Tag Archive for 'Mass'

blessing or communion?

Published on January 15, 2010 in liturgy. 14 Comments Tags: , , , , , , .

layingonhandsPrior to the 1970s, NZ Anglicans had to be confirmed in order to be allowed to receive communion. Then in the 70s and 80s General Synod allowed those baptised who had been “Admitted to Communion” to receive communion. This followed the then RC model of “First Communion”. In 1990 General Synod restored the tradition of communion for all the baptised, whatever their age, whatever their denomination. Confirmation moved from a puberty rite, to an adult confirmation of faith in the presence of the community and our bishop. Roman Catholics, meanwhile, moved in the opposite direction age-wise, now offering confirmation as a completion of baptism and requiring it for communion (where Anglicans were prior to 1970). Roman Catholics also require that one be a Roman Catholic in good standing (eg. not divorced/remarried) and have made one’s “first communion” in order to receive communion at their Mass.

All this means that in a variety of circumstances there will be some going forward for communion, whilst others present in the congregation are not welcomed to receive. In many places these are invited to come forward for a “blessing”.

There are different forms and traditions within Christianity about “blessings” – and generally a weak theological reflection on this IMO. Bishops and priests regularly bless in different forms. Roman Catholic deacons bless. Anglican deacons do in some provinces (eg. marriages, baptismal water). NZ Anglicanism appears to not have reflected much on this (do any deacons bless the baptismal water in NZ? – I know of none that bless marriages here).

I am aware of abuses: I have seen clergy administer lollies (sweets) to children as “the body of Christ”! I have heard a child back in the pew say, “Mummy, mummy, I don’t want to go up there and get my head measured again”!

I have seen blessings (”replacing communion”) done with far more reverence, take longer, and with greater intensity than receiving communion – giving greater weight to blessing than communion. Similarly, I’m sure we’ve all seen a blessing at the end of the Eucharist (optional in the NZ Anglican rite) done so dramatically as to “compete” with communion [remembering that this concluding blessing grew historically as receiving communion diminished].

Roman Catholic lay people cannot formally bless in a liturgy. At the Eucharist when distributing communion, the priest is the “ordinary minister” and lay people are “extraordinary ministers”. This means often when there are large groups not receiving communion but seeking a blessing at a Roman Catholic Mass, the priest, the ordinary minister of communion, is giving the blessings, while the extraordinary minister is administering communion.

Some, of course, hold to the position that if something is not mentioned in the rubrics or appropriate documents, then it is forbidden – there being no mention of blessing as an option at communion time, they argue, it should not be offered.

Increasingly there are health issues around communion. Do we lay hands on people’s heads and then with the same hand administer bread – sometimes on people’s tongues?

Pastorally, do we refuse communion to any who come forward that we know are not welcome to receive in our tradition?

This reflection can be extended to blessings in the home: of meals, places, people, our children. Protestants often do not use the sign of the cross having lost touch with their Reformation heritage.

What are your own reflections as you read the above post? What are your own practices and practices in your community and why?

Mass: We pray the video game

Published on November 22, 2009 in liturgy. 4 Comments Tags: , , , .

This is actually a well-done viral advertisement for the EA Dante’s Inferno game.
The video is a bit of a laugh for Christians with a sense of humour (sorry: humor).

Anglican Rite?

Published on October 28, 2009 in liturgy. 8 Comments Tags: , , , , , , .

It is worth adding some further reflections to the Vatican’s recent announcement of Anglican Personal Ordinariates. You may wish to read my post the end of the Anglican Communion first.

Firstly I want to highlight that, in my opinion, denominational boundaries are far far less significant than previously. Increasingly, it appears to me, denominational boundaries are no longer the primary “partitioning”. If one visualises denominational boundaries, for example, as vertical lines, then it seems to me that the horizontal lines are far more significant – where people receive support and encouragement from “evangelical”, or justice-focused, or environmentally-conscious, or contemplative, or liturgical – etc. And one finds those perspectives, with which one resonates, across denominations. The internet, of course, fits in with this “cafeteria style” spirituality.

Let us also not forget that, to most people on this planet, discussions about different denominations are as esoteric as debates about different perforation gauges on postage stamps. And we need to remember that these are people to whom we are called to bring the good news, and the way we live and model our unity and disunity will affect our ability to bring that good news.

