Christian Discussion Thread XII: Soter? I hardly know her!

[Tarsonis]

That is though, what actually happened.

Animosity towards homosexual people is something, in my heart, I don't understand. While it happens, I pray for peace on earth.

You don't understand how a doctrine that says their natural sexual orientation is a disorder or that their love for another human being, as real as the love of any heterosexual couple, is an affront to God, you don't understand how that breeds animosity?


Also I meant thats what happened in ancient Sparta.

[Lower Nubia]

I'm back people.

I don’t believe we have met,

I see you’re a Anglo-Catholic. I was one for a cup of coffee. Have you been to a Tridentine Mass in English? I always wanted to attend one, but they are not available in my area. Most Episcopalian/Anglican churches in my area are low/lowish.

Tridentine mass, even in Anglo-Catholic groups, is not very common. Outside that group, it simply does not get done. Most Anglo-Catholic liturgies are a return to pre-Reformation practices/customs (vestments, incense (can still be infrequent), ad orientem, candles) within the 1662 BCP, although others use the 1928 version too (This is for the Church of England, can't speak for the Episcopalians).

[Sundiata]

Tridentine mass, even in Anglo-Catholic groups, is not very common.

The veils and incense are always nice to see. I prefer the Tridentine Mass. Gloria in excelcis Deo.

[Salus Maior]

Tridentine mass, even in Anglo-Catholic groups, is not very common.

The veils and incense are always nice to see. I prefer the tridentine mass. Gloria in excelcis Deo.

I go to a Carmelite TLM. It’s lovely.

[Sundiata]

The veils and incense are always nice to see. I prefer the tridentine mass. Gloria in excelcis Deo.

I go to a Carmelite TLM. It’s lovely.

I'll have to see that. Do the Carmelites do weddings?

[Lower Nubia]

Tridentine mass, even in Anglo-Catholic groups, is not very common.

The veils and incense are always nice to see. I prefer the Tridentine Mass. Gloria in excelcis Deo.

Yes. It is very beautiful. I remember visiting the Catholic Church in my area (while deciding a denom, and I still search for one in my current position) and the irony that the Anglican Anglo-Catholic service was more traditionally Catholic (Altar rail kneeling, ad Orientem, ornate vestments, incense) while the Catholic service was more, I want to use the word.. Protestant... was certainly interesting...

[Sundiata]

Yes. It is very beautiful. I remember visiting the Catholic Church in my area (while deciding a denom, and I still search for one in my current position) and the irony that the Anglican Anglo-Catholic service was more traditionally Catholic (Altar rail kneeling, ad Orientem, ornate vestments, incense) while the Catholic service was more, I want to use the word.. Protestant... was certainly interesting...

Yes, the church is universal and the mass can be done in any language. But still, the Tridentine Mass is now my preferred form.

[Lower Nubia]

Yes. It is very beautiful. I remember visiting the Catholic Church in my area (while deciding a denom, and I still search for one in my current position) and the irony that the Anglican Anglo-Catholic service was more traditionally Catholic (Altar rail kneeling, ad Orientem, ornate vestments, incense) while the Catholic service was more, I want to use the word.. Protestant... was certainly interesting...

Yes, the church is universal and the mass can be done in any language. But still, the Tridentine Mass is now my preferred form.

Yes, it is very beautiful. Though I can understand why people would prefer other valid variations of the mass.

[Old Tyrannia]

I prefer Anglo-Catholic ceremonials to Evangelical style praise bands and modern liturgy, but if I had my preference all Anglican services would be conducted in strict adherence to the rubrics of the BCP. I don't really care for gaudy vestments, sanctus bells or incense.

[Salus Maior]

I prefer Anglo-Catholic ceremonials to Evangelical style praise bands and modern liturgy, but if I had my preference all Anglican services would be conducted in strict adherence to the rubrics of the BCP. I don't really care for gaudy vestments, sanctus bells or incense.

It’s funny, some of the most incensed masses I’ve been to have been Anglican Ordinariate.

