What is in Kelvin's Head?

1066 And All What?

15/10/2016

This is an exciting moment for liturgists everywhere. It would appear that the Church of England has published a new prayer, this time commemorating the Battle of Hastings.

Following some discussion last night on social media, I’m pleased to be able to provide this study guide to the prayer for those thinking of using it, in the form of 12 questions. (The questions may be useful for discussion groups).

But first, the prayer itself.

God of justice and mercy,
whose Son came among us as the Prince of Peace:
look with grace on all who look back on the Battle of Hastings
as a defining moment in our history.
Guide our island nation, poised between Europe and Scandinavia,
and from the remembrance of defeat bring solidarity
with oppressed, subjugated and humiliated peoples today.
By your Spirit lead us to make the past our friend,
and to find our future in you,
that we may become a people of memory and hope;
through our crucified and risen Lord, Jesus Christ. Amen.

1 – The prayer begins conventionally as an address to the God of justice and mercy. Looking back at the Battle of Hastings, which side represented the forces of justice? Which side was God on?

2 – In telling God to look with grace on all who look back on the Battle of Hastings does the Church of England suggest that those who do not look back on the Battle of Hastings will not experience that favour?

3 – What will be the measurable consequences of the favour of God being bestowed upon Battle of Hastings gazers?

4 – What nation is being invoked in the term “island nation”? (Groups may wish to make reference to #indyref, #brexit and #conquest in answering this question).

5 – Using a map and the description “poised between Europe and Scandinavia”, can you pinpoint

a) Europe?
b) Scandinavia?
c) This Island Nation?

6 – Given the phrase the “remembrance of defeat”, in whose voice is this prayer offered?

7 – Similarly, who is the “we” in the phrase “that we may become a people of memory and hope”?

8 – In what ways are the Saxon people of England today not a people of memory and hope? Give examples to demonstrate your understanding of this question.

9 – How would you lead a youth group towards understanding the passion of our Lord Jesus Christ through the death of King Harold? (Consider drama, storytelling and needlecraft based approaches)

10 – How can the oppressed, subjugated and humiliated members of the Church of England, acting in solidarity with all people of struggle, reach out to build a better world?

11 – Would the addition of Saint Harold the Good to the Calendar of the Church of England be a step forward for justice?

12 – In what circumstances will you use this prayer?

Battle of Hastings, Church of England

52 responses to “Inclusive Language – again”

ryan

11/10/2010

Kelvin – that cracked me almost as much as your last tweet on the left of your blog ;-)!

Reply
Jimmy

11/10/2010

Ryan, although you address your comment to Kelvin like I am not there. I assume you are referring to my poem, I can assure you that it does not crack me up watching you making any opinion you may have untenable.

Reply
1. kelvin
  
  11/10/2010
  
  No Jimmy – I think Ryan was indeed referring to my last comment, above.
  
  Reply
Jimmy

11/10/2010

Thank you Kelvin and Sorry Ryan.

Reply
ryan

11/10/2010

No worries! Was indeed referring to the v.amusing coming out day tweets at the side.

I’m not sure there’s ever existed anyone, anywhere,at any time, of whom it could be said that *all* their opinions are ‘untenable’, so such rhetoric is dehumanising at best. Apropos nothing, I was moved to google the poetic stylings of the great David Brent. Who needs Auden? 😉
http://murfinsandburglars.com/2009/04/14/bad-poetry-for-tuesday-david-brent-edition/

Reply
Peter

12/10/2010

Kelvin; no, I think it distracts. It simp;ly reminds us that this is how your mind works: you make connections and delight in that sort of word-play. However, to sharpen up my point. Thank you for helping me to realise that, for some, ‘family’ is not a positive word in the way in which I experience it. For my part, this willl mean that I will be more careful about its use when others might feel excluded (and therefore hurt). Mutatis mutandi can you accept that I feel offended by what seems to be merely a casual linking between family and the f word? These are sensitive areas, but sensibilities are by no means confined to those who find family a painful or unhelpful concept.

Reply
Simon

29/10/2010

I am slightly nervous aboaut the alternatives to the 1982 Liturgy, not because I don’t share the inclusive sentiments expressed above (I do). I fear that, as so often in the history of the church, the steps we take to avoid one kind of mistake in the way we talk about God can lead us into another. The avoidance of pronouns as a measure to achieve inclusivity produces inelegant, strained and stilted English. How would it be if one were to use it in day-to-day speech? ‘I saw John this morning. I asked John’s how John’s health was. John said that John was over his flu, and hoped to be back at work on Monday’. This may not in itself seem to be a problem. But in fact, what very quickly happens when we adopt this idiom in addressing/expressing God, is that the very idea of a personal God begins to recede. My basic instinct is that the church’s language of pulbic prayer is properly anchored in that of the scriptures. There are dangers in departing from this. The perceived problem (rightly perceived) is perhaps better tackled by good teaching about the nature of God, than by linguistic contortions that produce stilted prayers, and possibly a less real and vivid idea of God.

Reply
Melissa

15/11/2013

About the family imagery – another reason to drop it in church is for the sake ones who, like me, do actually have the signifying family relationships.

There is too much pressure on day to day life with children when that life is forced to serve as some kind of example or testimony or witness to the world – or more likely one’s church friends – about the nature of God.

I think it sours love because in that kind of scheme loving children is more fundamentally a means to an end.

Reply