Many have highlighted that some people genuinely will benefit from moving denominations. They will flourish, they will grow in holiness and be better suited in their new context to further God’s reign of love. We need to wish them Godspeed and encourage them. But there will be others who will essentially be as little suited in their new denomination as they were in their old – because of temperament or an inability to live within any constraints, be they Anglican on the one hand, or Roman Catholic on the other. [To be fair, those who encourage people to move denominations, with the understanding that some people suit one rather than another, tend to be of an Anglican perspective. To Roman Catholics, Anglicanism formally cannot even be categorised as a "church" but rather is referred to as an Ecclesial community]

Also let us not forget that the Anglican tradition has always been open to receiving members of the Roman Catholic denomination. In our own New Zealand Anglican binding liturgical formularies there is the allowance for communities to celebrate the whole Roman Catholic English (ICEL) Novus Ordo Mass as it is without alteration. The only concrete personal experience I have had since the Vatican announcement last week has been of a Roman Catholic priest seeking information on how to become a priest serving within Anglicanism (Note: Anglicans accept the validity of Roman Catholic orders and all other sacraments).

Ecclesiology

Anglican ecclesiology is essentially identical to Eastern Orthodox and Old Catholic ecclesiology in seeing the local Church centered on the bishop as “the catholic Church”, the full manifestation of the Body of Christ. This Episcopal or “Eucharistic Ecclesiology” (as it is often now termed) stands in contrast to Roman Catholic ecclesiology in which the local Church is a “particular Church” manifesting the universal, worldwide Church. In this Roman Catholic ecclesiology, such a local Church can only be considered “catholic” if it is a member, part, or portion of the universal Church, ie. in communion with Rome. Whereas the former approach sees each bishop as successor of Peter (where the bishop is there the catholic church is – Ignatius of Antioch et. al.), the latter has a universal bishop for the universal Church. It will be very interesting to see the document “The Role of the Bishop of Rome in the Communion of the Church in the First Millennium” when it is finally produced. (Please let me know when it does come out where one can find it online). One co-president of the commission, Metropolitan Ioannis Zizioulas of Pergamum, is well known for his exposition of “Eucharistic Ecclesiology.” The other, Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, was notable by his absence in the multiple press-conferences last week.

Many Roman Catholics are totally unaware that the Catholic Church has a great number of different rites (see here and here). In many of these rites priests are married. Since the 1980s there has been an “Anglican Use” within the Roman Rite. The pope granted some former Anglican and Episcopal clergy and their parishes the faculty of celebrating the sacramental rites according to slightly-altered Anglican forms. The new Apostolic Constitution, as I said, extends Anglican Use in an analogous way similar to what the Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum” did for the Latin Mass.

Within the Catholic Church anyone may attend any Catholic Church of any rite and receive the sacraments. It is no different than attending a different parish church in the same town. If you commit to a rite you can be married and ordained in that rite as a Catholic priest (if they have married priests). You would be “incardinated” in that rite. Eg. a Latin Catholic can join an Eastern rite, marry and be ordained. (Thanks for confirmation of this paragraph from Dr. William Ditewig).

The Vatican announcement came at the time the Church of England General Synod was working through issues about women bishops. It also came during the month-long meeting of Roman Catholic African bishops in Rome. Some Africans are seeking a relaxation of the Vatican’s celibacy rules. This is a no-go area for the current pope. While Anglican Use, with its non-celibate priests, is well-known in some countries, the African bishops were unaware of it. Its extension by the Apostolic Constitution caught them by surprise. Some suggest there was much muttering in the Vatican’s grand corridors. Others say that muttering is not only happening there.

It is my intention to continue this reflection in the future.

More on marriage and ordination

part 3 of this reflection is here

Comments policy

New Mass translation

Published on August 30, 2009 in liturgy. 9 Comments Tags: , , , , , .

The US Roman Catholic Bishop Conference has just launched a website to prepare English-speaking Roman Catholics for the dramatic changes to the Roman Catholic Mass. Currently Roman Catholics know their responses by heart. They don’t hand out sheets with responses when you arrive. They don’t use power point or overhead projectors to put responses up onto a screen. But in a few months time, this admirable chorus of perfectly synchronised voices will be disturbed. A new translation is almost ready and various texts said by the congregation will change.

I understand the collects/opening prayers will look a lot more like Anglican ones, whereas currently Roman Catholic and Anglican translations of the same Latin prayer are barely recognisable as having the same source. Unfortunately, texts agreed ecumenically are being abandoned by the Roman Catholic Church. With this also will go all the ecumenically shared music. Familiar musical settings will no longer fit with the new texts some of which have been changed a little, others have been changed dramatically.

