Worship Style

Thinking Anglicans has called attention to a blog post by David Murrow. The title of the post is “Why traditional churches should stick with traditional worship.” Murrow is an Alaskan who usually worships in an Anchorage megachurch. He claims to like his church, though he offers some criticisms of megachurches generally.

Murrow’s essay is about a church offering traditional worship in his hometown of Chugiak. (For some reason, Murrow doesn’t identify the church, though I suspect it is Lutheran. He calls it St. Mark’s.) Here is his description of a typical service at the Chugiak church:

We’ve been enjoying our Sundays at St. Mark’s. The richness and rigor of the liturgy is refreshing after years of seeker-sensitive services. It’s an eight-course meal, carefully measured out for us by church fathers—confession, forgiveness, praise, instruction, communion, giving, fellowship and benediction. It’s like a spiritual multivitamin in an easy-to-swallow, hour-long pill.

Once a month, however, St. Mark’s conducts a “contemporary” service. Lacking the appropriate resources, however, it does not do it well. This is what Murrow has to say about the service:

People come to church to encounter God. A good worship service is transcendent; it helps people detach from this present world to connect with the divine. But when traditional churches try to be contemporary it usually comes across as forced, stilted or artificial. This dissonance jerks people back into the mundane world. Worshippers focus on the distraction instead of the Lord.

Murrow urges churches offering traditional services to continue doing traditional services well. He concludes his essay saying, “I firmly believe there’s still a market for traditional worship—even among the young—if it’s done in Spirit and in Truth.”

There is a message for St. Paul’s here. When I first came to St. Paul’s, our identity was very much tied to excellence in worship. In recent years, however, our traditional worship has deteriorated in many small ways, and we have flirted with more “hip” worship. As we try to be all things to all people, our identity becomes confused, and true excellence is worship becomes increasingly difficult to identify.

Read Murrow’s essay, and see what you think.

A Video on Church Architecture

Clearly, the current 8:45 service and the now retired Refuge service represent attempts to make worship more meaningful to modern Americans. Even the Saturday evening service might be said to have such an objective. I personally find none of these services attractive for regular worship. Some agree with this view; others do not. If there is a way to attract crowds of new worshipers to services at St. Paul’s, we have not found it.

I will be the first to admit that I do not know how to make worship at St. Paul’s  more “relevant” to people who do not regularly attend existing services. What moves me does not necessarily move others. Whereas I do not believe that every American Christian should be an Episcopalian, I do think there are more people out there than we sometimes realize who could happily join our church given the right circumstances.

What has me thinking about this is a video I found on Bosco Peters’ blog. Bosco is a priest in Christchurch, New Zealand, where the diocese is considering how it should rebuild its cathedral, which was largely destroyed by an earthquake two years ago. The video, which appears below, is narrated by Richard Giles, the former dean of Philadelphia Episcopal Cathedral. That church made extensive architectural changes that facilitated liturgical changes. St. Paul’s, of course, has also made changes to its building, namely by modifying the chancel and building a platform extending to the crossing to accommodate a freestanding altar.

Philadelphia Episcopal Cathedral made more significant architectural changes. I don’t mean to be endorsing such changes necessarily, but the video is thought-provoking. See if you don’t agree.

2013 Easter Vigil

As many of my friends know, the Great Vigil of Easter is my favorite church service. It is, of course, the highlight of the church year. The resurrection is clearly the most important event celebrated by the Christian church. Significantly, The Episcopal Church has no special Easter Sunday liturgy, but there is a unique liturgy for the first Eucharist of Easter, which is celebrated at the Easter Vigil.

I first attended an Easter Vigil at St. Paul’s, and I was very impressed. (See “An Easter Vigil Memoir.”) As a long-time member of the Worship Commission and Audio-Visual Coördinator, I became the keeper of the corporate memory of how we orchestrated the service. Over the years, I felt that we had gradually made a fine service even better, nearly perfect even. The only Vigil I have ever attended that came close to rivaling the St. Paul’s service in its heyday was that of Washington National Cathedral, and that only because it is exciting to be walking from one venue to another in a huge, dark building.

Under Lou Hays, services generally, and the Easter Vigil particularly, were simplified. I resigned as Audio-Viosual Coördinator, as it was clear that the new rector had little that he wanted me to do. I was so disappointed in the first Vigil after he arrived—I was in tears at its conclusion—that I began attending Vigils elsewhere in the diocese. (Several local Episcopal churches do a good job with the resources available to them. I particularly recommend the Vigil at Church of the Redeemer, in Squirrel Hill.) This year, I decided to have another look at what St. Paul’s was doing.

In all honesty, I have to say that St. Paul’s put on a perfectly adequate service this year, but it cannot compare to the glory of the past. Let me explain.

