Saturday, December 25, 2010
Both evening services were well attended; there were more people at the early service, but it was gratifying to see a crowded church twice in one night. Worshipers mostly dressed up for the occasion—there was a lot of red in the pews.
As usual, the church was attractively decorated. It struck me that the poinsettias were more beautiful than any of the plants I’m used to seeing for sale. Their bracts (look it up) were an intense, deep shade of red.
The services were most remarkable for the music, which was abundant and stirring, yet mostly familiar. Instrumentalists played at both services, but the 10:30 hymn sing has grown from an opportunity for worshipers to sing the traditional carols and perhaps hear a few new ones to something more like a holiday pops concert, complete with substantial orchestra. The choir sang two choral anthems during the services, “In the bleak midwinter” and, from Messiah, “For unto us a child is born.”
Lou preached one of his better sermons—and his best Christmas sermon—from the pulpit. Members of the choir could actually see him there, and I assume that people sitting in the pews could better see him as well.
As is becoming commonplace, we were short on acolytes, though not embarrassingly so. There were four at 7:30 and five at 11 o’clock.
My only disappointment was the lighting, which was something of a mess. Since we seldom take advantage of the features of our lighting control system for the church, no one seems to understand it or the principles of theatrical lighting any more. The pew candles were lit, but the artificial lighting was often so bright as to make them irrelevant. Evening services generally should be less brightly lit than daytime events. Only at the Refuge service does this seem to be understood, but lighting for that service, at least for the times I’ve attended, has tended to be so minimal that even reading the service booklet is difficult.
As usual, we dimmed the lights for the singing of “Silent night.” There always seems to be some controversy about just how dark the church should be made for this. My guess is that, in the nave, the lighting was about right last night. The nave lanterns were dimmed, but not extinguished. On the other hand, the chancel lanterns were completely off, and, as a choir member, I found reading my music virtually impossible. Fortunately, choir members know the hymn pretty well. At both services, however, when the lights came up, they were much too bright, for reasons I cannot imagine.
Lighting aside, last night’s services were wonderful celebrations of the incarnation. It’s too bad if you missed going to at least one of them. (There is still time to get to today’s 10 o’clock service.)
Have a blessed Christmas.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
As part of its study, the SCLM has put a survey on the Web that Episcopalians are invited to take sometime between now and January 31, 2011. I recommend that St. Paul’s parishioners make their voices heard (so to speak) by taking the survey. It does take 10 or 15 minutes, but it is, at times, interesting.
I’m not sure whether revising the current hymnal is a good idea or not. Certainly I would make some changes were it in my power to do so, probably dropping a few hymns, including fewer unison hymns, and adding more rounds. In any case, the survey does not ask whether you think revision is a good idea but concentrates on individual experience and taste.
Don’t let me influence you, however. Take the survey yourself by clicking here.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
I have complained about the lack of acolytes in the past. (See “Sunday Discontents.”) Participation continues to deteriorate, however. Somehow, it was must better in the past, when we have a volunteer acolyte master (or masters). We used to have at least six acolytes every Sunday. On each side of the church, the procession was led by a crucifer, torch bearer, and flag bearer. I cannot remember when we last had six acolytes for a service.
Where have all the acolytes gone?
Sunday, December 5, 2010
At that convention, Dick invited me to stop by some Saturday at 5 PM to join All Saints in their weekly worship. Only yesterday did I finally get around to taking him up on his offer. The fellowship’s Web site gave me some idea of how the physical facilities might look, but I didn’t know what to expect from the service itself. (Some pictures of the worship space are available here.)
The fellowship’s building was easy to find, though the location of All Saints within the building was not quite so obvious. There is a sign by the side of Boyce Road, but it did not face the direction from which I came. Fortunately, I knew the fellowship was in the same building as a 7-Eleven, which was itself hard to miss. The side door sported a makeshift sign, so I entered and wandered through a labyrinth of hallways and stairs—this is not a handicapped-friendly facility. I met an Airedale—a regular worshiper apparently—in the corridor just before I found the entrance I was looking for.
The worship space is fairly conventional and well-appointed. Its most obvious disadvantage is that people enter the room near the lectern, so one cannot arrive late—as several worshipers did—and do so inconspicuously. Seating is on pews, which include kneelers. The altar was dressed with what I am told were homemade paraments that did not look at all homemade. Blue, an alternative color to the more penitential purple, is being used at All Saints during Advent. To the rear and side of the worship space is Dick’s office. There is another room in the back that I assume is used as a sacristy and perhaps for other purposes. It sported a sign over the door that read “Undercroft.” Something like 25 people (and one Airedale) attended the service. Every time I counted, the number seemed to increase. I am told that there is seating capacity for about 40.
There was a simple bulletin, though it did have a full-color front page. The back page included the following:
—NO ARTIFICIAL FLAVORS—
—NO ARTIFICIAL SWEETENERS—
—NO POLITICAL AGENDAS—
During the Eucharistic Prayer, one worshiper fell ill. She was apparently feeling cold and faint. Two doctors came to her aid, and the paramedics were called. They arrived in 12 minutes and took her to St. Clair Hospital. Needless to say, this interrupted the service. We said a prayer, and, eventually, worship was resumed. Somehow, we skipped over The Lord’s Prayer, but everything else went smoothly.
There were refreshments served after the service. Coffee was available on a back table, and food of various sorts were placed on the altar. (This, of course, would give some Altar Guild folks apoplexy, but no one at All Saints seemed to notice.) I was greeted warmly by a number of people I knew from St. Paul’s and spent some time catching up on family news.
Dick gave me a tour of space below the present “church” into which the fellowship plans to move when the congregation gets larger. The space is not conveniently arranged at the moment, but it is a good deal larger, so All Saints can grow without changing its address, though it will have to do some renovation. The new space is handicapped accessible.
From all I could see, All Saints is doing well for such a young congregation, and there is much to be said for the more intimate, close-knit church. The lack of a choir is something of a show-stopper for me, but not everyone has the same need for music that I do. I expect that All Saints Episcopal Fellowship eventually will become All Saints Episcopal Church and play a significant role in our diocese.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
The wreaths are quite lovely and welcoming. Moreover, the purple ribbon makes people stop and think, since Christmas wreaths generally sport ribbons of other colors.
To get to the doors from Washington Road, however, one had to pass the Refuge sign:
As usual, the sign, which is hard to read from a passing car anyway, was something of a mess. The New Morning sign, which should have been in the background of the above picture, had been damaged by wind and taken down. (I didn’t bother to take a picture of our permanent sign which looked only slightly more decrepit than it did the last time I wrote about it.)
Am I the only one who finds these semi-permanent cloth banners tacky?
