etc.
I think among ELCA Lutherans, the “assisting minister” is the equivalent.
And I’m happy to report that at least some Presbyterians—quite a few, in my experience—understand and “do” liturgy much better than it sounds like you’ve experienced. (Not that your experience surprises me.)
And the Reformed (of the Dutch or other non-Presbyterian variety) generally have approved liturgies. Granted, they’re often a bit wordy compared to other liturgies, but they’re there.
In my high church (Lutheran/Episcopal/etc.) experience, there isn't an equivalent except for lay readers, intercessors, etc.
I think among ELCA Lutherans, the “assisting minister” is the equivalent.
And I’m happy to report that at least some Presbyterians—quite a few, in my experience—understand and “do” liturgy much better than it sounds like you’ve experienced. (Not that your experience surprises me.)
And the Reformed (of the Dutch or other non-Presbyterian variety) generally have approved liturgies. Granted, they’re often a bit wordy compared to other liturgies, but they’re there.
Yes, I agree re: your last point...although I find usage in my neck of the woods (or, at least, churches who think of it as a liturgy and not just The Way We Do Things) to be a lower proportion than a Lutheran denomination, for instance. However, my parents' church (Christian Reformed) is intentionally liturgical and is equivalently "high" to a more relaxed Lutheran or Anglican/Episcopalian church.
And my Presbyterian experience, at least in my youth was PCA, which I find to be generally less liturgical across the board than their PCUSA counterparts.
In my high church (Lutheran/Episcopal/etc.) experience, there isn't an equivalent except for lay readers, intercessors, etc.
I think among ELCA Lutherans, the “assisting minister” is the equivalent.
And I’m happy to report that at least some Presbyterians—quite a few, in my experience—understand and “do” liturgy much better than it sounds like you’ve experienced. (Not that your experience surprises me.)
And the Reformed (of the Dutch or other non-Presbyterian variety) generally have approved liturgies. Granted, they’re often a bit wordy compared to other liturgies, but they’re there.
And my Presbyterian experience, at least in my youth was PCA, which I find to be generally less liturgical across the board than their PCUSA counterparts.
Yes, I’d agree. My life has been spent in the PC(USA) (or a predecessor denomination), though I have familiarity with the PCA, and it is definitely far less liturgical.
BTW, just spent the weekend with good friends who were raised Christian Reformed. Then they came to my corner of the world, where CRC and RCA are rare.
The question was suggested by a visit to an 'evangelical' Anglican service in Melb.Vic.Aus. Mother's day, and after what seemed to me for a while to be nothing more than a feel-good message about being good and caring for people, the vicar got on to the text from the readings, which made me feel more engaged and at home. I think on non-mothers-day he gets into the text earlier.
But the vicar only preached the message. Everything else was done by somebody else. I appreciate what a load that must be -- preparing the message is hard enough without having to run the service -- but it was a surprise to me. The man who stood up at the beginning, did the introduction and then ran the service -- introduced the readers, and the hymns, and the prayers, and the children's speaker and the vicar and everything else -- was a very casually dressed bloke who was perhaps (I can't remember) a church warden, but in discussion they were clear that wasn't required -- they agreed that the vicar had ultimate authority to supervise and permit anyone to be the "service leader"
So I thought that was interesting, and I was going to ask about it, but before asking the question I happened to be reading Mystery Worshipper, and saw this (Baptist):
1043: Metropolitan Tabernacle, Elephant & Castle, London
and this (Anglican)
1051: St Pancras New Church, Euston, London
(I can't figure out how to do links)
Which seemed to suggest to me that having someone else run an Anglican service was common,
I think it is becoming increasingly common for a bloke in relatively casual dress to 'lead' much of the service in evangelical Anglican churches these days, but I've never heard them referred to as the 'service leader.'
It's certainly the way they do things at my local evangelical Anglican parish. As far as I am aware the two main guys they'd call on to do this have had some 'reader' training.
The previous incumbent ran the place as if it were an independent evangelical church with only a grudging and cursory nod to Anglican rubrics and formularies.
Interestingly enough, perhaps, he's no longer an Anglican clergyman and worships in an independent evangelical charismatic church in another part of the country. He'd have been happier and better off in a setting like that all along, I think.
Now, things are more recognisably Anglican there but still pretty informal in comparison with parishes which are 'higher up the candle.'
Of course, there are churches which have been used as barns at times. St Peter's, Bradwell (amazing place!) and St Apolline's Chapel in Guernsey come to mind.
One of the most sublime worship spaces I have known is that of the former Anglican Cistercian monastery at West Malling in Kent. Vast medieval barn for a tiny community of two (very rarely more), but it never felt too big and the prayer always seemed to fill the space. It's now been taken over by a lay community and I hope it serves them as well.
