Beyond 2001...

Liturgy Consultation
on the Future of Worship

Province of Ontario
Worship after 2001 Consultation
meeting at Thorneloe University
Sudbury, Ontario
June 16-19, 2000

Thorneloe Consultation

Overall rating: 9 (x4), 8/9 (x1), 8 (x9, one with the comment: "a good event even if I am personally disappointed in what I discovered), 7 (x2), no rating given (x8)

1. a)clergy/laity relationships; b) that we have a firm centrality to our faith
2. Yes, I have a more developed sense of the theologies that inform the many worship forms we use
3. I appreciate much better those who see things differently from me. In a positive/strange way, through that my own position has become firmer
4. Rocks, candles, dreams, through all of this excellent time – Thank you Barbara
5. When people are treated as equals and valued as they are, the Spirit is freer to move, and everyone, from janitor to bishop, is authentically empowered to contribute their insights & gifts as they are able
6. Prayer Book Society being more open than I’d expected. Idea of Common Order as way forward
7. national structures and abilities
8. rocks, candles
9. It’s always good to widen one’s horizons. I do see that the commitment to change has a broader base than I had hitherto thought. (I still find it hurtful that those strongly committed to change are so contemptuous of those not so committed.)
10. Liturgical wars seem to be quietening down
11. Some respect for BCP tradition. A great deal of hope for what can be accomplished.
12. B.A.S. – a/b it being temporary
13. Appreciated input of non clerical members
14. I was delightfully surprised by the lack of polarization and the willingness of participants to collaborate to move forward instead of retrenching into positions
15. I don’t think anything changed for me personally. My concern is that people who have high expectations of this consultation may be let down in the future. I think Barb did an excellent job of facilitation and the process mostly went smoothly. It looked to me like the task was accomplished. This is now the fourth Nat’l consultation of one purpose or another I have attended. For the most part, the results of these consultations have been tangential to the church unless the bishops were present in significant numbers. I find their absence worrisome and worry that this will be used as an act of appeasement, rather than a concrete engagement with our liturgical challenges. Probably, in Niagara, we will have a clergy day to report back and invite other’s participation and opinion, but I suspect that is where it will end.
16. a new and effective method of an efficient and effective way to problem solve! achieve some consensus, prepare a plan of action
17. The possibilities re our Church’s essential identity in relation to prayer books
18. Less polarity in positions (BAS – BCP) than I thought there would be.
19. I am inspired to try some of the new and innovative things others are doing
20. A "snapshot" of varying liturgical experiences/issues in this province

1. a) I have a better grasp on parish education problems; b) Creativity is not a threat
2. about the need to hear the many voices and to share them
3. I really felt that the 2001 Synod would be terribly divisive concerning liturgy. I now see that this need not be the case.
4. After 3 gins.
5. ‘Open Space’ can be a safe way to grow, we can trust the Spirit to lead, without having all the angles covered, controlled….
6. Awareness rather than vision grew – of the current climate – even catholic climate in the Church. It worries me.
7. [illustration of sunrise]
8. I would like to involve more people in a local process.
9. New possibilities for work in the parish.
10. from considering my frustrations a personal and local problem to being one of many both clergy and laity throughout the province
11. through clarification of the role of ‘centre’/ ‘boundaries’
12. Greater appreciation of challenges in the North. Insights on how power is exercised in our Church

1. Not labeling people other than by name and Diocese. Fellowship times. Structure and workshop.
2. The careful look at the variety of issues we looked at in Open Space
3. Frankness and trust among ourselves which we learned to earn over the 3 days
4. Shaun – a saint. Great to have Bishop Lawrence here.
5. Open Space. Appreciative Inquiry.
6. Open Space technique, community
7. "some ones" – participants – realistic about likely resources for future. Therefore appropriate recommendations.
8. This was, though, a positive experience. I wish there had been more lay people involved.
9. The process, mostly.
10. Seeing the task come to a fruitful conclusion [illustration of a flower blooming]
11. Open Space
12. Name tags which didn’t specify rank or order; we all started from same playing field.
13. I enjoyed Open Space as a method for consultation and getting recommendations,
14. Great to discuss liturgical things with a variety of people from many different perspectives (practicing liturgy). People were open and forward-looking.
15. The method of raising, sorting and planning future action in a positive collaborative way. Democracy appeared to be alive and well.
16. Open Space: hard to imagine the actual outcome via any other pathway
17. Networking and meeting others
18. Networking – sharing with others with similar interests