A more promising sight was the progress being made on the steps and sidewalk associated with the narthex entrance facing Mayfair Drive:
If this sight isn’t welcoming at the moment, it will be soon. We have waited too long for this much-needed repair.
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Lou was in his office, and he explained what no one thought to explain to parishioners. Two contractors bid on the work, but the low bidder kept giving excuses for not beginning the project. As it turns out, the contractor did not do the demolition work; Vladimir did. We finally gave up on that contractor and managed to convince the other bidder to do the job at the lower price. (That was a good outcome!)
I passed by again this afternoon and saw that forms for the steps were in place. Men were working on the site. We should be able to use the narthex door to Mayfair Drive soon.
I still question the wisdom of what we are doing. Various proposals have been made to create handicapped access to the narthex, but the current work is pretty much replacing what we used to have. I also argued that the new steps should be limestone, rather than concrete. The new steps will be concrete, however.
Monday, November 15, 2010
My answer is unequivocally that we should not. I am the American convenor for the new No Anglican Covenant Coalition, which has a new Web site and an even newer blog. (The Coalition is also on Facebook and Twitter.) If you want to know more about the Covenant and why many think its adoption would be a mistake, you should spend some time at the No Anglican Covenant Web site. The About page explains what the Coalition is trying to do and lists who we are. The Background page offers an introduction to the covenant, a timeline, and a table showing what Anglican churches have done with the Covenant so far. The Resources page contains links to commentary on the Covenant, as well as links to official church documents, including the Covenant itself.
John also performed a recital in the afternoon that included mostly 20th- and 21st-century compositions. The concert drew a larger than average crowd. I saw only a few parishioners, but many members of the American Guild of Organists (AGO) attended. A fellow parishioner asked me why, at a church that appears to value music, so few people turn out for events such as the John Walker recital. I had to say that I had no idea.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
In celebration of the occasion, we sang several hymns that were sung 80 years ago, “The Church’s one foundation,” “Holy, Holy, Holy,” and “Jesus shall reign.” We did not sing “We love the place, O God,” which is no longer in our hymnal, but Lou read two verses of it to the congregation. (You can listen to the hymn and sing along at Oremus Hymnal.)
The historical material was unearthed by our archivist, Nancy Fink, who also created a nice display of historical material on one of the bulletin boards in the undercroft.
I am pleased that Lou has worked at connecting us to our past as a congregation. It is rather surprising that we never even used to celebrate our patronal feast before Lou came. It was particularly meaningful to contemplate our past on All Saints’ Sunday, when we remember those who have gone before us.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Thanks largely to the organizing efforts of former Standing Committee member Celinda Scott, Pittsburgh Cursillistas are organizing to bring a healthy movement back to the Pittsburgh diocese. Celinda is a parishioner of Christ Church, Indiana.
Today, October 7, our fledgling Cursillo group is offering an Ultreya, beginning at 4 PM at Church of the Nativity in Crafton. Details are available on the diocesan Web site. I will be talking about what I learned in Myrtle Beach and what it means to us as we go forward. I urge all Cursillistas from St. Paul’s to come. Bring your friends, even if they have never attended a Cursillo weekend. See you there!
Friday, November 5, 2010
Anyway, David has a letter in today’s Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:
I have to say that, when I read Ann Rodgers’ article, I had the same surprised reaction as David. The characterization of Dick Pollard’s church was flattering to the Episcopal diocese, but not really true, at least based on what I knew. What may be true is that Dick gathered some parishioners who might otherwise have jumped ship and joined the ACNA diocese. In any case, my understanding is that a majority of members of the new vestry are former members of St. Paul’s. One cannot verify this from the church’s Web site, however, as it is—as I am writing this, at any rate—woefully out of date.
I read with interest and affection Ann Rodgers’ article “Episcopalians Calm in Rough Sea” (Oct. 15) on the gathering of the Episcopalians in convention on October 15-16. I was heartened to read Bishop Ken Price’s encouraging words concerning his relationship with Archbishop Robert Duncan and the Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh. I would contend that the facts about the composition of the new gathering in South Fayette, All Saints, are a bit inaccurate.
The article states the congregation “was formed in 2009, largely from people who wanted to remain Episcopalians after their former parishes left the denomination.” I would contend the congregation was formed largely from members of St. Paul’s Church in Mt. Lebanon for various and sundry reasons, none of which had to do with leaving the denomination.
The majority of the congregation continues to be composed of former members of St. Paul’s. Note also, the pastor of All Saints, the Rev. Richard Pollard, is a former staff member of St. Paul’s. Nonetheless, best wishes for success are extended to the clergy and people of All Saints.
REV. DAVID WILSON
St. David’s Anglican Church
Monday, October 18, 2010
I arrived in the narthex at 5:50. There was no usher at the door, so I took a copy of the worship booklet and insert and chose a pew. The chaos before the service began had been eliminated. The lighting seemed a bit more reasonable, but, as the service wore on and it got darker outside, it became obvious that the lighting was insufficient for many (including myself) to read the service booklet. Lighting needs to be set based on the end of the service, not the beginning. The lamps illuminating the paintings on the aisle walls had been moved to allow freer movement through the aisle; this was an improvement. At the beginning of the service, the doors to the north transept were open and letting light into the church, an obvious mistake.
Music began at 5:50. The sound was muddy, noisy, and unpleasant. (More about this later.)
Mabel was the celebrant. She wore no microphone, but this was positive. I had no trouble understanding her, and the lack of a microphone made her speech seem more natural. The same slides were being shown as at the first Refuge service. I didn’t understand them then—they included a picture of one of the first atomic bombs and one of a mushroom cloud—and I didn’t understand why they were selected this time.
Mabel’s sermon was delivered in a typical fashion, but I thought that, for this service, she spoke too fast. Also, I did not agree on her characterization of faith as acting on what we believe. Faith as belief, which amounts to the same thing, has gotten Christianity into a lot of trouble.
From time to time, Mabel referred worshipers to a page in the service booklet. Unfortunately, pages 4 and 9 were unnumbered, a definite glitch.
I made several counts of the number of people at the service. Four people were there to actually conduct the service. Depending on when I counted, there were either 17 or 19 additional people, including myself. Sixteen people took communion, leaving one person in the nave. Almost everyone was from St. Paul’s.
I had no problem with the liturgy, which I found more acceptable than what we use at 8:45. The music was more problematic. The sound is simply bad, sounding like the musicians are performing from the bottom of a barrel. I thought this could be remedied by adjusting the mixer, but, after the service, Bryan told me that the mixer was broken and not being used. As far as I am concerned, this is sabotaging the service. Moreover, I think much too much amplification is being used, making the music sound unnatural. Rock enthusiasts and rock concert goers probably like this sort of sound, but I find it inappropriate in a relatively live room. Additionally, it is disconcerting to have the musicians in one place but the sound coming primarily from elsewhere. Again, this is inauthentic. I also object to the fact that some of the vocals were prerecorded.
