Using Technology to Modernise Worship

[ebia]

Im sure very similar complaints have accompanied every introduction of new technology, including printed Prayerbooks and hymnals, so it doesn't worry me. The sole exception probably being church heating.

 

[seeking_perfection]

I'd be really interested to see pictures of the technology being discussed. Does any of you have any pictures of the layouts you've described? Websites?

 

[ebia]

Technology? What technology?

How about we use 21st century version of the Bible? How about we have teachings rather than preachings? (Do we still need to be told that is naughty to use your neighbour's lawnmower without asking?) How about we introduce Sunday Schoolers to the real story of Jesus and not fantasy? How about we develop a liturgy that means something to today's culture and not to a society some two thousand years ago? How about we give our creaking churches to the local National Trust and go 'shopfront'? How about we use the proceeds to do something really useful like sending on the of youth to study theology at university?

Relying on coloured lights, overheads screens, piped music, video cameras are symbols of the lost. Christianity is not packed entertainment.

There is nobody who would want to buy most of our church buildings, and even if they did a shopfront costs money. There's no vast untapped reserve of money sitting in those buildings.

If your sermons are at the level of naughty lawnmower stealing maybe you need to have words with your rector - and maybe offer to do some preaching for him.

 

[MKJ]

A screen is only intrusive if you expect the church to look like something from a previous century; it's not really any more intrusive than having everybody's head buried in a selection of books they have to flick through.

I agree that people are not really meant to have their heads in books constantly.

Hence my comment about having the liturgy by memory.

Liturgy is made to be in the memory? I've never heard that. Plus our prayer book has 4 forms for the Eucharist and 6 for prayers of the people so that would be hard to memorize.

The number of options in many modern prayer books is really quite a recent thing, and it relates to having easy access to relatively inexpensive books and a very literate society.

Part of the purpose of common prayer in the old model is that we are free to continue to deepen our experience of prayer when we worship and pray; that we can really think about participating with others; we can recall the parts of the liturgy in our daily life when it is comforting; that it teaches us the beliefs of our faith. None of this really works well if we are flipping around in our book or do not have a substantially similar liturgy from week to week.

It also makes it possible for the congregation to sing the liturgy.

It was one of the great triumphs of the English Reformation that this aspect of liturgy became possible again because it was in the vernacular.

 

[higgs2]

I agree that people are not really meant to have their heads in books constantly.

Hence my comment about having the liturgy by memory.



The number of options in many modern prayer books is really quite a recent thing, and it relates to having easy access to relatively inexpensive books and a very literate society.

Part of the purpose of common prayer in the old model is that we are free to continue to deepen our experience of prayer when we worship and pray; that we can really think about participating with others; we can recall the parts of the liturgy in our daily life when it is comforting; that it teaches us the beliefs of our faith. None of this really works well if we are flipping around in our book or do not have a substantially similar liturgy from week to week.

It also makes it possible for the congregation to sing the liturgy.

It was one of the great triumphs of the English Reformation that this aspect of liturgy became possible again because it was in the vernacular.

I celebrate our differences!

 

[ebia]

I agree that people are not really meant to have their heads in books constantly.

Hence my comment about having the liturgy by memory.

That's not remotely an option in our situation, or really any situation that is seriously missionary in 21st century western culture. And i dont think I've ever experienced a church where the words to the hymns weren't needed to be read from something.

Having stability in the liturgy is good so that with time many experienced members of the congregation know much of the words by heart is a good thing, but it's pretty much irrelevant to whether the word are on screen or in a book. The preference for a book is a preference for 16th century technology over 21st, nothing more.

 

[wayseer]

There is nobody who would want to buy most of our church buildings, and even if they did a shopfront costs money. There's no vast untapped reserve of money sitting in those buildings.

Exactly - so why do we hang on to them - apart from sentimentality? Keeping a shopfront would be far cheaper than maintaining run down buildings however nice the stonework might look.

If your sermons are at the level of naughty lawnmower stealing maybe you need to have words with your rector - and maybe offer to do some preaching for him.

My point was to demonstrate the difference between preaching and teaching.

 

[wayseer]

That's really interesting stuff. Have you experienced any of this or is this what you would like to see? The shopfront thing, a local nondenominational does that. How would a teaching differ from a preaching?

The enormous cost of maintaining 19th century building is now prohibitive and the money could be used for more beneficial purposes.

Preaching is telling how we need to change of our lives. Most of us know this stuff off by heart. What we need to hear is how the gospel is relevant to the 21st century.

 

[ebia]

Exactly - so why do we hang on to them - apart from sentimentality? Keeping a shopfront would be far cheaper than maintaining run down buildings however nice the stonework might look.



My point was to demonstrate the difference between preaching and teaching.

I don't think I'm working with the same idea of preaching.

As for the buildings, in most cases I don't think anyone would be insane enough to want most of them, and certainly what we spend on our lump of concrete is less than we'd have to spend on a usable alternative.

 

[MKJ]

That's not remotely an option in our situation, or really any situation that is seriously missionary in 21st century western culture. And i dont think I've ever experienced a church where the words to the hymns weren't needed to be read from something.