In Un Zud the term has become something of a variant on @Nick Tamen's woes .... liturgical practices are often a little sloppy in this province. The "worship leader" would be what, as others have said, is often called the "liturgist," though strangely I don't like that title much as I first knew it as applied to liturgical theologians.
In my pad, where my predecessor had basically driven all but the most stubborn non-him persons away, I am slowly building a new/renewed team so that I'm not the sole voice - (or soul voice, I guess). I'm bending diocesan regulations with regards to licensing, tapping on shoulders to get new voices into intercession, reading, and delivering the non sacramental parts of the liturgy.
The term I have traditionally used for the latter is "officiant"
Regarding the comment about reader training - in my previous church, the person who led the service might not have had reader training. They were generally someone known and respected within the church as a 'safe pair of hands' though, mostly members of staff.
We also had a rota of preachers. In our diocese, you could undertake just the preaching module of reader training and be 'licenced to preach' (that sounds extremely James Bond!) without doing any further reader training. Hence we had at least 10 people who could preach in our church and neighbouring churches.
A year ago, my community lost an Episcopal priest who actually retired several years ago for mental health reasons. He lived just a block from me. In his retirement he drove school bus and saw my kids grow up. When I went to Bible Studies with him, he was very enlightening. He came to my son's ordination and participated in the laying on of hands. He was getting pretty frail by that time. At his funeral, the bishop pointed out he was the diocese' trained liturgist. The bishop said she never won any argument with him when it came to the liturgy. Kindly man. I wonder if he is arguing with someone up there on how to do it right.
The "worship leader" would be what, as others have said, is often called the "liturgist," though strangely I don't like that title much as I first knew it as applied to liturgical theologians.
Regarding the comment about reader training - in my previous church, the person who led the service might not have had reader training. They were generally someone known and respected within the church as a 'safe pair of hands' though, mostly members of staff.
We also had a rota of preachers. In our diocese, you could undertake just the preaching module of reader training and be 'licenced to preach' (that sounds extremely James Bond!) without doing any further reader training. Hence we had at least 10 people who could preach in our church and neighbouring churches.
I don't think it's that unusual for those regarded as a 'safe pair of hands' to lead services in the CofE these days, and given the pressures on clergy I think it makes a lot of sense.
For preachers though, as it sounds to be the case from your account, then clearly theological training is reliable.
I participated in a lay-led memorial service yesterday and whilst there's nothing to prevent that in Orthodox circles, it probably doesn't happen as often as it could or might.
Regarding the comment about reader training - in my previous church, the person who led the service might not have had reader training. They were generally someone known and respected within the church as a 'safe pair of hands' though, mostly members of staff.
We also had a rota of preachers. In our diocese, you could undertake just the preaching module of reader training and be 'licenced to preach' (that sounds extremely James Bond!) without doing any further reader training. Hence we had at least 10 people who could preach in our church and neighbouring churches.
I don't think it's that unusual for those regarded as a 'safe pair of hands' to lead services in the CofE these days, and given the pressures on clergy I think it makes a lot of sense.
For preachers though, as it sounds to be the case from your account, then clearly theological training is reliable.
I participated in a lay-led memorial service yesterday and whilst there's nothing to prevent that in Orthodox circles, it probably doesn't happen as often as it could or might.
When I took my lay reader training in the USA Episcopal Church, I was told this license qualified me to lead the Burial Office with appropriate emendations per the BCP rubrics, and part of the training was on this office. It won't surprise anyone to learn that I've never been asked to lead that Office, but once in a while I fill some time re-reading it and imagining how that would go. I should add that this lay reader training was not nearly so comprehensive and serious as the C of E's blue-tippet lay readers receive, and our qualification doesn't reach as far.
The "worship leader" would be what, as others have said, is often called the "liturgist," though strangely I don't like that title much as I first knew it as applied to liturgical theologians.
I'm with you on that.
Same here, but my efforts to encourage a shift to different terminology have born little fruit.
When I took my lay reader training in the USA Episcopal Church, I was told this license qualified me to lead the Burial Office with appropriate emendations per the BCP rubrics, and part of the training was on this office. It won't surprise anyone to learn that I've never been asked to lead that Office, but once in a while I fill some time re-reading it and imagining how that would go. I should add that this lay reader training was not nearly so comprehensive and serious as the C of E's blue-tippet lay readers receive, and our qualification doesn't reach as far.
Yes. When I was a C of E Lay Reader aka *blue-scarfed menace* ( ) some time ago, I did some extra training to enable me to officiate at funerals. This included use of the 1662 BCP as well as the contemporary-language Common Worship service.
