Jump to content
Mander Organ Builders Forum

English Cathedral Music-


Guest Roffensis

Recommended Posts

Hi Pierre

 

Sorry if you thought I was "getting at " you - my comments were general.

 

I have mixed feelings about the heritage issues.  I agree that it's important to retain our heritage - but on the other hand, the Church is not a museum, it's a living, changing organisation.  This leads to all sorts of dicotomies!

 

Every Blessing

 

Tony

 

You are welcome!

 

I think here we are to the point; we need to recognize there are contradictions between differing interests , and we shall not manage this situation with simple "suffice to do this and that" would-be "solutions".

 

A path could lay here: Does the "heritage" need to be a museum, a dead thing?

Or can it be used as a living thing? How?

 

I know of an example near here (Gerpinnes, near Charleroi), where a 17th century

organ has been recently restored with its original 17th century pipes.

The organ-builder could reconstitute the original temperament by removing the alterations that had been made to the pipes, and which were visible.

So the organ has now a mesotonic temperament, not the ideal one -so it was deemed- for the accompaniment of the choir (this church has one!).

 

After contemptating the purchase of an electronic organ, the church was advised by

a friend of mine there were true pipe organs available for not that many money.

They bought a used six-stops positive organ that took place not far from the altar in the nave.

Now there are two happy organists that attend every service there, alternating solo and accompanimental organs.

 

This is just an example, one could think of many other possible combinations.

 

Best wishes,

Pierre Lauwers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Roffensis
Hi

 

If I had a choir, I would use them - but not all the time!  With care, some contemporary music can work chorally - other pieces are more suited to solo singers leading.

 

Mixed services do work - given care in planning, and an open-minded congregation.  As I said before, I have limited experience of traditional liturgical worship, but I have heard contemporary music used well. 

 

The main reason that music groups are anti-organ, in my experience, is the intransigent attitude of many organists!

 

The danger of seperate services is that you end up with effectively 2 groups that have nothing incommon, except using the same building - and I don't think that's helpful in the Body of Christ - but we're straying into theology rather than organ matters!

 

Every Blessing

 

Tony

 

Its no different to having different themes for services each week though. The church should have variety, and as soon as you try to mix worship styles, one is compromised by the other. it's much better to have a variety of services, and take care of all artistry within the church. My own choir is a floating choir, which,although based at a church, is not actually the "property" of the church. This may sound odd, but it was simply silly arguments in the past that have made me sway that way. We are fully self supporting (I am paid as parish organist of course) and sing mass every week at church, but also at other churches who do not have a choir and relish the change(!).

Problems in the past atchurches have included"you will only use a 8 foot flute" to "why is the choir here?" is it for Jesus, do they have a personal relalionship with him? how do kids even know!!?? This is by the by, but does indicate pressures and tensions, rather than be plain glad there is a good choir and organist. No, there may be organists who are a bit stuffy in their outreach, and a lot of it is born out of plain fear, but this has very largely been caused by difficult clergy and I have to say, professional jealousies. "why do they wear robes, we dont" etc etc. Never mind how plain they be, just a cassock and cravat, its a case of why. In some places the quieter the organ can go the better, not to say the organist to replaced by a music group who often just up and go. The organist before me was there 66 years. The organ is still a very versatile and useful instrument, more so than any other, and organists are still treated with suspicion for trying to offer the best they can. My motto is, if you cant do it properly, dont. Be broad! But not compromisingly so. Give a choir a place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Roffensis
Dare I say the english "traditionnal" church music is extremely highly regarded

my side of the Channel?

 

Would we have something like that! go on the french forum to read the

guys talking about absolute nightmares (so-) called "modern church songs"

like Akepsimas and the like.

There are some islands (Taïze, etc) in this ocean of "pop-music".

 

Maybe it's better to have children accustomed to good music (from 4 years old not more) than to try to run behind bad tastes.

If we place Drums and guitars and Standford at the same level, we have a problem!

