It's the Dormition Fast in the Orthodox Tradition, equivalent to the 'Assumption of the Virgin' in Roman Catholicism although with some different emphases.
Our parish has organised some additional services, such as last night's Paraklesis consisting of the 'Small Supplicatory Canon To The Theotokos'.
Small? It seemed pretty long to me ...
A visiting priest read the priest's prayers and read the appointed Gospel reading. I've not paid that much attention to what people read from in Orthodox services as I've never thought of it as much of an issue - apart from being aware that there are apparently canons or 'push-back' on hand-held screen devices, which don't appear to be universally applied or observed.
Copies of the Paraklesis service were available on photo-copied sheets bound into a cover, the sort of thing that is available from most stationery stores or the stationery section of supermarkets.
That contained the Gospel reading and the priest read from that.
It was all pretty home-made and nobody batted an eyelid or expected the service to be conducted from a hefty tome inlaid with ambergris from the deepest part of the Pacific Ocean or lapis-lazuli or gems from the Hindu Kush ...
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.
Clearly, as an Orthodox Christian I am 'governed' by the idea of holding to an authoritative Tradition in a way that small t tradition Christians aren't. We tend to take a collective and collegial/conciliar view and whilst there's room for theologoumena - legitimate differences of opinion on theological matters within the framework of received Tradition - we keep within that collective frame of reference.
What you and your Tradition consider authoritative is by now well-established. But if one person's tradition can be considered authoritative, then anyone's tradition can be considered authoritative.
In response to your question above, I'm not sure how the word "should" applies to authority. On Lindisfarne, the "source" of authority is indicated by the attitude of those attending. But authority in general is associated with the investiture of power. A related usage of "authority", which seems pertinent, is an accepted source of expert information or knowledge.
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.
…
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?
Where should the authority have lain? I’d say it rests with Jesus. From the 10th Chapter of Marks gospel.
43 “Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 44 and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. 45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
Mind you it requires someone (of any gender) to have the courage to challenge the one who is lording it over the others. You should respect the office. You don’t have to respect wrong behaviour by the office holder
In that particular case, let the authoritarian explain how he thinks he is being a servant. And see where that takes you.
And if he wont listen you can always report him to the rural dean or the bishop.
The principle is you don’t have to put up with being bossed around. You do have to accept the consequences of standing up. And they may not be nice.
I suppose you’re always free to choose prudence as an alternative. If you do so, do so consciously. The lack of complaint may also have consequences which are not so nice.
I have no idea. When you’re a visitor, as a matter of normal courtesy the right to question would rest with a church member. Of course if you have space to express an opinion you can use it. But with due recognition of the fact that you have no permanent voice.
In general the effectiveness of a complaint to a rural dean or bishop would depend on the experience and reputation of the complainer. There is always the power of the quiet informal word. “I’m reluctant to do this but I feel I should draw to your attention ….”
Ways and means of complaint up the line require an understanding of the person you complaint to as well as a recognition of the most effective way to proceed. I’m sure that applies in all authority structures, not just the church.
I learned these things from a very good boss at my place of work.
“If you tell a senior officer that you think they are wrong and you’re wrong, they may give you credit for your independence of mind. But if you tell them they are wrong and they are wrong, they may never forgive you.”
I was 27 years old when I heard that. Never forgot it!
Sure, but forgive me, I think you are taking a rather 'literal' approach to what I'm saying here and it is a tangent to the main 'technological' theme of the OP and how that's expanded to cover issues other than electronic and digital technology.
I had no wish to 'report' the visiting vicar to anyone- and if I had done then I doubt anyone would have considered he'd done anything 'wrong.'
That's not the point I was making.
He wasn't preaching 'heresy' or anything that wouldn't be held by many people within sections of Anglican evangelicalism.
The point I was making was how ' in my view - he'd framed the discussion in a way that made it hard for anyone to arrive at different conclusions to those he wished us to arrive at.
Of course, that's going to be the case to a certain extent wherever we are. If we attend a liberally theological church then things will be framed to reinforce conclusions that are commensurate with that. The same with conservatively theological churches.
It's all very well and good saying that Jesus should be the final arbiter and source of authority.
'All authority in heaven and earth has been given to me.'
But how we understand that authority to be exercised and expressed is going to reflect our particular ecclesial traditions.
Traditional RCs would say it resides in the 'Keys of Peter'.
Congregationalists would see it lying with the collective 'mind' of the individual gathered community insofar as it accords with scripture - interpreted according to their particular theological framework.
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.
Our bulletin is distributed on line with just a couple of dozen printed out for visitors and people who don't do online stuff. We have hymn books and some laminated copies of mass texts for visitors from other traditions or none. Our greeters offer them to strangers when handing out hymn books.
Our parish takes green issues seriously and baulks at wasting paper. At the other extreme I have heard of parishes that prepare a weekly "worship aid" that contains all the liturgical texts and hymns etc. There might be several of these a week where there are several Sunday masses.
