What is in Kelvin's Head?

I respectfully disagree…

02/07/2022

I respectfully disagree with the latest College of Bishops statement on Aberdeen and Orkney and I do so in two respects.

Firstly, there is no mention of a mediation process in Canon 53. If the College of Bishops wishes to use Canon 53 section 11 and subsequent sections, then they should follow the procedure laid down there and name the bishop who is hearing the dispute. The bishop in question should publish the terms under which they are going to determine the dispute and the date on which the hearing will take place. Canon 53 does not allow for the resolution of such disputes to be outsourced to other individuals or organisations. (Sections before section 11 do not apply to disputes within a diocese). The procedure outlined in Canon 53 Section 11 and the following sections is clearly a decision making process and not a process of mediation. (In any case, my personal view is that mediation processes are seldom appropriate in cases where bullying is alleged and where there are discrepancies of power between the parties involved).

Secondly, anyone making a claim of bullying against a serving bishop or any serving bishop wishing to make a claim that they have themselves been bullied by anyone subject to the Code of Canons, should be explicitly invited by the College to make a complaint under Canon 54.

Canon 54 can only be initiated by someone who is a member of the church. My view is that the College should make public appropriate arrangements for the bringing of a complaint by anyone who has subsequently left the church – specifically that the complaint would be passed to a (communicant) diocesan registrar or the clerk to the Episcopal Synod to be initiated formally.

Making vague references to the “Disciplinary Canonical process” of the church in a press release is unhelpful. Canon 54 is what the process is and the College of Bishops should long ago have insisted that people use it to bring allegations.

This is not the first statement by the College of Bishops with regard to these matters that has given me cause for concern. In a statement last December the College asserted that neither the Primus nor the College of Bishops had the power to suspend a bishop. The Code of Canons is very clear that bishops can be suspended and that only the Primus can do so and that this can only be upheld or not by the Episcopal Synod (which is the same body of people as the College of Bishops). The due processes governing how these things can come about are found in Canon 54 (Of Offences and Trials) and Canon 6 (Of Diocesan Bishops and their Jurisdiction and of Bishops’ Commissaries).

For the last few years I’ve been a member of a review group which has been carefully considering whether the disciplinary canonical processes of the church need to be updated. In time, I hope that they are. However, the canons that we currently have remain in force. Bishops require clergy to take oaths to uphold the Canons. Bishops themselves take oaths that they in turn will uphold the canons of the church.

I regard members of the College of Bishops as colleagues and friends and remain willing to discuss these matters with any of them or indeed with any member of the church. A number of the members of the College of Bishops have heard me say privately what I now assert here, that for the good of the whole church, the College of Bishops needs to return to the Canonical norms of the Scottish Episcopal Church.

I will not be discussing this matter with any journalists. The opinions expressed in this post are explicitly with regard to the College of Bishops and do not constitute a comment on anything that may or may not have happened in the Diocese of Aberdeen and Orkney, about which I have little knowledge.

The Code of Canons of the Scottish Episcopal Church can be found here: https://www.scotland.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/Code-of-Canons-2020.pdf

18 responses to “Whither the Chrism Mass?”

Fr Keith

14/04/2017

I attended at St Paul ‘s Cathedral, London yesterday, after a gap of three years (when I’d been serving for Holy Week in the Diocese of Argyll and The Isles) – it was a moving service, though I’m now wondering whether that was as much for the opportunity to catch up with colleagues and worship with such a huge number of fellow clergy as for anything else. In Argyll and The Isles we do indeed celebrate the Chrism Mass in the context of the diocesan synod (as we did last month) – in fact, it’s at that Mass that the synod is constituted. It would be hugely impractical to get folk together on Maundy Thursday (easier and quicker for me to get to Oban from London than from Stornoway), and it does make more sense, it seems to me, to do such things (the blessing of oils, the re-commitment to one’s ministry) when gathered together with one’s bishop in synod.

Reply
Andrew Dotchin

14/04/2017

Suffolk unites Oils and Renewal of Commitment Ministry and includes prayer for healing with anointing and the Laying on of hands. Very powerful as we corporately recognise our vulnerability. Maundg Thursday works for us (for me) as it means we do not somehow fall into the Evening Service having run around doing the usual business of funerals and pastoral work. The year we had the Royal Maundy the Chrisma Mass was moved to Tuesday and it just did I not fit. A meal afterwards is also very important. The cathedral now offers a free bag meal to everyone but many do wander off to a local pub. For me it is the day when I, the only paid cleric in a team of six pay for the meal as my personal thanks for their service. Spouses and partners are also an important part of our way of doing things as their is a strong recognition that vocations are shared and supported within our own families

Reply
Peter

26/03/2024

Okay it’s hard for me to assume you are either Catholic or Anglican. I’ll assume you’re the former, like myself. I just returned from Chrism mass. It’ll be my last. Apart from the bishop facing the people ( which I detest as I believe unequivocally in ad orientem worship at mass) the crowds at this mass seem to give this liturgy a theatre like star studded atmosphere as they peer and talk among themselves about the identity of over 400 priests to choose from all straining and trying to verbally identify. Because priests are huddled in our cathedral in the center of the church, people who aren’t liturgically literate begin to recite those parts of the mass strictly reserved for priest e.g the consecration because the huge concelebration throws them off and they are following along in huge special programs. Then there is the “ communion pandemonium “ with clergy trying to speed things up by disrupting the flow of communion by suddenly giving it out at the rear of the church! And the overall sense of “ celebration” vs “ worship” due to so many addresses and welcomings that people feel free to simply talk rather than prayerfully follow along. Add to this the uncharitable crowds that jostle for a seat and squeeze an already packed pew beyond its capacity. Heaven help you if you need a washroom break and find out your seat was taken by one of these hustlers! ( as happened to me). If I had it my way, the old 1962 Latin liturgy would be restored. The one positive thing was that here in Canada tge chrism mass is not in Holy Thursday but either the Monday or Tuesday of Holy Week.

Reply
1. Kelvin
  
  02/04/2024
  
  Many thanks for illustrating my point so clearly.
  
  Reply
Malcolm

26/08/2025

Out of curiosity, what liturgy is used for the Chrism Mass in the SEC? I don’t see an appropriate liturgy in Lent, Holy Week and Easter 2024, do cathedrals/dioceses just make the service up on the spot or am I missing something?

Reply
1. Kelvin
  
  12/09/2025
  
  There is no authorised liturgy for a Chrism Mass in Scotland.
  
  Reply