Liturgy and Identity: What doesthe Liturgy Make of Me? by The Sheffield Centre

Liturgy and Identity: What does the Liturgy Make of Me? Interpreting the Effect of the Liturgy on Personal Identity in a Fresh Expression of Church

Tracy Robinson

Submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MA in Ministry (Oxford Brookes University)

Ripon College Cuddesdon - Oxford Brookes University May 2009

Abstract

This dissertation is concerned with the effects of the liturgy of corporate worship on personal identity - with what our worship is doing to us. It focusses this interest on fresh expressions of church, which are constantly developing and creating new liturgies. An adaptation of Stoddartâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (2005) interpretivist two-stage model for investigating the effects of the liturgy on personal identity has been used for this research in a case study fresh expression of church. The model is based on a social constructivist methodology which considers identity to be emergent and contextual and therefore open to being shaped by the multidimensional event of the liturgy. Participant observation and interview methods were used to obtain data, which was then analysed in two stages. In the first stage, a framework proposed by Downey (1997) for studying spirituality was used to sift the data which produced a thick description of the spirituality behind the liturgy. In the second stage, this thick description was analysed in the light of a model of personal identity (Collicutt, 2007), which enabled an interpretation of the possible effects of the liturgy of the research community on personal identity. The adaptation of Stoddartâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (2005) two stage model was found to offer an effective research methodology which, in spite of the insufficiency of Collicuttâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (2007) model to deal with the complexities of Christian personal identity, produced insightful results. The trends of the effect of the liturgy were towards movement and change rather than rootedness and stability, and to a focus on future development rather than the limitations of present realities. The research raises important questions about how churches deal with the paradoxes of the Christian faith in their liturgies, and about what skills might be needed for practitioners, particularly in the developing fresh expressions movement, to generate healthy and life-giving liturgies.

Acknowledgements

Grateful thanks to the research community for permission to carry out this research and for their generous hospitality, and to Helen Cameron for her care-full and encouraging supervision.

Contents

Introduction

Ch 1

Liturgy and Identity: Exploring the Concepts

Ch 2 Exploring Issues of Liturgy and Identity in Fresh Expressions of Church

Ch 3 Methodology and Methods

Ch 4 The Spirituality Behind the Liturgy

Ch 5 What Does the Liturgy Make of Me?

Ch 6 Conclusions

Bibliography

Appendix

List of Data Sources

Observation Schedule

100

Interview Questions

101

Research Information Sheet

102

Introduction

It can seem a simple undertaking for church and worship leaders to quickly put a service of worship together. But the complexity of the task becomes apparent when consideration is given to the possible effects the liturgy may be having on the identities of those participating in the worship. Over a prolonged period of doing corporate worship in particular ways, or when liturgy is being creatively renewed on a regular basis, it is very easy to become unconscious for different reasons of the effects of our worship. It would be healthy practice for those with responsibility for developing liturgy and leading corporate worship to be able to make an interpretive assessment of the possible effects of the liturgy on the identities of those contributing to and participating in it. In order to do this, practitioners would need to develop a particular consciousness in the area of liturgy and identity, and be offered the assistance of practical tools for the assessment of liturgy.

The literature on liturgy reveals that much work has been done on the pedagogical nature of the liturgy in Christian formation, as well as in the area of liturgy and corporate identity. However, there is a distinct gap in the literature on how liturgy may affect and effect personal identity. Noticing the paucity of literature on the subject, Eric Stoddart (2005) proposed a two-stage model of enquiry to investigate the after effects of worship â&#x20AC;&#x201C; what our liturgy is doing to self-identity. This research project will make use of Stoddartâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (2005) proposed model to shed light on the

possible effects of the liturgy of corporate worship on personal identity, and to assess its feasibility as a research tool.

I am particularly interested in the liturgical issues peculiar to fresh expressions of church as new and developing congregations, where liturgy for corporate worship is in a process of perpetual construction and experimentation. It would be beneficial to those involved in constructing and using liturgies in this context to be aware of the possible effects of such liturgies on the self-identity of those participating in corporate worship, and to have available some kind of tool to be able to assess what effect their worship might be having.

It is hoped that such an investigation could serve to open up new and important conversations in the literature regarding liturgy and personal identity. At a time when issues of identity are particularly salient, this would impact the consciousness of practitioners, enabling liturgy to be approached with the sensitivity, intelligence and awareness required for the best practice of corporate worship.

The research is situated in a practical theology framework - a study of Christian practice facilitated through dialogue with liturgy and psychology. The aims of the research are twofold. Firstly, to interpret the effect of the liturgy of corporate worship on personal identity in a fresh expression of church - the ‘me’ in the title refers to a conceptual ‘me’, any particular person encountering the liturgy. Secondly, the research aims to assess Stoddart’s (2005) two-stage proposed model as a tool for investigating the effect of the liturgy on personal identity. The

research intends to expose and critique the gap in the literature on the subject of liturgy and personal identity and to demonstrate the particular relevance for fresh expressions of church of issues concerning liturgy and identity. It intends to critique and refine Stoddartâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (2005) theoretical two-stage model of investigation for use in fieldwork research. It will interpret the possible effects of the liturgy of corporate worship on personal identity in a case study fresh expression of church, and critique Stoddartâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (2005) model in the light of the research experience, assessing its usefulness for researchers and practitioners in the future.

Chapter 1 Liturgy and Identity: Exploring the Concepts

This chapter introduces the concepts of liturgy and identity. It looks at how the liturgy is a rich source of potential meaning for questions of identity by considering what liturgy is, including the purpose and ambition of the liturgy. It considers briefly how liturgical renewal has been stimulated through a recognition of issues relating to identity, before introducing Stoddart’s (2005) interest in the question of how the liturgy might affect personal identity. This leads on to an investigation of the concept of personal identity, including different approaches to personal identity, important factors in identity formation and an indication of the link between spirituality, liturgy and personal identity. It considers a working model of personal identity which will provide a framework of reference in considering the impact of the liturgy on identity. Finally, it looks at a theological understanding of identity, which will underpin the interpretation of the effects of the liturgy on personal identity.

The fundamental existential question of ‘Who am I?’ has the paradoxical effect of richly energising and plaguing humanity. It causes both enthusiastic drive and frustrated restlessness in the ongoing search for answers, to find a settled state and a functioning framework from which one can effectively and satisfyingly live. And the question exists because we are not alone. The question exists because of the other – both the transcendent Other, and the other of humanity – who I am not. It is the relationship between myself, Other and other which enables and highlights 4

particularity – a uniqueness and specificity of being which causes us to question who we are. Exactly what kind of particularity is what each of us wrestle with and embrace and wrestle with throughout our lives.

The liturgy of corporate worship provides a focussed and time-limited space of intentional relation (which includes both conscious and unconscious elements) to both the transcendent Other, and the human other. In the interaction of self, Other and other, the liturgy is a rich source of potential meaning in the quest for answers to the question, ‘Who am I?’. The purpose and dynamics of liturgy, the way in which it works, and how it is used is therefore important to understand for the purposes of this research, which sees it as shaping and making sense of the self.

The word ‘liturgy’ comes from two Greek words – laos meaning ‘of or for the people’ and ergon meaning ‘work’ (Burns, 2006). Its meaning therefore carries with it the strong implication of participation – liturgy is produced by the people for the people to worship God. Liturgy is the work of the people in corporate worship – a vehicle for persons-in-community to engage with God in an embodied way. The essence of liturgy, the heartbeat so-to-speak, is invitation and response. All the senses are used in appropriating the invitation to engagement with God, with ourselves and with the worshipping community - hearing, sight, touch, smell and taste. Response to God, self and to others is facilitated through movement, speech, artistic expression, music, singing, silence. Looked at in this way, every act of corporate worship involves liturgy, and the idea of a ‘non-liturgical’ service is in fact a misnomer (Burns, 2006).

The purpose of the liturgy is threefold. Firstly, it provides a framework for corporate worship, which involves order and provision of particular ways of being and doing in a confined space and time. Secondly, it creates meaning through communicating in diverse ways the story of God’s relating to humankind, and in light of this encourages personal and corporate appraisal of relationship with God, self and other people. And thirdly, liturgy offers the possibility of fresh encounter with God, ourselves and with others as it invites participation and response in a variety of different ways to what is being discovered and appropriated. If it is fulfilling its purpose, liturgy makes sense of who we are both personally and corporately as a worshipping community – it helps to form our identity in relation to God, to self, to others and to the world as a whole.

The ambition of the liturgy in Christian worship is to enable worshippers to move towards greater clarity about God, self and others; it encourages and facilitates a different way of seeing. Drawing on Catherine Bell’s work on ritualisation, Susan Marie Smith (2006) envisages ritualisation in the liturgy as “a strategic way of acting through differentiation which privileges some actions and ways of “seeing” over others and renegotiates power relations” (p382). Ritualisation then requires perceptive decision in what to privilege and how in the worshipping community, which will shift people’s ‘sight’, with a change in the balance of power relations at stake. Liturgy aims to excite the imagination to hope, so that effective liturgy has the potential to draw the individual and community beyond themselves, and beyond constructed limitations and boundaries. Where liturgy struggles in its ambition, its effect is to “starve the imagination and to drive individuals and communities inward” (Holeton, 1988, p8).

The importance of liturgy in forming identity has been well recognised, and this can be seen as one of the fundamental concerns behind the impassioned work of liturgical renewal throughout the 20th century. Examples of this renewal work abound in the literature. There has been much work done on standardised forms of liturgy, carefully reworking wording so that the intended meaning is more easily accessible (Holeton, 1988). The Church of England has revised liturgical texts and structures in the last decade, presenting them in such as way as to encourage unprecedented flexibility and creativity (Earey and Myers, 2001). A Service of the Word provides the minimal legal structural elements for corporate worship, which can be imaginatively interpreted and developed to take into account all manner of worship space, time, context and resources (The Archbishop’s Council, 2000).

In the wider church, there has also been a move away from the standardisation of liturgy, which has dominated some mainstream churches for centuries. This in large part stems from an awareness of the potential damage caused through the imposition of particular assumptions and values upon others (Burns, 2006). There is increasing interest in the ‘inculturation’ of worship, whereby liturgy is formed and shaped through “the creative and dynamic relationship between the Christian message and a culture or cultures” (Shorter, 1988, in Tovey, 2004, p2). It has been recognised that liturgy which remains uncontextualised because it has been imported unthoughtfully from elsewhere, can cause alienation and the sense that one is following another’s religion (Clarke, 1985, in Tovey, 2004). This clearly has important consequences for the shaping and formation of a person’s selfunderstanding and sense of personal identity. More recently, this revision and

renewal work has included increased sensitivity to the marginalised, there now being examples of marginalised groups gaining explicit recognition and welcome in the liturgy (Day, 1990, in Burns, 2006).

This revision work focuses largely on identity issues relating to people groups, and this is reflected in the research on identity and liturgy. It is perhaps a little surprising that there is no literature available on research looking at the effect of liturgy on personal identity. So is it legitimate to ask the question, ‘what does the liturgy make of me? It is both a question of information – the collected facts and data – and a question of formation – what are the possibilities for the future?

Eric Stoddart (2005) has demonstrated interest in this question in a paper which proposes a two stage model to research the after-effects of worship. He sees the question of what our liturgy is contributing to people’s self-identity as being fundamentally important since “the call to worship is also a call to personhood” (Stoddart, 2005, p101). As a person participates in the corporate story of the liturgy, there is an appropriation of answers to the question “Who am I?” The liturgy of corporate worship offers the possibility of interpreting and making sense of who I am; it both affects and effects identity. This has important implications for the development of and participation in liturgy, with its power of interpretation. It would appear then that it is a legitimate question to be asking, and consequently, this research seeks to explore the question of liturgy and personal identity, building on Stoddart’s (2005) initiative and employing his suggested methodology.

In order to understand how liturgy impacts our sense of selfhood, it is necessary to explore the concept of identity. Identity is essentially about a consciousness of being – recognising those things which make up my sense of self, who I am. Emphasising the conscious nature of identity, Bauman (1996, in Hoyland, 2007, p171) states that “one thinks of identity whenever one is not sure of where one belongs… a name given to escape from uncertainty”. Identity can perhaps be spoken of then as a way of defining ourselves at any particular moment in time, which relieves us from uncertainty. It is a live concept, guiding our conceptualisation and evaluation of ourselves in relation to others and our social setting, and informing behaviour as a consequence.

The personal-social identity continuum describes how we can identify ourselves in two distinct ways. Personal identity refers to the perception of ourselves as unique individuals, while social identity refers to the awareness of ourselves as members of specific social groups (Baron, Byrne & Branscombe, 2006, p171). This highlights the fact that we do not experience all possible aspects of and contributors to our identity simultaneously, but particular aspects become more prominent at any given moment, influencing how we think about ourselves and how we act. Identity has been described as a “meeting ground for many different allegiances”, which vary in importance and power (Maalouf, 2000, in Hoyland, 2007, p171). These two ‘poles’ will obviously be very much at work in the response of a particular person to the liturgy.

Another way of looking at the experience of different aspects of and contributors to identity is to consider that a person is made up of different identity domains, such

as sexual, ethnic and religious domains (Bell, 2008, p127). The idea of identity domains has enabled a proliferation of identity research in the past decade, which has focussed in on identity in specific domains.

How we identify ourselves through time and according to circumstance is changeable â&#x20AC;&#x201C; identity has a certain plasticity because identity is a developmental process. James Marcia (1966, in Bell, 2008) conducted research which established a patterned growth of identity. He proposed four statuses of overall identity formation â&#x20AC;&#x201C; identity diffusion, foreclosure, moratorium and achieved (Marcia, 1966, in Bell, 2008). Identity achieved meant a person had gone through significant crises and identity explorations, resulting in a significant identity commitment. Identity moratorium meant a person was in the middle of exploring identity with a desire to achieve some direction. Identity foreclosure described a person who had formed an identity commitment without any process of exploration (for example, mimicking the commitments of childhood). Identity diffusion described the person in identity exploration, but unconcerned with a lack of direction (Marcia, 1966, in Bell, 2008).

This research on identity development is being taken further in work by Bell et al (2008), looking specifically at the domain of religious identity. It has been noted that the growth of religious identity is not directional, but identity status can fluctuate according to stage in life, situational factors and life experience. This has profound implications for the effect of liturgy on identity, perhaps particularly for liturgy used in pastoral services such as weddings, funerals, memorials and baptisms.

Changes in identity are impacted largely through relationship, because identity is a relational concept whereby consciously or unconsciously, we identify ourselves in relation to others. A social constructivist perspective sees this arising out of communication in relationship – the things we communicate say and do something. Language is more than just a transport system conveying messages from one mind to another. Communication “is a form of social engagement which acts back on those communicating and constructs their nature” (Wetherell & Maybin, 1996, p241). The particular meaning of any utterance is dependent on both the context and the network of surrounding talk or text.

