Who does what?

It seems that the main effort of training of full time Christian workers and in their work on the front-line in local parishes is all about that peak exhibition event "the sermon".

A speech that is neither training nor discussion and certainly rarely educational, or if it is, is mostly promptly forgotten as people walk through the 'sermon erasure portal' at the door out of the auditorium. 

But how wrong!

The main effort of the trained staff (full time or part time, employed or members) should be in mentoring, skill building and equipping to live a full span Christian life (Romans 12:1-2).

The Sunday gathering could then revert to the pattern Paul establishes in 1 Corinthians 11-14 where it is a 'joining-in' event, for mutually edification, encouragement, exhortation, prayer and singing (but not a concert...we can have those at other times).

Discussing this with an ex-missionary, ex-FT minister and current field-worker for a mission society; he mentioned that in the churches he worked in in Kenya, the first role to be employed after the parish rector (senior minister) was 'evangelist'.

I think he missed the point.

The first role should be to equip the saints through equipping for ministry themselves, training in Bible, theology, apologetics and 'incidental conversational evangelism'. This by mentoring, in small groups with plenty of discussion and conversation. Not an 'expert' wheeled in from elsewhere to do faith life for them.

Pastor or Preacher or both together?

 Mr YouTube landed this podcast on my screen recently, about preaching and pastors.

 Some good points made, but others needed some pondering,

 Obviously he's on about "preaching", "pastors" and touches "teachers", inter alia.

 First thing I noticed was a tendentious mistranslation of kerux (κῆρυξ). Sochor (the presenter) claimed it was "a herald of divine truth; work of proclaiming the word of God", Now it  might have that meaning in Christian usage, but that is NOT the translation, Thayer, for instance, has: "a herald or messenger vested with public authority, who conveyed the official messages of kings, magistrates, princes, military commanders, or who gave a public summons or demand"
 
Simply a proclaimer...of the gospel to non-believers. I guess so many non-believers attended congregations as "cultural Christians" the gospel had to be preached therein.

Paul showed us how this works in Acts 17 talking to the pagans.

I wonder how many congregations have an active community outreach? You know, a booth in the main street, a drop-in coffee and book shop, a stall at community markets, evening courses in the local college on Bible, church history, "True Spirituality", "Inner Peace" the "twisted tale of Christian thought". Titles to be attractive in the marketplace of ideas.

Even a well-structured "in-drag" program of introductory courses could work.

However, Paul tells us what happens in a gathering of the saints in 1 Corinthians 14:26b-33: teaching, revelation, a tongue (foreign language needing interpretation), prophesy.

What we have habituated to call "preaching" is probably more like "prophesy" for exhortation. But note: lots of contributors! No 'main man' and all in love (ch 13) for edification.

Then we go on to "pastor".

This role is derived from the Roman Catholic priest and not from the NT elder, although happily some congregations do have elders. Unfortunately, too often they are seen more as a board of directors than the gentle spiritual guides of 1 Peter 5:5 and Titus 1:5. Note Titus talks also of female elders,

This has rather tendentiously (again) been rendered as "older women" but the word is the feminine  of 'elder'. The qualification of only one wife obviously is to ban polygamists. There were no polyandrous women so no need to mention.

Now, on to the meat of it.

Being derived from the priest, the modern "pastor" is not seen in the NT at all. It's a fabrication of men and has been the greatest dis-empowerer of the church over centuries. It's main function is to train the congregation that its members have nothing to say and to "outsource" its learning and giving an account, proclamation, etc. to that one man, while inhibiting the growth of people to true Christian maturity and for many to be teachers (Hebrews 5:12).

Daryl Erkel  has a good essay on this: "The Urgent Need For Reformation in Pastoral Ministry" at www.semonindex.net website.

Who do we follow?

In a Christian gathering we often declare our allegiance, our vision and our commitment in some formal manner to commence our time together (some people call this a "service"; perhaps because we serve each other as per 1 Cor 14, although gathering/assembly/meeting are perhaps better words).

We might do this in the words of the Apostles Creed, a passage of scripture, or prayer.

My favourite scripture passage is (from the Morning Prayer format):

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us: but if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 1 St. John 1.8-9. 