There is some discussion in "liturgical circles" about the desirability of people following readings visually. Purists say that the readings are meant to be proclaimed and attentively listened to. While others take a more flexible attitude. Personally I think there is a difference between listening to a familiar parable originally spoken aloud on one hand, and listening to a dense bit of St Paul which originated in a written text. This is even more the case since our lectionary changed to the ESV which seems designed more for private study than public proclamation.
- The visiting vicar presented views as 'authoritative' that aren't necessarily seen that way by all Anglicans.
- He framed the discussion in a 'slanted' way to ensure the congregation came to the same conclusions.
- I didn't share those conclusions and neither, to some extent, did the curate.
In this instance where 'should' the authority lie?
With the visiting vicar?
The curate?
Me?
Whoever else happened to be there at the time?
Thanks. In my experience, the answer would usually be "none of the above". Just because a vicar makes pronouncements on issues such as PSA or other religions doesn't mean that anyone needs to take much notice. (The Order of Service matters rather more.)
But how we understand that authority to be exercised and expressed is going to reflect our particular ecclesial traditions.
Indeed. And also the extent of that authority.
Traditional RCs would say it resides in the 'Keys of Peter'.
Congregationalists would see it lying with the collective 'mind' of the individual gathered community insofar as it accords with scripture - interpreted according to their particular theological framework.
Other churches would have different views.
Context is all.
And contexts can overlap.
Anyhow, that's a tangent on the OP.
Not entirely. The "Keys of Peter" are a symbol of authority that directly references an ancient technology.
Meanwhile, in the C of E, whatever symbolic and metaphorical significance keys have in relation to authority is writ large - visibly and tangibly reinforced - in aged parish churches across the country; big heavy doors with big heavy locks. Who holds the keys?
This morning the congregation was invited to follow the reading in the pew Bible( NIV) whilst listening to the passage being read from The Message version.
As it was a very familiar passage, I did not choose to do so. Some did, but I felt it better to just listen anyway.
Also this morning, pre-recorded music was used as accompaniment to some of the hymns as there was no organist available. I have to say this was very successful.
That sounds odd, @Puzzler, following something on paper (or screen) from one translation/version whilst listening to another - or a paraphrase in this version.
@Pease plenty of ancient churches remain open for people to wander around and there's often a notice in the porch telling you who to contact for the keys.
That doesn't happen very often in non-Anglican churches - although RC churches in cities can often be open for private prayer.
So there's nothing sinister about old heavy wooden doors and big keys. At least you can get in and have a look around.
Gamma Gamaliel, I'm well aware of the accessibility of old Anglican churches.
A church that is locked is shut, not open, regardless of whether there's a notice on display with the contact details of any key-holders. (I note that Ecclesiastical Insurance, which insures many of them, actively encourages churches to stay open, ie unlocked.)
And who said anything about heavy doors and keys being sinister?
The point was about the symbolic and metaphorical significance of locks and keys in relation to authority, in which regard the attitude of those striving to keep church doors open is also significant.
We have NIV Bibles in the pews, dating from the late 90s, but the words of the readings are now put up on screen as well. The on-screen version is from the current online NIVUK, which diverges more and more from the printed version. Many of the differences are to make the text inclusive, which is fine, but often there is no obvious reason for the change and one is left wondering about the significance of it.
Following along in such circumstances leads, as far as I am concerned, to multiple distractions from concentrating on the meaning of the passage. I think in future I will leave the book in the pew and just adopt a restful attitude.
Puzzler wrote: Also this morning, pre-recorded music was used as accompaniment to some of the hymns as there was no organist available. I have to say this was very successful.
Caissa replied: Our oldest son is the sound tech at his church. When the organist is going to be absent our son and the organist pre-record the music for the service.
Comments
Our parish has organised some additional services, such as last night's Paraklesis consisting of the 'Small Supplicatory Canon To The Theotokos'.
Small? It seemed pretty long to me ...
A visiting priest read the priest's prayers and read the appointed Gospel reading. I've not paid that much attention to what people read from in Orthodox services as I've never thought of it as much of an issue - apart from being aware that there are apparently canons or 'push-back' on hand-held screen devices, which don't appear to be universally applied or observed.
Copies of the Paraklesis service were available on photo-copied sheets bound into a cover, the sort of thing that is available from most stationery stores or the stationery section of supermarkets.
That contained the Gospel reading and the priest read from that.
It was all pretty home-made and nobody batted an eyelid or expected the service to be conducted from a hefty tome inlaid with ambergris from the deepest part of the Pacific Ocean or lapis-lazuli or gems from the Hindu Kush ...
I'm pretty sure there will be whacky ecclesial book covers, accoutrements and fittings out there. In fact, I know there are.
In response to your question above, I'm not sure how the word "should" applies to authority. On Lindisfarne, the "source" of authority is indicated by the attitude of those attending. But authority in general is associated with the investiture of power. A related usage of "authority", which seems pertinent, is an accepted source of expert information or knowledge.
I don't understand what this question means.
- The visiting vicar presented views as 'authoritative' that aren't necessarily seen that way by all Anglicans.