That said, I didn’t actually dislike the music. It was often too loud, however, which discouraged singing. That interludes were of unpredictable length made it difficult to figure out when to sing the next verse. Also, I hate unison singing and felt resentful when the musicians were singing parts for which I did not have music. Keeping the music “simple” is apparently deliberate. I was unimpressed.
Finally, there are the “stations.” I actually tried to read the explanations of them this time, and I found them frankly silly. But I find most “interactive” displays at museums equally silly.
Overall, I give Refuge a grade of C–, but there is opportunity for improvement. Attendance, however, gets a D–.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Today had its own special irritations that began with the procession. The crucifer in the south aisle didn’t seem to know where he should be (i.e, leading the procession) and didn’t seem to know to keep the cross vertical. At the recession, he didn’t know where to stand, and choir members had to walk around him. As I was processing, I was wondering why we no longer have flag bearers and why, in the summer, we had almost no acolytes at all. (Steve, who has taken on the role of acolyte master, often had to act as crucifer.) Lou’s sermon provided some insight into the acolyte situation. He bragged that St. Paul’s has 36 acolytes. He probably does not know that, not too many years earlier, we had 56! Our problem used to be giving acolytes opportunities to serve; it is now finding enough acolytes to serve.
While I’m thinking about the sermon, I should mention that we were told that St. Paul’s attracted 50 new families last year, most of whom have remained. This sounds like an encouraging statistic, but Lou did not say how many families we lost in the past year to indifference, to other churches (including Dick Pollard’s), and to the fact that large numbers of families move in and out of Mt. Lebanon and the surrounding suburbs all the time. It is not clear that the membership of St. Paul’s is any larger today than it was a year ago. (See “Update: Is St. Paul’s Growing?”)
Perhaps most irritating was the celebration of baptism on the Twenty-first Sunday after Pentecost. I have complained to the rector more than once about the scheduling of baptisms whenever he feels like it and have been told, essentially, that he will do whatever he wants to do.
Here, in part, is what the prayer book says about the matter on page 312:
Holy Baptism is especially appropriate at the Easter Vigil, on the Day of Pentecost, on All Saints’ Day or the Sunday after All Saints’ Day, and on the Feast of the Baptism of our Lord (the First Sunday after the Epiphany). It is recommended that, as far as possible, Baptisms be reserved for these occasions or when a bishop is present.It is clear that the reservation of certain days for baptism is not merely a casual suggestion of the church. The prayer book even goes so far as to authorize a deacon to preside at baptism if a bishop or priest is unavailable in order that the sacrament may be celebrated on one of the days set aside for it. I must point out that the Sunday after All Saints’ Day is but three weeks away. Could the baptismal candidates not wait another three weeks?
If on any one of the above-named days the ministry of a bishop or priest cannot be obtained, the bishop may specially authorize a deacon to preside. In that case, the deacon omits the prayer over the candidates, page 308, and the formula and action which follow.
Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against either children or baptisms, but I did resent that it was difficult to hear a lovely duet sung in church today because of the crying of infants, and I did not appreciate the camera whose flash was in my face during the service.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Perhaps the most significant piece of business transacted was the passage of a resolution to begin a search for a new bishop for Pittsburgh. We will be hearing a lot more about this in the next few months.
We also changed the canons to allow the diocese to be partitioned into fewer district, since we have fewer congregations than formerly. There now are only four districts, and St. Paul’s, which used to be in District 5, is now in District 3, along with St. Thomas, Canonsburg; St. Peter’s, Brentwood; All Saints, Bridgeville; Nativity, Crafton; St. Stephen’s, McKeesport; and All Souls, North Versailles. All Saints, Bridgeville, by the way, is Dick Pollard’s new church, which was officially accepted into the diocese by this convention.
Some St. Paul’s people were elected to one position or another. Andy Muhl was elected a General Convention deputy, and Lou Hays was elected fourth alternate clergy deputy to General Convention. Our new district elected Jon Delano district chair and Kris Opat vice-chair. Carl Kylander was elected District 3 representative to Diocesan Council. Congratulations to our new office holders.
A highlight of the convention was a brief but spirited presentation aimed at getting people in the diocese to visit the diocesan Web site (at http://www.pittsburghepiscopal.org/) and to use the calendar on the site (available on the front page) to check on events around the diocese. Pittsburgh Episcopalians were also encouraged to sign up to receive the diocesan e-mail newsletter Grace Happens, which keeps you abreast of diocesan happenings with hardly any effort on your part. (Sign up on the diocesan Web site if you have not yet done so. You will will receive an e-mail newsletter each Tuesday or Wednesday.)
The banner of St. Paul’s was displayed throughout the convention in the north transept of the Cathedral, along with other parish banners. This year, however, we also had a new banner in evidence that I was pleased to see. You can see it in the photo above.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
What may or may not be obvious in this picture is that the memorial plaque that used to be at the base of the tree is gone. Instead, it has been relocated to the base of the nearest remaining tree:
Friday, October 1, 2010
St. Paul’s has been the beneficiary of the labors of a number of priests like Canon Davies, who, though retired, have worked tirelessly for St. Paul’s for paltry wages or less. Few priests of any sort have been associated with our parish as long as Canon Davies, who will have been a priest for 55 years in December.
Canon Davies informed the rector of his decision to retire for real about two weeks ago. Why parishioners have not been told of this decision, I don’t know. When I read the parish e-mail newsletter this week, however, and it said nothing of this development, I thought it was time that everyone know that we are losing a valuable and beloved member of the St. Paul’s staff.
Canon Davies is a modest man and, no doubt, does not want us to make too much of a fuss over his retirement. He deserves a comfortable retirement and a good sendoff, however. I hope that he and his wife Doris will indeed enjoy retirement, but I hope we will still see them at St. Paul’s with some regularity.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
So, was the praise justified? Well, yes and no. The cross with the hand prints on the cover is certainly arresting, and carrying the hand print motif through much of the brochure does, I think, work. Overall, so does the Berlin Sans FB font, although the Berlin Sans FB Demi Bold used in the calendar is ugly and hard to read. Ideally, the brochure should have been printed on heavier stock.