The context within which relationships are embedded will also be an important factor affecting and effecting identity. The culture of postmodernity is having a profound effect on identity, the consideration of which is important in understanding current influences on and concerns of the self. Postmodernity has been effected by a dramatic shift in consciousness over the last decade of the twentieth century. It has meant an increasing consciousness “of the relativity and particularity of every perspective and position”, fuelling conflicting interpretations of reality (McCarthy, 1999, p194).

Identity in modernity was in large part ‘constructed’ by the myth of progress and bureaucratic control perpetuated by large, dominating institutions and industry, and self-confident scientific enterprise. It seems the downfall of modernity has come with the realisation that the certainty and promise of rationality, and the authority prescribed to science, economic growth, democracy and law, cannot create a

secure environment for the self - the very attempts at the construction (and control) of identity have unsettled the self (Lyon 1999, p27).

Consequently, identity in postmodernity is ‘deconstructed’ – deeply suspicious of authority, of institutions, of metanarratives, which by their nature seek to influence the construct of the self through their broad-brush frameworks. The deconstructed self holds the illusion of individualised power and control, the currency of which is choice. The self is characterised by multiplicity, variability and flexibility – “postmodern identity is construed as a de-centrated, constantly altering mixture or playful pastiche of individual styles closely related to a person’s variable patterns of consumption in the global economy.” (Simon, 2003, p63). Its allegiances are loose and focused in time on the present moment, which means the self is “ceaseless becoming, bereft of origin and purpose” (Webster, 2003, p221).

Perhaps this explains the recent surge of interest in spirituality – the quest of the self for meaning and positioning and expression. Spirituality is intimately connected with identity – the search for and practice of our sense of self. And there is evidence that this searching has become increasingly individualised, or personalised, reflecting the mistrust and disregard for the traditional spiritual guidance provided by institutionalised religion (Heelas and Woodhead, 2005). In reflecting on their important research findings, Heelas and Woodhead (2005) conclude that in the past the self was held and formed in relation to external authority – be this state, institution, family or religion. Today the self is sustained and formed subjectively – in relation to inner processes of emotion, passion, memory, bodily experiences, inner conscience and sentiments.

The research findings of Heelas and Woodhead (2005) shed important light on the context for Christian worship and ministry today. The findings encourage the careful development and judicious use of liturgy in the church which connects with subjective experience. It should be recognised that in seeking to bring meaning, purpose and connection out of reference to something greater than and external to the self, the liturgy is a significant expression of spirituality (McCarthy, 1999). As the desire for spirituality drives the search of the subjective self for meaning, the liturgy serves spirituality in creating meaning, thereby playing an important part in the formation and shaping of identity in relation to God, other people, and the world. This research will exploit the intimate relationship between liturgy and spirituality, by uncovering the spirituality, or the meaning, behind the liturgy, using a method of studying spirituality proposed by Downey (1997). This method will be looked at in detail in chapter 3.

So in summarising this study of the concept of identity so far, it has been established that identity is a conscious process, made up of many contributing factors, which may be quite separate and at times even contradictory. We do not experience particular facets or contributors to our identity simultaneously, but what we perceive of ourselves at any particular moment is largely dependent on context. This enables us to function in a variety of different settings and in a range of differing roles. More recent research has focussed on the importance of different identity domains. In addition, research has demonstrated particular developmental statuses of identity, which are themselves unstable and open to change, highlighting the plasticity of identity. And the pervasive nature of culture,

affecting how we interpret our relationships and the world we live in, is also an important influence on identity.

Considering the complexity of identity, it is critical to have a working model of identity which will provide the necessary framework of reference in considering the effect of liturgy on identity. Such a model would need to take into account the conscious, multifaceted, developmental nature of the self. As a clinical psychologist, Joanna Collicutt (2007) has proposed a way of understanding the different elements of ‘being me’ in the context of the rehabilitation of brain injury patients. In such a context, the model highlights all the areas which need to be considered in a rehabilitation process. For this reason, it may function well as a framework to reflect on the messages about identity contained in the liturgy, since liturgy in its formational role could be considered as a rehabilitative event.

There are five aspects to Collicutt’s (2007) model. The first is a sense of physical identity and integrity, where the physical features of a person confer both belonging (such as to ethnic groups and biological families) and distinctiveness in terms of features, size and relative proportions. Physical identity and integrity also confers a sense of personal space, and acts of touch have the potential to compromise personal identity, whilst perhaps reinforcing corporate identity (Gurevitch 1989, in Collicutt, 2007, p57). The second aspect is freedom of movement and action, or autonomy, which incorporates both the physical and psychological freedom to move and to function independently. The third aspect of ‘being me’ concerns habitual behaviours and behavioural styles. The way in which a person does things will be influenced by both ability and temperament, and also

values and ultimate goals. The fourth aspect is social place, which involves the assumption of and movement between different social roles. These roles give us a particular place and describe our relationships with others (Collicutt, 2007, p118). The fifth and final aspect of the model involves personal narratives, which give identity both its coherency and its dynamic, developing characteristic. Memory plays an important role in this, so that â&#x20AC;&#x153;our sense of who we are is dependent on the construction of a set of reasonably coherent narratives based on past eventsâ&#x20AC;? (Collicutt, 2007, p62).

Having identified a working model of identity for use in this research, there is yet another important dimension which needs to be taken into account in considering the effect of the liturgy of corporate worship on personal identity. Liturgy situates itself within and perpetuates a Christian narrative, which provides a framework and meaning for the whole of a personâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s life. In this sense it is an identity-integrating narrative, the relationship of the omnipresent and omniscient God to our selves encompassing every aspect of life. The Christian narrative perpetuates a theological identity, a theology of personhood which should be reflected in the liturgy.

In searching for a theological understanding of identity, Vernon White (2002) derives from the creator-creature relationship that if God is the ultimate basis of what and who we are, then we draw from his identity to understand our own. A number of conclusions can be drawn from his work. Personhood is the most fundamental constituent of identity, manifesting as a continuous thread or enduring fact running throughout all human lives. The essential elements of personhood,

arising from being created in the image of the Trinitarian God, include particularity (the unique centre with which we relate to others) and relationality. White (2002, p49) sees personhood as â&#x20AC;&#x153;an enduring, unitary, relational continuum of our beingâ&#x20AC;? which reflects the imprint of divine being.

We hold simultaneously an actual identity and a potential identity. Who we are at any particular moment is different to who we could be in the future, impacted largely through changes in self-perception in response to relationship. Potential identity can unfold positively or negatively, bringing either development or decay (White, 2002). An interpretation of the two great commandments given by Jesus in Scripture (Matt 22: 36-40) might indicate that an important part of identity development involves growth in receiving Godâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s love and responding through a growing love of God and love of neighbour as self. The major contributor to identity decay would then be rejection (in all its guises) of God, neighbour and self, with consequent isolation, amounting to a denial of personhood.

As created beings in the image of God, the paradox of contingency and freedom are both the cause of and contributors to change in identity. Contingency means that theologically we only exist in any sense by dependence on God. Our personhood, as the enduring fact of human identity, only exists by relation to God first and foremost, and to others. Changes in our identity are influenced very often by circumstances and relationships beyond our control, which can both threaten our identity and fulfil it; we are not in control of how others relate to us. On the other hand, we have freedom to both give and receive in relationship with God and others and the choices we make in this freedom influence important aspects of

identity such as our character, outlook on life and abilities. However, this freedom is constrained by sin, so that in contrast to God, we are not truly free to be fully ourselves (White, 2002).

A theological anthropology would say that there is a sense in which we can be true to our personal identity, in spite of the contingency – freedom paradox. And this is because in our personhood there is continuity of story, giving the possibility of always displaying the same person no matter how radical the changes. A theological perspective of identity calls on the big picture, the narrative of our lives within the narrative of God, to make sense of who we are – “it will matter therefore, to live and act on this basis, in relation to ourselves and others. That is how we will be true to our personal identity.” (White, 2002, p49).

As Christians there is a relational calling always to have God and others in mind – this is an essential part of our identity. The very fact of corporate worship – coming together as persons in community to worship God – speaks to this identity and should reinforce it – it stands as a narrative of meaning. Coming to corporate worship could be construed as an identity-reinforcer – who I am is commitment to God, commitment to self and commitment to others. And the vehicle and expression of this identity education and reinforcement is the liturgy.

This chapter has introduced the major concepts of liturgy and identity, drawing on relevant literature from a number of different disciplines. It has considered the purpose and ambition of the liturgy and looked at the recent impetus for liturgical revision and renewal sparked by a concern for intended meaning and sensitivity to

particular cultures and people groups. It has exposed the gap in the literature on liturgy and personal identity. The important connection between liturgy and spirituality, which share a meaning-making intention in relation to identity, has been demonstrated. The concept of identity has been investigated using psychological and theological approaches. A working model of identity has been proposed which, alongside important theological considerations, will provide a framework of reference in interpreting the effects of the liturgy on personal identity in this case study. We now move on to consider issues of liturgy and identity specifically in relation to fresh expressions of church.

Chapter 2 Exploring Issues of Liturgy and Identity in Fresh Expressions of Church

This chapter looks at the fresh expressions movement in the UK, and considers how issues of liturgy and identity are particularly pertinent to it at the present time. It outlines the development of the fresh expressions movement, considers a working definition, and looks at what is being recognised in practice as a fresh expression of church. The main concerns and consequent shaping characteristics of fresh expressions of church are identified, and different critiques of the movement looked at. The development and support of fresh expressions of church is considered, focussing particularly on current practice in the development of liturgy, including resources and guidance available to practitioners. It concludes with identifying what is at stake in the creation of fresh liturgies on a regular basis, including personal formation and the development of ethics, demonstrating the relevance of this research.

If liturgy creates meaning, educates and reinforces identity for an individual and a community, then there are vital aspects of the liturgy to pay attention to. What liturgy is being used and how? Who is involved in creating it? How is it created in relation to purpose, context, time, space, resources available and so on. These questions are particularly pertinent for churches where the liturgy is regularly being re-created and developed. This is acutely the case for the growing number of

‘fresh expressions’ of church in the UK and around the world, which come out of a developing movement of experimentation with innovative ways of being church. Of course, the church has been renewing itself innovatively in every generation since its inception, but this movement appears distinctive in our time for the rapidly growing breadth and volume of activities consciously associated with ‘fresh expressions’ of church.

The Church of England has formally recognised and endorsed this movement, particularly in the commissioning of the Mission Shaped Church Report in 2004 (The Archbishop’s Council, 2004). This report sought both to investigate what is happening on the ground, and to explore a theology for these innovative forms of church. The wide distribution of the report has had a significant impact on the Church of England and other denominations such as the Methodist Church, so that the term ‘fresh expression of church’ has become very familiar in a relatively short space of time (Williams, 2007, p14). Alongside this report, the Archbishop of Canterbury has funded an Archbishop’s Missioner and the setting up of the agency Fresh Expressions to support and develop the work of these emerging forms of church within the Church of England (Mobsby, 2007, p8). The online resources and training ministry of Fresh Expressions is now of international significance, being tapped into by groups and communities in the USA, and the Anglican Church in Canada has recently announced the launch of Fresh Expressions Canada as a vehicle to facilitate the church’s engagement with Canadian contemporary culture (Adams, 2008).

The phrase ‘fresh expressions of church’ consciously reflects the focus on mission in the Church of England’s Declaration of Assent: the church is “called to proclaim afresh in each generation” the faith which is revealed in the Holy Scriptures and set forth in the catholic creeds (The Archbishop’s Council, 2000, pxi). The Fresh Expressions website gives the following as a working definition of a fresh expression of church: “A fresh expression is a form of church for our changing culture, established primarily for the benefit of people who are not yet members of any church. It will come into being through principles of listening, service, incarnational mission and making disciples. It will have the potential to become a mature expression of church shaped by the gospel and the enduring marks of the church and for its cultural context” (http:// www.freshexpressions.org.uk//section.asp?id=3547&cachefixer=, accessed 25/3/09). Although this definition is seen as an open-ended attempt to try to capture what is happening on the ground, it gives fairly clear and strong attributes to fresh expressions of church. These include the ideas of fresh expressions being for a changing culture, having an organic, mission-focussed origin, having a shaping agenda (making disciples), and existing in a transitory phase on the road towards becoming a mature expression of church. These ideas are clearly ones which will influence and impact the choices made about what is done, where and how when people gather with the intention of in some sense ‘facing’ God and each other – these are liturgical choices. And they will consequently be of interest in considering the question of how the liturgy of a particular congregation is affecting and effecting the personal identity of those participating in it.

So what is being recognised as church? The Mission Shaped Church report identified a whole range of different worshipping communities and activities 21

considered to be fresh expressions of church. These included communities engaged in alternative worship, cafĂŠ church, cell church, worshipping communities growing out of community initiatives and schools, network focussed churches, seeker churches, traditional church plants and youth congregations (The Archbishopâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Council, 2004, p44). The common thread of these fresh expressions of church has been the desire to engage more fully with cultures outside of traditional or inherited church cultures. This involves an intentional closing of the gap between what people experience inside church, and what they experience in their everyday lives, whatever their life contexts. It is possible that such efforts to close the sacred-secular gap in a postmodern context could be seen as arising out of the desire for identity-integration in a demanding and confusing cultural climate.

Indeed, most fresh expressions of church recognise that they are creating forms of worship and being church in such a way as to resonate with the pervasive complexities of a postmodern, post-Christendom culture. Post-Christendom describes the culture which is losing, or has lost conscious connection with the Christian faith, as institutions which communicate the Christian story are in decline (Murray, 2004, in Williams, 2007, p15). Fresh expressions of church deliberately seek to address the cultural discontinuity between church culture and everyday culture, through engaging with points of connection within postmodern culture. Mobsby (2007, p41-47) identifies these points of connection as being a hunger for relationships and belonging, a desire for spiritual exploration, the embrace of new forms of communication, creating space for listening and dialogue, engaging with and reframing consumption, offering exploratory ways of being and doing, reframing and engaging with the ancient, connecting with more feminine

understandings of power and relationships, and recreating and transforming public space. Engaging with, developing and transfiguring these postmodern points of connection in corporate worship is the task of the liturgy in any expression of church.

John Hull’s (2006) critique of the Mission-Shaped Church report raises concerns about a number of important issues for fresh expressions. The limited ecclesiology of the report he claims, proves ambiguous in its ideas about the church and the mission of God, so that at times, the church appears to be the mission of God itself. This becomes problematic when a failure of the church to grow numerically is equated with a failure in mission, so that church growth then becomes the mission agenda rather than the much wider mission of God, of which the church is a small part. In relation to culture and inculturation, Hull (2006) is concerned by the dumbing down of the prophetic role of the church in challenging prevailing social systems and their power structures, such as that of consumerism - “instead of a leading prophetic role for the church, the report concludes that the church needs to adapt itself to the culture of choice by providing more varieties of expressions of church.” (p19).