At the start of the Covid pandemic, we Readers were asked if we would be willing to conduct mass burials, should the need arise.
Comments
There is a baptist option on our shortlist but i don't want to start derailing the thread by droning on about our "situation"!
I've heard the "god is deaf theology" quip used to refer to the volume of worship bands (generally when I've been playing!). The way that stage craft inappropriate to the size of venue can be attempted very much crosses the sacred secular divide as the regular punters at the open mic night at the dog and duck could no doubt testify!!
I'm thinking that the more folk who are competently and appropriately involved on a Sunday morning the healthier the church culture as a rule of thumb.
Note that use of handbells seems to be local to the Patriarchate of Antioch. You would not find it in our Russian tradition Orthodox church within the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Nor have I encountered it in Greek Orthodox churches.
I can't remember whether we used the term 'service leader' in my previous church but we did have different people who effectively filled that role. Sometimes it was the vicar or curate, sometimes one of our staff and sometimes someone from the congregation (there was a rota, it wasn't just random people!) Basically their role was to stand up at the beginning, welcome people, make the usual announcements (toilets are over there, what to do if the fire alarm goes off, please feel free to stay for coffee afterwards, let's now pray together...) and then lead a prayer when the children went out for their activities, and introduce the people who were doing readings, prayers, preaching etc.
That may sound macabre but I feel she'd approve and that there's something about using that same bell to celebrate the Resurrection.
@Gill H and @Twangist - even though I've changed address big style, I certainly wouldn't write off everything from my charismatic evangelical days nor my Protestant days more generally.
I still have an appreciation for what we might call the 'charismatic' dimension but expressed in a rather different way. God is 'present everywhere and filleth all things.'
So on one level I'd see almost everything in church life (and beyond) as 'pneumatic' or potentially so.
There's more to the ministry of God the Holy Spirit than apparently charismatic gifts.
But that might be a topic for another thread.
By extension when teams are leading worship they often need to have someone in the worship leadership role. It can be combined with other roles in worship or even its words can be handed over to others. I once led worship without saying a word, but if anything had gone wrong e.g. someone forgets to say the words that hands over to the next person, I was there and ready to step in.
However in occasionally more complex liturgies such as a Pontifical High Mass which might be celebrated on such a Sunday as Pentecost ,there is then a Master of Ceremonies whose job is to know who should be doing what, where and when. He is ,if you like, the 'service leader' who puts everything together, even although he may not ever open his mouth.
But the vicar only preached the message. Everything else was done by somebody else. I appreciate what a load that must be -- preparing the message is hard enough without having to run the service -- but it was a surprise to me. The man who stood up at the beginning, did the introduction and then ran the service -- introduced the readers, and the hymns, and the prayers, and the children's speaker and the vicar and everything else -- was a very casually dressed bloke who was perhaps (I can't remember) a church warden, but in discussion they were clear that wasn't required -- they agreed that the vicar had ultimate authority to supervise and permit anyone to be the "service leader"
So I thought that was interesting, and I was going to ask about it, but before asking the question I happened to be reading Mystery Worshipper, and saw this (Baptist):
1043: Metropolitan Tabernacle, Elephant & Castle, London
and this (Anglican)
1051: St Pancras New Church, Euston, London
(I can't figure out how to do links)
Which seemed to suggest to me that having someone else run an Anglican service was common,
In the sort of Reformed traditions I was raised in (Presbyterian, the historically Dutch Reformed denominations), liturgist, as @Nick Tamen said, usually refers to a layperson who leads the intercessory prayers, reads the scripture, or does a responsive portion of the service that would be what most people from those denominations consider "liturgy." In my experience, the average person in a Reformed/Calvinist/"medium-low" denomination think of liturgy as when you add a fancy bit to the hymn sandwich before and after the sermon or communion that involves a responsive recitation of something or a prayer/scripture reading interspersed with some sung refrains. So, in that context, a liturgist isn't really a "presider/celebrant" in the high church sense, but rather a lector/intercessor who maybe has some extra bits. Another phenomenon I've noticed in these traditions is that sometimes guest/substitute ministers will just do the sermon and celebrate Communion if it is a communion Sunday, so a liturgist in that case might be an elder or an associate pastor who leads the whole service so the guest only has to preach the sermon.
In the non-denom/evangelical/BaptiCostal/rock band churches that I (fortunately, imho) have had comparatively little experience with, the service leader is usually the leader of the worship team who will lead the congregation up to the sermon, as, in those sorts of churches, the order of service is usually singing with maybe some prayers interspersed for the first half, followed by the sermon with maybe a couple songs afterwards for the second half.