- He framed the discussion in a 'slanted' way to ensure the congregation came to the same conclusions.
- I didn't share those conclusions and neither, to some extent, did the curate.
In this instance where 'should' the authority lie?
With the visiting vicar?
The curate?
Me?
Whoever else happened to be there at the time?
Mind you it requires someone (of any gender) to have the courage to challenge the one who is lording it over the others. You should respect the office. You don’t have to respect wrong behaviour by the office holder
In that particular case, let the authoritarian explain how he thinks he is being a servant. And see where that takes you.
And if he wont listen you can always report him to the rural dean or the bishop.
The principle is you don’t have to put up with being bossed around. You do have to accept the consequences of standing up. And they may not be nice.
I suppose you’re always free to choose prudence as an alternative. If you do so, do so consciously. The lack of complaint may also have consequences which are not so nice.
Even if I had been do you really think a complaint to the rural dean or bishop would have done any good?
In general the effectiveness of a complaint to a rural dean or bishop would depend on the experience and reputation of the complainer. There is always the power of the quiet informal word. “I’m reluctant to do this but I feel I should draw to your attention ….”
Ways and means of complaint up the line require an understanding of the person you complaint to as well as a recognition of the most effective way to proceed. I’m sure that applies in all authority structures, not just the church.
I learned these things from a very good boss at my place of work.
“If you tell a senior officer that you think they are wrong and you’re wrong, they may give you credit for your independence of mind. But if you tell them they are wrong and they are wrong, they may never forgive you.”
I was 27 years old when I heard that. Never forgot it!
I had no wish to 'report' the visiting vicar to anyone- and if I had done then I doubt anyone would have considered he'd done anything 'wrong.'
That's not the point I was making.
He wasn't preaching 'heresy' or anything that wouldn't be held by many people within sections of Anglican evangelicalism.
The point I was making was how ' in my view - he'd framed the discussion in a way that made it hard for anyone to arrive at different conclusions to those he wished us to arrive at.
Of course, that's going to be the case to a certain extent wherever we are. If we attend a liberally theological church then things will be framed to reinforce conclusions that are commensurate with that. The same with conservatively theological churches.
It's all very well and good saying that Jesus should be the final arbiter and source of authority.
'All authority in heaven and earth has been given to me.'
But how we understand that authority to be exercised and expressed is going to reflect our particular ecclesial traditions.
Traditional RCs would say it resides in the 'Keys of Peter'.
Congregationalists would see it lying with the collective 'mind' of the individual gathered community insofar as it accords with scripture - interpreted according to their particular theological framework.
Other churches would have different views.
Context is all.
Anyhow, that's a tangent on the OP.
Our bulletin is distributed on line with just a couple of dozen printed out for visitors and people who don't do online stuff. We have hymn books and some laminated copies of mass texts for visitors from other traditions or none. Our greeters offer them to strangers when handing out hymn books.
Our parish takes green issues seriously and baulks at wasting paper. At the other extreme I have heard of parishes that prepare a weekly "worship aid" that contains all the liturgical texts and hymns etc. There might be several of these a week where there are several Sunday masses.
There is some discussion in "liturgical circles" about the desirability of people following readings visually. Purists say that the readings are meant to be proclaimed and attentively listened to. While others take a more flexible attitude. Personally I think there is a difference between listening to a familiar parable originally spoken aloud on one hand, and listening to a dense bit of St Paul which originated in a written text. This is even more the case since our lectionary changed to the ESV which seems designed more for private study than public proclamation.
Indeed. And also the extent of that authority.
And contexts can overlap.
Not entirely. The "Keys of Peter" are a symbol of authority that directly references an ancient technology.
Meanwhile, in the C of E, whatever symbolic and metaphorical significance keys have in relation to authority is writ large - visibly and tangibly reinforced - in aged parish churches across the country; big heavy doors with big heavy locks. Who holds the keys?
As it was a very familiar passage, I did not choose to do so. Some did, but I felt it better to just listen anyway.
Also this morning, pre-recorded music was used as accompaniment to some of the hymns as there was no organist available. I have to say this was very successful.
@Pease plenty of ancient churches remain open for people to wander around and there's often a notice in the porch telling you who to contact for the keys.
That doesn't happen very often in non-Anglican churches - although RC churches in cities can often be open for private prayer.
So there's nothing sinister about old heavy wooden doors and big keys. At least you can get in and have a look around.
A church that is locked is shut, not open, regardless of whether there's a notice on display with the contact details of any key-holders. (I note that Ecclesiastical Insurance, which insures many of them, actively encourages churches to stay open, ie unlocked.)
And who said anything about heavy doors and keys being sinister?
The point was about the symbolic and metaphorical significance of locks and keys in relation to authority, in which regard the attitude of those striving to keep church doors open is also significant.
Following along in such circumstances leads, as far as I am concerned, to multiple distractions from concentrating on the meaning of the passage. I think in future I will leave the book in the pew and just adopt a restful attitude.
Caissa replied: Our oldest son is the sound tech at his church. When the organist is going to be absent our son and the organist pre-record the music for the service.