Martyn Percy (2008) is also concerned by the driving agenda of cultural relevance for fresh expressions of church, which “is elevated as the primary mode of engaging with contemporary society” (p27). He sees the fresh expressions movement as becoming complicit with the endemic post-institutionalism of contemporary culture, which, in stark contrast to the community building intention of many fresh expressions of church, dissuades people from belonging and

commitment and avoids the demands of duty and service which community life inevitably generates. Consequently, the organisations which sustain social and spiritual capital (such as more traditional forms of church), funded by unfashionable duty and service over sustained periods of time, become discredited and undermined in the rhetoric of fresh expressions. Percy (2008) insists on the necessity of the institution of the church to sustain faith through successive generations, and that without this, â&#x20AC;&#x153;all weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ll have left is multi-choice spirituality, individualism and innovationâ&#x20AC;? (p38). These are not criticisms of the idea of fresh expressions of church as such, but warnings of the potential fleeting nature of ungrounded innovation, providing stimulation and change which may become an avoidance of the hard work of commitment, duty and service which undergird long term sustainability and the deep transformation of faithful discipleship.

Despite the criticisms and concerns, fresh expressions of church are rapidly growing and developing, and the principle of creating points of connection with culture in the liturgy is beginning to influence the life and worship of more traditional forms of church. However, engaging with these postmodern points of connection in corporate worship is a challenging task, bearing in mind the integrating, meaning-making intention of the liturgy in a culture sensitive to and suspicious of metanarrative and an authoritative framework of meaning.

This challenge has been recognised by Guest and Taylor (2006) who have undertaken research to explore how religious groups sustain durable Christian communities whilst self-consciously embracing a postmodern worldview. Their

findings from the study of two emerging church communities show that the decentring rhetoric necessary for a postmodern worldview is sustained through a decentring from religious authority located in the perceived shortcomings that have driven people out of mainstream church. The community bonding forces arise from a post-evangelical “yearning for the holistic, open-ended, visual and provocative, alongside a discomfort with the paternalistic authority structures, propositional notions of truth, and disengagement from contemporary culture” (Tomlinson, 1995, in Guest and Taylor, 2006, p60). The liturgy clearly has an important role to play here, providing stability through sustainable and meaningful forms of ritual which shape and cohere the identity both of the group and of individuals within the group (Guest and Taylor, 2006).

The influence of fresh expressions of church and the challenges they raise in their approaches to mission finds support in influential places in the Church of England. A key initiative of Rowan William’s primacy is the development and support of fresh expressions of church. His challenge to the church at this time is whether it is capable of moving towards a more ‘mixed economy’ of church life – “recognising church where it appears and having the willingness and the skill to work with it” (Williams 2004, in Mobsby, 2007, p8). To this end, the recommendation of the Mission-Shaped Church report was to give priority and attention to “the identification and training of leaders for pioneering missionary projects” (2004, p134), to provide opportunity and impetus towards a mixed economy of church life.

This recommendation has been taken forward by the Ministry Division and the Mission and Public Affairs Department through resourcing the vocational focus of

identifying, selecting and training pioneer church planters for lay and ordained ministries in the Church of England (The Archbishop’s Council of the Church of England, 2005). Guidelines have been drawn up for those involved in guiding and selecting for vocations, for institutions involved in initial and continuing training, and for future deployment, particularly in first post. As a result of this work, there are currently 350 people in training for pioneer ministry (http:// www.freshexpressions.org.uk//standard.asp?id=4332&cachefixer=, accessed 21/4/09).

The development of Bishop’s Mission Orders has provided a vehicle for cross boundary planting and also for accountability and support. The process of obtaining a Bishop’s Mission Order involves the bishop initially discerning with the initiators of a new church and consulting with affected parties in the area of the prospective church plant. In the giving of a Bishop’s Mission Order, a Visitor is appointed who will oversee the project, offering a mechanism of accountability, and a means of reporting progress to the bishop, which enables review and if necessary, a revoking of the Order (http://www.sharetheguide.org/section5/bmo, accessed 21/4/09). Bishop’s Mission Orders have implications for the liturgy of fresh expressions of church in that what is done in worship is subject to authorisation and conditions from the Bishop (Skeleton Bishop’s Mission Order, http://www.cofe.anglican.org/about/churchcommissioners/ pastoralandclosedchurches/pastoral/mission/bmos/, accessed 25/4/09)

The skill to work with fresh expressions of church, which Rowan Williams calls for, and which has both extensive training and accountability implications, comes in

significantly at the point of making choices about what will be done in sustaining the life of the community in corporate worship through the liturgy. More traditional forms of church, particularly in the Church of England make use of authorised forms of liturgy, which have been created and renewed corporately over a period of several hundred years. There is a depth of reflection and consensus in the liturgy which ‘holds’ traditional forms of church - a vital part of what Martyn Percy (2008) calls the ‘density’ of the church. Of course there are still questions to be asked about the effect on identity of these dense and complex authorised forms of liturgy. But this research is particularly interested in the choices that will need to be made, and are being made in the creation of liturgy which resonates with postmodern culture, and the potential effect of that liturgy on a person’s sense of self.

So how is liturgy currently being created in fresh expressions of church? Having reviewed what is at this stage largely a web-based sharing of ideas on what to do in worship in fresh expressions, a number of factors can be identified. It has to be said that these are fairly loose and unsystematic ideas, which could be found only by sifting through a lot of the general advisory material present on such websites. Decisions about what is done in the corporate gatherings of a fresh expression of church will be shaped by the set of values which the worshipping community has chosen to adopt, for example demonstrating unconditional love and generosity, or covenanting to build community (http://www.sharetheguide.org/section2/21century/ index.html/, accessed, 26/3/09). The liturgy, whether it is recognised or not, then becomes a corporate expression of the implicit or explicit values of the gathered church community.

Another important consideration in deciding what will be done in corporate worship in a fresh expression of church is that of capturing and engaging the growing interest in spirituality. This means both meeting people where they are - using culturally relevant means of communication, and creating opportunities for subjective experiential activities. Symbol, image and ritual using bodies and senses in worship become important factors in considering what the liturgy will contain (http://www.sharetheguide.org/develop/exploring/#creative, accessed 25/4/09).

It is acknowledged that issues about worship are currently coming to the fore in fresh expressions of church, and the Share website indicates that planning is underway for a section on worship, “to explore in detail some of the issues being raised as fresh expressions explore different forms of worship” (www.sharetheguide.org/section1/4/up, accessed 21/4/09). What is offered as guidance in this area in the meantime is a list of ‘ingredients’ to be incorporated in worship, drawn out of traditional church orders of worship. Such ‘ingredients’ include invitation to worship, praise, confession, reading from Scripture, sermon, intercessions to be “done in your own style and your own sequence”. Encouragement is given to review what is being done in worship every so often to check whether any ‘ingredients’ are being ignored or forgotten.

The Alternative Church website offers a practice guide, which begins with “dreaming up” the environment in terms of equipment, visuals, layout and safety before considering what will be happening liturgically in that environment (http://

www.alternativeworship.org/practice_paul_structure.html, accessed 23/4/09). The suggested ‘ingredients’ of worship here are word-based, symbol-based, actionbased, sound-based, vision-based, imagination-based and tactile-olfactory based, with liturgical cohesion being provided by the service theme and structure of ritual (http://www.alternativeworship.org/practice_paul_ingredients.html, accessed 23/4/09) . In offering guidance to those devising creative liturgies of corporate worship, these ‘ingredient’ based resources will most certainly remain wooden in the worship context unless careful consideration is given to the theological purpose and life of the liturgy, and to the potential effects of the liturgy on those participating. I therefore feel that such resources in their current form are underresourcing those involved in making decisions about what is done and how it is done in corporate worship. A book on fresh expressions in the sacramental traditions is about to be published , which perhaps will address some of these resourcing issues for liturgy more systematically and helpfully (Croft and Mobsby, 2009, awaiting release).

In the meantime, ideas and resources for more creative forms of worship are shared largely via the internet. The Fresh Expressions and the Share websites offer links to a number of different sites with resources that can be used in worship, from images, to film clips, to written liturgies, to contemplative prayer suggestions. The Alternative Worship site is a particularly rich source of links to creative worship resources (http://www.alternativeworship.org/ directory_resources.html, accessed 23/4/09). Many sites, such as the Creative Prayer site are participative, inviting contributions and offering “a sort of collective,

one place where you can come to get ideas or use other peoples ideas” (http:// www.creativeprayer.com/, accessed 23/4/09).

In addition to sharing resources, many of these websites offer space for ongoing conversation and blogging about experiences relating to fresh expressions, creative worship and mission-focussed activities. So it would appear at present that the most influential factor in the creation of new liturgies in fresh expressions of church is the sharing of ideas and the participation in an ongoing conversation about what is being done in various gathered worshipping communities around the world.

But an important question must surely be, ‘What is at stake week by week in the creation of fresh liturgies?’. The most immediate concern in the context of this research is one of formation. The Church of England Liturgical Commission’s report ‘Transforming Worship’ (General Synod, 2005) recognises that “if the church is truly to realise its calling to share in God’s mission in the world, then its members need to be formed by worship” (p1). In this thinking, the missionorientated or ‘mission-shaped’ focus of many fresh expressions of church will be funded and sustained through their worship, which is facilitated and given expression in the liturgy. Attention in preparation needs to be given not just to the ‘text’ of the liturgy in its broadest sense - including all words and images, heard, seen and spoken - but to the performance of the liturgy.

It is arguably the performance of the liturgy which has the most powerful formative effect. This is because performance in liturgy not just about telling, hearing and

reflecting on the Christian story, but about the enactment and consequent participation in the story through ritual performance (Connerton, 1989, in Anderson, 2003). As a social anthropologist, Paul Connerton’s work on ritual shifts us away from more rational cognitive conception of its formational capabilities, to an understanding of ritual as “an embodied way of knowing” (Connerton, 1989, in Anderson, 2003, p75). In employing this understanding, Anderson (2003) argues, “we are “persuaded” by the liturgy to the extent that it enters into and becomes a part of who we are spiritually, cognitively, and, above all, physically in that liturgy” (p77). The fresh expressions movement is characterised by a drive towards a much more participative liturgy - “emotions, bodies, narratives and the arts provide new ‘probes’ by which to deepen religious knowing” (Savage, 2008, p66). And it is this participative liturgy which offers the space for the person to know and to become. But to know what, and to become what?

In the making of meaning through the liturgy of corporate worship, which will shape people’s identities, Lindsey Urwin (2008) warns, “we must ensure that we are introducing people to spiritual experiences that faithfully reflect and present Christian truth as the church has discerned it.” (p30). Sarah Savage (2008) reflects on the potential for ‘new pathologies’ arising in the fresh expressions movement, one of which may be “an endless search for novelty, a consumerist mentality, a mysticism somewhat unrelated to the biblical narrative” (p64).

As a means of guarding against such dangers, Susan Smith (2006) proposes several principles for maintaining the required tension between universalising (which holds onto tradition) and particularising (which moves away from tradition)

in the creation of liturgy. They include beginning with the experience and need of the focal group, strategically and sensitively engaging Christian ritual patterns and symbols, embracing the contraries of the cross and resurrection, encompassing the movement towards life and the reign of God, and expressing and representing action on behalf of the whole church and not just a particular local gathering. Fulfilling such principles in the creation of liturgy requires great skill, sensitivity, self-knowledge, theological insight, a love of the church and a grounding spiritually in prayer (Smith, 2006). This needs to be taken into account in the fresh expressions movement and adequate and ongoing training resources made available for those responsible for the worshipping life of a community.

Closely related to formation, the development of ethics is another matter at stake in the creation of liturgies for a worshipping community. Samuel Wells (2002) highlights the role of the liturgy of Christian worship in developing and training the “moral imagination” as part of the learning of discipleship. He sees liturgy as a vehicle for teaching skills, developing practices, forming habits, acquiring virtues and shaping notions, so that “worship helps Christians take the right things for granted” (Wells, 2002, in Graham, Walton and Ward, 2007, p212). The theologian and ethicist Stanley Hauerwas goes so far as to pattern a university course in Christian ethics on the liturgy. The task of ethics he argues, is “to assemble reminders from the training we receive in worship that enable us to rightly see the world and to perceive how we continue to be possessed by the world.” (Hauerwas, 1995, p156). This certainly has implications for the many fresh expressions of church which have growing disciples as a vital part of their agenda. The link between the liturgy and discipleship needs to be given its proper emphasis. And of

course, behind the notion of being a disciple lies a sense of self - who I am in relation to God and other people - and it is the sense of self which will govern how I act in relation to God and other people.

This chapter has been focussed on exploring fresh expressions of church, looking at how the fresh expressions movement has become established and considering its core motivations. It has investigated how fresh expressions of church might make decisions about what will be done in the liturgy of corporate worship, and why this is of importance in relation to the formational and ethical issues of discipleship - and underlying this, personal identity. The conversations generated between liturgy, spirituality and personal identity demonstrate their important relationship, and their relevance in the rapidly developing context of fresh expressions of church. This gives impetus to a research project concerned with interpreting the effect of the liturgy on personal identity in a fresh expression of church. It is hoped that this research may begin to answer some of the questions about what skills might be needed to create healthy and life giving liturgy, which can engage with cultural connection points as they impact identity, and be involved in the transformation of both.

Chapter 3 Methodology and Methods

The purpose of the research is to interpret the possible effects of the liturgy of corporate worship on personal identity in a fresh expression of church. The research methodology is based on a theoretical two-stage model for studying the potential after-effects of corporate worship, proposed by Stoddart (2005). In this two-stage model, Stoddart (2005) uses an interpretavist approach in his methodology, adopting the epistemology of social constructivism to inform the chosen methods of study.

A social constructivist epistemology considers identity to be emergent and contextual, highlighting the importance of experience, relationship and interaction with the environment. This perspective is able to embrace the multifaceted, multidimensional ‘event’ of the liturgy and to attempt to engage with the diverse factors in the liturgy affecting and effecting identity. It also supports both the theological and the psychosocial premises contained in the liturgy of the importance of relationship with God and with others impacting who we are and what we do as particular persons. This is in contrast to some of the other approaches to identity research such as biological, cognitive, experiential and psychodynamic perspectives. These models are more narrowly focussed on understanding the self as “singular, independent, self-contained, and self-generative” (Stoddart, 2005, p102).