Of late some Christian gatherings start with intoning an 'acknowledgement of country'. Sometimes this is given an attempt of a buffer, packaging it with some Christian niceties. But this is false as we would not do the package if we weren't really doing the AoC.

In case you don't know, an AoC is intended to 'acknowledge' Aboriginal presence on this island prior to the arrival of multi-cultural refugees from Britain in 1776 or so. Noting this is already well done and honoured in endless adoption of Aboriginal place names across Australia.

The AoC itself is a type of ceremonial paean derived from one invented in the 1970s by an Australian Aboriginal entertainer, Ernie Dingo (BTW a very good entertainer!) at the behest of, I think, of a Maori group who did historically have such a greeting.

So what does recital of these words imply when done in some association with a Christian gathering of any type, in a church publication (newsletter, website, letter) or sign?

As one of my bosses told me many years ago (she was CEO of a professional society) when a board member wanted to do something similar. The boss lady supported my rejection of the idea because "we do not split our brand". That is, we do not represent ourselves as anything but ourselves. We do not confuse our market as to who we are. We do not give allegiance to any others. No offense implied or intended, but we are who we are, not someone else.

Aside from her commercial 'nose' and loyalty to the organization, she could see the diffusion of our allegiance to our mission being implied by acquiescing to the request.

Now, what happens in a church context?

Same thing: we 'split our brand'. No longer do we meet to edify one another in the Spirit, we also meet to 'acknowledge' on political (perhaps on faux or real or misplaced compassionate grounds) a formal non-Christian, indeed pagan belief structure with practices as diachronically ungodly as the Western heritage is.

Do we acknowledge the Ancient Greeks or Romans? Caesar, even Constantine? No. What about Boadicea, Nero, or Scipio Africanus? No. These would be completely incongruent with our faith.

It also degrades implicitly the faith of Aboriginal Christians as we overturn Paul's teaching in Galatians 3:28. All of a sudden there is 'Jew and Greek'! We have injured in our words the unity of the body of Christ. We have said we meet for other than our Christian mission of making disciples. We have confused our message in our now split brand, mixed our allegiance and denied our Lord. Instead of inviting the world in, we have asked to join it!

Let's stop doing it and get some backbone when questioned. We are no longer of this world: Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Christians, we are all "in Christ". To him we give our total allegiance. Thanks be to our Lord and Saviour.

  

Conversations

In almost every congregation I've been part of, after the formal session we have coffee and buns, or similar (rarely lunch, because the NT congregational practice ain't for we moderns, it seems) and chat with each other.

Almost never have I experienced a theological or other serious topic arising in conversation.

Now when I've been in other groups: a political party, a couple of community volunteer groups, board member of a charity, even in professional contexts, the conversation is always concentrated on the activity of the group. Never idle chit-chat!

Why is this so?

Now, even at church board meetings and the like, we chat on topic!

On the up-side, maybe its because we are in some way sharing our every-day-ness with each other, like with your pals in the school playground.

Maybe its because the talk we've heard is so far from relevance to our lives there's nothing to connect with. Maybe the talk is a mere 'set-piece' like a groom's speech at the wedding breakfast (that's at the reception) and no further comment called for or even possible...

I've tried on a few occasions recently by hanging back with my own 'news' and asking what people thought of the talk, or the whole session. That usually gets platitudes (because mostly people forget the talk the instant they walk out of the auditorium).

From time to time there are real meaty conversations; but, so so rare.

Is this a mark of a deeper problem? 

Then there's the newbie.

I've been a newbie at a church gathering. I've also been on the other side.

Questions I've dealt with include:

Are you new here?

I haven't seen you here before.

Are you a Christian?

But NEVER have I heard (so this is what I say): "Hello, I don't think we've met, my name is 'Watcher' "...then a follow up, if I need it is "What brought you here?"

This starts a real conversation, not one that requires admission that you are a newbie. Plenty of people volunteer that, but the question requires no explanatory response.

Another follow up could be "What are your thoughts about the event we've just experienced/the talk they guy/girl gave/what this crowd (or we) believes...? 

 

 

Ship of Fools

Ship of Fools is a usually entertaining website that features 'mystery worshipper' (sic) reviews of congregational gatherings.

