Leave church happy

I think there is a feeling amongst some that a congregation ought to leave church in a good frame of mind having had a 'nice' time. (Although this conflicts with my other belief  - which I hope to follow up - that going to church means we are made to feel less worthy people than we actually are).

To create a feeling of a good time, modern vicars are - as I have observed before - rather chatty and familiar during their services.

From my point of view, I will leave church happy if I feel [a] that I have done a good job on the organ and [b] if I feel worship has been carried out correctly. Setting aside [a], factor [b] does not happen a great deal especially when the sermon is too long. When will clergy realise that the human mind can only focus for a certain amount of time? They seem to grab (hold hostage) their captive audience and want to give a lecture. If I read a book (i.e. one which is not just a story) I may need to go over a sentence to ensure that I have understood it. One cannot do that with a sermon.

Sermons need to be shorter.

Long service

I have had a dreadful morning: you couldn't make it up. I have material for a few posts, one may be quite long unless I cool down first.

The sermon today was given by a (senior) member of the congregation; a churchwarden I believe. It was about bread given that today was Harvest Festival.

She wanted to sum up, using children to hold up the ingredients of bread - flour, salt, water, fat, sugar, yeast. I guess it was all about different things make bread just as different people make up the world; you know, the 'talents' sermon I keep hearing.

Just as she was listing yeast and sugar a member of the congregation interrupted - at length - and sternly made the point that sugar is not strictly needed to make bread: it simply speeds up the yeast fermentation and is thus an idea from mass manufacture. She was 'keen' that the children did not leave the service with the wrong idea. She had missed the point, I feel.

The acted-out sermon (using children again) was long enough already without this delay and, in total, lasted 21 minutes.

It reminded me of the old story:

Hit Me Again

“I heard about a man who was supposed to preach for 20 minutes and he spoke for 30 and 40 and 50. An hour and 20 minutes later he was still speaking. The man who introduced him couldn’t stand it any longer and he picked up a gavel and threw it at the speaker. It missed the speaker and hit a man in the front row, and as the man in the front row was going into subconsciousness, he said, ‘Hit me again, I can still hear him.’”

It can be done

On Sunday (I've missed a couple of days as I've been busy) I played for a service which lasted 50 minutes. It started on time, had a sermon (not too long) and 4 hymns. So, if it can be done at one church why not at others?

I can manage an hour but I do get restless when clergy bang on for no reason and drag things out to 90 minutes. They do insist on trying to cover the whole of theology in their sermons rather than making one or two good points.

This church was part of another benefice and the vicar did have to get a few miles down the road to another service but it was refreshing to be at a service which covered all the necessary elements and flowed well.

It is a shame that it is 20 miles away!

Picturing God

I lost the thread of the sermon today. It seemed to be going OK although I cannot recall what it was about. Then, suddenly, white males were being berated as privileged.

After that we were asked how we pictured God. Did we view him as a white male, a black woman or a member of the LGBTQ community? I ask you!

What is wrong with the church?

Actual Teaching

So, the sermon on Sunday was about prayer as I've mentioned.

It was given at a church where there are several lady priests so, after the service, I approached the one I thought had spoken (I cannot see the pulpit from the organ console). she told me that it was a lay reader who had spoken so I went over to congratulate her.

The thing is that this sermon was thoughfully delivered and actually - I mean actually - contained some advice which would be helpful for those wanting to get closer to God. In short, the advice was to say the Lord's Prayer every day and that it didn't matter how or where one says it. Sitting, walking, slowly, line by line, with music playing, in silence, in bed, loudly, softly, morning or evening. There were more possibilites but you get the idea.

There were some points I felt were scooted over. For example "Why do bad things happen?". "Why does the person I've been praying for for weeks, months or years still die of the illness?" was the example she used. Her answer came from a book she recommended. Sometimes the answer to prayer is God himself. I felt this was not really an answer but she was brave to address the issue.

So many sermons I've heard have simply been about telling the story of a reading over again. Useful to place it in the context of biblical times but of little practical value.

This sermon was pretty good. So, it can be done. Vicars please note.

A clever sermon

The local vicar is on holiday and the service today (not at my usual church in the benefice) was taken by a retired but very experienced 85 year old priest. One reading was from Acts 16:16-34 about Paul and Silas being chucked into prison for casting out a fortune-telling spirit from a girl who was being exploited by her owners.

His thrust was that Satan sometimes speaks the truth, but not all of it. In order to make his lies sound more plausible he sprinkles them with truth so people get taken in.

He did not go so far as to mention the Sue Gray 'partygate' report or Boris but I knew this was what he was referencing.

Well done that man!

Have there been sermons about Halal?

This is a rant and may not be well thought out, but it is my blog.

Sermons should instruct and guide. The C of E is not known for taking a strong stance on issues such as Halal meat. Oh yes, there is plenty about whether Christians can eat it or not and the justification is usually taken from St. Paul's writings.

My gripe is that we have, in the country, the RSPCA, laws, customs and traditions whereby we do not cause unnecessary suffering to animals. The debate should not be "Is it OK for Christians to eat Halal meat?", but rather, "Should Christians object to the practice of Halal slaughter?" [Yes!]

In a typically English way, the church does not want to offend anybody and so I found little about Halal slaughter (with reference to the C of E): there is plenty to tell peope how not to offend others.

See https://www.compellingtruth.org/halal-food.html and https://www.thetablet.co.uk/blogs/1/309/halal-or-not-to-halal- The Tablet is an RC publication I believe. I think Catholics have thought about this issue a little more. Here is a longer article.

Halal in general makes my blood boil. I can find nothing on Christian websites about the fact that slaughter without stunning is cruel. I guess there is nothing particularly pleasant about slaughter anyway which is why so many are turning to other food philosophies such as Veganism.

Another case of "Let's avoid the difficult issues". As long as the annual church fête goes ahead OK that's that matters.