The first task of Stoddart’s two-stage model for studying the after-effects of worship is to investigate the spirituality of the worshipping community - in effect the spirituality behind the liturgy. He proposes a model adapted from Michael Downey (1997) which provides researchers with a framework of where to look when studying spirituality. Downey is a Catholic theologian with a particular interest in bringing methodological form to the study of Christian spirituality. He sees the study of spirituality as examining the interaction of the Holy Spirit with the human spirit – the Christian spiritual life as experienced in persons (Downey, 1997).

Downey’s (1997) proposed framework takes into account the multidimensional nature of spirituality, enabling the inclusion of the influences of culture, tradition, contemporary events, hopes and sufferings, the remembrance of Christ, elements of action and contemplation, charism and community and authentication in praxis (Downey, 1997, p120). It allows the focussed study of a particular ‘object’ of spirituality such as a painting, a piece of sacred music, a theological text, or for our purposes, the liturgy of a worshipping community, and it contextualises it, allowing a more accurate understanding.

The use of such a comprehensive model to draw out the spirituality of the liturgy acknowledges the fact that liturgy does not happen in a vacuum. The study of a liturgical event in isolation, paying attention only to texts, actions, music, symbolism, art without regard to context would be more in tune with an objectivist approach, but would greatly limit the ‘thick’ description of the liturgy necessary to be faithful to a social constructivist perspective of identity. Downey’s (1997) model

brings into the picture the important dimensions of culture, tradition, intention, praxis and so on. The Table 1 below demonstrates how Downey’s seven foci are used in this research.

Table 1. Use of Downey’s seven foci for studying spirituality

Focus

Question(s) indicating data required

Method(s)

Within a culture

What contextual information reveals the cultural context of this particular congregation?

‣ Analysis of text, imagery, form etc. of the liturgy and of emails and the website for cultural pointers ‣ Interviews with leader and those devising the liturgy

In relation to a tradition

Which Christian tradition(s) most influence the liturgy of this congregation?

‣ Participant observation ‣ Analysis of text, imagery, form etc. of the liturgy, emails and website ‣ Interviews with leader and those devising the liturgy

In light of contemporary events, hopes, sufferings and promises

What is the impact on the liturgy of events happening in the wider community, which may or may not directly affect this worshipping community?

‣ Recording headlines from The Week, and the weekly local newspaper over the period of data collection ‣ Analysis of text, imagery, form etc. of the liturgy ‣ Interviews with the leader and those devising the liturgy

In remembrance of Jesus Christ

How is Christ’s person, story and teachings presented in the liturgy?

‣ Participant observation ‣ Analysis of text, imagery, form etc. of the liturgy

In efforts to combine What is the relationship elements of action and between action and contemplation contemplation in the liturgy? How does the liturgy enable the intentional flow between worshipful reflection (contemplation) and life activities (action)?

‣ Participant observation ‣ Interviews with those devising the liturgy

With respect to charism and community

What does the liturgy communicate about the nature of God and the action of God within this worshipping community?

‣ Participant observation ‣ Analysis of texts (both written and impromptu) imagery, form etc. of the liturgy

As expressed and authenticated in practice

Are the broader actions and life of this community consistent with the (messages of) spirituality underpinning the liturgy?

‣ Analysis of website, emails, notices, publicity of events, discussion boards etc.

From the collection of data using Downey’s (1997) seven foci, a ‘thick’ description can be produced of the spirituality within and behind the liturgy.

The second task of Stoddart’s (2005) two-stage model involves analysing this thick description in the light of a model of identity. The model of identity is used as a framework to sift the thick description, highlighting the messages about identity in effort to provide answers to the question, ‘What does the liturgy make of me?’.

Stoddart proposes the use of a model of identity by Baron and Byrne (2000, in Stoddart, 2005) from the field of social psychology, which provides a framework of eight interlinked components of the self-concept. These include Interpersonal Attributes, Ascribed Characteristics, Interests and Activities, Existential Aspects, 37

Self-Determination, Internalized Beliefs, Self-Awareness, and Social Differentiation. Stoddart goes on to illustrate the applicability of this model to the exploration of the after-effects of worship by relating each of the components to aspects of the corporate worship of a conservative evangelical community. His illustration is not convincing for several reasons. It is difficult to see how information from the ‘thick’ description of the spirituality behind the liturgy might be examined using such a framework. The terminology is not clearly defined, and his illustrative suggestions appear quite speculative. The model appears very conceptual which would make it difficult to work with in research practice. There is no literature demonstrating the use and efficacy of this model in research on identity. For these reasons, the researcher chose not to use it.

Joanna Collicutt is both a clinical psychologist and a theologian and her model of identity, outlined in Table 2 below, was developed for use in the psychology of brain injury rehabilitation (Collicutt 2007). It appears more three-dimensional and workable as a research model to sift the ‘thick’ description of the spirituality behind the liturgy. The categories are well defined, less conceptual than Baron and Byrne’s (2000, in Stoddart, 2005) and appear well suited to embracing the multidimensional nature of the liturgy. Interestingly, Collicutt has used this model of identity in the teaching of theological students to think through how identity may be formed in the eucharist. She views liturgy as a “‘Christian technology of the self’ through religious belief-practice [in which] we are constituted as the people of God who participate in the Trinitarian life” (lecture notes, Cuddesdon 2007). Her model of identity appeared to be a good choice to trial in this research.

Table 2. Collicutt’s model of identity, ‘Being me’

Components

Features

Physical identity and integrity

‣ ‣

Distinctive physical morphology/appearance Boundaries

Freedom of movement and action (autonomy)

‣ ‣

Liberty and agency Includes physical and psychological elements

Habitual behaviours and behavioural style

‣ ‣

Temperament and abilities Goals (including values)

Social place

‣ ‣

Roles and relationships Including attachment and ‘belonging’

Personal narratives

‣ ‣

History Memory and recall

The strategy used to research the question ‘what does the liturgy make of me?’ was that of a case study, which involved identifying a particular worshipping community in which to conduct the research. Because of the particular interest in liturgies which are constantly changing and being developed, the worshipping community needed to identify itself as being a fresh expression of church. It also needed to be a stable, well-established community to ensure a suitable environment within which to conduct research. The congregation meeting times and venues needed to be convenient to the researcher. The congregation chosen was been identified from the directory of the Fresh Expressions website (http:// www.freshexpressions.org.uk/directory_section.asp?id=16, accessed 10/5/08) as being part of the Church of England, and well established in that it had been up and running for five years. The meeting times and locations were also suitable.

The boundaries of the case study were identified to include the weekly corporate worship of the community and a selection of community meals over a specified time period of six consecutive weeks. Data collected outside these events such as email correspondence and website information was collected for the purposes of understanding the events better.

The use of a case study is ideal for small scale research, such as this dissertation, and offers the opportunity of in-depth analysis into relationships, processes, contexts. A case study achieves its depth by holding a holistic view, and using a number of different research methods in the collection of data (Denscombe, 2007). The in-depth analysis in this case study enabled the examination of the multidimensional aspects of the liturgy and how they interacted, taking advantage of the “highly complimentary” multiple sources of data (Yin, 2003, p85) in order to formulate conclusions about how such liturgy may impact personal identity. Other methods, such as the use of comparative studies across several different congregations, would not have been capable of generating the quantity and quality of the data required to begin to interpret how the liturgy might be affecting and effecting personal identity.

A case study will not generally produce findings which are directly transferable to other situations, but it was expected that there may be some applicability of the results to other congregations of comparable nature – small ‘fresh expressions’ churches which are actively engaged in creating new and resurrecting old liturgies for use in corporate worship. In being able to understand why this research has yielded the answers it has, the insights gained could have wider implications for

the worshipping church (Denscombe, 2007, p36). It was expected that this understanding would prove of interest and help to those responsible for devising and/or leading corporate worship, prompting concern and careful thought about the possible effects of the liturgy on personal identity. In addition, the methodology of this particular case study could provide a suitable model for use in other case studies, in which case valuable comparative data could become available for use.

Data collection methods

Participant observation

Participant observation involves making observations whilst participating in the event being studied (Yin, 2003). It enables the researcher to blend in to the community event, perceiving what happens as an ‘insider’, thereby minimizing the researcher’s effect on proceedings. This was obviously important in the context of a corporate worship event, where due respect for proceedings is required and worshippers need space to participate without the anxiety of being ‘watched’ by a researcher.

An observation schedule or checklist helps with the decisions about what exactly is to be observed, creating prompts which are easy to follow as reminders during the event. Bell (1993) warns of the challenge in deciding what to observe, since there are endless possibilities relating to content, process, interactions etc. The

seven foci of Downey’s model for the study of spirituality helped to limit these possibilities, enabling the creation of a draft observation schedule in Table 3 below.

Table 3. Promptings for an observation schedule

The worship space

‣ ‣ ‣ ‣

Use of ritual objects

‣ ‣ ‣

How is the space set up? What is the focus of the space? How are people arranged within the space? How is the space used during worship? Are any ritual objects used? Furniture, vessels or containers, consumable items, other things? Are certain objects regarded as precious? How is this indicated? Who handles the objects, who does not handle the objects?

Use of Scripture

‣

When? What? How used?

Use of other words, including direction, teaching, prayer, bidding and response

‣

When? How communicated? What? Prepared or impromptu?

Use of music and song

‣

When? How introduced? What songs? How moved on?

Use of silence

‣

When? How introduced, how long, and how moved on?

Use of movement

‣

What movements? Who is moving? How do they happen (initiated and ended?)

Use of visual aids (may be related to ritual objects)

‣

What? When? How used (and initiated and ended)?

This was piloted in another church, and slight changes made to the order of observations and the layout adjusted. It was also decided that data should be captured in practice after the event rather than during the event, to enable full participation and minimal distraction.

Six consecutive Sunday Eucharists 1 were observed, along with three midweek community meals 2 during the time of data collection. Participant observation data was supplemented with the texts and images on resource sheets and in books, and with song lyrics. The observation schedule used can be found in the Appendix (p100).

Interviews

Interviews are essential sources of case study information (Yin, 2003). Semistructured interviews, with the feel of an informal â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;guided conversationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, were conducted with the community leader and with another person involved in devising the liturgy. Interviews took place at the end of the period of participant observation, which enabled a honing of the interview questions, and ensured a level of comfort conducive to authentic communication between the researcher and each interviewee. Table 4 below gives an indication of the broad topics covered, and general lines of questioning.

A Sunday Eucharist in the community takes place at varying times and in different venues each week (apart from the 7th week when there is a week off). 2

A Community Meal takes place every Thursday in a home, sometimes in groups, sometimes altogether. They are considered eucharistic in spirit. Food is shared, and a resource sheet used which facilitates conversation, the creative use of Scripture, worship and prayer. 43

Table 4. Broad topics and line of questioning for interviews

Concerning liturgy as a whole

‣ What is the interviewees understanding of what

Concerning culture

‣ How does the interviewee understand the culture of

Concerning Christian tradition

‣ does the interviewee consider the worshipping community to be part of a particular Christian tradition? ‣ If so, how does this influence the worship of the community? ‣ How does this influence the choices made about the liturgy the community uses?

Concerning contemporary events

‣ how do contemporary events in the local community,

Concerning efforts to combine elements of action and contemplation

‣ How does the interviewee view the relationship

liturgy is?

the worshipping community? ‣ how does this understanding affect the worship of the community ‣ how does this understanding affect the choices made about the liturgy the community uses to facilitate worship?

the UK and further afield impact the worshipping community? ‣ Do they have any effect on the worship of the community? ‣ Do they affect decisions about the liturgy of the worshipping community? Can you think of any specific examples? between action and contemplation?

‣ How does the interviewee make decisions about where to put space for worshipful reflection as opposed to action in the liturgy?

An interview outline (see Appendix, p101) was prepared beforehand to ensure that all the necessary areas were covered, and to provide a measure of standardisation between interviews. ‘How’ questions rather that ‘why’ questions were used to help keep the interview relaxed and guard against possible defendedness on the part of the interviewee (Becker, 1998, in Yin, 2003, p90). Notes were taken during the interview, and an interview transcript later written up for each interview.

Analysis of data collected

The two-stage model adopted from Stoddard (2005) for this research provided an initial framework both for indicating the data to be collected and for analysing this data.

Stage One

The data collected from participant observation, interviews, email correspondence from the leader to the community, and news headlines from The Week and the local weekly newspaper during the six week period of data collection, was arranged into a weekly order. Downey’s (1997) seven foci provided categories to capture information from the data relevant to each category. The categories were ‘applied’ to the full data set one at a time, enabling several readings of the data and a level of familiarity with the data. At the end of the process of analysis, each category contained a wide range of data pertaining to it. A summary of the data in each category was then produced, which focussed on the particular trends and themes in the data within the category. A thick description of the spirituality behind the liturgy was then written up from the category summaries, producing the findings of stage one of Stoddart’s (2005) two stage proposed model.

Stage Two

Stage two involved the sifting of this ‘thick’ description using the categories of Collicut’s (2007) model of identity. Whilst using this model drawn from clinical 45

psychology, the researcher remained sensitised to the theological dimensions of identity relating to the theological understanding of personhood explored in chapter 1. Sifting of the thick description took place one category at a time, allowing several readings of the description. Along with holding a theological sensitivity, particular questions were kept in mind for each of Collicut’s categories as follows: Sense of physical identity and integrity •

how is this encouraged? How is this hindered or threatened?

Freedom of movement and action (autonomy) •

how is this encouraged? How is this hindered or threatened?

Habitual behaviours and behavioural style •

how is this encouraged? How is this hindered or threatened?

Personal narratives •

how are these acknowledged and encouraged? How are they hindered or threatened?

Social place •

how are different roles and relationships acknowledged and encouraged? How are they hindered or threatened?

Critique of Stoddart’s (2005) Model

The final part of the analysis involved critiquing Stoddart’s (2005) model used in the research. The tools used in the two stages were assessed for ease of use, and for their ability to generate useful data which lent itself to analysis. Consideration was given to whether the model can be recommended for use in future research, 46

or possibly adapted for use by worship practitioners who may want to use such a model in assessing the liturgy of their own congregations.

Ethical Considerations

There were a number potential ethical issues pertaining to this research. Agreement was sought from the case study congregation for the research to be conducted over a particular time period. An information sheet about the research (see Appendix p102) was sent out in advance via the community leader to the research congregation. I also attended a community meal before the data collection period started so that I could be introduced and informally meet people. It was made clear when the researcher was to be present in the congregation, and without unduly influencing the normal development or practice of the liturgy, indication was given of the kind of information that was be collected. Care has been taken not to use identifiable names of particular persons in the write-up, and the case study congregation has been made anonymous. The leader of the case study community was given access to the full dissertation at the end of the research, and opportunity given for comment on the research findings before the dissertation was handed in, so that factual inaccuracies could be dealt with, and possible disagreement on interpretation noted.