They really love swinging those thuribles.

[Salus Maior]

I go to a Carmelite TLM. It’s lovely.

I'll have to see that. Do the Carmelites do weddings?

Not sure, never asked.

I imagine they would.

[Lower Nubia]

I prefer Anglo-Catholic ceremonials to Evangelical style praise bands and modern liturgy, but if I had my preference all Anglican services would be conducted in strict adherence to the rubrics of the BCP. I don't really care for gaudy vestments, sanctus bells or incense.

I think that monolithic uniformity is a detriment for liturgies, valid liturgical variety can cater to a number of diverse opinions of beauty, or other needs, certainly spiritual, by Christians. Assuming each variant offers the sacraments presented by the BCP, and is reverent in that offering, diversity is a good thing here.

[Salus Maior]

I prefer Anglo-Catholic ceremonials to Evangelical style praise bands and modern liturgy, but if I had my preference all Anglican services would be conducted in strict adherence to the rubrics of the BCP. I don't really care for gaudy vestments, sanctus bells or incense.

I think that monolithic uniformity is a detriment for liturgies, valid liturgical variety can cater to a number of diverse opinions of beauty, or other needs, certainly spiritual, by Christians. Assuming each variant offers the sacraments presented by the BCP, and is reverent in that offering, diversity is a good thing here.

I think diversity is good. But more in the sense that the various ancient liturgies should be preserved and practiced, and new forms of the liturgy should follow the structure and form of the ancient rites.

[Lower Nubia]

I think that monolithic uniformity is a detriment for liturgies, valid liturgical variety can cater to a number of diverse opinions of beauty, or other needs, certainly spiritual, by Christians. Assuming each variant offers the sacraments presented by the BCP, and is reverent in that offering, diversity is a good thing here.

I think diversity is good. But more in the sense that the various ancient liturgies should be preserved and practiced, and new forms of the liturgy should follow the structure and form of the ancient rites.

Yes, very much yes. Ancient rites have taken a heavy toll, especially in the middle east. Yet I also think if evangelicals wants to sing corny Christian rock, and they as a community are happy with that, then they can - it is a valid expression of their zeal - for them, and though the songs are corny, not usually blasphemous. Perhaps another wants a 45-60 minute sermon, compared to the usual 15-20 minute one, again, I don't mind that. As long as the sacraments are extolled validly, I don't mind the surrounding "fluff" - assuming it's not heretical or absurd.

[Old Tyrannia]

I prefer Anglo-Catholic ceremonials to Evangelical style praise bands and modern liturgy, but if I had my preference all Anglican services would be conducted in strict adherence to the rubrics of the BCP. I don't really care for gaudy vestments, sanctus bells or incense.

I think that monolithic uniformity is a detriment for liturgies, valid liturgical variety can cater to a number of diverse opinions of beauty, or other needs, certainly spiritual, by Christians. Assuming each variant offers the sacraments presented by the BCP, and is reverent in that offering, diversity is a good thing here.

In principle I agree with you, but in practice the fact that it's so difficult for me to find a Church of England parish that uses the 1662 BCP and follows the traditional "high and dry" style of worship is extremely frustrating. I think that all Anglican parishes should be required to follow the 1662 BCP and its rubrics for their main Sunday service and then allowed to offer additional services using alternative material, be they contemporary Evangelical or Anglo-Catholic, at the discretion of the parish priest. It's not really fair that the only group of Anglicans who aren't catered for by the Anglican church are those who actually want to be Anglicans rather than Roman Catholics without a pope or generic Evangelical Protestants.

[Salus Maior]

I think that monolithic uniformity is a detriment for liturgies, valid liturgical variety can cater to a number of diverse opinions of beauty, or other needs, certainly spiritual, by Christians. Assuming each variant offers the sacraments presented by the BCP, and is reverent in that offering, diversity is a good thing here.