I'll use their format from time to time, like here. Only I'll keep the whole thing incognito.

Denomination: Churches of Christ but with a new cooler brand.
Church: suburban of a large city.
Location: high income/well educated area.

Name of Gathering: 10 a.m. "Service"*

How full was building: about 20%, not surprising at the first week of the new year.

Were you welcomed personally: yes: a chirpy young girl (5yo?) and her little sister were the welcomers at the entry porch, adults nearby. Inside a couple of friendly nods, a pair of friendly men were chatting at the foyer to the auditorium. We spoke in a quite amicable manner.

Was your pew comfortable: rows of linked individual chairs were very comfortable and attractively in style with the 60s architecture of high steep ceilings and blond brickwork. 

Describe the pre-meeting atmosphere: as above: welcoming conversations, but not many around apart from those mentioned.

What were the exact opening words of the 'service': "Welcome everybody" I hate that glib almost alienating address. There is no 'everybody'. Better to say 'welcome' or 'I'm glad you could join us this morning', or even  Its  good to see you this morning. Let's start our time together with prayer'.

However as a 'high-church' sort of guy I like a formal opening liturgy...so there! Here's a tip: either go liturgical, or do "homely" with genuine connections made.

What books did the congregation use during the meeting: nil. Everything was on screen, and well managed.

What musical instruments were played: two guitars, one by the singing conductor. But there was an un-manned electronic drum kit and a vacant grand piano. Looked serious, which I liked. But music didn't dominate, which I also liked.

What I didn't like were the songs. Apart from one re-set old hymn they were of the modified 'Jesus is you boyfriend' variety. People went all 'worshippy' and swayed as they sang. Weird! It was like being in the back ward of a mental hospital.

Did anything distract you?: people swaying in awkward 'worshippyness' as they sang.

Nature of the service/meeting (stiff-upper-lip, happy-clappy, or?): simple 'we are not a mega-church but aren't they great' style. Informal and comfortable, my cynicism aside, although a little awkward and timorous. Tension between 'churchy' and 'community'.

This denomination (they used to call themselves a "movement") has communion at every morning service.  When I was a kid this was conducted with stiff awkward formality: the liturgy you have when you are not having a liturgy. But, if you want a liturgy, do it properly!

Here, at the door one was offered a sealed cup of a shot of grape juice, presumably, no wine available, and a cracker to nibble on in a holy manner. A 'help yourself' communion.

 As with most post-reformation gatherings this was a pretense of the real meal our Lord called on us to enjoy when we gathered. We ignore that, however as the Catholic/Orthodox 'worship'** idea has gripped us all, it seems, even the Campbellite "movement".

Anyway, at the opportune time we were invited to crack open the sealed cup and consume in a reverent manner. I didn't. No point.

Where there was a point was the 'pastoral moment' or some such name, where we talked to someone nearby. An old member and I chatted light-heartedly and briefly. T'was OK, I guess, but I'm not sure about this game. We do it at my regular gathering as well. She called me 'Peter', which I am not, so I called her Agnes, which as I discovered, she is not.

Exactly how long was the address (sermon): about 25 minutes, but too long for the content. I didn't time it.

Evaluate the speaker (1-10) and explain: 6. She spoke well from a public speaking point of view, was confident, warm and natural. Made good audience connection. A little too folksy for my taste. Some vague point was made, but I was too mesmerized by the ubiquitous illustrative "Peanuts" cartoons to follow it...

In a nutshell what was the sermon about: from the continuous use of 'Peanuts" cartoons, I think it was about "Peanuts' cartoons. But no, something to do with Mary's challenges as a new mother.

Which part of the service was like being in heaven: talking to the fellers at the door.

And which part was like being in...er...the other place: I could have skipped the talking down to us worshippyiness.

What happened when you hung around after the service looking lost: not many people came into the coffee lounge (and it could have been a little more lounge like with comfy chairs and sofas). There were some chairs and tables cafe style, which I thought good.

One fellow came to chat with me but he was impatient to get away. My fault, I think***. Shortly then one of the vestibule guys came and spent some pleasant time with me.

How would you describe the after-meeting coffee? They apologized for no barista, but as I loathe coffee-pretension, I liked the simple tea/coffee bags and do it yourselfness. Sort of like the Bertolt Brecht coming out in me. Nice Christmas cake.

