yrieithydd

My mum and I were on holiday last week and, as is our wont, we visited a number of churches, mainly around Rutland Water where we were staying, but also one the way too and fro. Mostly they were open; sadly, the one exception was in Ledbury. I say sadly because my granny used to be a church watcher there to help keep it open. Hopefully that tradition continues in the summer months at least, but it wasn't in play on a Saturday in January.

Two churches, however, stood out because of the contrasting ways they dealt with the presence of a famous grave: Leicester Cathedral and Holy Trinity, Stratford-upon-Avon.

For Leicester, this is a new opportunity after the discovery of Richard III's body in a car park on the site of the old Grey Friars Friary in 2012 and its re-internment in Leicester Cathedral in March 2015. For Holy Trinity, Stratford-upon-Avon, it has been 400 years since William Shakespeare was buried there.

I was worried about how the new tomb for Leicester - in the chancel - would work but they have managed it well, turning the former High Altar into a chapel and making the Nave altar the main one, moving the stalls to the West End, under the organ. We were welcomed at the door and given a guide to the church and a gift aid envelope if we wished to make a donation, but that was clearly voluntary. There were a number of boards around the church exploring aspects of Richard's life and faith and giving a contemporary perspective on the life of the cathedral and posing questions for us to consider about faith in today's world. In one place there was a facsimile of Richard's Book of Hours and also a contemporary Book of Hours with artwork from local schoolchildren relating to various Bible stories. Priority was given to worship, with the Cathedral being closed to visitors for the lunchtime Eucharist; this was publicized over the PA just prior to service, with an invitation to stay for the service which was well attended. On the hour, the chaplain asked us to pause and led us in prayer. There were knowledgeable guides both at the tomb and by the display cabinet for the pall which was over the coffin at the service where he was re-interred. It would have easily been possible to charge for entry to the old Chancel where the grave is but that was had not been done. There is also a Visitors' Centre which gives the story of the rediscovery. We did not visit this partly because I never worked out where it was - it could have been signed more clearly at the south door - "Now visit the Visitors' Centre [location/directions]". Instead we had a nice lunch in the White Rose Café and bought books from the Christian Resource Centre.

Our visit to Holy Trinity, Stratford-upon-Avon was very disappointing in contrast. The closest they came to interpretation was a sign in the West End area which welcomed Pokémon Go players and ended with a welcome whether you were seeking Pokémon, Shakespeare or Jesus. There was a charge of £3 to see Shakespeare's grave and this was imposed at entrance to the choir stalls which were to the West of the Central Crossing, so someone wanting to visit as a church was limited to seeing the nave. There was take-round guide as far as I could see. It is possible that there was more interpretation east of the divide but we were so unimpressed with the welcome that we decided against paying to see the rest of the church/Shakespeare's grave. There was also going to be a reading from the AV at 2:30pm. I was impressed by the helpful answer given by the person in the shop when asked by another visitor about the time of the Sunday service as she gave a very full answer explaining how it was a teaching Eucharist and where it happened. It did appear that they celebrate at the High Altar but then come forward to stations for the administration. It struck me how far away the High Altar is, with the choir stalls west of the central crossing, rather in the tradition place east of it in the chancel. I'm no fan of Nave altars, especially if you can see the High Altar behind, but I think a case could easily be made there for turning the Chancel/Sanctuary into a separate area (and charging visitors to see Shakespeare's grave if you must) and having an altar either in the crossing or just in front of the choir stalls (making it into a celebration in the round). A lot more could have been made of interpretation, perhaps with an exploration of faith in some of the plays - for example Measure for Measure - or a consideration of the question "Was Shakespeare a Catholic?".

We made a donation at Leicester Cathedral, but not in Stratford.

The one thing which would have improved the visit to Leicester would have been better signing. It was a bit patchy on the way; telling us to follow "town centre" for the cultural quarter and Richard III then later having a sign for "town centre" straight on and "cultural quarter" to the left and no mention of Richard. We went right and round the innner ring road, failing to make use of a flyover because it was poorly signed and found a car park. This wasn't as bad as our experience in Nottingham last year which involved the same roundabout 3 times, but could have been better. Leaving though was another matter. We came out of the car park in a different place and the first sign mentioned the M69 and M1 and assorted local places which meant nothing so we chose a direction which turned out be west when we wanted east. We then made our way back and did at least one loop. Eventually we passed the railway station which I have used on my previous visits to Leicester and which I could relate to the roundabout where we'd joined the inner ring road that morning. That, however, is an issue for the City Council not the Cathedral. Stratford being smaller was not quite as bad although we did drive around a bit before finding a car park, partly because ones were signed at big junctions but then were not obvious when you got to them.