Scheduling and advertising for the Vigil could have been improved. The banner in front of the church read “Holy Saturday: 7:30 p.m. The Great Vigil of Easter.” The Vigil is not technically a Holy Saturday service, though it might be said to be an Easter Eve service. (Compare this with Christmas Eve services.) The prayer book (p. 284) describes the Vigil as “the first service of Easter Day.” (Recall that the Jewish day begins at sundown.) The prayer book liturgy for Holy Saturday takes up about half a page and begins with the rubric “There is no celebration of the Eucharist on this day” (p. 283). Moreover, the instructions for the Vigil (p. 284 again), declare that the service is to be “celebrated at a convenient time between sunset on Holy Saturday and Sunrise on Easter Morning.” Sunset on Easter Eve in Pittsburgh this year was at 7:43 PM EDT. The St. Paul’s service began 13 minutes too early. (The Vigil at St. Thomas, Oakmont, was also scheduled for 7:30, but services at Calvary and Redeemer began at 8:00 PM.)

Lawn Sign. (Click for larger image.)

Starting time for the service actually matters. At 7:30, the church interior was reasonably dark, but the first fire of Easter was lit outside the front doors of the church, an action that would have been more dramatic had it been dark outside. (Redeemer actually lights a bonfire outside the church; worshipers light their candles and then go inside. It is striking in the dark.) I am actually pleased that the lighting of the fire and the candles of worshipers now takes place outside St. Paul’s, but much of the drama is lost by doing it in broad daylight.

Another change I noted immediately was the lack of pew candles. Not only do the pew candles enhance the atmosphere of the church, but they actually provide useful illumination. (More on this presently.) Over the years, we had devised a procedure for lighting the pew candles so that the candlelight began at the back of the nave and slowly moved forward with the Pascal Candle. It was an impressive sight. What was done last night was that the Pascal Candle was carried up the center aisle as choir members moved in parallel up the side aisles. Worshipers followed. It was not ineffective.

Doug had warned the choir that we would be singing by candlelight. That was adequate in the chancel. I cannot say what visibility of the service booklet was in the nave. (The service booklet was a good innovation, by the way, though I don’t know why we did not use color on the cover, as we regularly do for the 8:45 service.)  Because the track lights in the side aisles were on low and people in the pews did have their candles, I suspect that most people could read the booklet adequately, though pew candles would have helped. I was surprised, when it came time to sing the first hymn. Rich Creehan increased the lighting suddenly. (If that was to be done at all, a delay should have been used.) Clearly, he and Doug were not on the same page. When it happened, I uttered an epithet that, mercifully, I do not remember. The chancel was unnecessarily bright; the choir could easily have sung by candlelight. The nave lighting was also increased, but, as best as I could tell, not so dramatically. The lighting change was jarring and gratuitous, rather than helpful. It was something we had carefully avoided in the past.

Over the years, I had always argued for as many Old Testament readings at the Vigil as possible. More readings make the story of God’s dealings with his people more complete and compelling. There are nine readings; at least two are mandatory. In past years, we have used as many as five. This year, we used three, the number we have used most often. Moreover, we seem to have used the same ones almost every year, so that parishioners never hear many of the OT passages. (Israel’s deliverance at the Red Sea is a required reading, and we inevitably seem to read the story of Creation and the valley of dry bones. I always feel sorry for the Egyptian chariot drivers, by the way.)

The greatest loss the service at St. Paul’s has suffered comes at the end of the OT readings. In years past, after the collect following the final OT reading, the church was made as dark as possible. The Altar Guild brought candles, kneelers, and other liturgical furnishings that had been removed on Maundy Thursday back into the church and, at the same time, removed black veils from the Easter flowers. No longer are the veils used, however, and the candles, etc., were in the church at the beginning of last night’s service. Formerly, while the Altar Guild worked in the darkness virtually unseen, the clergy, who had been clad in black cassocks, went downstairs, changed into the vestments they would normally wear for a Eucharist, and returned to the church via the undercroft and narthex. (Last night, there was no need to change, since all the clergy were already vested for a Eucharist.) What used to come next was a dramatic addition to the liturgy. This is how it is described in my notes:

From the narthex, someone knocks loudly at the door.
Inside, someone asks: “Whom do you seek?”
From the narthex: “Jesus of Nazareth.”
Inside: “He is not here. Alleluia. Christ is risen.”
Congregation: “The Lord is risen indeed. Alleluia.”
At this point, the lights are instantly raised to their full intensity and music, including trumpets, is heard. We may want to encourage worshipers to bring their own bells The Gloria follows an organ and brass fanfare. As the fanfare is played, a second procession comes up the center aisle with clergy fully vested.

Agape Feast. (Click for larger image.)