 

And maybe discussing about details of organ's styles ( Would a Voix céleste better suit

a Pink Floyd's lover taste than a Tierce) could really end up with guitars everywhere while we should still be discussing about the matter.

 

And we should protect historic organs at the same time. Well, a big job!

 

Best wishes,

Pierre Lauwers.

 

True. We all need to be very vigilant, as what goes on at parish level will erupt still more into the larger churches. There are plenly of clappy clappy cathedral services already with the choir "tagged" on and paid a pittance into the bargain. Our choral and organ heritage is the finest in the whole world, that is a very real fact. At all cots we should be seeking to encourage and maintain it, at all and every cost. Cost of course is also an aspect, and i have known clergy to tell me I should do my work volutary as a offering to God. I told him straight that so should he, and see how long he lasts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are welcome!

 

I think here we are to the point; we need to recognize there are contradictions between differing interests , and we shall not manage this situation with simple "suffice to do this and that" would-be "solutions".

 

A path could lay here: Does the "heritage" need to be a museum, a dead thing?

Or can it be used as a living thing? How?

 

I know of an example near here (Gerpinnes, near Charleroi), where a 17th century

organ has been recently restored with its original 17th century pipes.

The organ-builder could reconstitute the original temperament by removing the alterations that had been made to the pipes, and which were visible.

So the organ has now a mesotonic temperament, not the ideal one -so it was deemed- for the accompaniment of the choir (this church has one!).

 

After contemptating the purchase of an electronic organ, the church was advised by

a friend of mine there were true pipe organs available for not that many money.

They bought a used six-stops positive organ that took place not far from the altar in the nave.

Now there are two happy organists that attend every service there, alternating solo and accompanimental organs.

 

This is just an example, one could think of many other possible combinations.

 

Best wishes,

Pierre Lauwers.

 

Hi

 

I'm very pleased to hear that this church was able to reconcile heritage issues with their current needs - that's fine if it works.

 

SOmetimes it's not so easy. In my own church, we have a c.1850 chamber organ - unknown builder, but with a long-compass manual (down to GG), 30 note straight, flat pedalboard CC-f1 (set-up as a return coupler).

 

Some of the pipework has been replaced over the years - including one complete rank (a Keraulophon) which is now a 4ft Flute (the only flute on the instrument). We also suspect that the 15th displaced something else, possibly a Stopped Diapason, somewhen during the instrument's history, also someone has added a tremulant and electric blowing. The pitch has been lowered to A=440, and the case cut down to get the instrument into the present building.

 

The question of how far we go in terms of restoration (as oppossed to just overhaul/repair) is far from straightforward. For example, do we revert to the higher pitch (and if so, how do we determine what it was from altered/replaced pipework)? If we do that (which would be correct restoration practice) we then have an organ which cannot easily be used with other instruments - something that we do most Sundays.

 

Do we, speculatively, remove the 15th and replace it with a Stopped Diapason? If we do this, the organ would not have the clarity to lead congregational singing without significant revoicing of the Principal 4ft. Do we retain the 4ft Flute (which is not really suitable, pipe-work wise), or do we repace it with a better rank? Or do we re-instate the Keraulophon (we have all but one of the pipes - recsued from a box in the cellar?

 

Should we re-instate the foot blower - this would mean re-making some parts? What do we do about wind pressure (the bellows weights are unlikely to be the originals). What about the tremulant - at present controlled by an extremely Heath-Robinson method?

 

What about the pipes that have been replaced? Do we retain what's there, or replace them with new that better matches in scale the existing?

 

And that's without even thinking about the case - there's no way it can be returned to its original height in the present room anyway!

 

These are all practical questions that we need to answer in the next few months, as fundraising has started for a much-needed overhaul.

 

This is the reality of the heritage dichotomy in a church with ever-changing requirements.

 

At least I think I've persuaded the treasurer away from suggesting an electronic replacement - although even that has some attractions in terms of a more flexible instrument (but not in terms of ultimate sound, or life expectancy)! The, of course, there's the issues of cost - a major problem for a small church.