Then, there is the text. For years, I have complained that publications from St. Paul’s are poorly edited and proofread. This brochure is no exception. The first line of body text includes the name “St. Paul’ Episcopal Church.” I kid you not; the “s” is indeed missing! Without getting picky, I identified:
- 1 missing letter
- 24 missing commas
- 1 missing period
- 1 missing capital
- 1 extraneous word that was clearly intended to be deleted
- 5 missing spaces
- 1 missing hyphen
- 2 misstatements of fact
- 4 badly chosen phrases
- 1 instance of failing to use italics
- 1 arguable misspelling (“worshipping” is a British, not an American spelling)
- 1 single quotation mark where a double quotation mark was called for
- 1 misspelling
I have a reputation as an obsessive editor. Am I being unfair in insisting on professional standards in publications from St. Paul’s? I don’t know. Are we only an amateur church?
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Apparently, this tree was the second tree dedicated to the memory of Rob Douglas. The first one was not thriving and was also cut down, likely also without any consultation with experts.
In any case, Rob Douglas’s tree now looks like some sort of phallic monument, as you can see below.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
St. Paul’s suffered some damage, but, as many homeowners could tell you, it could have been worse. Most significantly, the tree in front of the church that is a memorial to Rob Douglas suffered major damage, as can be seen in the photo below (inset shows dedicatory plaque at the base of the tree):
The damage seems to be from wind, rather than lightning, but I am not an arborist. Moreover, it is not clear to me whether the tree can be saved. The falling branch took out a small branch or two from the nearby tree, but that damage is minimal.
There was some debris in the parking lot, but no major damage was evident. Also, there were a few branches down in the front lawn next to the adjacent house, but this damage seems minor as well:
Update, 7 PM: I’m at church for choir rehearsal, and I can report that the tree has been reduced to a rather tall stump.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
When I entered through the lower Mayfair entrance, I found Pat Hurd in the kitchen working on food for the post-service reception. Apparently, food is going to be a regular part of the event, which is a good thing. The reception is pointedly not intended to be dinner, however.
Not surprisingly, I counted many fewer people in the pews than last week, probably about 23. Happily, the lighting was a bit brighter, which made it easier to see the service booklet. The sound from the musicians was still muddy, however, and the singing I heard was unintelligible. I only stayed for a few minutes—I was tired and hungry—so this report will have to do for this week. Only after a few weeks’ experience with the service will we have a good idea of what the long-term attendance is likely to be and who, in fact, is in the congregation. Stay tuned.
I believe the ECF report exaggerates the effect of the diocesan schism on St. Paul’s, and I think Mabel further exaggerates what was said in the report. The report states, for example,
- This schism rippled through St. Paul’s and numerous long-term members left, again depleting energies and good will. Church membership and stewardship have suffered as a result.
There is much that can be blamed on Bob Duncan, but the leadership of St. Paul’s must take responsibility for the failure of the Fulfilling the Vision proposal to gain traction. The proposal was a bad plan that was ill-timed and poorly promoted. If the parish could not put its trust in the plan that was advanced, it had good reason for not doing so.
I fear that Fulfilling the Vision II—be assured that there will be another proposal, of whatever name, coming down the pike—will simply drop the more ridiculous aspects of the first proposal while failing yet again to solicit parishioner input as to priorities and objectives. The small group of people who completed the Vision 15 work clearly did not capture the sentiments of the parish as a whole, and continuing to rely on Vision 15 to guide the parish will only further alienate the majority that finds it difficult to take Vision 15 seriously.
I will have more to say about how parishioners should be consulted on certain matters in a future post.
Let me conclude by noting that St. Paul’s, despite an explicit promise by Lou to put the ECF report on the parish Web site, has not yet made the ECF report available to parishioners in electronic form. My guess is that few members have gone to the office to read it. Poor communications within the parish, a concern identified long before Lou arrived, continues to plague St. Paul’s.
Friday, September 17, 2010
I checked for details of this event on the St. Paul’s Web site, but they were nowhere to be found. Using the search box, I entered “outreach.” The search yielded three results, cryptically, under the legend “Enter 468x60 Ad Code Here”: announcements from April and August and the Vestry list. Sad to say, our Web site is not only not welcoming, it is almost completely useless.
If you are on St. Paul’s e-mail list, you did get an announcement about the dinner in your inbox yesterday. In case you are not on that list, here is that announcement in full:
OUTREACH FUNDRAISER DINNERSt. Paul's Outreach Commission invites you to a buffet dinner this Friday, September 17 to raise funds for local outreach projects. The theme for the dinner will be Buy fresh, Buy Local to showcase local nutritious fresh foods in this harvest season. We will celebrate PA's tradition of farming and feature many local products, including meats, vegetables and fruits. Please come to the dinner from 6-8 p.m. Tickets for the dinner will be $9 for adults and teens and $5 for children 5-12. Tickets will be available at the door. Please email Pat Eagon Stafford (firstname.lastname@example.org) to let her know how many are coming. Beer will be available, along with wine. In addition, raffle tickets will be available at $2 or 3/$5 for the Anti-Cancer Cookbook, written by ca [sic] local author, Dr. Julia Greer.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
I arrived at the six o’clock service 10 or 15 minutes early. I came with Jane Little, who uses a walker. We sat a few pews back from the crossing on the Gospel side. After the service, we attended the reception that was held in the undercroft.
AmbianceAs is immediately obvious from the picture I posted yesterday, St. Paul’s looked different for Refuge than it does for most services. To begin with, the church was dark. Because it was still light outside, some light filtered through the stained glass, but even the light coming through the east windows—our “east” windows actually face west, so they are most brilliant in the time before sunset—did little to brighten the worship space. There were many lighted candles, but they didn’t provide much light either. The lanterns (i.e., chandeliers) were dimly lit, and their downlights (i.e., lamps pointing straight down from the lanterns or the ceiling) were likewise dim.
The scant illumination was restful, perhaps even beautiful, but it had its drawbacks. I found it very difficult to read my service leaflet and could only do so because I was near a window. A better balance needs to be struck between Milton’s “dim religious light” and the need to actually see what one is doing.
Decoration of the church was less extensive than for the Wilderness service held in May. This was actually a good thing. There was enough drapery to make the church look different without making it look like a fabric store that had experienced a suicide bomber attack. I was particularly struck by the “screen” in the middle of the chancel on which images were projected. (See the aforementioned photograph.) The screen was a translucent bit of white fabric suspended from a wire spanning the chancel. It proved functional and attractive without looking obtrusively high-tech.
Not all decoration was equally successful, however. For example, the painting nearest to where we were sitting was on the wall of the Gospel side aisle. It was illuminated by a lamp clamped to a music stand. Not only did this look jerry-rigged, but it made it impossible for two people to walk through the aisle side-by-side. The painting, however, done by Shelly Fanguy, daughter of the Rev. Mabel Fanguy, was lovely. (Shelly contributed a series of paintings for the service.)