My prediction: some Roman Catholics will welcome the new texts with enthusiasm – those who have looked with envy at Anglican English quality texts; regular Sunday Roman Catholics will faithfully accept changes, as they have all other changes handed down from above (with maybe a bit of occasional muttering); some occasional Mass attendees will continue to attend – occasionally. But for many occasional Mass attendees this will be the last straw. They will arrive at a Mass they can no longer participate in by rote, by heart. Mass attendance numbers will drop further. I have, for example, been present at Roman Catholic funeral Masses where, with a large number of nominal Roman Catholics present, as well as many not Roman Catholic, with the practice of assuming responses are known by heart, the responses have been embarrassingly dire. Unless Roman Catholics adapt by introducing some ways of helping people including visitors with responses, this deterioration will only accelerate.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops have prepared a website they hope will lessen the disruption. It indicates familiar cues like “The Lord be with you” will no longer have as a response “And also with you.” The response will now become “And with your spirit.” The response to “Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.” will become “It is right and just.” Words have been added and others removed in the penitential material, the Gloria has had a complete overhaul, the creed has had significant changes, the Sanctus, Memorial Acclamation, and Agnus Dei have had sufficient changes to trip one up.

Chart of changes
PDF of changes
More about liturgy by heart

First communion on the moon anniversary

Published on July 20, 2009 in liturgy. 4 Comments Tags: , , , , , .

replica of Buzz Aldrin's chalice

replica of Buzz Aldrin's chalice

Today 40 years ago Buzz Aldrin had the first communion on the Moon. I am delighted that Rev. Mark Cooper, the senior pastor of Webster Presbyterian Church in Webster, TX, wrote to this site in response to my post:

“Greetings, All:

I have the honor of serving as senior pastor of Webster Presbyterian Church in Webster, TX. At the time of the lunar landing Aldrin was an elder in our church. A communion kit was prepared for him by the church’s pastor at the time, the Rev. Dean Woodruff. Since Presbyterians do not celebrate private communion, the communion on the moon was structured as part of a service with the congregation back at the church. Aldrin returned the chalice he used to earth. Webster Presbyterian continues to possess the chalice, which is now kept in a safety deposit box. Each year the congregation commemorates the lunar communion on the Sunday closest to the anniversary of the landing.

While we have to confess some pride in his being a Presbyterian (at least at the time – I don’t know anything about his affiliation now, if any) communion is certainly not solely a Presbyterian ritual. The Presbyterian communion table is open to all Christians. We call it “communion” because in it we commune with God and with all our brothers and sisters in faith, in all times and places and of all names. Aldrin did not take communion on the moon as a Presbyterian so much as he did as a Christian. We Presbyterian, even we Webster-type Presbyterians, do not own lunar communion. The communion on the moon belongs to us all. It can, and should, serve as a powerful symbol of God’s presence everywhere, and of our unity as one family of faith.”

"I am the vine..."The image shows the original card with the words “I am the vine, you are the branches. Whosoever abides in me will bring forth much fruit.” (John 15:5) and “When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou has ordained; What is man that thou art mindful of him? And the Son of Man, that thou visitest Him?” (Psalm 8:3-4). This card sold in an auction two years ago for nearly $US 180,000

read more

Just for fun – don’t watch it if you have no sense of humour:

They DID land on the Moon!

Some possible blessings for an anniversary service:

Seek the One who made the vast expanse of interstellar space, galaxies, the sun, the moon, the planets in their courses, and this earth, our home and may the blessing of God… (BCP TEC USA adapt)

Seek the One who made the Pleiades and Orion, and turns deep darkness into the morning, and darkens the day into night; who calls for the waters of the sea and pours them out upon the surface of the earth, and the blessing… (Amos 5:8)

First Communion on the Moon

Published on July 16, 2009 in liturgy. 33 Comments Tags: , , , , , , .
L-R Armstrong, Collins, Aldrin

L-R Armstrong, Collins, Aldrin

On Sunday July 20, 1969 the first people landed on the moon. Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin were in the lunar lander which touched down at 3:17 Eastern Standard Time.

Buzz Aldrin had with him the Reserved Sacrament. He radioed: “Houston, this is Eagle. This is the LM pilot speaking. I would like to request a few moments of silence. I would like to invite each person listening in, whoever or wherever he may be, to contemplate for a moment the events of the last few hours, and to give thanks in his own individual way.”