In my high church (Lutheran/Episcopal/etc.) experience, there isn't an equivalent except for lay readers, intercessors, etc.
Whereas if our priest is present but not presiding, it probably means the Bishop is here.
I will note that in the period where we were between priests, and so had temporary clergy showing up on a Sunday, it was our habit for a warden to stand up at the start of a service, welcome the parishioners and thank them for joining us for worship, and then introducing the visiting priest before inviting them to lead the service.
I thought that was quite a nice gesture, and a subtle reminder that until a new vicar or rector is appointed, the ecclesiastical authority in the parish rests on the wardens.
And I’m happy to report that at least some Presbyterians—quite a few, in my experience—understand and “do” liturgy much better than it sounds like you’ve experienced. (Not that your experience surprises me.)
And the Reformed (of the Dutch or other non-Presbyterian variety) generally have approved liturgies. Granted, they’re often a bit wordy compared to other liturgies, but they’re there.
Yes, I agree re: your last point...although I find usage in my neck of the woods (or, at least, churches who think of it as a liturgy and not just The Way We Do Things) to be a lower proportion than a Lutheran denomination, for instance. However, my parents' church (Christian Reformed) is intentionally liturgical and is equivalently "high" to a more relaxed Lutheran or Anglican/Episcopalian church.
And my Presbyterian experience, at least in my youth was PCA, which I find to be generally less liturgical across the board than their PCUSA counterparts.
BTW, just spent the weekend with good friends who were raised Christian Reformed. Then they came to my corner of the world, where CRC and RCA are rare.
Ok. Thanks for clarifying things, @Melbourne.
I can see where you are coming from now.
I think it is becoming increasingly common for a bloke in relatively casual dress to 'lead' much of the service in evangelical Anglican churches these days, but I've never heard them referred to as the 'service leader.'
It's certainly the way they do things at my local evangelical Anglican parish. As far as I am aware the two main guys they'd call on to do this have had some 'reader' training.
The previous incumbent ran the place as if it were an independent evangelical church with only a grudging and cursory nod to Anglican rubrics and formularies.
Interestingly enough, perhaps, he's no longer an Anglican clergyman and worships in an independent evangelical charismatic church in another part of the country. He'd have been happier and better off in a setting like that all along, I think.
Now, things are more recognisably Anglican there but still pretty informal in comparison with parishes which are 'higher up the candle.'
One of the most sublime worship spaces I have known is that of the former Anglican Cistercian monastery at West Malling in Kent. Vast medieval barn for a tiny community of two (very rarely more), but it never felt too big and the prayer always seemed to fill the space. It's now been taken over by a lay community and I hope it serves them as well.
https://www.pilsdonatmalling.org.uk/#&gid=1&pid=3
Click on the second picture down on the right-hand side to get a closer view of the Barn Chapel.
They were spoken of very warmly by a tramp of my acquaintance
Indeed, they do good work. Their website seems a bit out-of-date, though - IIRC, the Wardenship recently became vacant.
In my pad, where my predecessor had basically driven all but the most stubborn non-him persons away, I am slowly building a new/renewed team so that I'm not the sole voice - (or soul voice, I guess). I'm bending diocesan regulations with regards to licensing, tapping on shoulders to get new voices into intercession, reading, and delivering the non sacramental parts of the liturgy.
The term I have traditionally used for the latter is "officiant"
We also had a rota of preachers. In our diocese, you could undertake just the preaching module of reader training and be 'licenced to preach' (that sounds extremely James Bond!) without doing any further reader training. Hence we had at least 10 people who could preach in our church and neighbouring churches.
I don't think it's that unusual for those regarded as a 'safe pair of hands' to lead services in the CofE these days, and given the pressures on clergy I think it makes a lot of sense.
For preachers though, as it sounds to be the case from your account, then clearly theological training is reliable.
I participated in a lay-led memorial service yesterday and whilst there's nothing to prevent that in Orthodox circles, it probably doesn't happen as often as it could or might.
Interesting to see that some Irish RC bishops are training and appointing lay funeral ministers because of declining priest nimbers.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-67064894
When I took my lay reader training in the USA Episcopal Church, I was told this license qualified me to lead the Burial Office with appropriate emendations per the BCP rubrics, and part of the training was on this office. It won't surprise anyone to learn that I've never been asked to lead that Office, but once in a while I fill some time re-reading it and imagining how that would go. I should add that this lay reader training was not nearly so comprehensive and serious as the C of E's blue-tippet lay readers receive, and our qualification doesn't reach as far.
Yes. When I was a C of E Lay Reader aka *blue-scarfed menace* (
At the start of the Covid pandemic, we Readers were asked if we would be willing to conduct mass burials, should the need arise.