Opening the debate on the report of the Liturgical Advisory Committee, Dr Valerie Jones (Dublin) urged that the LAC draft some notes to explain the Old Testament readings in the Lectionary. Dr Johnson (Cork) said he was impressed to find that the Church had a template document discussing how clergy should deal with the H1N1 pandemic. George Woodman (Connor) referring to Dr Jones’s comments agreed that many clergy don’t refer to Old Testament readings in their sermons. He added that in previous years there were such notes. 

Replying to the comments of Dr Jones, the Bishop noted that “we spent a lot of time talking about the revised common lectionary some years ago.” Noting that the lectionary is an ecumenical one he said, “it binds us all together in a common reading of scripture ecumenically.”  He emphasized that “the purpose of reading scripture in church is to allow the word to speak for itself.” He also commended the template document on dealing with the H1N1 pandemic.

Following the debate on the report the Synod approved a document on Liturgical space which will act as a set of guidelines for churches seeking to make alterations to its layout and furnishings. Proposing acceptance of the document, the Bishop of Cashel and Ossory he emphasized that “it’s a statute not a code…it’s an attempt to give a snapshot of liturgical space issues at this time.” The Venerable Ricky Rountree, seconding said, “the shape and style tend to have an effect on the way that worship can be conducted. Worship leaders should be aware of this and its implications.”

The Archdeacon of Down, the Venerable Philip Patterson expressed disquiet. “I am concerned that this expresses a particular taste” he said. “What we have is a particular document that expresses a particular theology of our day.” Once the code is there they tend to become codified and can be included in our constitution, it begins as a code but becomes a statue.”

The Archdeacon of Connor, the Venerable Stephen McBride agreed with the Archdeacon of Down. “I wear a hat here as a member of the Ulster Historical Churches Trust for their views…this code could encourage people to meddle in buildings…we have to remember the integrity of our buildings and how they were designed.” One maxim he said is “do as much as necessary and as little as possible.” The Revd Canon John McKegney also agreed. “I’d be very worried indeed that it gives an open door to liturgical fidgets.” The Bishop of Down and Dromore disagreed with the two Archdeacons. He said “you have given the LAC the task of dealing with the liturgy and how it is expressed.” Rather than encouraging people to meddle he said, “but to do the very opposite.”

The Revd Canon Michael Kennedy (Armagh) asked if those who objected had actually read the report. He said that the objections are “necessary alarmist.” Robert Neill (Glendalough)  said the place for these guidelines is on the website rather than “as a code to be published.” Cynthia Cherry (Connor) said we should have further guidelines beyond the code.

Replying to some of the points raised he said that once people have given something to the Church they belong to the Church not to the individuals who gave them nor their families. They cannot guide our worship for generations.”

::synod10::