Later he wrote: “In the radio blackout, I opened the little plastic packages which contained the bread and the wine. I poured the wine into the chalice our church had given me. In the one-sixth gravity of the moon, the wine slowly curled and gracefully came up the side of the cup. Then I read the Scripture, ‘I am the vine, you are the branches. Whosoever abides in me will bring forth much fruit.’ I had intended to read my communion passage back to earth, but at the last minute Deke Slayton had requested that I not do this. NASA was already embroiled in a legal battle with Madelyn Murray O’Hare, the celebrated opponent of religion, over the Apollo 8 crew reading from Genesis while orbiting the moon at Christmas. I agreed reluctantly…Eagle’s metal body creaked. I ate the tiny Host and swallowed the wine. I gave thanks for the intelligence and spirit that had brought two young pilots to the Sea of Tranquility. It was interesting for me to think: the very first liquid ever poured on the moon, and the very first food eaten there, were the communion elements.”

NASA kept this secret for two decades. The memoirs of Buzz Aldrin and the Tom Hanks’s Emmy- winning HBO mini-series, From the Earth to the Moon (1998), made people aware of this act of Christian worship 235,000 miles from Earth.

The 2003 Episcopal Church General Convention resolved that the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music prepare propers and collects for churchwide observance of the 40th anniversary of the event, July 20, 2009, and to include “The First Communion on the Moon” in The Episcopal Church’s Lesser Feasts and Fasts and on the calendar in the Book of Common Prayer for July 20. (Biretta tip: @rrchapman)

I only have the 1991 Lesser Feasts and Fasts on my shelf so cannot quote more than what I have found online. If you have the revised version, please add any omitted material in the comments section. I understand that there is now a “Common” to commemorate “those who have died in the course of space exploration – among them a significant number of Episcopalians. In addition, it provides a way of praying for future space explorers and for the thousands of people whose work make the space program possible.” The collect for this “Common” reads:

Creator of the universe,
your dominion extends through the immensity of space:
guide and guard those who seek to fathom its mysteries [especially N.N.].
Save us from arrogance lest we forget that our achievements are grounded in you,
and, by the grace of your Holy Spirit,
protect our travels beyond the reaches of earth,
that we may glory ever more in the wonder of your creation:
through Jesus Christ, your Word, by whom all things came to be,
who with you and the Holy Spirit lives and reigns, one God, for ever and ever.
Amen.

Colonel Aldrin holds a doctorate in astro-physics from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), was acknowledged as the most highly educated of the first astronauts. He is a wonderful example of a scientist who is a committed Christian.

There appear differing versions of the story whether Buzz Aldrin was a Presbyterian or an Episcopalian/Anglican. I hope this will finally be settled in the comments and then I can amend this post – please add a reference to your comment of the denomination to which Buzz Aldrin belonged at the time of the lunar landing. Here are the conflicting references I have found so far:
Anglican/Episcopalian 1, 2, 3 (click on number to got to website)
Presbyterian 1, 2 (click on number to got to website)

Other useful sites:
Buzz Aldrin website
@therealBuzz

Update: an anniversary post is now online

Screwtape liturgy

Published on July 14, 2009 in liturgy. 2 Comments Tags: , , , .

200px-thescrewtapelettersIn preparing for a blog post I was re-reading some of CS Lewis’s The Screwtape Letters in which a senior devil called Screwtape is writing to his nephew, a junior devil named Wormwood, giving him advice on how to entrap a human called “the Patient.” In my reading I noticed again this passage (from letter XVI) as relevant today as 67 years ago when first published:

I warned you before that if your patient can’t be kept out of the Church, he ought at least to be violently attached to some party
within it. I don’t mean on really doctrinal issues; about those, the more lukewarm he is the better. And it isn’t the doctrines on which we chiefly depend for producing malice. The real fun is working up hatred between those who say “mass” and those who say “holy communion” when neither party could possibly state the difference between, say, Hooker’s doctrine and Thomas Aquinas’, in any
form which would hold water for five minutes. And all the purely indifferent things-candles and clothes and what not-are an admirable ground for our activities. We have quite removed from men’s minds what that pestilent fellow Paul used to teach about food and other unessentials-namely, that the human without scruples should always give in to the human with scruples. You would
think they could not fail to see the application. You would expect to find the “low” churchman genuflecting and crossing himself lest the weak conscience of his “high” brother should be moved to irreverence, and the “high” one refraining from these exercises lest he should betray his “low” brother into idolatry. And so it would have been but for our ceaseless labour. Without that the variety of usage within the Church of England might have become a positive hotbed of charity and humility,
Your affectionate uncle
SCREWTAPE

stand up for your rites

Published on May 29, 2009 in liturgy. 7 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .
orans position - Catacombs of Priscilla, 3rd century AD