Research Community Feedback

It was hoped that the research outcomes could be fed back to those interested in the community. Ideally, I would have liked to have offered information to the community relating to the spirituality behind the liturgy, as well as research conclusions about the possible effects of their liturgy on personal identity. I would also have appreciated feedback on the responses to the research findings. A copy of the completed research has been sent to the community leader, but the two-way feedback hoped for has not been possible due to the community being in a significant time of transition.

Chapter 4 The Spirituality Behind the Liturgy

The first stage of analysis in Stoddart’s (2005) two-stage model forms the major part of this research and has yielded what in effect are the results of studying the liturgy of the research community. What follows is a thick description of the spirituality behind the liturgy of the research community, which has been presented for clarity’s sake within the structure of Downey’s seven categories for studying spirituality. The thick description has been written in a past tense, to reflect the bounded, time-limited nature of the data collection period. Writing in this way has lost some of the sense of immediacy and aliveness that comes with communicating in the present tense, but has been necessary I feel to remain true to the methodology.

Within a culture

The strongest motif of the culture of the research community was journey – this community saw itself as being on a shared journey, ‘following in the way of Jesus’ (Community Meal resource sheets 13/11; 27/11; 11/12). The rhetoric of journey was evident in the regular explanation of what was coming up – the terrain to come in the life and liturgy of the community. This included giving details of what would be happening, which resources had been used and why to assist on the

way. Several references to ‘continuing the conversation’ enhanced the sense of continuity of the corporate life of the community. Innovations such as the childreninspired eucharist were referred to as ‘another important stepping stone in our life’ (email 10/12).

Eating together was sustenance on the way. Meeting up was always around a meal – food shared at a community meal in a home, seen as eucharistic in spirit, or the spiritual meal of the Sunday Eucharist. Meals were about nourishing and continuing conversation – sharing stories of everyday life, discussing issues of life and faith, recalling community memories.

The open-endedness of the liturgy and of resources used was important; it is a journey in which people were ‘free to explore’ (Interview 2 transcript, p1). ‘Options’ enabled choice, for example, either conversation room or play room (Participant Observation 30/11). Mystique was reflected in the name of the research community and in the laid back arrangements for community gatherings – Sunday Eucharists had no fixed time or venue – the spirit of the community is seen to be ‘more important than technical details’ (Interview 1 transcript, p2).

There was a strong corporate sense to the journey with current community members, but also past members and with other inspirational Christian and secular writers, artists, musicians past and present. This was seen in phrases such ‘journeying together’ (Interview 1 transcript p2), ‘helping other people with our experience’ (Interview 2 transcript, p2), ‘sharing mentors’ (Interview 1 transcript,

p2), and the ‘sense of ongoing journey of the people who have gone before us’ (Interview 2 transcript, p2).

Which leads on to another important aspect of the culture of the research community – that of participation. All were involved in community life and the liturgy of – both adults and children. Children were asked what they enjoyed about the community in planning the children-inspired Eucharist (email 6/11). There was interactive involvement in the liturgy as parts were shared out with volunteers invited to read, to pray, to administer bread or wine. Generally all contributed to discussion and conversation.

The uniqueness of particular persons was highly valued. It was recognised that contribution to community life and liturgy emerges from ‘who you are’ (Interview 2 transcript, p1). What this community deeply appreciated is ‘knowing you can be honest’, ‘acceptance of different opinions’, and ‘attention to all of life experience’ (Community Conversation email, 28/11). Those with particular gifts were asked to do specific tasks such as creating a resource, story-telling, developing a prayer station, or being a ‘Guardian’ over a particular aspect of community life.

Creativity is of immense value to the culture of the research community – the community mattered to people is because it was ‘a canvas to be painted on’ (Community Conversation email 28/11). There are abundant references in the data to planning creative things – creativity was expressed in the community through art, music, games, writing, juxtaposing the sacred and the secular, valuing

symbolic action, and using visual, mental, and auditory imagery in resources. The resource sheets with printed liturgical texts and readings had a trendy, chic look with the use of coloured text, abstract art, icons and community photos.

Both participation and creativity were enabled in the research community conceptually by the offering of ‘space’. Space was an important word in the rhetoric of the community. The space is ‘safe’, ‘for people’, it’s ‘to be real’, ‘for praise and lament’ (Community Conversation email 28/11; Interview 1 and 2 transcripts). It’s ‘for thinking about each question’, for ‘stimulating conversation’, it ‘allows the tough things to be held’ (Interview 2 transcript, p2).

The culture of the research community is characterised by hope – the community journeys ‘in the way of Jesus… for a better world now’ (Community Meal resource sheets 13/11; 27/11; 11/12). The hope was for change, and the agent of change is God engaging the imagination – God’s work of reaching in to us and reaching out through us begins with re-imagining the world, ourselves and our communities. This was strongly reflected in the liturgy through major themes such as ‘new making’ (Eucharist resource sheet 9/11), and ‘the new thing comes’ (Eucharist resource sheet 16/11). Reaching out was ‘to people we know’ in everyday situations and workplaces, but there was some uncertainty expressed about welcoming in, since some found it difficult to explain to people what the community is (Community meal 27/11).

In relation to a tradition(s)

Liturgy is seen as an anchoring point – a ‘link to faith and tradition’ (Interview 1 transcript, p1), which is valued in the absence of fixed points such as a building, or set time of corporate worship. The tradition of the faith is envisaged as the tune, somehow detectable within the improvisation of multilayered voices – a sound which is ‘low-key, folky, not recording studio’ (Interview 1 transcript, p1-2).

The Church of England is an important influence – connection with the diocese is valued for accountability and a sense of ‘knowing where you’re coming from’ (Interview 2 transcript, p2). The Church year with its dominant themes were worked into the liturgy. Scripture was at the heart of the community, with readings and space for response of some kind – silence, often conversation, prayer, but no formal sermon. The Eucharist is seen as ‘the culmination of the worship’ (Interview 1 transcript, p2), and was presided over by the ordained leader each Sunday (or communion by extension when the priest was not available) and using a Eucharistic prayer from Common Worship provision. No priestly garments were used.

There is a strongly perceived connection with the early church. The regular invitation to join with raising hands in thanksgiving during the Eucharistic prayer was connected with participation in the royal priesthood of all believers, and in a practice of the early church (Participant observation 9/11; 16/11; 8/11; 14/11). The reference in Acts 2 to the early church breaking bread together at home was

identified with as “feeling like” the research community (Community Meal Report 27/11).

Monasticism has had a major influence on the liturgy and the corporate life of the research community. The language of community rather than church is used to define itself, order its life and nourish its ongoing identity. Monasticism contributes the important influences of both a ‘rhythm of life – rest, work, prayer, worship, recreation’ (Interview 1 transcript, p1) and a rhythm of prayer which penetrates ‘not just Thursday or Sunday, but into everyday and workplaces’ (Interview 2 transcript, p2). Several different strands of monasticism remain important resources both for use in the liturgy of corporate worship, and in community life and aspirations.

Franciscan influences could be seen in the desire for simplicity of worship and community life. St Francis of Assisi and quotations from Fr Richard Rohr, Franciscan priest, contributed to the wisdom section of the liturgy alongside Scripture.

The Benedictine influence is strong in ordering the community – the leader takes the title of Abbot. The Abbot leads the life of the community with Guardians, who prayerfully hold and watch over particular areas of community life. At the start of the new church year, time is given to a community conversation thinking about the past, present and future of the community. An annual service of vows and blessings is held in which all make and renew vows, which have been adapted from the rule of Benedict (Participant Observation 8/12). The leader recently held a

workshop on old and new monasticism with the Abbot of a Benedictine community, and hopes the Abbot and monks will be able to visit in the near future.

Other important community influences include Iona, Taize and the Northumbria Community. Call and response opening passages in the liturgy were frequently adaptations of Iona liturgy (Participant Observation 9/11; 16/11; 23/11) . An Iona worship book was used at the end of the community meals for an Evening Liturgy (Community Meal report 13/11; 11/12) . Taize chants were regularly used as an important part of the liturgy.

The contemplative and mystic traditions were also important to the liturgy and the life of the research community. Silence, designated prayer space (‘prayer room’) and prayer rituals in the liturgy all created space for encounter, for imagination, for rest and for change. Passages from Julian of Norwich were often used in the wisdom section of the Sunday liturgy, and she was referred to as ‘our friend Julian of Norwich’ (Participant Observation schedule 16/11, p1). Her phrase ‘all things shall be well’ was frequently used in speaking about the future of the community, particularly in facing challenging circumstances.

There is influence of Eastern Orthodoxy in the use of icons as focal points and aids to worship. A number of different icons were used most weeks in the Sunday Eucharist, placed both on the altar with candles, and at the foot of the altar. The influence of an eco-spirituality was seen in the importance to the community of worshipping in the outdoors – ‘feet on the earth and experiencing the seasons – have been out in community gatherings in the pouring rain, no leaves on trees,

sunshine and beautiful flowers – connects with spiritual journey’ (Interview 2 transcript, p1).

A final, but important influence to consider is the Fresh Expressions movement, which itself involves an amalgamation of differing traditions and serious engagement with contemporary culture. The research community could be seen to be both drawing on this tradition and contributing to it. The Fresh Expressions influence could be felt in the eclectic mix of traditions, the use of secular resources, the importance of community, an emphasis on participation and experience, the provision of choice, the flourishing of creativity and value placed on symbolism. In the period of data collection the research community was seen to be contributing to the Fresh Expressions tradition in offering its story to the growing body of literature on Fresh Expressions churches in the UK (email 5/11), and in contributing to a national event held in Coventry Cathedral to explore Fresh Expressions churches (email 2/12).

In light of contemporary events, hopes, sufferings and promises

There are distinct examples in the liturgy and life of the research community where world news, personal news and expressions of contemporary culture were taken up and engaged with. The most dominant example, due to the length engagement with the story, was the news of the election of Barak Obama as President-elect of the United States. On four successive occasions, extracts from Obama’s acceptance speech were explored for their resonances with Scripture readings on 56

the theme of God doing a new thing (Kingdom season) and transforming the outlook of the weak, the poor and the hopeless, in spite of opposition. The climax of this engagement was adopting Obama’s campaign slogan ‘Yes we can, yes we can, yes we can!’ as a corporate response in intercession to the things we hoped and longed for (Participant observation 16/11).

The use of elements of contemporary culture reflects a resonance with the sentiments expressed therein, particularly seen in the lyrics of songs used by the community in liturgy. These sentiments arise from engagement with the world – what it feels like to live with frustration and suffering, and expressing hope for change in the future. An example of this was becoming aware in conversation of the pain, suffering and frustration of particular world situations (in this case Gaza, Israel and the Ukraine) and of personal situations (the death of a friend) and then using the lyrics of the U2 song ‘40’ to express both lament and praise – ‘How long to sing this song…how long…how long…how long…. I will sing, sing a new song’ (Interview 2 transcript, p3).

Those involved in devising the liturgy perceive it to have a strong connect with and space for everyday life, and that contemporary events are seen to be ‘flying through the life of the community all the time’ (Interview 1 transcript, p2). The communities’ response to such engagement in the liturgy was one of gratitude that there is opportunity every week ‘to talk and reflect about things of life and bring faith into it’ (Community Meal report, 27/11, p1).

The written liturgy – including call and response, prayers, vows and blessings – contained phrases drawing attention to the wider world in general. Examples included being mindful of those suffering because of conflict, debt, loneliness (Resource sheet 14/12) and requests for help to re-imagine our communities and the world (eg. Resource sheet 9/11). In summary, the written liturgy contained a consciousness of the wider world – of other people, of communities, nations and the global community – and our personal response to these things.

In remembrance of Jesus Christ

The dominant theme of Christ’s story running through the liturgy of the research community was that Christ’s work is fundamentally about making new. The major motif of the Kingdom Season liturgy was explained by the leader as being about looking for the new thing that God is doing – scripture used presents Jesus and the coming of the Kingdom as the new thing that God is doing. ‘Christ is coming, he is coming to make all things new’ was an often repeated response used in call and response liturgy (Eucharist resource sheets 23/11; 8/12).

The community engaged in the liturgy with the ‘making new’ work of Christ through reconnecting with the stories of Christ in Scripture, reflecting on these stories through conversation, discussion, prayer, and proclaiming this work of Christ in the set words of the liturgy (often repeated) such as call and response and Eucharistic prayers. The making new work was emphasised and brought to life by the juxtaposing of secular texts with Scripture - extracts from the acceptance speech 58

of President-elect Obama were used alongside the Gospel passage about Jesus proclaiming ‘The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor…” (Eucharist resource sheets 9/11; 16/11).

Recurring requests within the liturgy indicated the desire to both appropriate and share in Christ’s work of making new – ‘help us to re-imagine ourselves…our communities…the world’ (Eucharist Resource sheets, 9/11; 16/11), the gospel acclamation asked, ‘may we be changed in its hearing and holding’ (Eucharist Resource sheets 9/11; 16/11; 30/11; 8/12). But the fundamental sharing in Christ’s work involved identification with and participation in the story of Christ through the symbolic action of the Eucharist – ‘we do this in remembrance of him’; ‘his body is the bread of life’; ‘his blood is shed for all’ (Eucharist resource sheets 9/11; 16/11; 30/11; 8/11). The body and blood of Christ were received with words indicating renewal of person and world.

A vital part of Christ’s work of making new appeared to be discomforting the status quo. The community prayed ‘Jesus of the Gospels discomfort us in what we dream about… work towards… settle for.’ (Eucharist resource sheets 9/11; 16/11). There was a sense that the engagement in conversation with others in the liturgy was about discomforting – being challenged with different insights into ways of seeing the world and thinking about God. During one conversation noted, there was surprise that both righteous and unrighteous did not expect the judgement Jesus gave (in Matt 25).

Christ in his being and doing encompassed the whole of life, ‘as close as breathing’ (Eucharist resource sheet 8/12; 14/12). He was coming to make things new in every place, ‘on the streets and on the parks, by the roads and by the rivers… to the churches, in the pubs and in the cafes’, and in every kind of person – the poor, proud, persecuted, the privileged (Eucharist resource sheet, 23/11; 8/12; 14/12).

Christ was also identified as the servant – ‘those who would wish to serve him must first be served’ (Iona Communion A liturgy, Participant Observation 30/11). He was the one who comforts, ‘with a gentle touch, with warm embrace’, giving peace and providing safe keeping. Christ is grace, which the community aspired to be characterised by. Christ was a ‘light-bringer’, drawing people and helping people to see things as they really are (Community Meal resource sheet 11/12). The icon of Christ and the friend was a commonly used focal point in community Eucharists (Eucharist resource sheets 9/11).