How would you feel about making another visit (10=ecstatic, 0=terminal): 5. This place has mixed memories for me, some good childhood vibes and less good young adult vibes.

Did the experience make you feel glad to be a Christian: Close, but no cigar.

What one thing will you remember about all this in seven day's time? Peanuts cartoon

____________________________________________ 

 *Christians have 'gatherings'! The only 'services' might be weddings and funerals, perhaps baptisms as special ceremonial gatherings.

**Nor do we 'worship' by gathering or in gatherings. We gather for edification in mutuality, See 1 Corinthians 11-14. The only 'worship' enjoined is as per Romans 12:1-2 and James 1:27. 

***Usually the visitor is asked 'you are a visitor' questions. Next time, I'm going to drive the conversation: "What did you think of that?" (what we just experienced); "What brings you here?" (old night-club routine that never worked with the twittering girls who were alone); "What did you think the best part was?", etc.

My church is in real trouble. Here's what happens

1. What Paul calls for in 1 Corinthians 11-14 where we meet to edify each other, and different people contribute, has turned into a sermon show. No one can test their understanding or thoughts by asking questions, and having the answer discussed in the congregation.

2. Prayer is a rote performance, prepared beforehand and given by one person. We don't get to collectively undertake prayer for each other.

3. We think that the songs we should use to teach one another are 'worship'. But no one talks about discipling in true worship (Romans 12:1-2, James 1:27). In fact, there is no discipling, nothing that leads one to spiritual growth in the company and encouragement of older saints...but maybe there are no such 'older saints'. Songs of course have a function that's never mentioned, except by Paul: Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16.

4. There is nothing to teach new Christians. For instance, our Community College runs a class on the Bible (its called 'Ancient Texts in the Modern World) and while a bit liberal, it gives a really good overview of the structure, history and content of the Bible. We don't get that at our church.

5. No one seeks to develop our skills in speaking in public so we become more effective gospel-talkers. Only the paid performer does the speaking. Sure, he's trained, but his job should be to train and coach others.

6. It's all oldies who 'conduct' our gathering, which we call a 'service' as though we are in a pagan temple. No young people are being nurtured into the body life of our gathering.

7. The Lord's Supper has been reduced to a meaningless shot glass of grape juice and a crumb of cracker. I thought 'supper' was a meal. Like in Corinth, although Paul had to correct the selfish ones.

We really need to return to the practices of gatherings enjoined by the NT.

Who are your leaders?

The favourite job in a Christian group is 'the Leader'. Apparently we need more of them. 'Leading' is the preferred skill.

Yet our Lord throws some cold water on this in Matthew 23:8-10:

But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your teacher, and you are all brothers. Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your father, he who is in heaven. Do not be called leaders; for one is your leader, that is, Christ.

Hard to argue with.

Paul's view in the list of giftings seems to differ as well, from our modern hubris:

1 Corinthians 14:39 sets the record straight:

Therefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy.

There are plenty of other roles called for as well. Roles, not titles. Romans 12:6-8 covers it. But we have to be wary here, the word sometimes translated 'leads' is proistēmi.

It has a range of meanings: to be a protector or guardian, superintendent, to give aid, to care for, give attention to. Hardly the modern 'leader' which is acted out as the Greek 'archon'. Not a happy term in a gathering of Christians.

What should we do with 'titles' then? 

Here are a few that we can use:

• Moderator
• Organizer
• Convenor
• Coordinator
• Minister
• Worker
• Helper
• Assistant (that could be a quite high 'rank', come to think of it)
• Teacher
• Facilitator
• MC/Master of Ceremonies (for formal gatherings)
• President/Chairman (committees)
• Administrator
• Coach
• Counselor (as in Summer Camps)
• Speaker.

 But above all...let everything be done in love...do not be conformed to the world...

Is this your Sunday?

 A comment on an interview with Tom Wadsworth.

The church can, I think, flex with society as it grows. so, learning from Tom, I'd like this for a Sunday gathering:

1. 40m to 1 hour teaching. Real teaching, not a sermon, but Bible/theological study with pre-reading, a short talk and then discussion and working together to learn. People giving short 'papers' on their own study during the week.