So many thanks to the team at Leicester for their work in caring for Richard's legacy and interpreting the Christian Faith for today.

I've been thinking about the tensions that can arise between the pastoral and the prophetic. The pastoral focusses on caring for people in the world as it is, while the prophetic speaks about how the world is not how it should be. Last night, the issue that brought this up was war. Pacifism is prophetic -- war should not be. Army chaplains are pastoral -- war exists and armies exists and people are in them and have spiritual needs. Some Christians emphasise the prophetic and speak out for peace and campaign against nuclear weapons -- such as those protesting at Faslane at the moment. Others, happier with the idea of a Just War, emphasise the pastoral and work within the system as it is. It seems to me that we need both, but too often one side or the other thinks the other is letting the side down.

I think there is an element of this split in the discussions about sexuality. To the liberals, care for people is most important. There are people who feel attracted to their own gender and why should they be penalised for something they cannot help. If a loving committed relationship with someone helps them live out their faith what's the problem? To the conservative, the prophetic is important. Christianity has a distinctive sexual ethics -- it's not just about sleeping with whoever you happen to be attracted to today -- and any change to the traditional teaching is a threat to that. Neither seems to listen to the other.

How do you promote the ideal (a lifelong committed relationship) while acknowledging that people are fallible and don't live up to that? Too often, it seems to me the church has become the `pure club' and those who don't make the grade are kept out. But that's how the pharisees worked while Jesus was alongside the tax-collectors and sinners.

TBH, I think the church needs to stop focussing on the negative (no sex before marriage etc) and focus on the positive -- the value and the joy of a committed relationship, which is about more than sex.

I had a PM on the ship today asking permission to use something I'd posted on the Liturgy of Unrest Thread which now resides in Limbo. I vaguely remembered the piece though I'd forgotten I'd posted it there. Re-reading it I wanted to alter the punctuation slightly.

God, Creator of all that is,
You cannot be pinned down
Defined, caged in, summed up;
We might try,
in theology or religion,
To say 'God is x or y';
'He belongs to us';
But you ARE;
Beyond our exclusiveness,
Our cliques, our firm boundaries
Always leading us on,
Pillar of fire or cloud,
The wind blowing where it wills,
A butterfly calling us onwards,
Fluttering just out of our grasp.

And yet,
On the cross, you were pinned down
Or rather up.
Nailed there, left to die,
Dead and buried.
Out of sight.
Gone.

Or so we thought;
But, Unpinnabledown God,
You could not be contained
in that cage of death;
Burst from the tomb;
Rose Again!

I'm not quite sure of its copywrite position. I'm fairly sure it predates the ship's claim to (part?) copywrite of what we post there and I don't think it was made retro-active. But my permission at least is required for it to be re-used.

Auricular confession raises Protestant hackles as soon as it's mentioned. `Christ is the only Mediator; we do not need to go through a priest to be forgiven', they say. And yes, that's all true, but it completely misses the point. It's not about having to go through a priest to be forgiven, but a gift from God, a Sacrament, for our benefit. We don't have to go through a priest to be forgiven, and indeed that is not quite what is happening. We are confessing first to God, then to our Lady and the Saints and then to the priest. It's almost as though the priest is eavesdropping on what we are saying to God. Then he's there to offer advice and insight and the pronounce the absolution (the power to do which was given by Christ). The trouble with confessing one's sins to God secretly is that it is so hard to get them into proportion and one can be tempted to be unclear and unspecific `because God knows already'. With sacramental confession, the priest can put things into proportion and one has to be specific because he doesn't. Actually, the person who needs to be specific is the penitent, it is she who needs to acknowledge the specifics of what has happened, or how can she `truly repent'?

God gives us the sacraments and who are we to despise his gifts? We are human beings, enfleshed spirits who know each other and ourselves only in relation to one another. God does not save us from these things, but through them in the sacraments.

This brings me on to an aspect of sacramental confession that I had not really considered until someone talked about it at the CUC Discussion Group about the Salvation Army* and pointed out that as well as rightness with God, there is also reconciliation between the penitent and the Church and that the Church is represented in the priest.