orans posture - Catacombs of Priscilla, 3rd century AD

“New Zealand’s [Roman Catholic] bishops are no longer seeking approval that kneeling be the posture for the faithful during the Eucharistic Prayer at Masses, reversing an earlier decision,” Michael Otto reports on front-page news of the fortnightly NZ Catholic (#317). Last November the bishops had voted, not unanimously, to kneel from the end of the Sanctus/Benedictus until after the Great Amen. Luckily, now that the bishops have changed their minds, that request was lost in the Vatican’s in-trays. The Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship has apologised for losing it. The article is unclear if kneeling will be required for what it terms the “consecration” (presumably the Last Supper story found in all of New Zealand’s RC Eucharistic Prayers). Or if standing throughout will be an option. Or if people can choose individually when to kneel or stand (I can already visualise the video of of the – how many variations can you think of, Mathematicians? – people bobbing up and down at different points within the same shared prayer… :-( )

[Aside: Not all Roman Catholic Eucharistic Prayers have a "consecration" (in the sense of Last Supper story). The Roman Catholic Church recognises the Eucharistic Prayer of Addai and Mari as a valid, consecrating eucharistic prayer even though it does not even contain the Last Supper story, nor the words “this is my body”, nor "this is my blood." These last two quotes from the Last Supper at that event were words, not of consecration, but of administration/distribution.]

The article NZ Catholic highlights the Vatican’s General Instruction of the Roman Missal has “they should kneel at the consecration, except when prevented on occasion by reasons of health, lack of space, the large number of people present, or some other good reason.” Even there, however, this appears in the Errata of that document. The article goes on to point to Cardinal Ratzinger’s (aka Pope Benedict XVI) writing on kneeling in The Spirit of the Liturgy.

The bishops at the first ecumenical council of Nicaea (325) were horrified to discover that Christians were kneeling on Sundays and in the Great Easter Season of 50 days (which they termed Pentecost) and ruled in canon 20:

Since there are some who kneel on Sunday and during the season of Pentecost, this holy synod decrees that, so that the same observances may be maintained in every diocese, one should offer one’s prayers to the Lord standing.

Bishop Cullinane in the NZ Catholic article highlights that “the ancient tradition regarded standing as the posture of the Easter people.”

Other denominations may not have a moment-of-consecration theology, and wonder what the rationale for the rest of the Eucharistic Prayer is if its purpose is effected by a small section within it. These may see the whole Eucharistic Prayer as consecrating – or in fact the whole eucharistic action (from taking bread and wine, giving thanks, breaking bread and distributing bread and wine) as consecrating. Anglican eucharistic theology was sent off on a tangent after the discontinuity of the Commonwealth Period when the 1662 Book of Common Prayer added an “Amen” after the Last Supper story, put the fraction (breaking of the bread) as an action into the Last Supper story, and referred to what followed the Sanctus as the “consecration” – implying that the preface was not part of the “consecration”.

As with the NZ Catholic article, in which the new National Liturgy Advisory Group are reported as asking the bishops to review their decision and be stronger for standing, so the NZ Prayer Book commission presented to the Anglican General Synod (1987) a rubric at the start of the Eucharistic Prayer:

It is recommended that the people stand throughout the following prayer.

This not only preserves the unity of the Eucharistic Prayer, but also has the same posture for the presiding priest as well as all others participating. I well remember the debate about this in General Synod as some misunderstood the meaning of the word “recommend” and argued that the “traditional” posture of kneeling be added, so that the rubric now reads “It is recommended that the people stand or kneel throughout the following prayer.” (Note the posture does not change from “The Lord is here…” to the Great Amen). There was much muttering of “what about people in a hospital bed… wheelchair…” I note that the Book of Worship of the United Church of Christ precedes every rubric with “All who are able may…” Each of their Eucharistic Prayers (called there “Communion Prayer”) has the rubric, “All who are able may stand.”

Pentecost – Joan of Arc

Published on May 24, 2009 in liturgy. 2 Comments Tags: , , , , , , .
Joan of Arc - Feast Day May 30

Joan of Arc - Feast Day May 30

In response to someone viewing my video on the Liturgy of the Notices, they emailed me a genuine notice from their parish bulletin. I have permission to quote it here – I have removed locations to keep anonymity:

Joan of Arc/Pentecost BBQ– Sun., May 31st after the 5:45 p.m. Mass (Parish of St Ann O’Nymous) Come out to Ann O’Nymous location after Mass to celebrate the feasts of Joan of Arc and Pentecost with a bonfire and BBQ!