2. Morning break for coffee and a snack, maybe 20 minutes.

3. Join prayer groups for the next 20 minutes

4. Large gathering for a short edifying talk, and responses, some singing, and Lord's supper that might be part of lunch that follows.

5. After lunch, informal discussion groups (optional), or skills training (speaking, evangelism, teaching, kid's ministry, conducting small groups, etc.) People could join and leave for any segment.

HYMNALS. They were great; most of my favourite hymns/songs are the deeply theological 'horizontal'. and praising/teaching hymns of my youth. They still stir my soul. Unlike most modern puerility. And thanks for the song clip, Tom...the way it should be, ordinary Christians singing to edify each other. 

BUILDINGS Interesting to note that Coverdale, in his 16th century English translation of the Bible, used the word 'congregation' and not 'church' for the Greek of 'gathering'. He was concerned for the local meeting of saints being recognized, rather than what 'church' had come to connote: the formal hierarchical imperialistic structure.

LITURGY A liturgical church brought me to renewed faith in my young adult-hood. With it I had the experience of all together being at one with each other in the presence of our Lord. It is not for me (and those I know) a mere rote practice that is just form and not content; I tell you it makes my week. Is encouraging, and brings us all into the one place of Christians enjoying our faith together. Much better than modern evangelicalism which turns the gathering into a spectator sport.

Moreover, even the simple rural church can share the liturgy with the words composed by some great saints (Cranmer, for instance), no matter the skill, talent or training of any of the participants.

The good was good, but the bad was...bad

Back to the government imposed over-reaction to a virus with a CFR of .011!

No congregational singing at church. Not even a group of formal singers, but only one person singing.

The precentor read a psalm.

I didn't see anything in the public health order to prevent the congregation reciting the psalm. But we didn't!

Prayer was good, mostly.

I quite liked that the new archbishop was referred to biblically as a 'new overseer'. Excellent that we avoided the very worldly ambiguity of 'leader'.

Unfortunately in the prayer the government authorities in India were referred to as 'leaders' of India, as though they were kings. No, they are 'the authorities'.

Then we had a 'God make everyone better' prayer, as though the Christian faith is a 'protect us from suffering' club.

The prayer should have been: that Indian Christians, missionaries, etc will have opportunities to witness to their faith in many ways, that they will preach the gospel at every opportunity with boldness, and that desperate people might be caused to turn to our Creator in repentance.

We could then go on to ask that we have opportunities to bring the gospel to our nearby Sikh worshipers and introduce them to Christ, and that this might echo through their friends and relatives in India.

Church, but not as you know it.

With the Covid-19 scare prevailing, we have church differently from normal...the normal of two millennia of history!

No singing. The band is a performance unit, rather than a ministry unit. One Bible-reading, one prayer, one sermon.

So, how could we do it to keep the congregation (the church) involved?

Return to responsive readings. A responsive psalm, and the ol' evensong responses brought up to date.

We could speak the words to songs, rather than 'sing', I understand singing is not allowed. I wonder at the epidemiology behind this, but there you are. Church organisers buckled like a wax doll in a spotlight.

We could chant. Chanting is not singing, surely? Or we could hum the songs, maybe sing sotto voce.

And what about a formal choir? It could comprise whoever was 'on' on the day: signified by whoever turned up. Spaced groups of about 5 at five mutually distant points around the auditorium and 25 people singing. Then change choirs for the next song or hymn (and please, no more Bethel or Hillsong efforts). Just remember, singing is instructed by the Apostles. It is not a 'nice to have'; it is an inherent part of our Christian life.

A few people could do prayers: an intro, the main one, and a dismissal prayer or benediction. Or we could do the litany to involve everyone. This might introduce some dignity into the end of the service rather than the trite 'that's all folks' we too often get...for the meeting of the people of God with his Spirit present? Yeek!

And the band. Always good, but 'leaders'?

We were told the band would 'lead us in song'.

No! Bands, choirs, precentors, organists...do not 'lead us'. They minister or serve we the congregation, or any 'doing' words other than 'lead' would work. May be 'let's now sing' or 'let's listen to the band sing for us', etc. But please, they are not a 'leader' or an entertainment troupe, for that matter; although high quality is to be striven for.