In efforts to combine elements of action and contemplation

In the interviews, there was clear opinion and vision for the relationship between contemplation and action – they are intimately connected, a ‘virtuous circle’ (Interview 1 transcript, p3). Contemplative prayer ‘opens our life to God, sensitizes us to response, then to prayer and reflection’ (Interview 1 transcript, p3). Contemplative prayer ‘allows us to go out into the world, workplace and to take

something you’ve found in the space out. Activity then comes from a better place.’ (Interview 2 transcript, p3).

The liturgy operated to serve this vision by offering a spaciousness –contemplation – which enabled shape – action. The shape or action that was desired is action arising out of each person’s unique passions and yearnings – ‘what might my offering to Christ look like?’ (Interview 1 transcript, p3).

Silence was not used frequently within the liturgy as a medium of contemplation. Rather, the spaciousness appears to have been created through the use of repeated call and response liturgies, repetitive sung chants and use of other music (often secular), visual aids such as candles and icons (Eucharist resource sheets 9/11; 16/11; 30/11; 8/12; 14/12), invitation to creativity such as drawing or making something (Community Meal resource sheets 13/11; 25/11; 11/12), and conversation and discussion in an intimate, safe environment (eg. Participant Observation 9/11; 16/11; 23/11). Contemplation through these media was about noticing, being affected by something, thinking at length and considering possible courses of action – an ongoing process. In effect it was an activity of the imagination – re-imagining being and action.

There appeared to be no hurry for action, no frenetic activity. There was a restfulness, echoed in the pattern for corporate worship of not meeting every 7th week, and in the perception of playing a small part in a very domestic way – ‘we’re just a small part of God’s big picture – we join in our small part’ (Participant

Observation 30/11). There was a strong vision for the corporate action of ‘living a parable of community’ (Interview 1 transcript, p3).

With respect to charism and community

The liturgy of the research community communicated the expansiveness of God, and God’s action was to invite into the expansiveness. Following God in this community was an exploratory adventure in which meaning is discovered (Eucharist resource sheet 9/11), where one seeks ‘God’s better-worldcoming’ (Community Meal resource sheet, 13/11). It was an invitation to ‘reimagine’, about ‘looking for the new things’ (Participant Observation 9/11) and being ‘unafraid of the open spaces’.

Closely allied with this expansiveness was the idea of vulnerability and openness. God’s action of invitation into his expansiveness requires openness and a vulnerability on the part of God to the freedom which he gives. The action of God in the community is to enable and encourage vulnerability and openness. This was seen in the acknowledgement that ‘we can let God out of the box a little’ (email 28/11), that creativity in the liturgy of the community comes from personal experience, ‘from what’s inside me’ (Interview 2 transcript, p3), and that the community ‘allows the tough things to be held’ (email 28/11). Vulnerability was visibly demonstrated in the concept of the children-inspired Eucharist where ‘each group is headed by a child’ (email 6/11).

The communication and liturgy of the research community strongly conveyed the celebratory aspect of God’s nature. There was an underlying exuberance where playful living was explored and encouraged. The sacrament could be received in celebration style, in ‘an exuberant rather than a solemn way’ (Participant Observation 30/11), as God nourishes us and enables us to nourish others. There was an explicit sense of satisfaction and expectancy in gathering – ‘very good to be together’ (email 7/11); ‘happy times yesterday… in God’s good care, Yes we can, yes we can, yes we can!’ (email 17/11). An important aspect of celebration for the community was blessing, which could be seen as the passing on or sharing of the richness of God. The power of this was acknowledged explicitly (email 2/12), and people were seen to be ‘blessing-makers’ of the community (email 4/12).

Holiness was an important concept for the community. God is holy – a God who by his nature invites response. There was a sense in which the holiness of God was questioning the community – ‘how do we see ourselves as part of the Kingdom coming… how might we be helping the hungry, thirsty, sick, unwelcome etc. as a community?’ (Community Meal resource sheet 20/11), ‘how might God be calling us to play our part?’ (Community Meal resource sheet 27/11). The worship of the community is a context in which the presence of God was sensed, ‘a place to touch the holy’ (email 28/11). The abbot’s vows included the statement, ‘remember to whom you will give account’ (Eucharist resource sheet 8/12).

As expressed and authenticated in practice

The broader actions and life of the research community demonstrated a remarkable consistency with the spirituality underpinning the liturgy – there is a tangible authenticity and naturalness to the life of the community. There was a genuine sense of sharing life – in regular contact, in sharing meals, in sharing stories and conversation. Through frequent emails from the leader, people remained in touch with the community even if they were not able to get to community meals or Sunday Eucharists. The website was acknowledged to currently have been more of a shop window for those outside the community, though there have been attempts in the past for it to be a place for ongoing community conversation (Interview 2 transcript, p4).

The research community was not formally involved in ongoing outside projects, and this appears in keeping with embracing the simple rhythm and continuity of a spiritual life which envisions all to be infused by God. An recent publicised event, to which anyone was invited, could be seen to be a celebration and expression of the community’s life together, and an invitation to others to enter in, to engage with, to share in the ongoing journey of this community as they engage with the expansiveness of God.

The broader actions and life of this community were firmly rooted in its spirituality – Christ in every encounter makes the small, routine and even mundane things matter. As evidenced previously in this thick description, accompanying each other mattered; listening and conversation and being real mattered; the expression of 64

who we are mattered; celebrating God and each other mattered. Fundamentally, allowing our hearts and minds to be infused with the love, hope and possibility of God mattered, and it was the community’s delight to creatively employ all manner of resources from the secular world and a breadth of different Christian traditions to this end.

This chapter has presented the findings of the first stage of analysis in Stoddart’s (2005) two-stage model for interpreting the effects of the liturgy on personal identity. A thick description of the spirituality behind the liturgy of the research community has been generated, using Downey’s (1997) seven categories for studying spirituality. This work identifies the meaning-making thrust of the liturgy (the sense or meaning the liturgy reflects back to the community), and offers the basis on which to proceed to the second stage of analysis - sifting the description with a model of identity to generate answers to the question, ‘What does the liturgy make of me?’.

Chapter 5 What Does the Liturgy Make of Me?

The question explored in this chapter is an analysis of the possible effects of the liturgy on the conceptual ‘me’ – the unknown person who might be encountering this liturgy. This second stage of the analysis in Stoddart’s (2005) two-stage model has yielded an interpretive piece of writing, which has deliberately been brought to life by writing in the present tense. It is a commentary with the researcher very much as the exponent, interpreting through the lens of Collicut’s (2007) model of personal identity the possible effects the liturgy of the research community might be having on the identity of the conceptual ‘me’. The writing has been structured for clarity’s sake using Collicut’s (2007) five components of personal identity.

Sense of physical identity and integrity

A sense of my physicality is enhanced through the liturgy in a number of ways. My physical presence is valued and acknowledged through physical greeting – a hug usually on arrival and leaving and during the peace. Gathering in the outdoors for worship exposes my body and senses to different temperatures, sights, sounds, smells, and feel of the terrain which augments my physical awareness, usually suppressed by the comfort and familiarity of indoor settings.

In participative elements such as reading, praying, making music and making art, my particular physical abilities produce distinctive contributions which are acknowledged and valued for what they are. I can appreciate and learn from the distinctive contributions of other people. In the centrality of gathering around meals, my physical body is infused with the spiritual through the eucharistic spirit of the community meals and the Eucharist itself. I experience connection with others as we share the same food.

This contributes to me sensing in the liturgy the vital importance of ‘beyond physicality’. My physical presence at community gatherings is celebrated but not coerced – contact remains via email and texting and website. The physicality of my age, gender, physical appearance or ability is not intrusive or distracting to community life – rather, there is the sense that the offering of each person’s different physicality strongly develops community life. The rhetoric in the liturgy of looking for the ‘new thing’ allows me to supersede my current physicality, looking beyond the way in which I feel it limits me, and also beyond the way I feel it benefits and ‘secures’ me.

Freedom of movement and action (autonomy)

A significant part of the liturgy involves improvisation which encourages and values my autonomy and creativity. Improvisation is welcomed within the general constraint of the tune – the tradition of the faith and the connection with the diocese. The frequent spontaneity of a chant, or a particular song, or permission 67

for me and others to do something in an unusual way means the liturgy in itself reflects a kind of autonomy, giving permission and affirmation to my autonomy. The unpredictability of improvisation can sometimes be releasing for me, while at other times I find it intimidating, so that it constrains my action. In some sense though the intimidation is offset by the freedom for me to participate or not in different parts of the liturgy.

The general tenor of the life and liturgy of the community, reflecting the expansiveness of God, points toward each of us seeking greater freedom of expression with our particular passions and yearnings, which will be of benefit to others. This paradoxically draws me into the holiness of voluntary constraint, where I give up limitless choice in choosing to inhabit and develop the gift of my particularity, and contribute this gift to community. Christâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s discomforting work challenges the status quo and questions my autonomous choices, reminding me of my neighbour and of the wider world which may be forgotten in the pursuit of my personal autonomy.

There is in the liturgy a delightful sense of entering into the fruit of the freedom of others through the different resources used. And through engaging imaginatively with these resources, I am able to taste the potential of being taken and taking others to new places.

Habitual behaviours and behavioural styles

In recognising and encouraging diversity, the liturgy provides space to accommodate my particular behavioural style, in several instances offering me the choice of what to engage with. I get the impression that the shared journey can accommodate and incorporate creatively different habitual behaviours and styles for the good of all.

The liturgy has the feel of an anchoring point for my particular habitual behaviour and style â&#x20AC;&#x201C; it is able to draw me and others in to a corporate expression of faith. And the community itself, in its valuing of monastic rhythms of contemplation and action, draws me in to corporate habitual behaviours and patterns, through which I am shaped and my personal behaviour ordered. However, the unpredictability of venue and meeting times, and frequent improvisation in the liturgy itself could hinder this process of my being shaped and formed.

Running through the liturgy is the understanding that my actions will be better if they arise out of contemplation. Through the contemplative space of the community, the questioning holiness of God provides opportunity for me to reflect on behaviours which may require change. A changing or re-ordering of my personal goals is stimulated through the liturgy engaging my imagination.

Social place

In the liturgy, there are no reserved roles for me personally - the Abbot as priest has the only reserved role in leading the Eucharistic prayer. As such, my role is extremely flexible, and the invitation is there for me to inhabit different roles at different times. This communicates to me equality of relationship and valuing of my potential, which might otherwise be hidden by fixed roles. It can sometimes feel unsafe however, not knowing what I might be doing.

The rhetoric of corporate journey is enhanced and authenticated by my participation in the liturgy, and points me beyond any particular role I may have to something bigger. In the Eucharist I participate with others in the love and life of God - in an important sense practising my identity in relation to God and other people. Creativity gives me the opportunity to explore out of and beyond my various roles in life and in this community, assisted by the culture of expansiveness in the community and liturgy.

In the contemplative space of the community, all my roles can be questioned by the Christ who disrupts and discomforts. Through this I am given opportunity to inhabit my different roles in life in a new way and to grow in my potential.

The eclectic use of resources from different Christian traditions gives me a sense of role significance as I participate in this worshipping community â&#x20AC;&#x201C; awareness of a role for me in this time and place within and for the wider church. This brings both

self-esteem and responsibility â&#x20AC;&#x201C; a connectedness to something much bigger to which I contribute.

Personal narratives

Personal narratives are highly valued and there is regular opportunity in conversation and discussion for me to share my narrative, interwoven with faith. Contemplative space in silence, liturgical responses and prayers, readings, music, and creative activities, serves both to comfort and discomfort my personal narrative. There is openness to both the difficult and painful parts and the successful and joyful parts of my personal story.

The corporate narrative of the community colours and gives perspective to my personal narrative, both revealing it more clearly â&#x20AC;&#x201C; drawing it out through interest, value and creativity â&#x20AC;&#x201C; and challenging its perspectives in the light of other narratives. The strong message of Christ making new gives me encouragement, and hope for the future development of my story, interwoven in the stories of other people.

The liturgy helps me to listen and to participate in the personal narratives of those outside the community, through Scripture and wisdom readings, engaging with the lyrics of music, and news stories. In the Eucharistic prayer and reception of the elements, I identify with and participate in the narrative of God in Christ.

There is no explicit space or words given to formal confession in the liturgy. The lack of regular explicit acknowledgement of the constraint of sin in my life clouds the reality of my limitations and weaknesses, which I need to face if I am to really change and grow. It may mean that sometimes the roots of my discomfort and limitation go undiscovered and remain influential in my life, in spite of the rhetoric of ‘new-making’ in the liturgy.

Critique of Stoddart’s two stage model

While the ‘feel’ of its use is fresh, it seems sensible to move directly to critiquing Stoddart’s (2005) two-stage model for interpreting the effects of the liturgy on personal identity, before continuing to analyse some of the pertinent trends and explore implications.

The first stage of the model involved using Downey’s (1997) seven foci for exploring the spirituality behind the liturgy. The seven foci proved helpful in indicating the data that would be required in this research. The observation schedule which was used (see Appendix p68) proved very effective in capturing the relevant data, and as a basic research instrument in itself, would offer a quick and simple means of gathering information periodically on what is actually happening in the liturgy of a worshipping community, which participants, and particularly leaders, may lose sight of. In the first stage of analysis, Downey’s (1997) seven foci offered clear categories, enabling pertinent themes and trends to be drawn from the large quantity of raw data, which could then be distilled into a 72

thick description of the spirituality behind the liturgy in a fairly natural way. This has produced I think an honest, authentic feel to the thick description of the spirituality behind the liturgy. With the inclusion of references to specific data, the description importantly reflects the raw data which lies behind it, indicating the careful and sensitive management of a large amount of data from diverse sources.

Using just the first stage of Stoddart’s (2005) model produced very interesting data which would be helpful in and of itself to the worshipping community which the thick description describes. It extracts and reveals the story that the liturgy is telling to those who are contributing to and participating in the worshipping community. It highlights the meaning the liturgy is giving to the corporate life of the community and to the personal life within the whole. A thick description of the spirituality behind the liturgy enables a leader or community to ask, ‘is the liturgy communicating what we expected, or what we hoped for?’, and to look for surprises. ‘What is the liturgy saying to us?’ is a very useful research question in itself for any worshipping community to be asking. And because the liturgy is the work of the people, the derivative question becomes ‘What are we saying through the liturgy? What are we communicating through our corporate worship?’