Having stability in the liturgy is good so that with time many experienced members of the congregation know much of the words by heart is a good thing, but it's pretty much irrelevant to whether the word are on screen or in a book. The preference for a book is a preference for 16th century technology over 21st, nothing more.

Of course there has to be some texts or access to them. I find a screen distracting in a way a book isn't (or, some other small, hand-held device.) I can look at a book as I need to in my pew and it isn't all that noticeable to those around me. A screen is visible to everyone, all the time, and kind of impresses itself upon people. In a room with a screen on, people's eyes are drawn to the screen. Which means they are not on, for example, the altar.

 

[MKJ]

The enormous cost of maintaining 19th century building is now prohibitive and the money could be used for more beneficial purposes.

Preaching is telling how we need to change of our lives. Most of us know this stuff off by heart. What we need to hear is how the gospel is relevant to the 21st century.

Well, not really. Building properties are on the books as an asset. And in most cases we are legally obligated to maintain them to some standard. Where will the money come for the shop-front? No one will buy the building. If we demolish it (which may not even be allowed) we have no funds. If we abandon it we are still paying for it.

And a policy of putting our churches in nasty little buildings to save funds is one which indicates a nasty little heart. If we have no building we go where we can, but there is actually spiritual and psychological impact to giving our best and most beautiful creations to God. Since people first had religion they have set aside their best efforts to create holy things, not their worst.

 

[Naomi4Christ]

Well, not really. Building properties are on the books as an asset. And in most cases we are legally obligated to maintain them to some standard. Where will the money come for the shop-front? No one will buy the building. If we demolish it (which may not even be allowed) we have no funds. If we abandon it we are still paying for it.

And a policy of putting our churches in nasty little buildings to save funds is one which indicates a nasty little heart. If we have no building we go where we can, but there is actually spiritual and psychological impact to giving our best and most beautiful creations to God. Since people first had religion they have set aside their best efforts to create holy things, not their worst.

Our church building is valued at about half of what my house is worth. It is enormous, but maintenance costs are high. We had to spend around one-third of its value in our last quinquennial repairs. That money could have been used to provide assets for our mission work.

We do have a shop front in our church. Our church building is tucked away and does not get much passing foot traffic. Therefore, we have a "shop" on the high street. We give away free lunches, coffee and cakes, and sit down and talk with people. Sometimes we fill out forms for social services, and help with job applications. Our Polish-English dictionaries come in handy.

The shop is a vacant property that is given to us by the council for free. We do have to move around a bit if someone else wants to rent it. This means doing a bit of redecorating and cleaning every so often, and moving our catering equipment - but we find a new place give us new opportunities, even if it just a few metres away from the old place.

 

[ebia]

I don't find that at all, sorry.

 

[Naomi4Christ]

Which means they are not on, for example, the altar.

Why would you want to look at an altar?

We have a big calico bag over ours so not possible to see it. In fact, it just merges with the background. We would have removed it but the Georgian preservationists wouldn't let us. We even managed to secure a faculty, but the secularists won out.

Golden lamb, anyone?

 

[Naomi4Christ]

I find a screen distracting in a way a book isn't .

The whole purpose of a screen is to look at it at the appropriate time. It is not a distraction in itself - only when there is important information to convey.

When our screen is out for a service but not in gainful employment, we just have our parish background, which is not distracting when you have seen it for a cumulative hundred of hours (and very much less).

If the screen is distracting, then that is probably a good thing. Sit up and take note!

 

[ebia]

Why would you want to look at an altar?

We have a big calico bag over ours so not possible to see it. In fact, it just merges with the background. We would have removed it but the Georgian preservationists wouldn't let us. We even managed to secure a faculty, but the secularists won out.

Golden lamb, anyone?

I think he means wherever the Eucharistic action is happening, not an unused high altar.

 

[ebia]

I'm sure people said very similar things the first time someone opened a codex instead of unrolling a scroll to read the scriptures. In another 50 years noone will remember it was ever controversial.

 

[Naomi4Christ]

I think he means wherever the Eucharistic action is happening, not an unused high altar.

I'm not sure what that is. Ours is just a big marble block, about table height. I'm sure a local butcher would have been happy to have it, but alas, we are stuck with it.

 

[ebia]

I'm not sure what that is. Ours is just a big marble block, about table height. I'm sure a local butcher would have been happy to have it, but alas, we are stuck with it.

When you have communion you presumably use a table of some sort. All he is saying is that during the liturgy of the sacrament - the Eucharistic prayer and so forth- it is better for people to be looking towards what is happening rather than a text. He's not suggesting that staring at a table of any form is especially pious.

 

[Naomi4Christ]

When you have communion you presumably use a table of some sort. All he is saying is that during the liturgy of the sacrament - the Eucharistic prayer and so forth- it is better for people to be looking towards what is happening rather than a text. He's not suggesting that staring at a table of any form is especially pious.

Yes, we have a wooden table. I suppose we look at our presbyter, but it is not a major thing.

It is funny that when we have catholic mass in school, I am somehow compelled to look away when priest is doing his bit. I must be subconsciously worried about gazing at the sacrament when it is raised in error.