Let's get the idea of 'service' back into church life and expunge the worldly idea of 'leadership' with its overtones of superiority, prestige and power, fetching unfortunate images of generals in the military, CEOs in business and party leaders in politics, all with reference to power and influence and preening in the spotlight (the same spotlight that melt's wax dolls, presumably).

Christ Church St.Lawrence and I

I mentioned CCSL in a recent post.

In the late 1980s this was my parish church. I had moved to Surry Hills and my ex-girlfriend had declined to become my current girlfriend if I didn't resume my Christian participation.

I resumed. As it was, the Christian participation was more enduring that the relationship.

The nearest place of Christian coalescence was CCSL. I'd been there on a couple of occasions previously. One for a service sung by the choir of Kings College, Cambridge (or a similar choir) and on another occasion at Easter, so I had some familiarity with the place.

I quickly fell in with a crowd of about my age, but including people of upwards of 15 to 20 years older.

One couple hosted an open lunch in their home on Sundays after the Choral Eucharist. These were wonderful occasions of friendship and fellowship attended by a diversity of members, clergy, servers, choir and general friends. The lunch often ran up to time for Evensong.

I developed some lovely friendships over the three or so years I considered myself part of this church and its Wednesday evening group.

We met for the Wednesday eucharist, then dinner at a local restaurant (the Volcano pizzeria was a favourite) followed by a study group at Fr Reg's flat. These were the highlight of my week.

I loved living in walking distance of both my office and my church, and both buildings were of architectural significance in the history of Sydney, to boot.

St. James had some similar litrugical attractions: the un-hurried confidence and peacefulness of the services was very encouraging and 'grounding' and the prayer, music, scriptures, and the biblical solidarity of the prayer book all worked together to engender worshipful reflection.

As St. James was very close to my office, I often attended the mid-week eucharist there. Later at St Philip's Church Hill, when my office was closer to it. A few of us met for a BCP service.

When we didn't trot up to R and M's for lunch a few of us strolled along to the Graphic Arts club for Sunday lunch. I also ate at this, my father's trade union club with him from time to time during the work week. They were wonderful times.

A memorable moment from this time was a 'pilgrimage' we undertook to Bathurst cathedral. The two parishes clubbed together and hired a steam-engined train for the trip to Bathurst and back. I think the CCSL choir might have sung at Bathurst. Very special.

The mostly Christian service

We attended a 9 lessons and carols service at St James, King Street, for Christmas. Happily it was outside the latest 'lockup' zone, or gulag, as I like to call it, both geographically and dispositionally.

We were initially hesitant to go as the official encouragement was to make only essential trips.

Church is essential. Anyway, the governor of NSW went. She clearly thought it was essential.

A good service in many respects, and wonderful musically. Rarely heard carols, a couple of old favourites, and wonderful readings, almost all by culturally significant people, unfortunately. Some of whom were not so good at reading in public.

We had judges, members of parliament, academic worthies from Chippendale indoctrination centre (Sydney...University?) and its mail-order twin (Charles Sturt, same question).

But that was the thing. I don't go to church for other than members of that congregation, and particularly worthies from the world, to read the word of our Lord and Saviour to me.

That's not worship of our creator and redeemer, it is prostrating before the world and its vanities.

I immediately thought of James 2:1-7 and Luke 14:7-11 and allowed myself to be dismayed.

In this respect a Christmas eve service at Christ Church St Lawrence was much more Christian (although, Christian of the 17th century, charmingly).

Notably the St J's service included the absurd 'acknowledgement' of the 'traditional custodians' of the land. Apparently the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation, with more than a touch of thespian anachronism, but not my 'tradition', or probably anyone's, in reality. Pure political theatre.

I don't see the gospel as being made subject to any earthly tradition, particularly an obviously pagan assertion. Did Paul encourage the Ephesians to acknowledge the priests of Diana in their meetings? The very idea is anathema. Israel's dance with Baal show us where this sort of syncretistic gesture ends.

In fact, I'm agin any form of jingoism in church. I'll happily pray for the government to maintain justice and peace, that's its God-given job. To preserve our natural liberty. But, that's all. A putative 'tradition' of actual animists, not so. And please, no national flags, no pictures of heads of state or government, either.

