• Still Prayin’

    In many churches, St Mary’s included, there is at least one, often two short public service of daily prayer. Here in St Mary’s we have morning prayer at 9.30 and a dedicated band of people take turns in leading. There are generally between five and ten people who come – sometimes more and sometimes less.

    For almost a couple of years now we’ve been experimenting with an evening service on Saturdays which is convened online rather than in church. After a break in the summer, that has now started up again.

    When I first participated in a daily tradition of prayer I was working in the University of London in one of the University Chaplaincies. I remember once saying to someone in the college that I needed to get back for Evening Prayer and his response has stuck with me. “Say one for me” he said. He was not someone who would ever dream of coming to the service itself but somehow it mattered to him that prayer was offered in that place.

    Something  of the same thing is going on with the online service. There’s a small band of people who do it – never more than 10 because we don’t have the technology for more than 10. Sometimes we’ve approached that number but more often it is just a few of  us. I find that when I tell people that prayer is offered in a google hangout online they are really interested but far fewer come and join in than care about it. There’s obvious delight in the very idea from some people who don’t ever make it into the hangout. There’s a touch of “say one for me” about the experience, I suspect.

    People are also interested in what it feels like.

    Interestingly the experience that it has most felt like to me is morning prayer at St Mary’s. I guess I am generally comfortable living life online and more so than many. However, it doesn’t really feel any different to me.

    I’m interested in this because I know that clergy find it hard to say the daily office on their own. No, let me be more truthful, I know that I find it hard to say the daily office on my own. When I worked in a smaller church I could never quite drag myself into church to say it publicly and I shared what quite a lot of people say – that it makes them feel lonely. Now sometimes you can get yourself in th mood by reminding yourself that you say it with the saints and angels and with all the company of heaven, including those who are saying the same words in many different situations. There’s a core truth that you never pray alone which I believe. However, that is often easier to belief than to feel.

    Saying the office online is one way that groups of people could chose to build into their spiritual practise. The little group that does it at St Mary’s now has been doing it long enough to be able to offer tips and I’d welcome any questions or enquiries. Best thing to do, of course, is just turn up to one of our services in cyberspace.

    There’s more detail here:

    http://thecathedral.org.uk/online-evening-prayer/

     

10 responses to “The Tim Farron Question and the Archbishop of Canterbury”

  1. Bro David Avatar
    Bro David

    This brings up an interesting memory with the long-time leader of Changing Attitude England (CA). This leader was taken in by Andrew Marin, founder of the Marin Foundation (MF) when he visited the UK in conjunction with some big outdoor Christian festival you lot hold anually. Marin and his followers were attending Pride Marches/Parades around the US and getting their photos taken hunging GLBTQ folks in the marches. His foundation claims to be attempting to build a bridge between the LGBTQ community and conservative Christian communities.
    Marin was invited to comment on the CA blog. He spouted his pablum message of love for LGBTQ folks. Then, in a comment, I point blank asked Marin if he believed that we LGBTQ folks were sinners and needed to repent and become straight. He refused to answer the question. He said that I was asking the “wrong” question. Then he gave this answer verbatim from the Marin Foundation website;
    “We call these the “Big 5.” They are:
    Do you think that gays and lesbians are born that way?
    Do you think homosexuality is a sin?
    Can a LGBTQ person “change?”
    Do you think that someone can be gay and Christian?
    Are LGBTQ people going to hell?
    “The one common theme of these “Big 5” is that they are all close-ended, yes-or-no questions. Each of them must be answered with one word and they are all meant to end conversation. Based solely on one’s close-ended answers, it is easy to label, judge and dismiss the other community entirely. Thus we dehumanize a community based off of a word rather than create a productive conversation. In essence, by close-ended answers either the conservative or the LGBTQ community judges who you are, what you believe, whose team you’re on and how you should be treated.
    “Rather than answering close-ended questions, The Marin Foundation seeks to elevate the conversation and continual fruitful dialogue, as tense as that may be. This is a model taken from Jesus throughout the Gospels. Of the 25 times Jesus was asked close-ended questions, only three times did he respond with a yes or no. These three times were only after he was arrested and admitting he was the Messiah. Prior to this, Jesus never answered close-ended questions with a yes or a no. Instead, he elevated the conversation.”
    I spent the next three days searching the MF website and reading through articles and white papers. I realized that it was a ministry to the LGBTQ of wolves in sheep’s clothing. These people were trying to love vulnerable LGBTQ folks into their embrace, to slowly chip away at them until they had brought them to realize that their sexual/gender orientation was false, acting upon it was a sin and they needed to seek the help of Jesus to beome heterosexual and accept their gender assigned by birth.
    I posted my findings on the CA blog and was promply chastized and barred from further posts. In a personal email from the leader of CA I was ripped a new arsehole and declared anathema. Sadly, even LGBTQ folks in prominent positions are taken in by these folks. I think that we need to continually ask the Big 5, of everyone, epsecially those non-LGBTQ folks who profess to be our allies and supporters, secular or religious.