In principle I agree with you, but in practice the fact that it's so difficult for me to find a Church of England parish that uses the 1662 BCP and follows the traditional "high and dry" style of worship is extremely frustrating. I think that all Anglican parishes should be required to follow the 1662 BCP and its rubrics for their main Sunday service and then allowed to offer additional services using alternative material, be they contemporary Evangelical or Anglo-Catholic, at the discretion of the parish priest. It's not really fair that the only group of Anglicans who aren't catered for by the Anglican church are those who actually want to be Anglicans rather than Roman Catholics without a pope or generic Evangelical Protestants.

As someone who prefers the TLM, I empathize with you. It's a similar issue.

Sometimes it feels like being a devout, traditional Catholic is like being the ignored middle child in the Church.

[Salus Maior]

I think diversity is good. But more in the sense that the various ancient liturgies should be preserved and practiced, and new forms of the liturgy should follow the structure and form of the ancient rites.

Yes, very much yes. Ancient rites have taken a heavy toll, especially in the middle east. Yet I also think if evangelicals wants to sing corny Christian rock, and they as a community are happy with that, then they can - it is a valid expression of their zeal - for them, and though the songs are corny, not usually blasphemous. Perhaps another wants a 45-60 minute sermon, compared to the usual 15-20 minute one, again, I don't mind that. As long as the sacraments are extolled validly, I don't mind the surrounding "fluff" - assuming it's not heretical or absurd.

Tbh, I think Ad Orientum is really the best way to conduct the mass.

As my priest back at school puts it, versus populum carries the risk of the mass becoming narcissistic for the priest. He does conduct both forms of the mass though.

[Lower Nubia]

I think that monolithic uniformity is a detriment for liturgies, valid liturgical variety can cater to a number of diverse opinions of beauty, or other needs, certainly spiritual, by Christians. Assuming each variant offers the sacraments presented by the BCP, and is reverent in that offering, diversity is a good thing here.

In principle I agree with you, but in practice the fact that it's so difficult for me to find a Church of England parish that uses the 1662 BCP and follows the traditional "high and dry" style of worship is extremely frustrating. I think that all Anglican parishes should be required to follow the 1662 BCP and its rubrics for their main Sunday service and then allowed to offer additional services using alternative material, be they contemporary Evangelical or Anglo-Catholic, at the discretion of the parish priest. It's not really fair that the only group of Anglicans who aren't catered for by the Anglican church are those who actually want to be Anglicans rather than Roman Catholics without a pope or generic Evangelical Protestants.

The issue with creating and enforcing a standard, is that instead of the standard becoming uniform, it simply becomes a new variant on top, and in addition to, all the others.

The inherent problem is that liturgical style becomes partisan - people will shift to one or the other, as remaining on a tight rope can be tricky - especially when that tightrope is a theology the English don't usually follow today; Reformed, compared to Wesleyan.

[Lower Nubia]

Yes, very much yes. Ancient rites have taken a heavy toll, especially in the middle east. Yet I also think if evangelicals wants to sing corny Christian rock, and they as a community are happy with that, then they can - it is a valid expression of their zeal - for them, and though the songs are corny, not usually blasphemous. Perhaps another wants a 45-60 minute sermon, compared to the usual 15-20 minute one, again, I don't mind that. As long as the sacraments are extolled validly, I don't mind the surrounding "fluff" - assuming it's not heretical or absurd.

Tbh, I think Ad Orientum is really the best way to conduct the mass.

As my priest back at school puts it, versus populum carries the risk of the mass becoming narcissistic for the priest. He does conduct both forms of the mass though.

I agree. Ad Orientem makes all Christians of the congregation look, symbolically, to the future of the resurrection - it's a nice detail. Though I don't think it a necessity, as much as I think it a better example of praxis.

[Old Tyrannia]

Yes, very much yes. Ancient rites have taken a heavy toll, especially in the middle east. Yet I also think if evangelicals wants to sing corny Christian rock, and they as a community are happy with that, then they can - it is a valid expression of their zeal - for them, and though the songs are corny, not usually blasphemous. Perhaps another wants a 45-60 minute sermon, compared to the usual 15-20 minute one, again, I don't mind that. As long as the sacraments are extolled validly, I don't mind the surrounding "fluff" - assuming it's not heretical or absurd.