Of this, only the fanfare has survived, and people have indeed been invited to bring their own bells. Last night’s bulletin mistakenly listed a Johann Christoph Pezel fanfare. In the past, I think Doug has used his own fanfare for organ and brass, and it has been marvelous. What was used last night, however, was Aaron Copland’s “Fanfare for the Common Man.” This was wrong on two fronts. First, we are supposed to be celebrating Jesus’ resurrection, not the “common man.” Perhaps more importantly, however, music, particularly instrumental music, is generally used liturgically to cover movement. Lacking the second procession, there was no movement to cover, and everyone was left standing simply waiting for the fanfare to end.

There is not much more to be said about the service, as what followed was simply your basic Eucharist with Renewal of Baptismal Vows. (I’m always disappointed when there are no baptisms at the Easter Vigil, but one can do only so much about that. I know that Lou asked if anyone wanted someone baptized at the service.) It is perhaps worth noting that the stage directions Lou insists on giving were more irritating than usual, at least for people used to the 10:45 service, since the service bulletin made crystal clear the sequence of events in the liturgy.

Of course, the service was followed by our usual Agape Feast in the undercroft, and I think it fair to say that it was a very pleasant affair with food and drink both pleasing and adequate.

Epilogue. A number of years ago, our interim—now deceased—Michael Randolph, delivered John Chrysostom’s Easter sermon (from about 400 CE) at the Easter Vigil. That sermon is joyful and mercifully brief, and Michael, who was really an actor at heart, delivered it with panache. For several years, I tried to convince whoever was preaching at the Vigil to use that sermon, but I was never successful. Michelle Boomgaard gave a sermon that was good enough, but that of the fourth-century Archbishop of Constantinople is hard to beat. Read it for yourself and see if you don’t agree.

The Sexuality Dialogue

Bishop McConnell is sponsoring a structured dialogue on sexuality in which, it is hoped, 500 or more Pittsburgh Episcopalians eventually will participate. The first two sessions, which are something of a trial run, involve invited participants, but everyone will have an opportunity to sign up later. On Lionel Deimel’s Web Log, I have described my experience in the initial dialogue. If you’re interested in the conversation, you can read my post here.

Why Chant?

Today’s 10:45 service was a musical mixed bag. Among other things, the choir sang Herbert Howells supremely beautiful “O Pray for the Peace of Jerusalem.” There were other musical highlights as well. Also, there was Michelle Boomgaard’s chanting at the beginning of the Eucharist.

It is thoroughly inadequate to say that Michelle’s nervous chanting was bad. It was, in fact, excruciating. It was not only inadequate, but also distracting. It took one’s attention away from the text of the liturgy and surely caused many to think, “When is this agony going to be over?”

Now, I like Michelle. I like her the more I know her, in fact. Moreover, I understand that she practiced diligently for today’s assignment. She was not, however, ready for prime time. Why was she allowed to chant today? Her performance was particularly distressing in comparison with Lou’s chanting, which, as I recently noted, is quite good. That you don’t chant well doesn’t mean you aren’t a good priest or that you shouldn’t be one in the first place. Why was Michelle allowed to embarrass herself?

Why, in fact, do we chant at all at St. Paul’s? I have heard that chanting was developed because it allowed for greater intelligibility in large spaces without the benefit of sound systems. We chant now out of some sense of tradition, I suspect, but we don’t do it regularly. We don’t chant the whole service. If we are going to chant at all, why do it half way? But we are chanting in Lent. Are we doing so because this is a penitential season? If we were less sinful, could we dispense with Michelle’s chanting? Do any parishioners even like chanting, even if well done? I doubt it.

Good News/Bad News on the First Sunday in Lent

First, the good news. As usual, the 10:45 service began with the Great Litany. (This led me to do some research, which I report on my main blog in the post “Persons of the Trinity.” But I digress.) Lou and Annette Tierney alternated in chanting the part of the celebrant in the long Litany, and they each did a very good job. Lou definitely chants better than most priests I’ve known.

The postlude was performed by Bill Owens on trumpet, Curtis Starr on trombone, Tommy Starr on timpani, and Doug Starr on the organ. It was a quite wonderful arrangement by Doug of Copland’s well-known “Fanfare for the Common Man.” It helped that our organ has some magnificent trumpet stops. What was particularly remarkable was the fact that I did not see one person leave after the dismissal. Everyone stayed to listen to the postlude, and they clapped enthusiastically when it was over.

Bill, Curt, Tommy, Doug, and Bryan Sable played at a Friends of Music concert at 3 o’clock. It was surely an unusual all-instrumental concert. They again performed “Fanfare for the Common Man,” as well as some Copeland songs, less the actual singing. Much of the program was devoted to early music, however. The audience was small, but appreciative.