Yes, the sacraments can be abused and treated mechanically, but that doesn't stop them being wonderful gifts.

*This basically became a discussion of sacramentality and how vital (or not) it was in Christianity.

As my previous post indicated, I went to the Goth Eucharist last night.

The TV cameras and journalists taking photos were mildly distracting (especially when they appeared to be attempting to film candles and when the cameraman sat on the altar step just was we were about to go up to receive communion) but on the whole I managed to ignore them. I was as much distracted from worship by wanting to watch and judge this event.

I admit that I went along out of curiosity. I am not a Goth. TBH, I'd never come across Goths until I came to Cambridge and do not know that much about the sub-culture. But, given the conversation we had over dinner after Mass on All Saints' Day, I wanted to see for myself what it was like and I do have a number of friends who define as Goth. This was really my first opportunity to go as for the last three terms I've had something on on the same alternate Tuesdays but that's on the other set this term!

I wasn't that sure what to expect. I got there at 8:30 and we hung around and chatted and I nearly didn't recognise meirion in the half dark. After a bit, we sat down and started looking through the liturgy. I observed that the Eucharistic Prayer, though not an authorised CofE one had the words of institution and an epiclesis of sorts which reassured me on the point of validity.

Although the theme of the service was given as Miracles, the sermon did not discuss the idea of miracles and whether they were possible but took us through the raising of Lazarus and related it to our lives: being called out by Jesus from darkness and imprisonment; the role of the bystanders in freeing his bonds; the fact that Jesus made clear that Resurrection was not just some nice abstract idea that they'd learnt about in Sunday School (Sabbath school surely!) but was embodied in him and could happen how.

The text used at the invitation to Communion which was described as `after Teresa of Avila' was powerful. It had resonances with the Methodist Covenant prayer. It certainly was not a happy-clappy service and acknowledged the darkness many of us experience. The use of the beginning of the Prologue to St John's Gospel at the lighting of the Paschal candle worked, with its statement that the darkness has not overcome death and psalm 139 is my favourite psalm (although my inner pedant was amused by having several verse of it as the `opening sentence'!). I did wonder why there were 5 candles around* the paschal candle when only four were lit in the course of the service (and there were 6 spaces in the candlestand).

I'm still not sure though how to answer Fr Andrew's concern about it creating a ghetto. Where is the balance between reaching out to people in terms that they will understand and drawing them into the wider body of Christ in which there is no Jew, no Greek, no Barbarian, no Goth etc?

*That's what it said in the opening blurb but they were in front of it really)

You scored as Chalcedon compliant. You are Chalcedon compliant. Congratulations, you're not a heretic. You believe that Jesus is truly God and truly man and like us in every respect, apart from sin. Officially approved in 451. </td> Chalcedon compliant 100% Pelagianism 50% Monophysitism 33% Nestorianism 17% Apollanarian 8% Monarchianism 8% Arianism 0% Adoptionist 0% Docetism 0% Gnosticism 0% Albigensianism 0% Modalism 0% Socinianism 0% Donatism 0% Are you a heretic? created with QuizFarm.com

I'm fully Chalcedonian, but I appear to be semi-pelagian!

Not sure where the monophysitism comes from though. I possibly disagreed less strongly with those questions.

Those who remember my rant a year ago* might be pleased to know that I do not feel the need to rant about this year's Advent Carols.

( The order )

Yes, it got Christmassy, but I think it was a reasonable compromise of the competing expectations for the service. It's a pity we didn't have Lo he Comes as it makes a great climax to the service. I remember in my first year we had a similar compromise and finished with that which works well I think, because it leaves us looking to the second coming having meditated on the first. But I'm not too sad, because we had it this morning!

( footnotes (again!) )

cartesiandaemon and I appear to be having TGGD in comments on other people's journals. This seems unfair the owners of those journals, especially the_alchemist as her post was about vegetarian food in India, but to an extent to mr_ricarno even though it is rather more relevant to his post on a debate on the place of faith in national life, so I thought I'd bring the comments and response together on my own journal!

( The Story so far )

I drafted this post on the train going down to London for the memorial service for Br Roger, in the week after the 13th Sunday after Trinity. I then typed some of it up, but never posted it. I think for now I'll leave the question hanging at the end, but there should be a follow on. The thing that amused me was just after I wrote this, I was working back through my journal entries and came across this post from the 13th Sunday after Trinity last year! I suppose it means I'm consistent!

( Anglo-Catholic Mission )