 

The organ's stop list is:-

 

Stopped Diapason Bass (GG-:blink:

Dulciana 8 (treble)

Open Diapason 8 (Treble)

Principal 4 (throughout)

Fifteenth 2 (throughout)

Flute 4 (Treble - on the Keraulophon slide)

 

Every Blessing

 

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Mr Newnham,

 

In such cases, you won't do anything "wrong" having the organ just

"repaired" as it is. This way, no further alterations would be done, while

the organ itself would be preserved for X-tents years farther.

 

Second option: we have an original Keraulophon, a mysterious stop that seems

to have originated in England, and arrived later on the continent, but under another form

-and quite variable to say the least-.

 

As far as I understand the disposition, we have two 8' (Dulciana and O. Diapason) that share a common bass (Stopped Diapason).

If the Keraulophon was complete, that is, covered the complete compass, it would certainly be better to have it back in the organ; moreover, these original pipes would be better protected inside than outside the instrument.

 

A second Stopped Diapason 8' would be unlikely in such an organ, or was it the treble only? Possible.

 

Now wheter the 4' Flute or the 15th should go in order to place the Keraulophon back, this is a question an organ builder has to answer "in situ", according to the origin and quality of the pipes, and the acoustic requirements of that peculiar church.

 

The original pitch can often be find, in that the alteration to the pipes can often be traced -save if the pipes have been sawn back of course, but even then this can be adressed-, but this could well be least priority. Leaving the pitch as it is if it's better suited to today's requirements would not harm, suffice to let the things as they are

without, once more, adding "one step more away from the origin".

 

About the wind pressure, any professional voicer can find the original back by trying several pipes from several stops on a voicing chest with different pressures. But here it is possible that the change was dictated by the modified pitch.

 

Good luck,

Pierre Lauwers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Mr Newnham,

 

In such cases, you won't do anything "wrong" having the organ just

"repaired" as it is. This way, no further alterations would be done, while

the organ itself would be preserved for X-tents years farther.

 

Second option: we have an original Keraulophon, a mysterious stop that seems

to have originated in England, and arrived later on the continent, but under another form

-and quite variable to say the least-.

 

As far as I understand the disposition, we have two 8' (Dulciana and O. Diapason) that share a common bass (Stopped Diapason).

If the Keraulophon was complete, that is, covered the complete compass, it would certainly be better to have it back in the organ; moreover, these original pipes would be better protected inside than outside the instrument.

 

A second Stopped Diapason 8' would be unlikely in such an organ, or was it the treble only? Possible.

 

Now wheter the 4' Flute or the 15th should go in order to place the Keraulophon back, this is a question an organ builder has to answer "in situ", according to the origin and quality of the pipes, and the acoustic requirements of that peculiar church.

 

The original pitch can often be find, in that the alteration to the pipes can often be traced -save if the pipes have been sawn back of course, but even then this can be adressed-, but this could well be least priority. Leaving the pitch as it is if it's better suited to today's requirements would not harm, suffice to let the things as they are

without, once more, adding "one step more away from the origin".

 

About the wind pressure, any professional voicer can find the original back by trying several pipes from several stops on a voicing chest with different pressures.

 

Good luck,

Pierre Lauwers.

 

Hi Pierre

 

The Keraulophom is treble only. It's actually unusual to find a British organ of this age that doesn't have a Stopped Diapason (or perhaps a Clarabella) throughout the compass, along with an Open Diap and a softer rank. (Indeed, in Early English music, Stopped and Open Diapasons 8ft together is a very common registration).

 

I'm not too worried about wind pressure - I know this can be sorted and the pipes re-voiced accordingly - but my point is that, whatever we do, there is no sure way of determining from the organ as it now stands just what the original pressure was. An organ builder could make an educated guess from the pipework cut-ups, etc - but there is no actual proof.