There is little I can say about the various “stations” scattered about the chancel. I didn’t even discover the description of these in the service leaflet until Monday. Perhaps I am simply not spiritual enough to get into this sort of thing, but they reminded me of kindergarten, where, at playtime, kids have a number of options to pass their time. In any case, the explanations at the individual stations were impossible for me to read without my being infelicitously close to the printed explanations at the stations themselves. Chalk this up to aging eyes and inadequate lighting (but perhaps also too-small fonts and too-long explanations).
I should say that lighting candles with a prayer—the places where this was done were “stations” of a sort—seemed natural. I did not personally do that, but I could without being self-conscious about it. I am nonplussed by how fast the candles used for this purpose burn down. Lighting one of these candles seems more like lighting the fuse on a firecracker, except that, in the end, the candle just goes away. There seems to be symbolism here, but I don’t know what it is.
As I mentioned, Jane and I arrived a few minutes early, giving ourselves lots of time to settle in, look over the material that was handed out, and put ourselves in a worshipful mood. This was difficult to achieve. Not only was the church dark, making reading difficult, but the musicians were practicing, and people were busily moving about the chancel, presumably putting last minute touches on the decorations.
Music and SoundIt is hard to know where to begin here. Perhaps I should start with the wireless microphone worn by Kris. It should be well known by now that reception of the signal from this microphone has a tendency to drop out when the transmitter is at the crossing. This is where Kris spent most of his time, and the drop outs inevitably happened. They are annoying. Probably the antenna for the receiver should be repositioned, but this has been an issue for years, and no one has seen fit to do anything about it. Additionally, the microphones for our beltpack transmitters are all patched with tape, and, some day, they will likely fail during a service. Even if we don’t replace our sound system in the church, we need to keep it in good repair. (Perhaps, like the un-repaired steps at the upper Mayfair entrance, sound system glitches are to remind us that someone should pony up money for a new system.)
I felt rather detached from the music, which, as a musician, was uncomfortable. This was partly because I could not see all the musicians. In fact, I could see only one well, but I think there were actually three or more. The poor quality of the sound—see below—made it unclear to me whether I was listening to live or recorded music.
In general, the music sounded muddy. It was as if the bass controls on the mixer were turned all the way up and the midrange and treble controls were turned all the way down. I do suspect that this was a mixing problem, rather than a poor equipment problem, but I’m not certain of that. I don’t know if appropriate microphones were used, for instance. In any case, singing was not very intelligible, and the overall effect of the music was not what it could have been.
As for the music itself, it was mostly acceptable, if unremarkable. The use of a much-too-loud drum early in the service, however, nearly caused me to run out of the room screaming. I was so glad when it was over! It was good that none of the music was rhythmically complex, a characteristic that makes so much “contemporary” Christian music difficult to sing, particularly with those unfamiliar with it.
The service used both new and old tunes, but nothing was actually unsingable. On Sunday mornings, worshipers generally hear an entire hymn before they begin singing. This is not simply to give people time to stand up and find the right hymn in the hymnal. We play the hymn so that people can get the tune in their minds and begin singing when the time to sing has come. This is especially helpful for the musically trained, who may be listening to the alto or bass part during the introduction. (As a choir member, that is what I do.) On Sunday evening, however, we got no such introductions, and I found myself always playing musical catch-up. Moreover, on one of the songs, there was a long interlude between two of the verses. Unlike the interludes Doug plays on Sunday mornings, the music gave no clear signal when it was ending, so I did not catch the entrance to the next verse.
A personal note: I hate unison singing, and everything the people sang Sunday night was unison. This may be a personal quirk, but being able to sing regularly in four-part harmony is one reason I am an Episcopalian. It may not be the best reason, but it is one reason. (My theory is that all good church musicians are really Episcopalians at heart, no matter what church they work in.)
The Psalm that was read was not reproduced in the service leaflet or in an insert that included the readings from I Timothy and Luke. I have no idea why, but I suspect it was to save space. The reading was hard to follow, as it was “decorated” with music that tended to cover up the voice of the reader.
LiturgyWhen I first heard of plans for the new service, I was concerned that it would not be Episcopal enough. I now worry that it is too Episcopal. Although the liturgy was not taken from the 1979 Book of Common Prayer, the arc of the service was that of a standard Rite II Eucharist. I don’t really know if this is a criticism, as it is unclear to me for whom this service is intended. The Eucharist and the creed (“Affirmation of Faith”) made the service definitely Christian, and it struck me that someone of the spiritual-but-not-religious persuasion might feel very uncomfortable at a Refuge service. I estimated the congregation at 75 or so, and it seemed that just about everyone took communion. I suspect that this was a very Episcopalian crowd.
In any case, any parishioner who is worried that Refuge is some new-age, non-Christian experiment should be reassured. The attractiveness of the service to Christians, Episcopalians, or the unchurched, on the other hand, remains an empirical matter. Attendance will almost certainly be down next week. Many of the curious will be satisfied, and many Episcopalians will have gone to the Pirates game.
Personally, I found the distribution of the elements problematic. Whereas the service encouraged informality and wandering about, communion felt conventional and regimented. Kris stood at the crossing with bread, flanked by chalice bearers. Two lines of communicants stretched down the center aisle. (There were candles and other stuff in the middle of the aisle that people had to walk around.) Jane, who is now used to receiving communion in her pew, decided to try walking up to receive, with a little help from me at her side. Remarkably, we accomplished this, but not without assistance. Because of the music stand and lamp partially blocking the side aisle—see under “Ambiance,” above—I could not walk beside Jane past the pier at the front of the nave. Happily (and surprisingly), there was a volunteer handy who helped get Jane past the barrier and up to the crossing. (The volunteer was from Calvary Church, as it turned out. She had come to the demonstration service in the spring and liked what she saw.)
Other MattersIt was only after Jane and I sat down that I realized that there was an insert for the service leaflet that we did not receive. Of course, everything should have been collated in advance. As I mentioned, the insert lacked the Psalm, but it contained the announcements from the morning’s bulletin.
Then, there is the matter of the offering. Appropriately, I thought, there was a basket for donations but not a passing of the plate. Kris, however, talked about donating “for those in need.” At the last Vestry meeting, however, it was decided that collections from Refuge would be used exclusively to support the Refuge service itself, something that is done for no other service. There is what I can only view as deception here. The church cannot have it both ways—are we helping the less fortunate or building our own ecclesiastical empire? I must admit that the decision made by the Vestry did not trouble me at the time, but I think we have a problem here.