  2. Peter Davison Avatar

    Good column.
    So who is entitled to express opinions on ethical issues? I’ve long understood it’s the duty of all of us to have INFORMED consciences and to obey them. We may wish to consult people we believe to be more informed than we are, such as our presumed leaders, but in the end, when asked, we should at least be ready to state, however firmly or tentatively, where we stand. As for our leaders, they may or may not be better informed than we are; but we also know that ‘experts’ may be people who know more and more about less and less – and that politics often intrude into our public morality. Much of ethics is situational. That said, Jesus seems to have had much more compassion for alleged ‘sinners’ than for those who chose to label them as such. And much of our present troubles seem to stem from our desire to label and scapegoat people who appear to be different. What would happen if we simply accepted people for who they are and learned to accept that love is indeed ‘a many splendoured thing’?

  3. Graham Evans Avatar
    Graham Evans

    A very interesting new perspective and certainly a question that should be put to all the Anglican bishops who sit in the house of Lords.

  4. The Rev Sr Helena Barrett, OSB Avatar
    The Rev Sr Helena Barrett, OSB

    Absolutely spot on, Kelvin. The ABC should be asked The Question until he is sufficiently exhausted to give a clear and honest answer (whatever it may turn out to be) instead of the usual yards of ecclesiastical flannel.

    1. June B Butler Avatar
      June B Butler

      “The ABC should be asked The Question until he is sufficiently exhausted to give a clear and honest answer…”

      Justin Welby wails piteously: “I’m not the pope.”

  5. the Rev. Grant Barber Avatar
    the Rev. Grant Barber

    I always wondered how the preachers in Pepys’ diary could preach such long sermons. I think I understand better now. So glad we’ve already settled the matter in the Episcopal Church. (Oh, the answer can be a succinct “no, not sin just by its nature).

  6. Bernard Silverman Avatar
    Bernard Silverman

    if I asked an archbishop whether deliberately stamping on someone’s toe is a sin they would give a direct answer. So they should be asked the Farron question over and over again until they do similarly. If the Prime Minister can do that so can they. Indeed the question should be “the PM thinks that gay sex is not a sin. Was she right?”

  7. Kate Odling Avatar
    Kate Odling

    Very interesting. I always think that if someone does not give a clear answer to a question that they have something to hide or that their true belief/thought would be unpopular. I think the ABC has looked very uncomfortable when any direct questioning about LGBT issues are raised. So someone should ask & not accept anything but a straightforward answer. My final thought is that we are all qualified to have an opinion – what’s wrong with that?

  8. Bruce Gulland Avatar

    Whatever I think about the answer to the question, I did rather enjoy the style of your post – you had me on the edge of my seat!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Easter Update

    I’m not sure where the energy came from for last night’s evensong. I was beyond speech, but somehow managed to sing the Rose responses as though I knew them. The choir belted through Dyson in D, one of the Vaughan Williams Five Mystical Songs and a glorious Howells Te Deum. +Idris reappeared to join us,…

  • More on the bikers

    More pics of the bikers on the BBC Website.  (NB the fifth pic – thanks Stewart)