 

The question of stop replacements is also an issue. Neither myself, nor our organist would want to remove the fifteenth (althoguh it does need re-voicing to blend better with the rest of the pipework), but he likes the 4ft Flute (indeed, hed removed the Keraulophon pipes and inserted the flute) whereas I find it a very poor stop (it came from an organ on a much higher wind pressure - it has a huge cut-up) and rarely use it, whereas, because when I play, it's usually with the music group, a string-toned rank would be very useful. Even if we wanted to add another stop, there's no room in the case, nor space for another stop knob on the console - and anyway, I think that we shouldn't be making alterations for the sake of it.

 

I sometimes wonder about restoration as it's practiced - when, as at Reading Town Hall, the pitch was raised, making it difficult to use the organ with a modern symphony orchestra!

 

The whole area is fraught with problems! I would love to see our organ fully restored to its original state,as a historic excercise it would be very interesting, - it won't happen though, because we couldn't house it, and nor would it fulfill some of the requirements we have for it.

 

 

Every Blessing

 

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then, according to the long compass, we must see the bass Stopped Diapason as

a kind of 16' Subbass if we were with german compasses.

 

This organ seems to be rather ancient, from a time when keen "strings" did not exist yet.

 

The question of stops choices is a matter of style, which does not matter at all when we deal with preservation; indeed, if today we wish, say, a full Diapason chorus to "lead the song", in the 19th century people wanted foundation stops for exactly that use, with their "noble and religious" tone. I have a letter copy here from the 1840's where a belgian builder told a dean "You need to have enough 8' to fill the church with them alone in order to accompany the singing with dignity".

 

So you have several options:

 

-Keep te organ as it is

-Have the Keraulophon back

-Ditto plus a Stopped Diapason treble

 

The two last options imply of course to renounce to one or the two

added stops.

But anyway, from a conservative point of view, none of these options would be wrong.

They would not render more difficult a torough reconstitution later if this becomed

the aim.

 

Best wishes,

Pierre Lauwers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then, according to the long compass, we must see the bass Stopped Diapason as

a kind of 16' Subbass if we were with german compasses.

 

This organ seems to be rather ancient, from a time when keen "strings" did not exist yet.

 

The question of stops choices is a matter of style, which does not matter at all when we deal with preservation; indeed, if today we wish, say, a full Diapason chorus to "lead the song", in the 19th century people wanted foundation stops for exactly that use, with their "noble and religious" tone. I have a letter copy here from the 1840's where a belgian builder told a dean "You need to have enough 8' to fill the church with them alone in order to accompany the singing with dignity".

 

So you have several options:

 

-Keep te organ as it is

-Have the Keraulophon back

-Ditto plus a Stopped Diapason treble

 

The two last options imply of course to renounce to one or the two

added stops.

But anyway, from a conservative point of view, none of these options would be wrong.

They would not render more difficult a torough reconstitution later if this becomed

the aim.

 

Best wishes,

Pierre Lauwers.

 

Hi

 

Yes - it's insteresting trying to balance the pros and cons of the various options.

 

We date the organ as c.1850 - the stop list is certainly not typical of older English chamber organs. The long compass began to be superceeded in the mid.1850's - the pedal board is C-compass (although it's possible this was a later addition or replacement) The extra 1/2-octave in the bass does add considerable depth to the sound - especially as the pedals operate at 16ft pitch down to the lowG,(then jump back an octave).

 

We will not be re-instating the Stopped Diapason - but I do hope to be able to get the Keraulophon back in - I've still got to convince my organist - but since I play the organ more often than he does these days, I think my views will prevail!

 

Now all we need is the money - and a couple more quotes from organ builders for the work! Any donations gratefully received!!!!

 

Every Blessing

 

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Roffensis
Hi

 

Yes - it's insteresting trying to balance the pros and cons of the various options.

 

We date the organ as c.1850 - the stop list is certainly not typical of older English chamber organs.  The long compass began to be superceeded in the mid.1850's - the pedal board is C-compass (although it's possible this was a later addition or replacement)  The extra 1/2-octave in the bass does add considerable depth to the sound - especially as the pedals operate at 16ft pitch down to the lowG,(then jump back an octave).