There was a reception in the undercroft after the service. The fare was modest, but adequate. Jane and I rode the elevator downstairs, and we found a place for her to sit, I then went off in search of wine, cheese, and other goodies for the two of us. When I got to the table, I realized that there were no plates, only napkins. I assume this was an oversight rather than a mechanism to discourage gluttony, but it made it difficult to carry food for the two of us back to where Jane was sitting. After unsuccessfully attempting to embarrass the rector into fixing the problem, I walked to the kitchen, found two paper plates, and returned to the food table. (I’m not sure the lack of plates was really Lou’s problem, but it wasn’t mine, either.)
AdviceIn light of my observations, here are some ideas to make Refuge @ St. Paul’s—or whatever we’re calling this service—better.
Lighting. We need more of it. I understand the “dim religious light” thing, but it is easy to carry this too far. Perhaps all that is needed is to increase the intensity of the downlights. In any case, some experimentation is indicated. We should also consider using different lighting treatments at different times. The uniform gloom quickly became tiresome. We may have to purchase lighting to illuminate objects like paintings on the wall. It would have made more sense to turn up the track lighting in the side aisles. Not only would this have illuminated anything on the walls, but, by contrast, it would have made the central nave seem darker.
Setup. Keep obstructions out of the side aisles and perhaps out of the main aisle as well. Objects in the aisles hinder movement, which is something the service encourages. Moreover, the fire marshal might not approve.
Make sure all handouts have been collated when they are given out.
There is a tension between making the service familiar to Episcopalians and yet not too alienating to others. The via media is hard to find here. The service leaflet referred to the “High Altar” and the “Holy Table” (i.e., freestanding altar). There is a certain schizophrenia here. Also, I found the conventional list of announcements on the back of the insert strange. If this service is oriented to outsiders—I don’t know that it is—the “announcements” should target those people and their perceived special needs. The conventional announcements could be left in a pile somewhere for parishioners to pick up, if needed.
Before and After. Setting the mood happens before the service begins. I would suggest that all preparations be completed at least by 5:50. No tweaking the set or practicing should happen after this time. Consider whether there should be soft, contemplative music before and/or after the service.
The reception felt like a reward for having pulled off the first Refuge service. That is perfectly appropriate. We should consider whether we should serve some kind of food after each such service, however. This would encourage people to share their experiences. Of course, this isn’t, so far as I know, provided for in the budget.
Sound and Music. The sound needs more presence (a technical term), and the musicians should be more visible. This would make them seem more participant than performer. Music that has no visible source should be limited to elevators. Drums should be used sparingly, if at all. Amplification for drums is almost always unnecessary in a setting like this, in my opinion.
There is a tendency in contemporary services to use music to set a mood. This technique should be used sparingly. The “decoration” of the Psalm mostly covered up the words.
Songs should have a full introduction, and interludes should have cues as to when they are about to end.
Liturgy. As one who has attended offbeat liturgies at the General Convention, I had no problem with the liturgy for Refuge. There were times when I lost my place, however, because I could not hear Kris very well and because there were distractions.
I don’t think the distribution of the elements worked well. It felt too claustrophobic. I’m not sure what to do about this. I am tempted to put the priest and chalice bearers on the other side of the altar rail, but I can anticipate objections to this. This needs to be thought through.
Concluding ThoughtsDid I like the service? Well, I didn’t hate it. I do have a been-there-done-that attitude, however, and I don’t expect to return except possibly to see what my parish is up to. Jane was more positive, but I don’t want to speak for her.
I would like to see a mission statement for Refuge. Certain elements appeal to one clientele and others appeal to other groups. I would like to see a clear declaration of what Refuge is trying to accomplish that would provide a standard against which we could measure various options.
It is too much to ask that Refuge seem like an effortless production at this stage, but that should be a goal as the service settles in. On Sunday, I think everyone was coping with discomfort and anxiety.
How does Refuge fit in at St. Paul’s? Just as Refuge needs a clear mission, so does the parish itself. Aspiring to be welcoming is not helpful operationally, except for trivial matters. The Pittsburgh Pirates have a similar aspiration, as do many establishments that are nothing like churches. Does Refuge help us do what God has planned for us?
Monday, September 13, 2010
A substantial crowd showed up at St. Paul’s yesterday for the inaugural service of Refuge @ St. Paul’s. (I think that name, with its trendy at sign, is an abomination.) The service was followed by a reception in the undercroft.
I will have more to say about the service later. Suffice it to say, there were no substantial glitches, though I do think there is room for improvement. (One should not expect St. Paul’s to conduct a perfect service the first time out.) Whether the service will attract a following and whether it proves worth the substantial effort being devoted to it, however one might measure that, remains to be seen.
The photograph above was taken just before the service began. Click on it for a larger image.
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Unfortunately, the story runs off the rails in the last paragraph:
As are all of St. Paul’s worship services, Refuge @ St. Paul’s is free and open to the public. The church also offers a youth-oriented outdoor service at 6 p.m. Saturdays in St. Margaret’s Garden, a family-friendly, contemporary service at 8:45 a.m. Sundays, and a more traditional, choral liturgy at 10:30 a.m. Sundays.That first sentence plays into my fears that the new service is more entertainment than worship. Whereas most people understand that an offering may be taken up at church services, they generally do not expect to pay an admission charge, though they usually do have such an expectation when attending an entertainment event. Moreover, why do we need to emphasize that not only is Refuge @ St. Paul’s “free and open to the public,” but that so are our other services. This seems to suggest that either this has not always been the case at St. Paul’s and we need to emphasize the change in policy, or that we think that other churches have services that charge admission and for which attendance is by invitation only. Mostly this sentence makes us look clueless.
Finally, it was certainly a good idea to include information about other services at St. Paul’s, but there are a few things wrong with the characterization of our Saturday Eucharist:
- It is not clear where “St. Margaret’s Garden” is. A reader might assume it is on the church grounds, but a reader might just as easily assume it is some other venue with which he or she is simply unfamiliar.
- I would not describe the 6 P.M. Saturday service as “youth-oriented.” Few attendees could be described as “youth”; the service seldom includes music; it is a conventional prayerbook service; and, more often than not, it is conducted by one of our older priests.
- Finally, I have to point out that, although the Saturday service has been held in St. Margaret’s Garden all summer, as of today (i.e., the first Saturday after the story appeared in The Almanac), the service has been moved to Old St. Luke’s.
Friday, September 10, 2010
Last Sunday, I saw plans for the repairs posted, without comment, in the undercroft. (See picture at right, and click on it for a much larger image.) The plans call for replacing the steps more or less as they have been. The steps are to be concrete. The plans were marked “OWNER/REVIEW SET/NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION,” which I took to mean that demolition and construction were not imminent. I learned yesterday, however, that this was a misinterpretation; I passed the church and discovered that the existing steps have already been demolished. (See below.)
I have two concerns: the materials called for and whether we are ultimately planning to provide handicapped access at the front of the building.
