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the post above all point to previous descriptions I’ve written on this blog about those services – a couple of years out of date, 2000 years up to date – I don’t know)/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

Nick Brindley

14/05/2014

It is probably helpful to be clear about the distinction between “dogma” (which is best understood as the definition of orthodoxy and of heresy, of the things it is mandatory to affirm and the things it is forbidden to affirm) and “church order” (the rules about how people are to conduct themselves). These are related but by no means the same thing.

“Doctrine” is a third thing again, to my mind. It is the body of teaching that the church affirms but is much more extensive and changeable than dogma.

Of particular relevance is who has the authority to pronounce on these things. Denominational authorities quite properly establish church law and discipline (this needs to be done and there’s nobody else to do it) but would go beyond their proper sphere (in my view) if they tried to establish new definitions in the field of dogma.

Reply
Andrew

14/05/2014

I feel the need to separate praxis and doctrine, but I suppose that is probably a minor heresy in itself, in a church that hides its doctrine in its liturgy. Although I suppose the deftness of the ‘McCarthy Liturgy’ has maybe sidestepped that pitfall as deftly as an 18th century non-juring bishop side-stepping western orthodoxy and the rest…

Reply
Rosemary Hannah

15/05/2014

To a degree I think it is a matter of tradition. Anglican churches have tended (and it is only a tendency) to insist of orthopraxis. Church of Scotland churches have tended (same health warning) to emphasise orthodoxy of belief, call it doctrine or dogma. St Andrews is not of course a C or S institution, but it used to be, certainly in my day, and to a degree in yours, heavily steeped in C of S ethos. St Mary’s trained C of S ministers and that was ALL the training they got, because then they knew Orthodoxy.

Reply
Jimmy

15/05/2014

The links on this post have led me to think of this –

The Inner Party – The Outer Party – The Proles.

The model demands tight control of the middle class, with ambitious Outer Party members neutralised via promotion to the Inner Party or “reintegration” by Miniluv, while proles can be allowed intellectual (and sexual) freedom because they lack intellect. Winston nonetheless believed that “the future belonged to the proles”. Wikipedia.

Reply
Allan Ronald

19/05/2014

There was most definitely a C of S ethos at St Andrews in my day [67-71]. Robin Buchanan-Smith was running a packed college chapel and one president of the SRC and one president of the Union were St Mary’s men who went on to ordination and, in one case, to be Moderator of the Kirk. Perhaps they got their orthodoxy from Matthew Black at St Mary’s and their skill in future clerical politics from their student posts…….

Reply