 

We will not be re-instating the Stopped Diapason - but I do hope to be able to get the Keraulophon back in - I've still got to convince my organist - but since I play the organ more often than he does these days, I think my views will prevail!

 

Now all we need is the money - and a couple more quotes from organ builders for the work!  Any donations gratefully received!!!!

 

Every Blessing

 

Tony

 

Hi Tony, that little organ sounds a proper little gem, and good for you being so careful with it. My home chamber organ (1807) is 8 and 4 flutes, 8 and 4 principals, and a 2 ft flageolet. It would be good to have a 8 flute, but I'd be wary even of a Keraulophon, unless you had the original, in which case you might even apply for a grant?

All best

Richard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We seem to have gone miles away from the cathedral music thread but the 1867 Vowles where I play is very much the same as the above - 8OD, 8Claribel, 8Dulc, 8VdiG, 4Princ, 4Flute, 2Fifteenth, 8Hautboy plus 16Pedal - all enclosed except OD and Bourdon.

Amazingly versatile despite TC stops and odd pedal dimensions etc. - I would not change a thing and the church is about to pay for a restoration!

Are we starting another line of discussion or do we need to get back to the point?

AJJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....Or maybe you still have in Britain, besides a choral tradition that makes

others jealous, a number of "modest" organs (not suited for Bach, etc, etc, etc!)

that deserve to be treated like the gems they actually are.

Quality and quantity are independant things. What really counts is maybe authenticity, not "repertoire"; the fashions come and go, quality remains!

 

Best wishes,

Pierre Lauwers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Tony, that little organ sounds a proper little gem, and good for you being so careful with it. My home chamber organ (1807) is 8 and 4 flutes, 8 and 4 principals, and a 2 ft flageolet. It would be good to have a 8 flute, but I'd be wary even of a Keraulophon, unless you had the original, in which case you might even apply for a grant?

All best

Richard

 

Hi

 

It is a gem - although probably not as flexible as your chamber organ. Details are on NPOR at E00285 - and the history that we know is traceable by following the links. We have the original Keraulophon pipes (except one that's gone missing!) in storage - now in the organ, beneath the reservoir, after we rescued them from a box in the cellar. I shall be trying for grants as soon as I get time to sort out who to ask and get the relevant paperwork. Unfortunately, the organ has been altered too much to merit an Historic Organ Certificate. The casework is also very attractive (see picture on NPOR) in Walnut veneer, with some elaborate carving.

 

I think the organ may possibly be an early example of JohnLaycock's work - the console is very similar to that on the organ at Cowling Hill Baptist Church - but there is no evidence one way or the other - not even inside the windchest (I'm told).

 

Once the action has been overhauled, reservoir either patched or re-leathered, and the pipework cleaned and regulated, it will be a very nice - and useable - organ.

 

Every Blessing

 

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Roffensis
Church choristers, whether children or adults, normally commit much more time week in week out to their church than almost any other group from the congregation. In return for this they do like, and deserve, to feel appreciated. They do not take kindly to being told that "an anthem is not needed this morning" for example, if the trying-to-be-trendy (but usually failing) vicar wants to try something different. When Rev. Newnham says "If I had a choir, I would use them - but not all the time!" it seems not surprising that he doesnt have a choir.

 

Of course there is nothing wrong in having different types of service at different times which do not involve the choir, but the choir and organist will often not react well if they feel they're being messed around.

 

Andrew Lucas's comments "That is why perhaps conversations about soft solo reeds and 32' + strings registrations as the most crucial elements of a good cathedral organ are actually missing the point" may refer back to an earlier post from myself which I was well slapped down for! But I certainly didn't suggest soft reeds and 32' pedal stops are "most crutial", but they do still have their place and can in my opinion enhance choral accompaniment.

 

Its great if any organ is able to accompany Leighton or more modern styles of music, but its a tragedy for a cathedral organ NOT to be able to accompany Stanford, Elgar, Howells and Bairstow for example (a famous HNB instrument of 1969 just down the road from me being a case in point!)