Tbh, I think Ad Orientum is really the best way to conduct the mass.

As my priest back at school puts it, versus populum carries the risk of the mass becoming narcissistic for the priest. He does conduct both forms of the mass though.

You could always adopt the Anglican custom of having the priest stand at the northern end of the altar as a compromise.

Personally I think ad orientem makes more sense from a theological perspective, though the custom of standing at the north end does have the advantage of allowing the congregation to see what is going on at the altar without making the priest the centre of attention. I agree with your priest's critique of the versus populum. The priest's job isn't to put on a show for the congregation, but to lead them in worship.

[Salus Maior]

Tbh, I think Ad Orientum is really the best way to conduct the mass.

As my priest back at school puts it, versus populum carries the risk of the mass becoming narcissistic for the priest. He does conduct both forms of the mass though.

You could always adopt the Anglican custom of having the priest stand at the northern end of the altar as a compromise.

Personally I think ad orientem makes more sense from a theological perspective, though the custom of standing at the north end does have the advantage of allowing the congregation to see what is going on at the altar without making the priest the centre of attention. I agree with your priest's critique of the versus populum. The priest's job isn't to put on a show for the congregation, but to lead them in worship.

Huh, "North end"? Like perpendicular to the congregation?

First time I've heard of that practice.

[Salus Maior]

Tbh, I think Ad Orientum is really the best way to conduct the mass.

As my priest back at school puts it, versus populum carries the risk of the mass becoming narcissistic for the priest. He does conduct both forms of the mass though.

You could always adopt the Anglican custom of having the priest stand at the northern end of the altar as a compromise.

Personally I think ad orientem makes more sense from a theological perspective, though the custom of standing at the north end does have the advantage of allowing the congregation to see what is going on at the altar without making the priest the centre of attention. I agree with your priest's critique of the versus populum. The priest's job isn't to put on a show for the congregation, but to lead them in worship.

Yes, he's something of a nerd for liturgy. He actually practices Eastern Rite as well as Extraordinary form and Novus Ordo. Get him on the subject of liturgy and you'll be sitting there for a while

Well, I wouldn't say versus populum is meant to "put on a show", but I think it carries the risk of the consecration becoming that.

[Old Tyrannia]

You could always adopt the Anglican custom of having the priest stand at the northern end of the altar as a compromise.

Personally I think ad orientem makes more sense from a theological perspective, though the custom of standing at the north end does have the advantage of allowing the congregation to see what is going on at the altar without making the priest the centre of attention. I agree with your priest's critique of the versus populum. The priest's job isn't to put on a show for the congregation, but to lead them in worship.

Huh, "North end"? Like perpendicular to the congregation?

First time I've heard of that practice.

Yes. As I say, it's a traditional Anglican practice, one that has largely fallen out of use.

[Dylar]

You could always adopt the Anglican custom of having the priest stand at the northern end of the altar as a compromise.

Personally I think ad orientem makes more sense from a theological perspective, though the custom of standing at the north end does have the advantage of allowing the congregation to see what is going on at the altar without making the priest the centre of attention. I agree with your priest's critique of the versus populum. The priest's job isn't to put on a show for the congregation, but to lead them in worship.

Huh, "North end"? Like perpendicular to the congregation?

First time I've heard of that practice.

I learned about it from one of the monks at a Benedictine monastery I visited. My understanding is that they adopted that practice because members of the Anglican Church viewed the traditional stance with your back to the congregation as too "pope-ish"

[Salus Maior]

Huh, "North end"? Like perpendicular to the congregation?

First time I've heard of that practice.

Yes. As I say, it's a traditional Anglican practice, one that has largely fallen out of use.

Huh, seems very strange to me. But interesting.

Was it a Reformation development or did it exist before then as well?