What is in Kelvin's Head?

The Beatitudes of Livestreaming

13/09/2024

Blessed are they who livestream their church services
for the Kingdom of Heaven is theirs to share with others and they know it.

Blessed are the sick and the dying in churches which livestream
for they shall be comforted by still being able to be part of their congregations
in addition to receiving the personal and pastoral care of their friends and clergy.

Blessed are those who are meek enough to know that audio matters more than video
for they will inherit the online audience.

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for life-changing worship both online and in-person
for their love of God will be counted as righteousness.

Blessed are the joyful
for their joy online will light up the world.

Blessed are the purposeful
for they will make their livestreaming easy to find and they will ensure that
no-one needs to download a hymnsheet, a liturgy book and a pdf version of the notices.

Blessed are the livestream makers
for they are counted amongst the evangelists of today.

Blessed are the congregations who rejoice in the technical and digital skills of those who are often overlooked
for they shall reap a harvest of plenty.

Blessed are those who know that their worship would be better not livestreamed yet
for they know that they need to concentrate on renewing their in-person worship first.

Blessed are you when people make snarky comments about your livestream
for they are telling you they want it to be better for the honour and the glory of the Lord our God.

beatitudes, churches, livestream, online worship

11 responses to “The Columba Declaration – where are we now?”

Ben

25/05/2016

Has any of this been caused by the 2011 census where it might have been the first time that the CofE realised they have quite a big constituency in Scotland, and a lot more people in Scotland claiming an affiliation with the Church of England than the SEC. It says here that 67,000 people said they were C of E, compared to just 8,000 Scottish Episcopal Church? (though probably need to add the 20k who answered as generic ‘episcopalians’):

http://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/documents/censusresults/release2a/rel2A_Religion_detailed_Scotland.pdf

I.E. apart from the rudeness and cack-handedness, are there any legitimate arguments for them to do ‘brand management’ in another jurisdiction if there are so many of their affiliates here? Like, if the aim was to enable some of those 67k to feel they have more options is that a good possible outcome from this?

Reply
1. Ben
  
  25/05/2016
  
  I didn’t mean good possible outcome, I meant good possible intention if it had been handled better.
  
  Reply
2. Kelvin
  
  25/05/2016
  
  Actually, I don’t think the C of E is trying to establish itself in Scotland and I’d be surprised if the census was a factor in any way.
  
  There are big issues from the census for Scottish Episcopalians to think about – the C of E is probably more concerned with the large drops in allegiance south of the border than any stated Church of England members north of it.
  
  I wrote a bit about the census here:
  http://thurible.net/2013/09/30/i-d/
  
  Reply
Fr Terry Taggart

25/05/2016

Thank you for this update Kelvin. I’ve been struggling to get anything of substance regarding who said what to whom and when it was said !! A committee!!! Well that should sort it 🤔

Reply
Hugh Foy

25/05/2016

We have been Offended throughout our history at people referring to us as the ‘English Church’ in Scotland in complete ignorance of our history. This sad sttempt at faux ecclesial imperialism does nothing to help us consolidate our Scottish identity in public space in post referendum Scotland. Kelvin is absolutely correct in identifying the issue is Jurisdictional and the pain and insult emerges from this. However at a political level it’s simply a pathetic attempt at establishment power consolidation but it addresses no significant issues in our divergent Eucharistic Theology and Theology of Ministry. In a time of Church decline it allows the Church establishment to speak with one voice to the political establishment. A delusional codependent alliance that allows clerical gatekeepers to believe they still matter in a post post Christendom society to the State. I find out acquiescence here both disturbing and saddening.

Reply
Father Ron Smith

25/05/2016

This high-handed treatment of the Episcopal Church of Scotland – with an attempt to achieve ecclesial unity on its own provincial ground between the Church of England and the Presbyterian Church of Scotland, without local consultation with SEC – must indeed seem, not only a snub but also a deliberate sidelining of our Anglican partner Church in Scotland – the Church whose episcopate was instrumental in providing the basis for an episcopal (Anglican) presence in North America – when the Church of England had refused to provide such a provenance.

A very good reason, one might suspect, for SEC to join TEC in a new brand of Anglican presence in the world – in common with those provinces of the Communion who wish to go forward on the matter of Same-Sex Unions and the banning of sexism & homophobia

Father Ron Smith, Christchurch, new Zealand

Reply
John Neal

26/05/2016

Our Church of England community in Tours, France uses the protestant Temple. As such, the Reuilly Declaration between the Eglise reformée and the Church of England (2001) has particular significance for us. The second of the acknowledgements is this:

“We acknowledge that in all our churches the word of God is authentically preached, and the sacraments of baptism and the eucharist are duly administered.”

I am just not sure about this. Naturally, the pasteure has not been episcopally ordained. I think there must be many similarities with the Church of Scotland, indeed, in the 1920s the local pasteur had studied at a Scottish University. He offered BCP Communion services in English and had to be warned off using the absolution and prayer of consecration by the C of E bishop.

Hmmm!

Reply
1. Kelvin
  
  26/05/2016
  
  Yes, the Columba Declaration has much copied over word for word from the Ruilley Declaration. That’s always left me to say that this means the C of E isn’t taking the C of S that seriously, something that C of S people don’t understand. Columba is made up of Ruilley not Porvoo.
  
  Reply
Whit

27/05/2016

“We don’t do Archbishops generally. We don’t have one of our own and woe betide any Primus that doesn’t understand that from the get go.”

That’s interesting. Our Presiding Bishop has, over the course of the last two decades become an archbishop in all but name. Indeed, I no longer bother correcting English people who call the PB an archbishop.

Reply
1. Robin
  
  27/05/2016
  
  The last Scottish Episcopalian Archbishop was Archbishop Paterson of Glasgow, who died in 1708. The Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church is neither an Archbishop nor a Primate nor a Metropolitan. He/she is, as the name ‘Primus’ implies, merely first among equal Bishops.
  
  Reply
Richard Barnes

28/05/2016

You’ve been very restrained in not naming anyone over the past 5 months, but since Abp Welby specifically mentioned him, it seems to me it’s the Bp of Chester who should have apologized. According to Chester Diocese he studied and trained in Edinburgh, so I’d’ve thought he would have known the hurt the Columba Declaration would cause to the SEC…
With Welby trying to be all things to all men, I’m surprised his costume department didn’t find some Geneva bands for him to show how Calvinist he is.
40 years ago in St Andrews, we had ecumenical Communion Services in the University Chapel led one week by the CofS Chaplain, another week by the “Anglican” Chaplain, and sometimes by a transAtlantic, woman Presbyterian minister; all equal in integrity, consecration and worth for my spiritual health, and no Declarations or Committees, just local ecumenism working.
I look forward to our House of Bishops working out how to welcome married gay CofS ministers to work in England while persecuting their own.
Not a proud week to be CofE.

Reply