St. J's also has submitted itself to the age and apparently put the fiction of amoral 'sexual orientation' before the proclamation of the gospel. See above on Baal.

At the end we seem to have learnt nothing from the history of the formation and course of the Deutsche Evangelische Kirche which followed Herr Schicklgruber like a lap dog.

And, a couple of wonderful 9LC services: Durham, St. Swithun's, New College, plus a stack more on YouTube, of course.

Church and imagination

During these strange times of Covid-games, the church has shown remarkable un-creativity in maintaining services while being legal.

Outdoor service, spaced participants. Put everyone in an 'official' choir. have the choirs take turns during the service, spaced out around the auditorium.

There, just for starters.

Advent Evensong

A local church had an Advent Evensong this evening. We went.

For the first time in months we got to sing at church (something the apostle has instructed us to do and the church should have rebelled against this nonsensical government ruling).

We sang (first lines, not names)

Come and stand before your maker

In Christ alone my hope is found

Great is thy faithfulness

Our father everlasting

The prophets saw in ages past

Lift up your voices (The love of the father).

The sermon was a dialog between the rector and senior curate.

The prayers were given from various places in the congregational seating area.

All well done, and outdoors to boot, with good music, amplification and weather (24 deg. after a day of 39 deg.  That's Sydney weather for you!)

Now, I'm all charged up, listening to Advent hymns on YouTube.

Christingle

The BBC despite its mission to subvert all things good accidentally keeps running Songs of Praise.

This morning it was about Christingle.

Great idea. We could do this too. It helps focus children (any their grown-ups) on Advent, rather than the consequential gifts and fun of Christmas; which, by the way, is also worthwhile.

Let the devil have a go?

The long practice of the church is to reserve our meetings together for mutual encouragement, prayer, contemplating the presence of the Spirit of God (even including contemplation by singing, prayer, discussion, learning, participating in communion) and the community life of the congregation.

We do not turn up to listen to songs extolling animism or convey historical deceits and revisionism.

Thus at a friend's church we were assailed by a 'rap' song by an Australian Aboriginal band. Nothing against the ethnicity of the band; nor in fact its music...I found it tolerable. But its 'spirit of the land' paean was not on.

We don't introduce into our Christian gathering the pagan, let alone the work of demons.

Where would it end? Invite some Devil worshippers in to tell us all about it? Opps. That's just what we did do!

Educating ourselves about the beliefs and lives of others is fine in a training or educational session. It is not suitable for a gathering for corporate worship and turns it into a travesty.

The 5pm service

As we come out of the (completely unnecessary) coronavirus circus, our church instituted a 5pm service. We all had to keep up the circus performance, of course, sitting distant from others, not singing (not even finding creative ways to sing while avoiding being infection vectors) and signing in!!

I hope those records were destroyed 14 days after they were made. I don't want anyone prying on who goes to church.

Anyway, we got an e-mail telling us that the 5pm service was now a real service. I'd not thought anything but.

I've been to churches with services at 5pm, 6pm and 7pm in the evening and 8am, 9am, 9:30am, 10am, 11am and 11:15am.

The early starts were either to accommodate three morning services, or to let people 'get church out of the way'.

I have no interest in 'getting church out of the way'. Meeting with my Christian brothers and sisters is the highlight of my week.

The pattern of church during my adolescence and early adulthood was what suited me.

9:30 to 10:30 Sunday School, and adult bible study. I helped on the bus roster at one church. We had three full size buses and 9 or so on each Sunday to operate them. While SS was on we had our Bible study. It was a wonderful time.

11:00 was the main church service. Pre-busses we spent the time between SS and church at morning tea with other helpers. This too was a wonderful time of chatting as well as prepping for church if on roster.

Back home for 1pm Sunday lunch -- the high meal of the week. Typically baked chicken or lamb, sometimes beef, with roast vegetables. Desert was usually an apple pie with cream or custard (or both) or a lemon meringue pie. Bliss.

Sunday afternoon relaxing, visiting friends and occasionally church: training or discussion meetings, committee meetings of the youth club organisers, etc. For a while we held Christian Endeavour meetings in the afternoon. I learnt a lot from them.

