What is in Kelvin's Head?

The Triduum Promise

02/04/2015
Over the next couple of days, I will be entering into a different time zone.

It is one thing to put the clock forward to British Summer Time but it is quite another to step into the triduum zone.

The Triduum is the set of services that begin with the Maundy Thursday communion service tonight and which culminate (if Jesus rises) with a great feast on Sunday morning.

When I say that it is like stepping into a timezone, people might presume that it is like stepping back 2000 years but in fact it feels different to that. It is more as though the events surrounding the crucifixion step into our time than that we are looking backwards.

Every year I make the same promise – if you come and keep the Triduum here in St Mary’s it will change your life and change the way you think about Christianity forever. I’ve never had anyone say that my promise wasn’t kept.

What I’m talking about is coming to all of the following:
- The Maundy Thursday service followed by as much of the Watch as possible. (The Watch will be kept until Midnight and some people go away after the communion and return for some of the Watch later in the evening).
- The Good Friday Three Hour devotions and at least one of the other services (either Veneration of the Cross at 9.30 am or Stations of the Cross at 7.30 pm)
- The clean and polish on Holy Saturday – (Yes, this really is part of the triduum experience).
- The Fire Vigil at 7 am on Easter Day.
- High Mass on Easter Day.
It seems like a lot. It is a lot.

But it is a big promise and I’ve found that there’s always one or two who try it out every year. They tend to come back and repeat the experience and yes, they describe it as life changing.

There’s at least one description of what it is like from someone who tested the promise out online, but there’s plenty more accounts circulating in the congregation.

[The previous links in the post above all point to previous descriptions I’ve written on this blog about those services – a couple of years out of date, 2000 years up to date – I don’t know)/

5 responses to ““Issues” is no more”

Cedric

16/07/2025

Oh I well remember the day ‘Issues’ landed with a loud thud through the letter box. I had been ordained for over 10 years by then. And I reeled in reading it.
Before then the general culture of conversation about sexuality in the Church was ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’. And most bishops acknowledged that among their most able and effective clergy many were gay men, some in relationships, and often deployable in parishes where others would not contemplate living and working.
But remember the context. This was also a period when AIDS was an international emergency and in Britain the Thatcher government sought to outlaw the ‘promotion’ of homosexuality through section 28 of the Local Government Act. And for sure, ‘Issues’ was a direct consequence of the passing of the amended Tony Higton General Synod private members’ motion declaring all ‘homosexual acts’ as sinful. The consequent noise of the shutting of closet doors was deafening.
In my diocese the bishop asked one of the archdeacons to convene regular confidential meetings with a few gay clergy to offer them an opportunity to talk about the effects of all this on their lives and ministry. Some would not trust the Church to participate in such enterprises. Understandably. And huge numbers of vocations were thwarted and lost. And are to this day, as the toxic debates continue in the C of E in a social context which has changed beyond imagining.
So thank you Kelvin, as ever, for your insightful questions.

Reply
1. Beth
  
  17/07/2025
  
  Cedric, I recall you speaking to the LGBT Network at the Cathedral about Issues and that it was reaffirmed by the C of E around about that time too. I wasn’t so aware of it when it was published (being about eight years old at the time and also a Roman Catholic), but I remember so clearly from what you said how devastating it had obviously been and still was. I remember thinking at the time of that reaffirmation, “oh, I can never go home”. It became so clear to me that the Church of England wasn’t somewhere I could feel welcome as long as it was allowed to stand.
  
  Reply
Ian Paul

18/07/2025

Kelvin, I can understand why you are glad that the offensive language of Issues has gone. Ironically, it was actually a statement written by liberals of the day; the main author was Richard Harries.

And conforming to Issues was never the real question. The real question is conforming to Canons B30 and C26, so that the pattern of life of clergy should reflect the doctrine of the Church ‘according to the teaching of Jesus’. All Issues did was make that clear and unambiguous (though in an unhelpful and obsessive way) with regard to sexual intimacy. Ironically, it was the liberal ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy which cemented Issues in place as a response.

And of course, with Issues gone, the Canons remain in place, and the demand is the same. The good thing about GPCC is that it sets this one issue in the context of many others, which is much healthier.

But on the question in hand—nothing has changed. You seem to have missed that.

Reply
1. Kelvin
  
  19/07/2025
  
  No Ian. It isn’t that I’ve missed that. It is that I don’t believe that.
  
  Issues was a massively offensive document that coloured absolutely everything the Church of England had to say about sexuality. Changes to Canons will look significantly different in the light of its removal.
  
  A great deal is changed by its removal.
  
  Reply
Mike Burnett

16/10/2025

Jesus preached love, but he also forgave sins with the instruction ‘to sin no more’.
Deciding not to sin when the sin in question is something that we enjoy so much that life may feel miserable without it, is a real sacrifice. It really is ‘bearing your cross’ to follow him. But that is what Christians are called to do.
We may wish to question our translation of the Bible, or quibble over the exact meaning of a phrase we find challenging, but Christianity is not a ‘pick and mix’ faith where we just have to accept the bits we like and can ignore, or condemn, the bits we don’t like. We do not get to negotiate – we must take it or leave it.

Reply