 

Well eat your heart out. It may be that soft swell strings and 32 foot flues are on the decline, together with soft reeds. Far better to have some nice open foot diapasons and lovely chiffy flutes, which is of course what the likes of Stanford et al wrote for. Mixtures breaking back to 66 are also far better than a nice quint or tierce, and we can all rest assured being told that our own Upminster Cathedral Organ is suddenly being burnt to allow a nice 20 stop tracker on half inch wind (but with a single nice embossed pipe in the cases to look at) to take us into the next era. Stuff it!!, the worlds mad and some organists decisions defy analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we starting another line of discussion or do we need to get back to the point?

 

Iinteresting point - we often seem to go off topic - I am as guilty as anyone.

 

Unfortunately here in the UK we often seem to be good at decrying our heritage, in a way. Or, if you prefer, knocking the things we actually do well. Insofar as church music is concerned, I think we are in serious danger of throwing the baby out with the bath water. In our society to-day, there is much evidence of 'dumbing-down' - church music included. We feel the need to make things over-simple, to over-explain things. It does not matter if it is done well, as long as we enjoy it. Some clergy (I know at least two) actually take a perverse kind of pride in things going wrong during services. This disgusts me. Personally, I think that we should only dare offer our best to God.

 

Whilst Rev. Newnham has reminded us that there is no one way in which to worship God, I would ask him to remember that some of us are definitely not happy in 'both types of worship' (paraphrased). I have experienced many types, including charismatic and I have to say that I observed at least as much backbiting and un-Christian behaviour in these type of congregations as I did in those of a more traditional nature. In addition (and I can only speak personally as an experienced church musician) Graham Kendrick-type choruses drive me to distraction - I realise that to some they are encouraging and attractive. I can respect that. All I ask is a little tolerance in return from those who look down on myself and others who prefer a fully choral 'cathedral' style of worship. Let us not forget due reverence and genuine awe of the Creator of all things in our worship - not merely be a clanging gong or a jangling cymbal. (I know that this is a somewhat mangled quote, but it is now 01h28 and I was at school by 08h01 this morning.... yawn!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst Rev. Newnham has reminded us that there is no one way in which to worship God, I would ask him to remember that some of us are definitely not happy in 'both types of worship' (paraphrased).

 

All I ask is a little tolerance in return from those who look down on myself and others  who prefer a fully choral 'cathedral' style of worship. Let us not forget due reverence and genuine awe of the Creator of all things in our worship - not merely be a clanging gong or a jangling cymbal. (I know that this is a somewhat mangled quote, but it is now 01h28 and I was at school by 08h01 this morning.... yawn!)

 

Hi

 

I'm all for toleration of others preferences. I have no problem with, for example, our local Anglican church which still has a choir - and a pretty competent one at that - and I enjoy the times when I get to preach there. If a church can genuinely fill a "niche" market with one form of worship, then well and good, but the reality for many in these days of shrinking congregations is a more blended form of worship - which incidentally can be very challenging for the musicians! - is the way to go. After all, worship is (or at least should be) an attitude of mind. We come to church to worship Almighty God, not to be entertained by the beautiul (or otherwise) music. (Although if we are "entertained", so much the better).

I am quite happy to worship any any context - High Anglican, Charasmatic, or anything "in between".

 

Every Blessing

 

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a church can genuinely fill a "niche" market with one form of worship, then well and good, but the reality for many in these days of shrinking congregations is a more blended form of worship - which incidentally can be very challenging for the musicians! - is the way to go.  After all, worship is (or at least should be) an attitude of mind.  We come to church to worship Almighty God, not to be entertained by the beautiul (or otherwise) music.  (Although if we are "entertained", so much the better).

I am quite happy to worship any any context - High Anglican, Charasmatic, or anything "in between".

 

This is an interesting concept.