Sunday evening we met at 7pm. Following this service was a light supper.

Often my family went on Sunday evenings to our 'mother' church: the church that had 'planted' our regular church which we supported, and the church  my mother had grown up in.

Following the evening service here (7pm, of course), we could join a small group to take communion, then many times we were invited to old friends of my mother's for  supper.

Truly joyful times.

The wrong liturgist?

 Our church service today was puzzling in parts.

The liturgist had a unique approach, which provided most of those parts.

Most services start with a 'call to prayer' a reading of scripture or the like.

Ours started with 'let's kick-off'. No, it was not a foot ball game. At least she didn't want to 'kick-start' it, like an old motorbike.

It was good that she prayed next. But I wondered why she prayed that we should 'hold God to account' for his promises. Hold the almighty creator of heaven and earth, our saviour and Lord to account? Hardly.

She made a remark that we 'come in repentance but leave some change'. I didn't follow that at all. Like we've something to leave for our Father who provides all that we have?

Next stop was reference to John 21:17, where Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him and reminded Peter that love meant obedient action concordant with that love.

I got the impression that the liturgist thought of a warm feeling in the 'heart' in response to Jesus's undoing Peter's three-fold denial.

Later the preacher asked us how long a sermon should be and what its purpose was. Answers included that it was to teach us the Bible, apply it to our lives. He asked why.

Now, just off the cuff I was stumped trying to think of a thorough answer (always the way with me when unrehearsed).

One brother said  'because it's the rules'.

I thought, no, it shapes our knowledge of reality and of God. (or our Creator and our connection with him).

So next time "It shapes our knowledge of reality and of God".

I'll stick with that.

The knowledge is by action played out in history, of course and interpreted by the prophets.

Then the liturgist came back (after some wonderful songs offered by the band).

She ended with a quiet and lovely prayer. Much appreciated.

The declining congregation - 1

One of the routes I take for my daily walk goes past a local church property. It is on a main road, so highly conspicuous.

The building itself is a quite attractive (or not unattractive) 1960s style triangular prism, the grounds immediately around the building are a step down from that: not so good. They appear, from an aesthetic point of view, not quite considered, and are not appealing. Often they look un-cared for.

Adjoining the plot of land of the building is an unmade car parking area, and then adjoining that a dwelling and open ground used for outdoor functions.

Here the unkemptness looks even worse, even sloppy, bedraggled!

Think of the passers-by. In the locale of this church people are generally very 'house-proud'. It is a high income area and the properties usually look very 'sharp' and at least neat, well presented and carefully looked-after. It's an area with high appearance values.

The church premises are discordant with this. They suggest a demeanor that is inconsistent with the area. A place people might feel ashamed to be associated with (I would).

Over the years I've been living near this property, I've seen the number of  'services' decline from three per Sunday to one.

What's happened? It can't be just poor property presentation, it's got to be more.

I pray for this church as I stride past it.

But, what would I do?

I'm not a professional clergy-person*, nor do I know the congregation; but I know the area and its people, so I can but make a few guesses.

They are here.

*but I have post-graduate quals and experience in adult education and marketing.

Church...at last

 Family and I attended church this evening.

It was great to be there, even allowing for no singing (but we had a small band and fine singers).

Familiar things were wonderful:

As we set to depart home, I thought of bringing my old tiny BCP just for fun, but did not.

But, lo and behold, the service started with the Confession; not Cramer's, of course, but a contemporary version. Still OK, though.

During the prayers, the Reader included Paul's wonderful prayer at Ephesians 3:14-19.

¹⁴ For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, ¹⁵ from whom ^[a]every family in heaven and on earth derives its name, ¹⁶ that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with power through His Spirit in the inner man, ¹⁷ so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; and that you, being rooted and grounded in love, ¹⁸ may be able to comprehend with all the ^[b]saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, ¹⁹ and to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled up to all the fullness of God.

 At the conclusion, rather than any modern 'hip' triviality, the other Reader read the next verses, 3:20-21.

²⁰ Now to Him who is able to do far more abundantly beyond all that we ask or think, according to the power that works within us, ²¹ to Him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations ^[a]forever and ever. Amen.

 How church should really be!