All of St. Paul’s is faced with limestone. The front steps and the lower Mayfair entrance steps are limestone. The upper Mayfair steps, that is, the steps just demolished, were mostly concrete. (From the rubble pile, it seems that there was some limestone used. The deteriorated steps were definitely concrete, however. See picture below of the steps as of sometime last May.) The existing stone steps are largely in good repair, except that there are significant cracks where railings were installed. (I suspect that none of the iron railings are original.) In any case, I believe the integrity of the building demands limestone steps. I was told Sunday, however, that limestone cost too much. Shouldn’t it be parishioners, or at least the Vestry, who decide this? (I am told that the Vestry has not been shown the plans or approved the project.)
It is clear from the recent feasibility report on Fulfilling the Vision that parishioners are very concerned about the physical plant of St. Paul’s, and I suspect that they might well opt for limestone steps if asked, even if such steps were more expensive than concrete ones. No one has asked, however, which seems to have become the way business is conducted at St. Paul’s these days.
The second issue is whether we are going to provide handicapped access at the front of the building. I suggested back in May—see “Do We Really Want to Repair the Steps”—that we could use the excuse of repairing the steps to the narthex to provide handicapped access via a ramp from Mayfair Drive. The plan for Fulfilling the Vision—now on hold, of course—proposed an alternative plan that would have sloped the pavement in front of the building upward to provide handicapped access from Washington Road. (See “Fulfilling the Vision, Part 1.”) The plans for the present repair connects the front pavement to the Mayfair entrance exactly as it has been. But what if we alter the pavement in front of the building? (It is in poor condition in any case, and a good case could be made for replacing it.) I question whether we should carry out any project involving access to the narthex before we have a comprehensive plan for the front of the church. Because the appearance of the building is affected, that plan should be one at least presented to parishioners, if not actually endorsed by them.
Do we need handicapped access to the narthex? Whenever I bring up the subject, I am told that that is what the elevator is for. After all, we wisely spent the money necessary for an elevator that reaches every level of the church, save for the choir room and chancel. (One might ask for a sign pointing down Mayfair and labeled “Parking and Handicapped Access” or some such, by the way.) One must admit, though, that there is something symbolic in everyone’s being able to enter the church at the front. The parking lot entrance for the handicapped seems a bit like a back-door entrance for “colored.” (I grew up in the South.) Perhaps a more compelling argument for accessibility, however, is for a handicapped exit. In case of fire, the elevator should not be used. What is someone in a wheelchair supposed to do if there is no exit without stairs?
That said, neither plan for handicapped access to the narthex is without its problems. A ramp from Mayfair Drive would have to be long if it were not to be too steep. Access from Washington Road as proposed in Fulfilling the Vision would have significantly changed the building’s façade. Moreover, Washington Road is not an ideal place to discharge passengers, particularly handicapped ones, from an automobile. Even if we installed some sort of driveway in front of the building, the lack of parking would be problematic, particularly for handicapped drivers. The only good solution I see to this problem would be to provide handicapped-only parking parallel to the street but cutting into the existing sidewalk and lawn. Such parking would need to be without a curb to facilitate egress from vehicles.
My current idea for providing handicapped access in front of the church would indeed add a parking area off Washington Road as I have described. I would build a larger paved plaza in front of the church, leaving the front steps as they are. I would build a ramp from that plaza to the side door of the narthex. As it happens, the existing sidewalk from the front of the church to the side entrance actually slopes downward; we had more steps on the side than in the front. This sidewalk could be regraded to go upward. This plan, of course, would require demolition of much of what is about to be built.
Sunday, September 5, 2010
The hymns included “Lift high the cross” (#473) as the processional, “Praise the Lord through every nation” (#484, employing the familiar “Sleepers wake” tune harmonized by J.S. Bach) as the sequence hymn, and “Praise to the living God!” (#372, to the Hebrew melody “Leoni”) as the recessional.
The choir sang Martin How’s “Day by Day,” which was lovely, but which was outshown by solists. Mezzo soprano Kathleen Hendricks sang Adolphe Schlosser’s “He that keepeth Israel” during communion. (This seems to be a popular solo, though I know nothing—and could discover nothing—of Schlosser.) Doug Starr played the very interesting “Galeries ancien” by contemporary composer Dennis Janzer as the postlude.
Despite those lovely performances, the star musician of the day was Alexandra Thompson. Alexa played two movements from Bach’s Cello Suite No. 5. Before the service, she played the Prelude, and, during communion, she played the Allemande.
I first heard Alexa play at St. Paul’s when she was about 12, and I was struck by her musicianship even them. She is now studying to become a professional cellist, and she has passed the point where I can identify any imperfections in her playing. After the Allemande, I just wanted to sit quietly and meditate on what I had heard.
Alexandra Thompson is not the first musician to grow up at St. Paul’s. Doug should be commended for providing what encouragement he has to these musicians by allowing them to play at services and concerts. Certainly, the parish has greatly benefited from their musical talents.
As explained in the summary itself, the document “is taken from the ECF report without editorial comment.” This was a wise decision, though, as I noted in “The Episcopal Church Foundation Feasibility Study Report,” the foundation went out of its way to mitigate the sting of its conclusions. Those excuses are reproduced in the executive summary as item 4 under “Concerns.”
Friday, September 3, 2010
A number of people have mentioned to me that we have never inserted a nameplate into the bronze tablet for our current rector. There is clearly more wrong with it than that, however. Our forebears realized that the parish rector would change from time to time, but they apparently failed to recognize that services and service times might also change. Such details are not cast in stone and should therefore never be cast in bronze.
It should be obvious—was it not obvious to the capital campaign committee?—that our bronze tablet needs to be fixed, and not by chiseling off the text as was seemingly attempted in the past. No, I’m afraid we need professional help. It may be that our current plaque is hopeless, and a new one will have to be manufactured, but I would hope that we could modify what we have, if only for tradition’s sake. (Admittedly, one could make a case for a new plaque that leaves off the rector entirely. The rector changes but the Lord abides.)
I suspect that the COMMUNION, MORNING PRAYER, and CHURCH SCHOOL lines can be removed by a foundry. The space between the two horizontal rules will then need to be filled with something. I suggest adding a bronze medallion in the space, either of the St. Paul’s dove or of the Episcopal Church shield. In the latter case, the medallion can perhaps be painted or enameled.