On a more serious note, what about, on the Day of Pentecost, processing out with lit candles:

Everyone carried a candle lit from the Paschal Candle during the Easter vigil, symbolically sharing the light of the risen Christ. Perhaps on the Day of Pentecost, during the period of reflection after receiving communion, these candles could be relit from the Paschal Candle. The Pentecostal fire is thereby visibly divided and shared by everyone (cf. Acts 2:1-4; first reading for the Day of Pentecost, Three Year Series). The Paschal Candle can then be extinguished, vividly concluding the Fifty Days. The risen and ascended Christ, gone from our sight, is still present by the Spirit and we are commissioned to go out into the world to spread the light of Christ. (This might be symbolised by all processing out with the lit candles).

OTHER RESOURCES

A reflection on the Day of Pentecost collect/opening prayer

As the Day of Pentecost concludes a season, this collect would not be used during the week following. Instead, the Ordinary Sunday that this day replaces (9th Ordinary Sunday of the Year – Sunday closest to June 1 -  Sunday between 29 May and 4 June) is the collect that is used if required during this week.

An outline for a vigil for the Day of Pentecost

This is my body

Published on May 2, 2009 in liturgy. 7 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , .

brake-breadI was surprised to open the Easter edition (11 April) of the reputable Tablet to find the first article was a one-and-a-half page, very confused criticism of part of the Eucharist by Stephen Hough. The qualifications for this article as given by the Tablet is that he “is a concert pianist”. Mr. Hough is “perturbed” that the priest does not break the bread at the moment the priest describes Jesus breaking it within the Last Supper story (”Institution Narrative“) in the Eucharistic Prayer.

Mr. Hough quotes all the biblical Last Supper accounts and from liturgical texts and then says:

He “broke the bread”, but we don’t – at least not at the same moment. The priest waits until the Agnus Dei to break the consecrated wafer, which is quite a while after the Consecration. Indeed it is after the Eucharistic Prayer, after the Lord’s Prayer, after the sign of peace – just before Communion. Yet it is quite clear from all the sources, scriptural and liturgical, that the piece of bread at the Last Supper was broken before the words were said.

What Mr. Hough plainly fails to notice is the quite elementary realisation that at the Last Supper, Jesus saying “this is my body” did not function as the “words of consecration” but were Jesus’ words of administration. Even the Roman Catholic Church, which places such emphasis on these words, recognises the Eucharistic Prayer of Addai and Mari as a valid, consecrating eucharistic prayer even though it does not even contain the words “this is my body”.

At the Last Supper “this is my body” functions similarly to the words at the Eucharist when one receives communion: “the Body of Christ”. Jesus took bread, (and later wine) blessed it by giving thanks, broke the bread, and gave the bread with the words of distribution “this is my body”. What we do today in the Eucharist is quite similar: we take bread and wine, bless it by giving thanks (Eucharistic Prayer), break the bread, and distribute it with words such as “the Body of Christ”.

Mr. Hough describes his understanding of the Last Supper:

It is the Feast of Unleavened Bread in the Jewish calendar, the Passover. He [Jesus] is not holding a wafer and speaking words over it, around it, into it…

This, of course, totally contradicts his previous half page where he has repeatedly quoted scripture and liturgy that Jesus did in fact say a prayer of thanksgiving blessing whilst holding the bread!

Mr. Hough continues

And it doesn’t end there. “This[pouring the red wine into the cup] is my blood.” This is what will happen to my blood. It will pour out from my hands and my feet, and especially from my side. I don’t think it is the fermented grape juice in the chalice which is so much the object of his “This”, but rather the action of pouring out blood-like wine, …

Mr. Hough does not even attempt to justify his assertion that there was a pouring of wine at this point in the Last Supper.

I am astonished that such an unwarranted critique of contemporary liturgy was allowed to find print in such a reputable magazine. Mr. Hough has some lovely pious reflections on the fraction (the breaking of the bread) but they do not rely on his lengthy, incorrect analysis and the editor should have helped him write it into a much briefer, devotional article.

For further reading: Celebrating Eucharist especially chapters 2, & 10-13

church and swine flu

Published on May 1, 2009 in liturgy. 6 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , .

Front page news in our local newspaper (which, by the way as far as I know has still not retracted the false, fabricated papal faux pas it wrote about) today is: “The Maori hongi and the traditional Catholic communion are among the centuries-old traditions being put on hold amid fears over a global swine flu pandemic.”

And yes, there is notification on the Roman Catholic diocesan website with a directive from the bishops: The following actions are to cease: Communion on the tongue; Communion from the chalice; shaking hands at the Sign of Peace. I will be particularly interested in the reaction of traditionalist Roman Catholics to the forbidding of communion on the tongue.