The second stage of analysis using Stoddart’s (2005) two-stage model proved more demanding. Collicutt’s (2007) model of identity felt difficult and uncomfortable to use when it came to sifting the thick description of the spirituality behind the liturgy. It was a real challenge to think my way in to the various categories of the model, whilst at the same time incorporating a theological bias towards personal identity. The theological lens added the complexity of paradox,

which the more absolute categories of Collicut’s (2007) model were unable to accommodate. A Christian sense of identity wants to acknowledge the importance of a sense of physical identity and integrity, freedom of movement and action, habitual behaviours and behavioural styles, social place, and personal narratives, but also to move beyond them. The inadequacy of the model can be seen as each category struggled to contain a Christian understanding of identity which seeks to inhabit the creative tension between the freedom of the person and the coherence of the community and the Christian narrative – freedom on the one hand and constraint on the other.

This stage of analysis might have been more workable if these theological considerations had been built in to a model of identity. Some questions to bear in mind as a starting point in developing such a theological model of identity might be, ‘what would we want our liturgy to be saying about us as particular persons?’; ‘what important themes of the Christian narrative need to be incorporated into such a model?’; ‘can the model accommodate the creative tension of paradox?’. It would be helpful for such a model to be capable of revealing the tendency of the liturgy - in the important Christian paradoxes, which way does the liturgy tip us? If this was being used for research in a particular church setting, the model could be constructed from the views of the church on Christian identity – from the hopes of how we would like to be being formed. This would vary with different church contexts and theologies, but would allow an assessment of the current liturgy of a particular church to see if it is likely to be effecting this desired Christian identity or not – and where the constricting points may be in the liturgy of the worshipping community.

Having said this, I feel the results of the second stage of analysis using Collicutâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (2007) model of identity have been fruitful, and will look at some of their implications in the next section. Writing interpretively in the present tense and in the first person singular makes the activity of the liturgy come alive - the personal effect of the liturgy jumps out and provokes thought. This is surely a good thing for those assessing possible effects on personal identity of the liturgy they create.

Trends and Implications

There are several noticeable trends in the interpretation of the effect of the liturgy of the research community on personal identity. In terms of information (who I am), this liturgy tells me that I am valued - my presence and activity is important. I am one who can actively participate in the story of God, the life of the community and the wider world, and receive all the benefits of participation. My particularity as I participate - my unique contribution - finds a welcome space; it is encouraged and desired. In terms of formation (who I am becoming), this liturgy urges flexibility towards an open-ended becoming. In the changing times and venues, in the exercising of many different roles, in the looking for the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;new thingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, in the creative stretching of ideas, there is little room for settledness. Movement in a myriad of ways is the formative energy of the liturgy. Imagination is always reaching for what could be, possibilities being explored in creativity, drawing hope towards future development.

So what might be the implications of such interpreted informative and formative trends? This research work demonstrates the real complexity of Christian personal identity, which needs to inhabit, negotiate and draw life from the paradoxes of the Christian faith. These paradoxes pull in the seemingly contradictory directions of constraint and freedom, stability and change, present reality and future hope. And it is the liturgy which offers a vehicle to inhabit, negotiate and draw life from these paradoxes.

The liturgy of the research community highlights the very real tension between developing a life of habit and order, and being innovative and experimental. The tension for this community lies in its wanting to subscribe in many ways to the influence of monasticism with its holy habits of rhythm and order, while at the same time enjoying the lure, playfulness and energy of creativity, improvisation and spontaneity. Though the research community identifies and shapes itself in the monastic tradition, its liturgy is weighted towards improvisation and spontaneity. This has implications. It could suggest that the monastic tradition is being interpreted in such a way that its depth and density is lost, attractive elements and concepts being appropriated which give only an illusion of rootedness and rhythm and discipline. This is what Martyn Percy is concerned about in a culture which celebrates the freedom to pick and choose - “we are all too easily immersed in a semi-detached and sacred meaning-making enclave within consumerist culture” (2008, p35). Recalling the powerful shaping effect of performance, Anderson (2003) reminds us that it is performance which ‘persuades’ us, so that what we perform becomes part of who we are. Monastic rhythm and discipline requires repeated performance born out of commitment and

discipline if it is to have itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s desired shaping effect on who we are. The performance of the liturgy of the research community is more likely to be at risk of forming transience and fleetingness. The constant engagement with novelty could dampen sustained attentiveness, as it fosters a hunger for change.

The tension between stability and change, habit and innovation is a growing tension that all churches face, as the unprecedented openness to experimentation brings the possibility of dramatic change to what is done in corporate worship. Decisions about how to deal with this tension in the liturgy require first of all a consciousness to it, and concern for the long-term formational effects of the trends intrinsic to the liturgy. As the research community lives with the formative influence of constant movement and change, other churches struggle with the equally formative influence of being more heavily weighted to sameness, rhythm and familiarity. An example of this might be the weekly use of a standardised liturgy, always in the same church building, very often engaged with from the very same seat in the church building. The formative consequences of such liturgy might be a resistance to and fear of change, which could inhibit growth, particularly as it limits our relational possibilities. And as we have established in exploring the concept of identity, our identity is constructed largely through our relating.

Many fresh expressions of church are trying to wrestle with the complexities of providing a desirable monastic stability, at the same time as providing desirable cutting edge innovations. Both of these arise out of the cultural connection points of a postmodern culture identified by Mobsby (2007), which fresh expressions seek to engage. Monastic stability engages the interest in relationship and

belonging, and the drawing on ancient wisdom; cutting edge innovation engages the hunger for exploratory ways of being and doing in a spiritual context. What is needed in the creation of liturgy is a sensitivity to and consciousness towards the important theological themes of Scripture, which speak both to stability and to change. Both of these strands need to be reflected in the liturgy in a balanced way, which will offer the necessary challenge to the tendency to inhabit a particular pole.

Another very real tension highlighted by the liturgy of the research community is the tension between facing the reality of the here and now, and focussing on hopes for the future. The reality of the here and now includes our limitations, which are incorporated into the concept of our sinfulness. In our hopes for the future we are taken beyond the limitations of reality in the present moment to focus on what could be. In its active looking for the ‘new thing’ through creativity and engaging the imagination, the liturgy of the research community is weighted towards what could be, rather than to what is in the present. The ‘what is’ is engaged with from the perspective of the discomfort of the pain and suffering of life – for example, a personal bereavement, or an identification with the suffering of those in the world being evicted from homes, or caught up in conflict and war. ‘What is’ is not engaged with from the point of view of the reality of my personal limitations, and the effect of these limitations on the world. This comes across in the lack of a formal confession in the liturgy, and the lack of explicit acknowledgement of sin.

Again, the paradox of facing reality and sin, and of looking in hope beyond our present limitations is what all churches need to wrestle with. The vital question is

how we can be enabled to face reality without being drowned in it – unable to move from it and beyond it. The Church of England Book of Common Prayer liturgy (is weighted towards facing people with the present reality of their sinfulness with a power that can be challenging to move beyond; when reality is presented so starkly, it can be paralysing. The challenge for all those who write and use liturgy is to enable both a facing of reality – as God faces us – and a moving beyond reality – as God is able to do more in us and through us than we could ask or imagine.

There needs to be an intentional commitment, and an encouraging rather than threatening space for the facing of reality, since it is not a comfortable nor natural thing to do. In his book on desert spirituality, Rowan Williams highlights the tactics employed by the desert fathers and mothers in their facing of reality, as being ‘pledged to the walls’ of their cell (2003, p89): “you have to promise yourself to yourself and to your actual environment... you have to ‘espouse’ reality rather than unreality, the actual limits of where and who you are rather than the world of magic in which anything can happen if I want it to.” (Williams 2003, p89). This idea echoes the deeply scriptural pledging of Christ to the world in all its limitations, and to the church as it is, even as it is being transformed in its partnership with triune God. The important consequences of this ‘pledging to the walls’ for the church is that it demands commitment, cannot be rushed, and is not sexy. It requires facing the reality that the church, in all its expressions, fresh and not so fresh, “is a place where holiness takes time and where the prose of daily faithfulness and yes, sometimes daily boredom, has to be faced and blessed, not shunned and concealed” (Williams, 2003, p91).

Innovation and improvisation and re-imagining can be a distraction from the necessary and important task of facing reality. In White’s (2002) theological understanding of identity, there is acknowledgement that who we are now is different to who we could be in the future. However, this change takes place through the reality of our everyday relating which changes our self-perception. Avoiding this reality could lead to a negative unfolding of our potential identity, not just impacting ourselves, but those to whom we relate. This then becomes an issue for the development of ethics in our lives and in our churches and beyond. For Hauerwas’ (1995) our ethics are derived from our coming to “rightly see” through our worship - overlooking reality will result in a measure of blindness which has far reaching consequences.

In seeking to identify and address the formative trends of our liturgy, it needs to be recognised that the different seasons of the church year offer (and have always offered) the possibility of creative solutions. Seasonality offers space for different emphases, so that over the course of a year different weights will be applied to stability, confession and the facing of reality, and movement and celebration and the embracing of the gift of new life. The period of data collection for the liturgy of the research community fell during the kingdom season, which does encourage the ‘new-making’ rhetoric so evident in the liturgy. So to be fair and accurate in assessment, this research should ideally incorporate the whole church year. What all churches need to face however, in the story of their liturgy over a church year, is the issue of people coming and going in a way which can upset the rhythm of

the story being told. This is an ongoing challenge among the many which this research has identified, which somehow our liturgy must learn to account for.

This chapter has presented the results of the final stage of analysis in Stoddart’s (2005) two-stage model. Analysis of the thick description of the spirituality behind the liturgy using Collicut’s (2007) model of identity yielded an interpretive piece of writing which offers answers to the question of the effects of the liturgy of the research community on personal identity. A critique of Stoddart’s model has identified both the feasibility and the value of investigating the spirituality behind the liturgy in a worshipping community. It has revealed the difficulty of moving to interpreting the effects of the liturgy on Christian personal identity, where theology introduces the intricacy of paradox. Collicut’s (2007) model of personal identity was found to struggle with the complexity of Christian identity. However, the interpretation of the effects on identity which it has yielded is both thoughtprovoking and helpful in identifying the formative trends of the liturgy. It has highlighted the need of the liturgy to help people to inhabit, negotiate and draw life from the paradoxes of the Christian faith, particularly as they relate to constraint and freedom, stability and change, present reality and future hope.

Chapter 6 Conclusions

This research has called attention to the intricacy of the task of putting together different elements which will constitute the liturgy of the people in corporate worship. This is because the text, including words and images seen, heard and spoken which engage all senses, along with the performance of the liturgy, has a shaping effect on personal identity and on personhood. The consequences of these shaping effects are by no means isolated to the individual, but have an extensive reach due to our interconnectedness as persons - “as persons-inrelation, my personhood is inextricably linked to my enabling you to be a person...How I and my community worship has implications for the personhood of each one of us.” (Stoddart, 2005, p101). There are profound implications for persons, for communities and for the mission of God to the world, all of which the church is intimately concerned with. The lack of work to date on liturgy and personal identity is therefore surprising.

It may be that the complexity of Christian identity, which this work has encountered, along with the likelihood of contested interpretations of the positive or negative effects of a community’s worship, hinders research in this area. But this research project has demonstrated both the feasibility and value of interpreting the effect of the liturgy on personal identity in a particular worshipping community. Stoddart’s (2005) two-stage model has revealed firstly the usefulness of Downey’s

approach to studying spirituality in the context of liturgy, offering a relatively simple means of establishing through thick description the story that is being told through the liturgy of corporate worship. And secondly, in sifting this thick description with a model of identity, that it is feasible to interpret the possible effects of the liturgy on the conceptual â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;meâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. Generating an interpretive piece of writing in the first person singular was found to bring such a study alive in a way which provokes engagement.

What such a model enables is an interpretation which generates a consciousness towards the trends of the effects of the liturgy on personal identity. Considering such trends gives the means to assess the implications of choices made about what will be done and how in corporate worship. And whether the trends are considered positive or negative will be a matter for each community to determine within their particular context and theological understanding. What this research signals is that developing this consciousness toward the effects of the liturgy on personal identity is a vital part of leading a worshipping community.

The important questions raised by interpreting the effects of the liturgy of the research community on personal identity have implications for the church as a whole. How does any church in its liturgy deal with the paradoxes of Christian identity, particularly as they relate to stability and innovation, and facing the limitations of reality and moving beyond current constraints? The dangers are an oversimplification which does not help people to live creatively in the tension of paradox, but tips the balance in a particular direction. Healthy, life giving liturgy needs to offer space for both a deep rootedness and stability, and exploratory

innovation and movement. It should both encourage a facing of reality, and open doors to unimagined futures.

In focussing on liturgy and identity in fresh expressions of church, this research highlights a number of pertinent issues for a movement currently developing its resources and growing in influence in many countries of the Western world. Concern to engage with postmodern cultural connection points needs to be tempered by the prophetic challenge of the Gospel which should transform culture. Graham Tomlin (2008) speaks of the importance of setting expectations, “the creation of an atmosphere that gently encourages goodness and discourages deviousness, deceit and divisiveness” (p74). This is the task of the liturgy.

Learning to engage with postmodern culture in a Christian way requires developing skills of seeing and making sense, and becoming conscious of what is influencing this sight and interpretation. In other words, coming to inhabit a hermeneutical circle which facilitates “reading the signs of the times and interpreting them in the light of the Gospel” (Kubicki, 2005, p221). Conversations begun on fresh expressions websites could go a long way in generating and sustaining such a hermeneutical cycle. Ultimately, it is the understanding of culture and of the Gospel which will impact decisions made about what is done and how it is done in corporate worship.

As there is ongoing development both of the formal training of pioneer ministers, and of guides and resources relating to good practice in setting up and sustaining fresh expressions of church, now is the time for serious consideration to be given

to the skills needed for developing liturgy in worshipping communities. Such learning will need to incorporate an appreciation of the complexities, dynamics and potential of the liturgy, and a growing depth of theological understanding which will inform and support the Christian narrative we seek to communicate through the liturgy. What is it that we invite people to in the liturgy? How might people be shaped through the performance of the liturgy we have created, as it encourages particular ways of relating to God, to ourselves and to others? The offering of broad principles for consideration in the development of liturgy, such as those proposed by Susan Smith (2006), offer a more helpful guidance I feel than supplying a list of suggested ingredients for worship. Smith’s (2006) principles for the creation of liturgy call for discernment of the experience and need of the worshipping community, the judicious and sensitive use of Christian ritual and symbol, the support of the contraries of cross and resurrection, an encouragement towards life and the reign of God, and a recognition of expressing and representing action on behalf of the whole church.

