The priest in charge at St. Hilda’s, Rev. Dr. Brian Ruttan, has been regularly packing in 3 people (himself, wife and altar setup lady) to the diocesan Sunday service in the church building. St. Hilda’s proper averages well over 100 people each Sunday; although we have left the building for a local school, we did take with us the candles, chalices and other accoutrements needed for an Anglican Eucharist. Brian wants them back. Most of the items in question – some of them hand made – have been lovingly cared for by our altar guild for over 30 years. When our negotiator approached the altar guild to ask for the items, the consensus among the ladies was that our faith is not rooted in things and that Brian could have them all. There were tears in some of the eyes.
So the key to negotiating with the diocese of Niagara is – love and grace (a lot more than this crabby author has).
No, no, and no. I’m sorry, but I can’t agree with this. My mother said it best, years ago in another context: “You have to understand the psychology of the bully. The more you give in to him, the more he pushes you down.”
I admire the graciousness of St Hilda’s. But in the end this passivity will just make it easier for the bullies at the diocesan office to throw their weight around. They see no negative consequences for their actions, so they will keep on with what they’re doing: running roughshod over anyone who disagrees with them.
The tears were in the eyes of the negotiator as well. It is an interesting convention that requires all the acoutrements to remain in a church, and not be “borrowed” under these unusual circumstances. What has happened to all the altar supplies from the churches that have been closed within this diocese? Could not a priest-in-charge be supplied from the storeroom-of-plenty at the Cathedral as he/she takes care of the service during this waiting period?
But the beauty of this story is in the relinquishing, and keeping our eyes on Jesus.
I agree totally with Ellie.
Admin: Sorry to edit this one Frank, but it may have been a little close to the wire. Email me at gs07liveblog at hotmail dot com if you want more info.
Edited by admin – sorry Paula.
Ellie and Frank,
although I believe we did the right thing, my inclination would have been the gift of a swift punch up the hooter (delivered metaphorically, of course *ahem*) – which is probably why I’m not allowed anywhere near the negotiations.
Of course, the vessels etc, actually did initially stay with the church – the people. They are now in the clutches of imposters.
“Do you love me more than these?” Please don’t misunderstand, I think this move is the worst case of pettiness I’ve ever come across. That said, the Rev. Dr., his missus and the remaining altar set-up lady can sit and admire all the Eucharistic vessels, candlesticks etc. after they have completed feeding all those who are crowding in to St. Hilda’s each week. These antics are going to get worse before all is said and done. Some relinquish their licences, others will relinquish treasured symbols of the faith, many given in loving memory of a dear one as well as buildings that hold so many memories. For the time being, however, we must travel light and with a sense of urgency ( Luke 10), there are many sheep and lambs to be fed, cared for and healed, and the Gospel must be broadcast by word and deed.
Blessings to all!
I’d sure like to hear the diocesan side of this one! I’m sure someone from the diocese checks out this blog. How ’bout an answer, because if this is the case it is truly dispicable. No evidence at all of any awareness of the meaning of grace.
We must not lose sight of the fact that the standard of behaviour which Christ set for us was his own behaviour. He could have called ten thousand angels to save him from the cross and yet he did not. He asked God to forgive those who crucified him for they didn’t realize what they were doing. We are called to love our enemies, and to do good to those who use us badly. He that loses for His sake will win. Vengeance is mine, said the Lord. He will repay. I think given the choice, I’d rather be on the receiving end of a (metaphorical or otherwise) punch up the hooter (whatever that is – obviously nothing to do with Hooters) than on the receiving end of God’s vengeance.
For the unenlightened:
hooter: beak, honker, hooter, nozzle, snoot, snout, schnozzle, schnoz (informal terms for the nose).
“Those who hope in Me will not be disappointed. Can plunder be taken from warriors, or captives rescued from the fierce? But this is what the LORD says: ‘Yes, captives will be taken from warriors, and plunder retrieved from the fierce; I will contend with those who contend with you, and your children I will save.’” Isaiah 49:24,25
After two years of exposure to Anglicanism, I believe I understand a few things at least. This thread, however, gets into an area where I feel like a true neophyte. Can someone enlighten me as to the special significance of “temple furniture” in Anglican worship? It didn’t feature prominently in the parish I attended, but I know that tradition must play a prominent role. If we were still under the old covenant it would make more sense to me, but the NT doesn’t have anything to say about the “tools of trade” for doing church. In asking this question, I am not suggesting that the Diocese officials were justified in their actions.
#11 Warren,
I’m probably not the best person the answer this since I’m a bit of an ersatz Anglican.
Here goes anyway:
The articles in question had indisputable sentimental value for those who care for them: as I mentioned, many were made by members of our altar guild for use by the body of Christ at St. Hilda’s.
Also, while transubstantiation ‘is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture’, Anglicans generally do believe in consubstantiation – that during the sacrament the fundamental substance of the body and blood of Christ are present alongside the substance of the bread and wine, which remain present. Thus the vessels have special significance since they do hold the body and blood of Christ in the latter sense.
It didn’t feature prominently in the parish I attended, but I know that tradition must play a prominent role.
