Anyone up for a chat thread?

[Paidiske]

I have seen concelebration, but it is rare. My bishop likes to do it at the induction service for a new priest for a parish; he will have himself and the priest say alternating parts of the great thanksgiving prayer at the Eucharist. (I suspect this is not how it is always done, but I am not from the Anglo-Catholic end of things).

Is it wrong, or just unusual? I think your answer to that will depend on your understanding of what is happening in the liturgy. My take runs similar to @Deegie's; and therefore I would say that concelebration obscures, at best, the full participation of everyone present. Personally I would prefer to step back and let someone else preside, than to concelebrate.

I am not aware of any canon law which answers the question definitively, though there may well be some obscure canon I don't know about!

 

[Deegie]

Warning - I am in the UK.

I saw three Priests simultaneously conduct the Eucharist here. It was only at the special Memorial Mass after the Queen died. I assumed the official Priest at that church just invited the other two who are qualified to do it, one of whom is an Episcopalian from the USA, because it was for the Queen, and it was for the last time. Is that "concelebration"? Is it wrong, or just unusual? I am in the Anglo-Catholic corner, I mean my region leans heavily that way.

There's a difference between multiple priests standing at the altar and concelebration. At the latter, the priests all make manual acts (i.e. gestures) and sometimes split up the speaking parts. Which did you observe?

 

[The Liturgist]

We need a suffragan, I think. But our diocese is short on funds at the moment, alas.

It’s too bad there aren’t more vocations for the Order of the Holy Cross. If you established a monastic pipeline to the hierarchy, you could tap monasteries as a source of bishops who require very little compensation due to their monastic vows. This also applies to members of mendicant orders that exist in Anglicanism such as the Franciscans.

Another cost-effective approach you could consider would be to adopt the practice currently found mainly in the Assyrian Church of the East and the West Syriac Orthodox jurisdictions in Malankara, of having Chorepiscopi, “Choir Bishops”, who are essentially glorified archpriests, who can be delegated responsibilities from the diocesan bishop, although traditionally they do not ordain priests or deacons, but there’s no reason why you couldn’t do this. There is no limit on the number of chorepiscopi in a diocese, and since they can only act in a manner outside the normal ministry of a priest with the permission of the diocesan bishop, they do not pose a risk of a loss of control. Thus, one priest from parishes who have a multiplicity of priests, such as St. Thomas Fifth Ave in New York, could be asked to serve on a rotating basis as one of several chorepiscopi who could work to relieve the burden on the diocesan bishop and also allow for more frequent provision of services normally celebrated only by bishops in the Anglican tradition, such as confirmations and the tonsuring of readers (if you do that in Anglicanism; I can’t recall - I seem to remember in the Church of England readers obtain a license and wear a blue half-length stole, but one does not have to be a licensed reader to serve as a lector during the liturgy - does that sound right?

 

[The Liturgist]

Is it wrong, or just unusual? I think your answer to that will depend on your understanding of what is happening in the liturgy. My take runs similar to @Deegie's; and therefore I would say that concelebration obscures, at best, the full participation of everyone present. Personally I would prefer to step back and let someone else preside, than to concelebrate.

That view is actually commonly held by advocates of the Traditional Latin Maas, in which concelebration is not typical, and there is either a full Pontifical Mass, or a bishop might celebrate the mass from the throne or faldstole, in which he sits there while a priest or another more junior bishop actually celebrates (together with a deacon and subdeacon, who are often themselves priests, or else seminarians, since the permanent deacon fell into abeyance).

In the Carthusian liturgy, the lack of concelebration combined with the requirement for all priests to celebrate the mass daily, and the fact that all of the choir monks were both priests and hermits, who would only leave their cells for the conventual mass and for a weekly walk, and would otherwise eat food brought to them by the lay monks through a slot in their door, resulted in the practice, which I believe remains the norm even in the majority of Charterhouses which reformed their liturgy after Vatican II (and some did not, retaining the old use, but the two forms are very similar, not unlike the difference between the Novus Ordo mass when celebrated ad orientem and in Latin using Eucharistic Prayer A (the Roman Canon) with traditional vestments, Gregorian chant and vestments, and the Tridentine missa cantata), is for the choir monks who do not celebrate the conventual mass to instead pray in addition to the Divine Office the Missa Sicca, instead of celebrating a low mass, which would require a server and an altar and other acoutrements. The Missa Sicca, or “Dry Mass”, is analogous to Ante Communion in Anglicanism or the Orthodox service known as the Typika, in that it has the Liturgy of the Word and part of the Liturgy of the Faithful, but not the full consecration and partaking of the Eucharist. It is also known as the Hunter’s Mass (Missa Venatoria) as it was used in rural areas, attended by hunters before heading out to seek their quarry, because of its brevity.