Now, the bad news. The 10:45 service began with a problem. We had only one acolyte, and we were doing the most complicated procession we ever do. (Informally, the path taken by the choir as we sing the Great Litany is referred to as “the pretzel.”) The procession down the (liturgical) north aisle was led by a crucifer, but Annette, in the south aisle, was on her own. The choir improvised nicely, and I’m sure most worshipers were unaware that anything was amiss. By the time we were a few minutes into the service, another two acolytes had materialized from somewhere. I long for the days when St. Paul’s reliably had seven acolytes at each principal Sunday service. We are enlisting ever younger acolytes, but we cannot seem to get them to show up.

The choir sang two anthems—well, I think, but I may not be objective. One of the anthems, Farrant’s “Call to remembrance,” a favorite of mine, was sung just after we had sung the Angus Dei. At this point, the Chinese fire drill began. We had been told to abandon our sections and take up positions in which choir members singing different parts would be mixed up. We didn’t quite execute this as planned, and I fear the effect was chaotic. Then there was confusion about when we should be taking communion ourselves, and more chaos ensued. Doug began playing the communion hymn before most of us had returned to our places. I hope worshipers were concentrating on their own trip to the communion rail and not watching the choir, whose comings and goings were not a pretty sight.

Finally, there was this afternoon’s concert. The concert itself was fine, actually, but the church was inordinately cold. The church had been comfortable in the morning, though the choir room registered 52°F when I showed up for rehearsal at 9:30. (I had nearly frozen to death in Bible study in the lounge Saturday morning, when that room was also in the 50s.) Anyway, I had meant to put on my sport coat before I left the house, but I only grabbed my parka, which I left in the cloakroom downstairs when I returned to the church for the concert. It was a cold concert indeed, and I was jealous of concertgoers wearing sweaters or coats. On cold days, why can’t we heat the building enough so that it is only mildly chilly?

Commissions

I was  at the church this morning for Saturday Bible Study. There was not yet any sign of an Annual Report or brochure about Vestry candidates. As I was leaving, however, I noticed a listing of current Vestry members and the commissions to which they are assigned. I was surprised that the number of commissions is reduced from what it once was, and two Vestry members are assigned to a number of commissions. The current commissions are as follows (number of Vestry members assigned are shown in parentheses):

• Children & Youth (2)
• Fellowship (2)
• Outreach (1)
• Stewardship (2)
• Welcoming (1)
• Worship (1)

By contrast, here is the commission list from the 2003 Annual Report:

• Children and Youth Ministries (1)
• Communications (1)
• Fellowship (1)
• Outreach (1)
• Pastoral (1)
• Spiritual Growth (1)
• Stewardship (1)
• Worship (1)

Some Observations

 Currently, 9 Vestry members are assigned to commissions; in 2003, only 8 were. Both then and now, of course, the property has been the primary responsibility of the junior warden. Other roles that need to be filled are those of senior warden, treasurer, and secretary. The treasurer, secretary, and junior warden may be, but need not be among the 12 lay Vestry members, which I assume accounts for the 8 versus 9 commission members in 2003 versus 2012.

What I find especially interesting is the disappearance of the Pastoral and Spiritual Growth commissions. I assume that clergy have taken over these responsibilities and operate largely without Vestry oversight. One conspicuous result of this is that Adult Forum seldom hosts outside speakers, and the topics covered are more circumscribed than formerly.

The disappearance of the Communications commission is unsurprising. It was actually short-lived. The need for it is no less pressing than in 2003, but the commission was problematic, since it attempted to oversee and influence paid staff members. (Maybe there is an insight to be had about the Pastoral and Spiritual Growth commissions here as well.)

It is, no doubt, a good idea to have two Vestry people assigned to Stewardship. The job of the Stewardship commission is important, difficult, and—dare I say it—unpopular.

On the other hand, I am perplexed by the assignment of two Vestry members to the Fellowship commission and one to the Welcoming commission. Do we really need three people devoted to hospitality? Of course, people on Fellowship are subject to burnout, as parishioners seem to think that their job is to run events personally, not simply organize them.

It isn’t clear just how many non-Vestry people are involved with commissions. At one time, at least a handful of people were on each commissions, and the commissions met on the same night once a month. That doesn’t seem to be the case any more. That’s a pity, since the commissions provide a means to involve more people in running the church and to lighten the load of Vestry members.

One commission whose demise is to be lamented is the Property commission. In recent years, the junior warden seems to have acted largely alone, but it would be helpful if a small representative group of parishioners provided  regular advice to the junior warden. I have written about what I think is needed here—my suggestions go somewhat beyond a Property commission as it has been constituted in the past—and I commend to you what I wrote on the subject about two years ago. (See “Managing Change in a House of Worship.”)