Um, they did, Warren. Remember what the altar looked like on Good Friday? All the things that were missing are what we are talking about here.
Warren
Remember in the NT Jesus, said I did not come to abolish the Law and by reference the OT, but to fulfill. This means a lot of the things we use in worship while we do not worship them are aids in our worship life. They all have particular religious and sacramental significance which assist us in our worship of Jesus as the Resurrected and Risen Lord.
Fr. Brian+
Kate (#13), I think you know what I mean. I doubt that the majority of people at the 9:15 am service would have been very fussed if they showed up on a Sunday morning and discovered that some of the altar items had been replaced by a cheap replica. Of course, I could be mistaken.
David @ #12 and Warren @ #11,
Some Anglicans believe in consubstantiation – mostly it was Luther’s attempt to deal with the issue of the real presence of Christ in the Supper (and hence is predominantly a Lutheran doctrine).
How is Christ really present? Luther’s answer was along these lines – in the Last Supper narratives, Jesus says, ‘This is my body…’; trying to preserve the integrity and plain meaning of Scripture, Luther concluded that, although the substance of the bread and wine don’t change with the prayer of consecration (the doctrine of transubstantiation), Jesus’ body is nevertheless present with the bread (under/around it) because the Word of God says so.
Calvin sorted out the answer to Christ’s presence in a different way, and most of the early Anglican liturgies tend to follow this direction, that Christ’s physical body is present at the right hand of the Father in heaven, where he ever lives to intercede for us. And so Christ is present with us by his Spirit – the Spirit of Christ – and through the promise of Scripture that promises us Christ’s presence, of which the Supper is an ‘effectual sign’. So the Holy Spirit takes the word of God and brings the presence of Christ to us in his person (that is, the person of the Spirit) by means of the Word of God. In plainer English, the Spirit of God takes the Word of God about Christ, and presents Christ to us (or, perhaps more appropriately, the Spirit lifts us up to Christ, who is seated at the right hand of God – Eph 2:1-10). Thus, the Supper is a visible sign and seal of the grace of Christ’s presence by his Spirit, through his Word – which we take hold of by faith.
As to the history of the vessels for communion and the furniture, here’s my (very limited) understanding: the Holy Table (what some call the ‘altar’) is there to represent the Last Supper gathering around the table, but also the table fellowship of the Lord’s Supper (in 1 Corinthians 10-11), where we gather as fellow-believers to share in the meal of remembrance of Christ’s death and demonstrate our union with him by faith and with other Christians who share the same faith. The Holy Table also looks forward to the end of time banquet that the book of Revelation sets out. The Cup has a similar meaning – re-enacting part of the Last Supper, plus the Cup’s significance as ‘the new covenant in my blood’. In this sense the Eucharist is a communal ‘meal’. No element of presenting a sacrifice is present in the meal itself. The only sacrifice that is offered is ourselves as a living sacrifice (from Romans 12:1-2). The meal offers us communion in Christ’s one perfect and sufficient sacrifice and oblation (see the prayer of consecration in the first order BCP Holy Communion service) by the power of the Spirit and receiving the elements in faith.
At various stages the Anglican Church has had ‘Anglo-Catholic’ elements, that have a more Roman Catholic view of the Eucharist – hence the fancier robes, calling the Holy Table an ‘altar’, including aspects to the liturgy that have a more sacrificial notion to it, and other trappings.
Sorry for the long post, but I hope that’s helpful.
Brian (#14) and Jason (#16), thank you for the explanation concerning consubstantiation. This now raises another question in my mind (what’s new). If ANiC churches are going to grow and new ones be planted (Brian, I hope your plant is just the first of many), I would suggest that it will mainly be through evangelism and the spreading of the gospel. ANiC churches will need to be missional (in a good sense of the word). This means reaching previously unchurched people with the gospel – people who know nothing of Christianity let alone Anglicanism. Will there be a deliberate plan/program to catechize these new converts in Anglican traditions and routines, in addition to the basics of the faith? Do you think it will be easy to convince them that an ornate silver chalice has more significance than one made of plastic, that an impressively carved altar carries more weight than a two by four and some cinder blocks, or that it just isn’t right to baptize an infant from a plastic pail? I know I’m exaggerating (and probably being irreverent), but I think it is necessary to stop occasionally and see things through the eyes of the new believer.
After this discussion, at least I now know where I fit in: a high evangelical charismatic anglo-catholic Lutheran Anglican. Or perhaps a closet Baptist.
Warren (#17),
I’d hope that the focus would be on church planting and evangelism – with the training of new believers in basics of the faith, and the basics of Anglicanism. If it’s a context where the ritual aspect of Anglicanism has significance (e.g., older Anglicans), then the more formal service would sound like a good church planting strategy. If it was an area where new families predominate and formality isn’t something understood or valued, then drop the more formal/ritual aspects of the service in a second. Having said that, Anglican ministers are bound by their ordination vows to keep a certain degree of “Anglicanism” in the service.
It occured to me that the “candles, chalice and other accoutrements” were given to the congregation of St. Hilda’snot the church building, and therefore they belong tothe congregation which meeting in the nearby school. A solution which is too simple!!