 

[The Liturgist]

There's a difference between multiple priests standing at the altar and concelebration. At the latter, the priests all make manual acts (i.e. gestures) and sometimes split up the speaking parts. Which did you observe?

Interestingly in Orthodoxy, since there can be dozens of concelebrants including bishops and priests at a large hierarchical divine liturgy, one can concelebrate without actively having anything to do in the liturgy other than stand in a designated spot and with the other concelebrants, make certain responses to the principal celebrants, as well as join in the prayers and hymns to the appropriate extent.

So when I said “Concelebrate”, I did not mean to imply the kind of active sharing of duties you mentioned as a necessity, although what you describe is also not uncommon.

 

[PloverWing]

It’s too bad there aren’t more vocations for the Order of the Holy Cross. If you established a monastic pipeline to the hierarchy, you could tap monasteries as a source of bishops who require very little compensation due to their monastic vows. This also applies to members of mendicant orders that exist in Anglicanism such as the Franciscans.

It's a thought. I don't think we have any monastic communities in our diocese, but Google tells me that the Community of St John Baptist has a house in the Diocese of Newark, just north of us. Two of their sisters have been ordained to the priesthood, according to the website. I don't know if any of them have been considered for the role of suffragan bishop.

I believe we have occasionally called on retired bishops to help out, if they're needed for confirmations at a time when the diocesan bishop is overworked.

 

[Arcangl86]

It's a thought. I don't think we have any monastic communities in our diocese, but Google tells me that the Community of St John Baptist has a house in the Diocese of Newark, just north of us. Two of their sisters have been ordained to the priesthood, according to the website. I don't know if any of them have been considered for the role of suffragan bishop.

I believe we have occasionally called on retired bishops to help out, if they're needed for confirmations at a time when the diocesan bishop is overworked.

I live in the Diocese of MA and we are host to SSJE, the Society of Saint John the Evangelist. Three bishops ago I believe we elected the former superior as our diocesan bishop. But that was seen as a very unusual choice.

@The Liturgist There really isn't a history of monastics serving in an episcopal capacity, or even as a priest outside of the monastery. You also have to remember that the revival of monastic life is relatively knew for Anglicans, even if our spiritual DNA is heavily influenced by Benedictine spirituality.

 

[Paidiske]

It’s too bad there aren’t more vocations for the Order of the Holy Cross. If you established a monastic pipeline to the hierarchy, you could tap monasteries as a source of bishops who require very little compensation due to their monastic vows. This also applies to members of mendicant orders that exist in Anglicanism such as the Franciscans.

In my experience, when a member of a religious order takes a stipended role (I've known them as parish clergy, but I guess the same would apply to a bishop) the usual stipend is paid in full to their order.

I would also be wary of any approach that would provide a financial incentive to appoint one person over another.

IME it's not the services or liturgical duties that are the problem in terms of episcopal workload; those can be managed reasonably well with a bit of goodwill. It's the administrative burden and all the other demands on our bishops. Talking to mine, the stress of dealing with the legacy of historic abuse cases in the diocese places him under considerable strain.

 

[PloverWing]

the tonsuring of readers

By the way, thanks! I learned something today. I'd never heard of the tonsuring of readers, but I did some googling after you mentioned it. Reader seems to be a very particular office in Orthodoxy, for which I don't think there's any Anglican counterpart. We have lectors and lay Eucharistic ministers, but neither is considered a first step towards the priesthood, and (in our diocese, at least) neither requires a formal initiation or license.

 

[Paidiske]

By the way, thanks! I learned something today. I'd never heard of the tonsuring of readers, but I did some googling after you mentioned it. Reader seems to be a very particular office in Orthodoxy, for which I don't think there's any Anglican counterpart. We have lectors and lay Eucharistic ministers, but neither is considered a first step towards the priesthood, and (in our diocese, at least) neither requires a formal initiation or license.

I think it'd be closer to being a licensed lay reader; someone who can take (non-Eucharistic) services and preach. But while lay readers hold the bishop's licence, that doesn't necessarily mean the bishop comes to a service to formally hand it over.

 

[The Liturgist]

By the way, thanks! I learned something today. I'd never heard of the tonsuring of readers, but I did some googling after you mentioned it. Reader seems to be a very particular office in Orthodoxy, for which I don't think there's any Anglican counterpart. We have lectors and lay Eucharistic ministers, but neither is considered a first step towards the priesthood, and (in our diocese, at least) neither requires a formal initiation or license.

Roman Catholics also historically had Readers and other minor orders. The other minor orders still extant in the East are Psaltis. Subdeacons are technically a major order, and in most Eastern and Oriental churches one must be married before being ordained to a subdeacon or commit to holy celibacy, and subdeacons, deacons and priests cannot remarry (I am not sure if readers can or can not, but i know readers can be married after being tonsured, as can psaltis; indeed many boys and girls are tonsured Psaltis in their and some are later made readers before reaching the age of 18.