Looking at the New Zealand Anglican websites (General Synod, Taonga, diocesan) I cannot find any reaction within Anglicanism.

flying-disk-gun-hq9645My e-friend Rev. Scott Gunn has 10 suggestions for liturgy to be adapted in this context. Some will have my not-so-high-church readers looking up their liturgical glossary for “lavabo” etc. My personal favourite is shooting communion wafers at congregants from great distance, to avoid contamination. I also like the suggestion to use incense — loads and loads of it — to fumigate the building. Add methyl bromide to the mix for good measure. And I appreciate the inclusion of the video clip of the botafumeiro, the huge thurible that swings across the transept of Santiago de Compostela’s cathedral (I am lucky enough to have attended such a mass there).

The Great Emergence – Phyllis Tickle

Published on April 27, 2009 in liturgy. 1 Comment Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

The Great Emergence: How Christianity Is Changing and Why (Hardcover)
by Phyllis Tickle (Author) 176 pages
Publisher: Baker Books (October 1, 2008)

This book is about a very significant development within Christianity – and hence the world. The first point about this book is that it is not large. At around 60,000 words it is a fast read. And fast-paced. Tickle brings together an enormous wealth of facts and concepts spanning the whole of Christian history. She interweaves Albert Einstein and physics, psychology, the automobile, Karl Marx, drugs, feminism, Alcoholics Anonymous, the effects of wars, and so on. She fits her points into simple metaphors and diagrams. One might argue with some of her details, but the overall generalisations certainly are strong.

It is some of the details that did take me by surprise. I was surprised by Tickle’s repeatedly referring, without apology, to the Christian Sunday as “the Sabbath”, particularly within her context, and her recurring attempts to include Judaism within her analysis. Similarly “the Dark Ages” was used repeatedly, again without apology – whereas many scholars would now use “Early Middle Ages”. Or her seeing Mormons as the fourth great Abrahamic faith alongside Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Or (as an Episcopalian herself) her appearing to lump Anglicanism in with continental Protestantism rather than a reformed catholic movement ante-dating and anticipating much in post-Vatican II Roman Catholicism.

The biggest weakness of the book, in my opinion, is that if a reader has no idea at the start of the book what emergent Christianity regularly refers to, what an emergent community might currently look like, they may very well still not have the slightest idea by the end of the book. When she does point to a form of emergent Christianity it is to the “signs and wonders” movement associated with John Wimber, an approach that again might surprise many who see themselves as emergent, but cannot identify with Wimber’s approach.

Tickle rightly highlights the significance of the internet in the changes occurring within Christianity. What she fails to mention is that it is often not “emergent Christianity” but regularly the more conservative to fundamentalist forms of Christianity, from pro-Tridentine Mass Roman Catholics to selectively biblically literalist protestants who have the better websites, higher ranking, and greatest number of hits on the internet.

I am not convinced, as Tickle makes so much of in her book, that of necessity there is a “Great” transforming event within Christianity and Judaism every 500 years. And I do not think that the book would have suffered if that theory was abandoned. I think far more strongly are the phases of pre-Constantinian Christianity, Constantinian “established” Christianity, and our movement now into a post-Constantinian situation. We can still learn from transformative events such as the sixteenth century Reformation, and also compare and contrast with pre-Constantinian Christianity.

She helpfully sees the more conservative parts of her four-sided current Christianity as providing ballast in our movement forward. We all need each other and can learn from each other. There is certainly much of value within this book, and I recommend it as a good read. But I cannot recommend it unreservedly as there is much in it that is open to debate. Hence, it may be a good book to engender such discussion within a group – including of church leaders. Members of such a group could decide how much to prepare from the book before a meeting highlighting what they found helpful, what they disagreed with, what they sought a group discussion on, and how they might apply what they have discussed to enhance their community in our new context.

Feast John Bosco

Published on January 31, 2009 in liturgy and liturgy of the hours. Closed Tags: , , , , , .
St John Bosco

St John Bosco

Today in the Church of England, the calendar has the commemoration of John Bosco, founder of the Salesian teaching order. You can read more about him here and here:

John Bosco educated the whole person—body and soul united. He believed that Christ’s love and our faith in that love should pervade everything we do—work, study, play. For John Bosco, being a Christian was a full-time effort, not a once-a-week, Mass-on-Sunday experience. It is searching and finding God and Jesus in everything we do, letting their love lead us. Yet, John realized the importance of job-training and the self-worth and pride that comes with talent and ability so he trained his students in the trade crafts, too.