In speaking about the principles of learning for pioneer ministry in the context of fresh expressions of church, Steven Croft (2008) suggests that “building habits of ongoing reflection, supervision and support is more important than advanced preparation”. This supports the importance of ongoing conversation between practitioners, and also, the relevance of having tools to make an interpretive assessment of the possible effects of the liturgy on personal identity. This research work has initiated an important process of beginning to open up conversations about liturgy and personal identity, considering the question, ‘what is our worship doing to us?’ And it has been able to demonstrate the potential of Stoddart’s

(2005) two-stage model as an assessment tool in this area. It is hoped that this research might go some way towards enabling practitioners to develop a necessary consciousness towards issues of liturgy and personal identity. And that the fruit of this for the church and the world might be life-giving and lifetransforming encounter with God, self and others.

Bibliography

Adams, I. (2008), ‘International Perspectives and Developments’, in Mixed Economy: The Journal of Fresh Expressions, Autumn/Winter 2008/2009, p24

Anderson, E. B. (2003), Worship and Christian Identity: Practising Ourselves, The Liturgical Press: Collegeville, Minnesota

The Archbishop’s Council (2002), Common Worship, Church House Publishing: London

The Archbishop’s Council (2004), Mission-Shaped Church: church planting and fresh expressions of church in a changing context, Church House Publishing: London

Baron, R.A., & Byrne, D. (2000), Social Psychology, (9th ed), Allyn & Bacon: Boston

Baron, R.A., & Byrne, D., & Branscombe, N. R. (2006), Social Psychology, (11th ed), Allyn & Bacon: Boston

Blaxter, L., Hughs, C., & Tight, M. (2001), How to Research, (2nd ed), Open University Press: Maidenhead

Bell, D. M. (2008), â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Development of the Religious Self: A Theoretical Foundation for Measuring Religious Identityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, in A Day (ed), Religion and the Individual, Ashgate: Aldershot

Bell, J. (1993), Doing Your Research Project, Open University Press: Buckingham

Burns, S. (2006), Liturgy, SCM Press: London

Collicutt, J. (2007), Ethical Practice in Brain Injury Rehabilitation, OUP: Oxford

Collicutt, J. Lecture notes, Ripon College Cuddesdon, 2007

Croft, S. and Mobsby, I. (2009, awaiting release), Fresh Expressions in the Sacramental Tradition: Ancient Faith, Future Mission, Canterbury Press: Norwich

Croft, S. (2008), ‘Formation for Ministry in a Mixed Economy of Church: The Impact of Fresh Expressions of Church on Patterns of Training’ in Evaluating Fresh Expressions: Explorations in Emerging Church, Nelstrop L. and Percy M. (eds), Canterbury Press: Norwich, pp40-54

Cray G., et al. (2004), ‘Mission-Shaped Church Report’, Church House Publishing: London

Crichton, J. D. (1992), ‘A Theology of Worship’, in C Jones, G Wainwright and E Yarnold SJ (eds), The Study of Liturgy, SPCK: London, pp3-30

Denscombe, M. (2007), The Good Research Guide, (3rd ed), Open University Press: Maidenhead

Downey, M. (1997), Understanding Christian Spirituality, Paulist Press: New Jersey

Earey, M., and Myers, G. (eds) (2001), Common Worship Today: An Illustrated Guide to Common Worship, Harper Collins: London

General Synod of the Church of England, (2005), Transforming Worship: Living the New Creation, A Report by the Liturgical Commission, GS1651, General Synod: London

Guest, M., Taylor, S. (2006), ‘The Post-Evangelical Emerging Church: Innovations in New Zealand and the UK’, in International Journal for the Study of the Christian Church, Vol. 6, No.1, March 2006, pp49-64

Hauerwas, S. (1995), In Good Company: The Church as Polis, Notre Dame Press: Notre Dame

Holeton, D. R. (1988), ‘The Formative Character of Liturgy’, in T J Talley (ed), A Kingdom of Priests: Liturgical Formation of the People of God, Alcuin/GROW Liturgical Study 5, Grove Liturgical Study No. 53, Grove Books Ltd: Nottingham, pp8-14

Hoyland, G. (2007), ‘Contemporary Anglican York: Denominational Identity, Association and Affiliation’, in Kim,.S.C.H. & Kollontai, P. (eds), Community Identity: Dynamics of Religion in Context, T&T Clarke: London, pp167-182

Hughs, G. (2003), ‘Worship as Meaning: a Liturgical Theology for Late Modernity’, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge

Hull, J. M. (2006), Mission-Shaped Church: A Theological Response, SCM Press: Canterbury

Kubicki, J. M. (2005), ‘Perception, Presence, and Sacramentality in a Postmodern Context’, in Studia Liturgica 35, pp221-234

Lyon, D. (1999), Postmodernity, University of Minnesota Press: Minnesota

McCarthy, M. (1999), ‘Spirituality in a Postmodern Era’, in J Woodward, S Pattison and J Patten (eds), The Blackwell Reader in Pastoral and Practical Theology, Blackwells: Oxford, pp192-206

Mobsby, I.J. (2006), Emerging and Fresh Expressions of Church: are they authentically church and Anglican?, Moot Community Publishing: London

Percy, M. (2008), ‘Old Tricks for New Dogs? A Critique of Fresh Expressions’, in Evaluating Fresh Expressions: Explorations in Emerging Church, Nelstrop L. and Percy M. (eds), Canterbury Press: Norwich, pp27-39

Savage, S. (2008), ‘Fresh Expressions: The Psychological Gains and Risks’, in Evaluating Fresh Expressions: Explorations in Emerging Church, Nelstrop L. and Percy M. (eds), Canterbury Press: Norwich, pp55-70

Simon, B. (2003), Identity in Modern Society: A Social Psychological Perspective, Blackwell Publishing: Oxford

Smith, S. M. (2006), ‘The Scandal of Particularity Writ Small: Principals for Indigenizing Liturgy in the Local Context’, in Anglican Theological Review, 88:3, pp375-396

Stoddart, E. (2005), ‘What is Our Liturgy Doing to Us? The After Effects of Worship’, in Studia Liturgica, vol. 35, pp100-110

Tomlin, G. (2008), ‘Can we Develop Churches that can Transform the Culture?’, in Mission-Shaped Questions: Defining Issues for Today’s Church, Steven Croft (ed), Church House Publishing: London, pp66-77

Urwin, L. (2008), ‘What is the Role of Sacramental Ministry in Fresh Expressions of Church?’, in Mission-Shaped Questions: Defining Issues for Today’s Church, Steven Croft (ed), Church House Publishing: London, pp29-41

Warner, M. (2008), ‘How does a mixed economy Church Connect with Contemporary Spirituality?’, in Mission-Shaped Questions: Defining Issues for Today’s Church, Steven Croft (ed), Church House Publishing: London, pp173-185

Webster, J. (2003), ‘The Human Person’, in Postmodern Theology, Vanhoozer (ed), Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, pp219-234

Wells, S. (2002), ‘How Common Worship Forms Local Character’, from Studies in Christian Ethics, Vol. 15, No. 1, 2002, pp66-74, in Theological Reflection Sources, Graham E, Walton H, and Ward F (eds) (2007), SCM Press: London, pp211-222

Wetherall M., and Maybin J. (1996), â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;The Distributed Self: a Social Constructivist Perspectiveâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, in R Stevens (ed) Understanding the Self, Sage: London, pp219-280

White, V. (2002), Identity, SCM Press: London

Williams, E. (2007), Fresh Expressions in the Urban Context, Lulu.com

Williams, R. (2003), Silence and Honey Cakes: The Wisdom of the Desert, Lion Publishing: Oxford

Yin, R. K., (2003), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, (3rd ed), Sage Publications: California

Zimmerman, J. A. (1999), Liturgy and Hermeneutics, The Liturgical Press: Collegeville

Websites

Fresh Expressions www.freshexpressions.co.uk http://www.freshexpressions.org.uk//standard.asp?id=4332&cachefixer=, accessed 21/4/09

Anglican Church Planting Initiatives www.acpi.co.uk

Share www.sharetheguide.co.uk http://www.sharetheguide.org/section1/1 accessed 26/3/09 http://www.sharetheguide.org/section2/21century/index.html/, accessed 26/3/09 http://www.sharetheguide.org/section5/bmo, accessed 21/4/09 http://www.sharetheguide.org/section1/4/up, accessed 21/4/09 http://www.sharetheguide.org/develop/exploring/#creative, accessed 25/4/09

Alternative Worship www.alternativeworship.org http://www.alternativeworship.org/directory_resources.html, accessed 23/4/09

http://www.alternativeworship.org/practice_paul_structure.html, accessed 23/4/09 http://www.alternativeworship.org/practice_paul_ingredients.html, accessed 23/4/09

Church of England www.cofe.anglican.org http://www.cofe.anglican.org/about/churchcommissioners/ pastoralandclosedchurches/pastoral/mission/bmos/, accessed 25/4/09

Creative Prayer www.creativeprayer.com http://www.creativeprayer.com/, accessed 23/4/09

Appendix

List of Data Sources

Participant Observation Period of Observation: 4th November - 14th December 2008 Events observed: Sunday Eucharist 9/11/08 Community meal 13/11/08 Sunday Eucharist 16/11/08 Sunday Eucharist 23/11/08 Community Meal 27/11/08 Sunday Eucharist 30/11/08 Sunday Eucharist 8/12/08 Community Meal 11/12/08 Sunday Eucharist 14/12/08 Documentary observations: Printed resource sheets and published liturgical texts Eucharist resource sheet 9/11/08 Community meal resource sheet 13/11/08 Evening Liturgy A (Iona 3) 13/11/08 Eucharist resource sheet 16/11/08 Community meal resource sheet 27/11/08 Liturgy for Holy Communion A (Iona 4) 27/11/08 Eucharist resource sheet 8/12/08 Community meal resource sheet 11/12/08 The Boisil Compline (Northumbria Community5 ) 11/12/08 Sunday Eucharist resource sheet 14/12/09 3

Wild Goose Worship Group (1999), A Wee Worship Book (4th Ed), Wild Goose Publications: Iona. pp54-57 4

Ibid pp80-93

Northumbria Community (2005), Celtic Daily Prayer, Collins: London, pp42-43 98

Description of community values published on the research communityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s website, accessed 19/1/09 (web link not given here to protect the communityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s anonymity) Email correspondence observations: November: 4/11/08; 5/11/08; 6/11/08; 7/11/08; 10/11/08; 11/1108; 14/11/08; 17/11/08; 19/11/08; 27/11/08; 28/11/08 December: 2/12/08; 3/12/08; 4/12/09 (x2); 10/12/08 News observations: The Week6 : 8th Nov; 15th Nov; 23rd Nov; 30th Nov; 6th Dec; 13th Dec issues The Oxford Times 7: 6th Nov; 13th Nov; 20th Nov; 27th Nov; 4th Dec; 11th Dec issues

Interviews Interview 1, 9/1/09 am Interview 2, 9/1/09 pm

The Week Magazine, published by The Week Ltd: London

The Oxford Times Newspaper, published by Newsquest Oxfordshire: Oxford 99

Observation Schedule

Date:

Time, service, venue: Number present:

The worship space How is the space set up? What is the focus of the space? How are people arranged within the space? How is the space used during worship?

Use of ritual objects Are any ritual objects used? Furniture, vessels or containers, consumable items, other things? Are certain objects regarded as precious? How is this indicated? Who handles the objects, who does not handle the objects?

Use of words, including direction, Scripture, teaching, prayer, bidding and response When? What? Who? How used? Prepared or impromptu?

Use of (deliberate) silence When? How introduced, how long, and how moved on?

Use of music and song When? How introduced? Who? What songs? How moved on?

Use of movement What movements? Who is moving? How do they happen (initiated and ended?)

Use of visual aids (may be related to ritual objects), including images. What? When? Who? How used (and initiated and ended)?

100

Interview Questions Liturgy ‣ ‣

What is your understanding of liturgy? What do you think it is? When preparing a resource for the community, what do you have in mind as the purpose of the resource – what do you hope it will be and do? Are the hopes different for a community meal and for a eucharist?

Culture ‣

‣ ‣

How would you describe to someone the culture of the community? What it feels like to be a part of it? What it looks like (who’s there, where is it, what’s being done?) What is sounds like (what do people speak of, how? Music, singing? What its hopes and aspirations are How do you think this culture affects the worship of the community? How does the culture affect the choices you make when planning a resource for a community meal and Eucharist?

Tradition ‣ ‣ ‣ ‣

Which Christian traditions are important for the community? Do you think the community is part of any particular Christian tradition? How do these traditions affect the life and worship of the community? How do these traditions influence resource preparation?

Contemporary events ‣ ‣ ‣

How do you think events and news stories, either locally, in the UK and worldwide impact the community? Do they have any effect on the worship of the community? Do they affect decisions when planning resources? Can you think of any specific examples?

Contemplation and action ‣ ‣ ‣

How do you view the relationship between contemplation (stillness, silence, reflection) and action (the activity involved in doing)? How does this influence the planning of a resource? How do you make decisions about where to put space for worshipful reflection as opposed to action in the liturgy? How do you think they help each other?

101

Research Information Sheet Who is the researcher? My name is Tracy Robinson, and I look forward to the opportunity of meeting you as I spend time with your community over the course of this research. I am training full time for ministry at Ripon College Cuddesdon, doing an MA in Ministry with Oxford Brookes. I hope to be ordained in 2009. Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve been living in Oxford for more than 8 years now, coming here in 2000 from Zimbabwe where Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d lived all my life. At various times I have been a physiotherapist, a church pastoral worker, and theological college administrator.

What is the research about? The title of the research is: Liturgy and Identity: What does the Liturgy Make of Me? Interpreting the Effect of the Liturgy on Personal Identity in a Fresh Expression of Church

Why is it important? There has already been research into the effect that worship has on groups of Christians but there is little research on how it affects individuals' sense of identity. We live in a culture that emphasises the personal and subjective so it seems important to me to investigate this aspect of worship. Because the research community has developed and continues to develop its own way of worship it seems a good place to explore this issue. A model has been proposed by a practical theologian as a way of looking into the effects of the liturgy on personal identity. I plan to test out this model to see if it is a workable, useful tool, and to gain information through it about the possible effects of liturgy on personal identity.

What will be involved? I will be participating in the Sunday worship and some community meals at the research community over a period of around seven weeks, from the end of October to the beginning of December. I will also be doing some interviews about the liturgy with two or three community members towards the end of this period. Sensitivity to the community, and confidentiality where particular people are concerned will be maintained at all times; individuals who I speak to at community gatherings will not be named. Throughout this process I am working with a supervisor to whom I am accountable.

102

How long will it take? I plan to finish all the data collection by mid-December. It will then take between 3 to 4 months to analyse the data and write up my findings. The dissertation will be submitted for marking by early summer 2009.

What will happen with the research findings? I plan to share what I have learnt through the research with the research community, and offer the opportunity for your feedback on the results. I very much hope this will be a mutually beneficial exercise. Once the dissertation has been submitted, a public copy will be available in the library at Ripon College Cuddesdon.

103