Thursday, September 2, 2010
One of those signs is promoting the forthcoming Refuge service. Looking over my post once it was uploaded to the Web, I was reminded that the banner and the ad in Mt. Lebanon Magazine both point the reader to a Web page, namely that at http://www.stpaulspgh.org/refuge. This is what that page looks like as of today (click for a larger view):
What’s wrong with this picture? To begin with, there isn’t much here. Supposedly, Refuge is a big deal. Why aren’t there more pictures, more explanation, and more information about the church and personnel who are making this service a reality? There certainly are more pictures on the service’s Facebook page, but, even there, there isn’t much of a pitch for attending or caring about the church’s new initiative.
What really made me think I had to write this post, however, was this line:
One doesn’t have to look at the calendar to know that, even in Mt. Lebanon, the first Friday can never fall on the 10th of the month. The post on the St. Paul’s Web site is dated July 29, 2010, and, in more than a month, no one caught that egregious error!
While on the subject of the St. Paul’s Web site, let me offer a thought or two. (I will defer a full critique of the Web site for another time.) I am sitting at my computer that says the outdoor temperature is 90 degrees, but the banner picture on the Web site shows a winter scene, snow included. The picture is not refreshing, just insensitive and irrelevant. And the colors look like they were chosen for a Halloween makeover. How welcoming is this on September 2?
Banner signs on church lawns tend to be tacky, but St. Paul’s often does as good a job with such advertising as anyone. As we enter a new program year, St. Paul’s has two banners on the lawn facing Washington Road, each an attractive, two-sided pitch for Episcopal worship services.(Click on any of the pictures in this post for a larger view.)
The sign nearer the corner of Washington Road and Mayfair Drive employs the now-familiar “Joyful Morning” motif. It is a pleasing design with legible copy. One has a fair chance of reading all or part of it while driving by.
New this year is a sign for Refuge. It is smaller than the other banner, and, because of the font used, is somewhat more difficult to read. It is nicely designed, but its placement is more problematic, being more nearly parallel to Washington Road. Also, as can be seen in the picture at left, the two green steel poles holding up the banner are not quite parallel, giving the installation an amateurish quality.
As I said, however, the design on the banner is quite nice. It is virtually the same as the advertisement St. Paul’s placed in the September issue of Mt. Lebanon Magazine. (Back issues of the magazine are posted on-line, but the September issue is not on the Web as I am writing this. When available, the issue can be found here.) The design actually works better as a print advertisement, but we can hope that the sign on the lawn also gets some attention from passersby.
It is good to see St. Paul’s getting more imaginative in its publicity. The magazine ad is well placed, well executed, and well timed. Attracting worshipers is no easy task, however, and it remains to be seen how much the new advertising will help.
Update, 6:30 PM: I drove by St. Paul’s a little while ago and was gratified to see that the Refuge sign had been repositioned. It is now perpendicular to the roadway, so it can be seen easily by travelers moving in either direction. The stakes holding the banner are still not parallel.
Update, 9/4/2010: I visited downtown Mt. Lebanon last night for First Friday. Kris had has table on Washington Road promoting the new Refuge service. A Refuge banner was behind him. I assumed it was yet another banner, but the banner had apparently been removed from the St. Paul’s lawn. As of Saturday afternoon, it has not been returned to the lawn. Meanwhile, the other banner has apparently suffered wind damage and is largely disconnected from its supports.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Alas, the statement does not suggest that the Vestry has any regrets for having handled this matter poorly. We are told, however, that it “ will take the time necessary to revise and refine the various aspects of a capital campaign to focus on those items of greatest interest and concern to the congregation, and then explain more fully the need and rationale for each of them.” This is all well and good, but it is not clear that the Vestry really intends to consult parishioners in any effective way before presenting yet another take-it-or-leave it package. The congregation as a whole needs to be involved in charting our future.
More disappointing is the news that the church “will be providing a summary of the feasibility study report in the near future,” but not yet. “A copy of the full report is available to be read in the parish office.”
Why is there no copy of the report on the parish Web site? Why is the message from the Vestry not on the parish Web site?
In case you missed it, the report is available here. It is a quick and informative read. Don’t wait for the executive summary or the promised report on the Web site. Read it now!
The purpose of providing the report here, of course, is to let parishioners make their own judgments about Fulfilling the Vision and the way it has been dealt with by our parish leaders. I cannot avoid making a few observations, however.
What most stands out in this report is the rather strong support for maintaining the building—there is less support for “enhancing” it—and the nearly total lack of support for program expansion financed in any way other than through annual giving. There is also great skepticism that St. Paul’s can raise anything near the price tag of the proposal presented to the congregation, a matter on which ECF agrees.
What is also apparent is that there is deep dissatisfaction among parishioners concerning the state of the parish and little agreement with respect to the details of the Fulfilling the Vision proposal. Whereas the ECF report does not try to hide these unpleasant realities, it struggles to mitigate their significance. According to the ECF, the economy is bad, taxes are worrisome, the split in the diocese was traumatic, previous rectors were poor administrators, parishioners haven’t adapted to the rector’s leadership style. ECF seems to be flattering those who pay its fee. The reality, however, is that Fulfilling the Vision was ill-conceived and poorly sold.
But don’t take my word for it. Read the actual report here. I invite your comments below. Note that you need a Google, AIM, Wordpress, or other ID to leave a comment.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Holloman made clear that there was much support for projects involving St. Paul’s physical plant, but that there was a general consensus that the program part of the proposed initiative should be financed through the annual budget. Even some of the improvements to the building were controversial, particularly the air conditioning of the church, a new sound system, and changes to the undercroft. In any case, it was made clear that the church could not now raise anything near the $1.8 million in the Fulfilling the Vision proposal, both because of concerns about the proposed projects and because of the unfavorable economic climate.
The consensus on the Vestry was that no definitive decision about a capital campaign could be made immediately, but it was recognized that, if the Vestry did not move forward immediately, the campaign would have to be postponed. A statement to the effect that the proposal for a capital campaign will have to be revisited is to be drawn up and presented to parishioners.
The ECF report did not include an executive summary, and it may be up to the Vestry to draft one for the parish. In any case, the ECF report will be made available to parishioners in various forms and will presumably be posted on the parish Web site soon.
I will probably have more to say about tonight’s meeting later, but it is worth noting that the Vestry handled what was no doubt seen by many as bad news with equanimity and maturity. By the time the church undertakes its next capital campaign—I have no doubt that it will eventually—it is to be hoped that there is a greater consensus about what is to be done with the funds raised. The Vestry has a good deal of work to do between now and then.
Meanwhile, the church needs to run a successful stewardship campaign. If the programmatic elements originally proposed for Fulfilling the Vision are ever to be implemented, they will have to be incorporated into the operating budget and financed through increased annual giving.
I hope that the leaders at St. Paul’s will work diligently to build consensus around components of a revised capital campaign, one targeted to physical plant rehabilitation and improvement. It is to be hoped that such a campaign is one that most parishioners can get behind.