John Bosco’s theory of education could well be used in today’s schools. It was a preventive system, rejecting corporal punishment and placing students in surroundings removed from the likelihood of committing sin. He advocated frequent reception of the sacraments of Penance and Holy Communion. He combined catechetical training and fatherly guidance, seeking to unite the spiritual life with one’s work, study and play.

Lord,
you called John Bosco to be a teacher and father to the young.
Fill us with love like his:
may we give ourselves completely to your service
and to the salvation of all.
We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

Google promotes this website

Published on January 27, 2009 in liturgy. Closed Tags: , , , , , .

Google has just promoted the PageRank of this website www.liturgy.co.nz from PageRank 5 to PageRank 6. PageRank is Google’s view of the importance of a page. In a search in Google for “liturgy” there are only four sites of PageRank 6 and that is the highest PageRank for that search term.

There are a great number of online tools to check PageRank of a site. Here is the link to just one such tool. Here is Wikipedia’s explanation of PageRank.

The three other PageRank 6 “liturgy” sites are:

Thank you to all of you for your ongoing encouragement of my work on this site (voluntary and in my “spare” time). Thanks to those of you who link from your sites and blogs – if you place a link, please let me know so I can acknowledge that and link back.

Help for linking to this site

Eight new Eucharistic Prayers

Published on October 25, 2008 in liturgy. Closed Tags: , , , , , , , , .

Eight new Eucharistic Prayers/Great Thanksgiving Prayers have been added to this website:

Alternative Great Thanksgiving A
alternative to Thanksgiving of the People of God
Alternative Great Thanksgiving B
alternative to Celebrating the Grace of God
Alternative Great Thanksgiving C
alternative to Thanksgiving for Creation and Redemption
Alternative Great Thanksgiving D
alternative to Thanksgiving and Praise
Alternative Great Thanksgiving E
alternative to Form for Ordering the Eucharist
Alternative Great Thanksgiving F
alternative to Service of Holy Communion
Alternative Great Thanksgiving for use with Children A
Alternative Great Thanksgiving for use with Children B

Six of these began as revisions by Rev Ken Booth with the following rationale:

  • To shorten New Zealand Prayer Book Great Thanksgiving prayers which some found too long and were sometimes pruning ill advisedly. This was achieved by omitting any doublets or “expansions” of key events in the narrative, resulting in up to a sixth reduction. In one case, the Great Thanksgiving for use with the sick (NZPB page 732) was expanded to make it more appropriate for use in contexts beyond the sick.
  • To standardise responses to allow communities to be less book-bound and use regular sung responses – in line with international ecumenically agreed texts.

(The drafting before the revision which was passed at General Synod)

I was asked for my opinion about them as these texts were heading for General Synod. In the brief time I had available prior to their General Synod submission I suggested that

  • Seasonal and festal variants could be inserted
  • The people’s acclamation be moved from directly after the Last Supper story to the more natural break between the remembering/proclaiming/anamnetic material of the prayer and the asking/epicletic material. I also suggested a more appropriate, consistent clear cue.
  • Minor alternations – adding “sing” to “say” where appropriate. Changing “Your [God’s] body” to “Christ’s body”, simplifying the children’s final acclamation to be consistent with all other final acclamations.

All my alterations (in red or blue) were accepted by all involved with these prayers.

Some will notice that some of the original intentions of the Prayer Book versions have been diluted. Celebrating the Grace of God, originating with Bishop Brian Carrel, eschewed the use of “Blessed is he…” (words unpopular for some in the Eucharistic Prayer). Those two lines have now been restored. The intention of Rev. Richard Easton in his work resulting in Thanksgiving and Praise was to not merely have the congregation echo the priest, but have the congregation move the eucharistic prayer forward in ways that more traditionally would have been left to the presider. Those parts have been returned to the priest. Those who have especially strong convictions along these two lines still have the full use of the original prayer book versions.

A weakness in practice is that congregations used to a particular prayer can sometimes start on remembered responses that have either been removed, altered, or moved in these new prayers.

I am not as convinced about the Alternative Great Thanksgiving for use with Children A in which children have to learn a new responses (without a consistent cue) [and hence prefer the Alternative Great Thanksgiving for use with Children B or my own Eucharistic Prayer 2]

On balance, however, I am highly enthusiastic about the opportunities provided by these new resources.

In the Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia these only needed a majority of synods of the episcopal units to assent to General Synod’s approval. If you are reading this in another context, you will know your own requirements for eucharistic prayers.