 

I would not necessarily agree that a mixture of musical styles can be very challenging. I further find it hard to accept (personally) a mixture of worship styles. Many people often do not, in many other areas of society, welcome the juxtaposition of diversity. For example, some people like football, but cricket bores them stupid. Whilst they both involve balls and people running about on turf, not only is the level of excitement different, but the pace of the two games is also different. Then, some people like a good hot curry after a concert - others prefer to go home for a mug of cocoa. To try to suggest that each might get equal enjoyment if they tried the others' sport/method of socialising, etc, sounds ever so slightly arrogant. We are, after all, different people!

 

The point of this is, I get quite weary of clergy injecting unusual/unsuitable/badly thought-out styles of worship in my own church, purely because they think that it is 'a good idea' or because of the young people. Yes, of course we need to attract people of all ages to our services. I just do not think that serving up the ecclesiastical equivalent of kippers and custard is necessarily the best use of our resources. There is still the problem of lack of tolerance - from both camps. If you doubt this, I suggest you try going to your local charismatic church and suggesting that they offer a monthly High Mass with Benediction, in order that by all means some [Anglo-Catholics] might be saved.... :blink:

 

I would suggest not that one style is better than the other, but that they do not mix effectively - in some places where it has been tried regularly, it merely created two quite separate congregations -which preferred not to socialise together.

 

Anyway, why not do whatever we all do best, and do it with all our strength unto God - that way, we may even stop bickering with each other!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the reality for many in these days of shrinking congregations is a more blended form of worship - which incidentally can be very challenging for the musicians! - is the way to go.

 

...but you see that kind of "My way's best & everything else is wrong" statement is exactly the type of intolerance we're talking about!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an interesting concept.

 

I would not necessarily agree that a mixture of musical styles can be very challenging.

 

 

Reply: To do it well can be challenging for the musicians who need to be proficient in a number of styles and musical genres.

 

I further find it hard to accept (personally) a mixture of worship styles. Many people often do not, in many other areas of society, welcome the juxtaposition of diversity.

 

Reply:  The church is by its very nature a diverse body.

 

 

The point of this is, I get quite weary of clergy injecting unusual/unsuitable/badly thought-out styles of worship in my own church, purely because they think that it is 'a good idea' or because of the young people.

 

Reply: I thoroughly agree.  Whatever we do in church needs to be done to the best of our ability - and that means thinking it through and planning thoroughly!

I also have some reservations about trying to use forms of worship to attract people to church - most of our evangelism should be done outside of the church service context.

 

Yes, of course we need to attract people of all ages to our services. I just do not think that serving up the ecclesiastical equivalent of kippers and custard is necessarily the best use of our resources. There is still the problem of lack of tolerance - from both camps. If you doubt this, I suggest you try going to your local charismatic church and suggesting that they offer a monthly High Mass with Benediction, in order that by all means some [Anglo-Catholics] might be saved.... :blink:

 

Reply: I would hope that practising Anglo-Catholics don't need to be saved!

 

I would suggest not that one style is better than the other, but that they do not mix effectively - in some places where it has been tried regularly, it merely created two quite separate congregations -which preferred not to socialise together.

 

Reply:  That's why I prefer blended worship to different services in different styles.

 

Anyway, why not do whatever we all do best, and do it with all our strength unto God - that way, we may even stop bickering with each other!

 

Amen!

 

All I can say is that some of us who have seriously tried blended worship have found that it works in some churches. I still hold to my opinion that it's probably the way ahead for most (but not all) church fellowships - especially as Local Ecumenical Projects and shared buildings become more common.

 

Actually I find it interesting that some of the charismatic groups are not only re-discovering hymns, there is also a growing interest in Taize, and Iona community and other "Celtic" influenced worship patterns.

 

Every Blessing

 

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...but you see that kind of "My way's best & everything else is wrong" statement is exactly the type of intolerance we're talking about!

 

Please read what I've said a little more carefully! If you had quoted accurately you would have seen that I said "but the reality for many ..." NOT for all.

 

I suspect that I've written more than enough on this subject on this list - we've got way off topic!

 

Every Blessing

 

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...