In the Ethiopian church, Debteras, who are basically readers in charge of the chants who engage in what some people mistakenly call “Liturgical dance”, which is really just a sort of backwards and forwards movement which I feel it is not really fair to those who perform ballet or other professional dancers to call “dance”, since it is unidirectional and in some cases not even rhythmically synchronized, also have served as “lay clerks” to use an Anglican term albeit in a more complete way, by providing various ministries to the people.

This is evocative of the fourth century church where there were also among the minor orders Exorcists, Doorkeepers and a few other offices which have fallen into abeyance as actual tonsured orders (the Exorcists were the most junior of the Minor Orders).

 

[The Liturgist]

Talking to mine, the stress of dealing with the legacy of historic abuse cases in the diocese places him under considerable strain.

Indeed that has to be an absolute nightmare.

 

[RamiC]

There's a difference between multiple priests standing at the altar and concelebration. At the latter, the priests all make manual acts (i.e. gestures) and sometimes split up the speaking parts. Which did you observe?

All three of the Priests said everything the Priest usually says simultaneously. We, the congregation did our part exactly like we usually do. I am pretty sure they did all the gestures at the same time too.

The longest reigning monarch of our history does not die every day, as things go in a country, we were having a rather momentous occaision. What now occurs to me is that I have not asked anyone if the clergy were under some exceptional instructions, maybe the Archbishop of Canturbury or even the new King did not want a single ordained soul in the C of E to miss it. I am going to try to find out out.

Thank you and to Paidiske for trying to help me out.

I hope the whole world has a blessed Sunday in the meantime.

 

[Paidiske]

I hope the whole world has a blessed Sunday in the meantime.

Sunday is just about over, here. Of course, being the height of summer, sunset is still about an hour and a half away; but it's well and truly time for a pre-dinner gin and tonic!

 

[RamiC]

Sunday is just about over, here. Of course, being the height of summer, sunset is still about an hour and a half away; but it's well and truly time for a pre-dinner gin and tonic!

Enjoy it, goodnight. I am just about to get ready for church, on Sunday morning. See you after I have finished doing your yesterday!

 

[RamiC]

Three Priests Simultaneously - So I asked a retired local priest in church, about the service I was at where three priests all did the Eucharist simultaneously, he said that it was concelebration, that it is not that unusual here, and there was no special instruction for the late Queen's Requiem Mass, but they just all wanted to do it, so they all did.

He also said that our Bishop should occaisionally come and concelebrate at our church, but he refuses to because our Priest is a woman. This I do not understand, because that Bishop inaugurated her as our Vicar, so .

The sermon this week from said allegedly not priest, who is our Priest as far as we can all tell, involved declaring that the only sermon anyone should listen to this week was the one from Bishop Budde in Washington, then she quoted some of it and recommended watching or reading it to anyone who had not already.

 

[Shane R]

My former bishop always concelebrated priestly ordination services. The new priests concelebrated with him. This is the only picture I have of that particular aspect of my ordination service; it appears we are doing a synchronized genuflection.

 

[RileyG]

Three Priests Simultaneously - So I asked a retired local priest in church, about the service I was at where three priests all did the Eucharist simultaneously, he said that it was concelebration, that it is not that unusual here, and there was no special instruction for the late Queen's Requiem Mass, but they just all wanted to do it, so they all did.

He also said that our Bishop should occaisionally come and concelebrate at our church, but he refuses to because our Priest is a woman. This I do not understand, because that Bishop inaugurated her as our Vicar, so .

The sermon this week from said allegedly not priest, who is our Priest as far as we can all tell, involved declaring that the only sermon anyone should listen to this week was the one from Bishop Budde in Washington, then she quoted some of it and recommended watching or reading it to anyone who had not already.

Very interesting!

 

[Paidiske]

He also said that our Bishop should occaisionally come and concelebrate at our church, but he refuses to because our Priest is a woman. This I do not understand, because that Bishop inaugurated her as our Vicar, so .

Oohhhh that makes me cranky. It's one thing to have a problem with the ordination of women. It's another thing to accept office in a church which ordains women, and then act in a way which undermines said women. If you really have that much of a problem, have the integrity to go somewhere where official policy agrees with you!

Reminds me of this piece, which I've posted before in the Egalitarian forum: Why are female clergy cheering for a bishop who doesn’t believe in female priests? | Martine Oborne

 

[Arcangl86]

I think it'd be closer to being a licensed lay reader; someone who can take (non-Eucharistic) services and preach. But while lay readers hold the bishop's licence, that doesn't necessarily mean the bishop comes to a service to formally hand it over.

Lay readers don't exist in the Episcopal Church in that sense. We do have licensed lay ministries, but lay reader isn't one of them. The closest thing to what you are describing would probably be somebody exercising two separate lay ministries at once, lay worship leader and lay preacher.