1. The talking stone; the need to stand before a silent audience and make a speech very threatening… Passed around the circle, people could talk or pass it on.
2. My depth of comprehension of the ‘real’ theological differences in rites
3. The Black Room
4. Too much was expected of participants on Sunday evening… it sure would be nice to use less paper/trees
5. Starting every session late
6. too relentless. We needed spaces in the schedule to renew.
7. likely needed a break on Saturday evening
8. The rock kept us from open discussion…It was too far away from us. I didn’t want to go and get it. I felt inhibited, [illustration of stone wall] stonewalled
9. Rock
10. The rock was not helpful because of the size of the circle made it difficult to access… the room became a difficult place to be because of the lack of light and its blackness
11. 1. not enough free time (only at night, when we were tired); 2. the black room was very unhelpful….
12. 1. would’ve helped sometimes to know where we were going, rather than being controlled by someone telling us one task at a time
13. The things that could have pleased more people are just the incidentals of process and I think need to be consigned to the reality of being human. Overall, I thought the plan and its delivery were as well done as anyone could ask.
14. Hurried agenda
15. Not enough free time!
16. We struggled with the stone; in some cases it limited participation… schedule keeping

1. Permission to speak. Materials from conference. Continued passion.
2. Regular updates on progress of all of this.
3. Prayers first. Time to reflect and courage to act.
4. The others in our group to help.
5. Others who understand the vision – we can joyfully create/bring new resources to liturgy, with less fear of straying from ‘the book’
6. Copies of the reports
7. all the workshop materials – and time and energy!!
8. A bishop that cares and supports.
9. Report which can be shared – help orient delegates to G.S.; give focus for planning and sharing in diocese
10. the paper from the consultation
11. A sense that we will come together some time in the future to talk about what’s working and what’s not
12. to find an effective way to share the final conclusions with as many as possible
13. some documentation to validate what I think was the outcome
14. A framework for presenting the material
15. Only time.
16. Mandate from Bishop; forum for similar dialogue in our diocese

Pre-conference arrangements 10 (x3),8 (x4),7/8, 7 (x3) 6 (x2), 5,3, too hard to quantify, sorry.

Lack of confirmation; There seemed to be some anxiety about expectation; Generally good; Well done; Needed better map – some details of the agenda; Too bad about the Bishops and youth not coming. Was there a change of plan to assure native representation? instead of youth?; This means I got the information I needed about getting here. I don’t know anything about other pre-arrangements; I was happy with not knowing exact details of the event – ‘though it might have been helpful to know registration time, dinner time, and starting time of first session [the dinner and first session start times were on the registration form that was mailed to delegates to complete and return]; Not enough information in regard to expectations and task; Very little information from before conference actually began. My "J" side needs at least an outline of agenda beforehand!; Sketchy. It would have helped to have material for reflecting ahead; Good and helpful; I don’t know. The Dean of the cathedral called – I came; Perhaps a little more info as to agenda; Good information provided regarding schedule of registration and choices available regarding meal plan; Not clear on how selected – some anxiety about travel arrangements

Thorneloe University 8; the college has many barriers to physical access and became for me a challenge that got in the way of the conference; beautiful, comfortable, good hospitality

Rooms: 10 (x5) tops, 9, 8 (x8), good 9; rooms were comfortable and quiet 7; rooms w/ sinks?; OK 6; B, adequate; fine; good; comfortable and reasonably quiet; adequate (small beds); OK

Food: 10 (x3), good 9; 8 (x4 – ample with a good variety for my tastes); good; 7 (x2); 6; C+; 6/7; good; fair – good; food better as conference progressed - 6; okay; erratic; 6 (x2) – variable quality – especially coffee; OK (less meat or meatless options would be good) no reusable dishes [sad face]; 5 – improved greatly on 2^nd day; 4; 2

Site: 10, 9, 10, excellent – 10; such awful and sterile meeting rooms, thank God for our circle, and our posted sheets; site beautiful!; 8; B+ - beautiful, isolated, + no car; 10 – the public spaces here are good; the private rooms are what one could expect. I wish we could have had plenary sessions in a space with windows. Although the theatre was a good size, it nevertheless had a claustrophobic feel (or an inclaustrating one?); 8; 8; 10; 9; beautiful; needs to be closer to civilization; good; 10 – great walks; 10; 10; 8; 9; 7 – the main meeting room was a good space fortunately our schedule allowed us out into natural light from time to time; somewhat isolated; theatre OK at night – a room with natural light preferred during day.

First evening: Was particularly wonderful - I think everyone was put at ease - for me the openness was very important - I began to relax; 10 (x4) – a special thank you for a well organized conference; excellent time of sharing; from this first evening’s tone of "I want…" we gradually moved to "we want…" by Sunday – good to let people express the personal first…; 9 (x4); B+; much too long – needed at least one stand-up break!; good start; 8 (x2) – was concerned about length of time into evening but the sharing was a gift; needed a break, but great; I found it hard to hang in in such a large group, but I don’t know how else it could have been done; 7, 6 (x2); 3

Appreciative Inquiry: 9 (x3), 9, 8 (x4 – worked well – was hard to get into; really helpful; seemed to have no purpose;), 7 (x3 – once I grasped the concept – good learning and community building); I think I see the process better at the end – I think at the time it was a bit confusing – yet it worked; 6 (x2) – lost in wonder love and praise; hard to appreciate when I can’t remember what it was; surprisingly helpful; helped in getting me thinking about things that matter to me; I found this a somewhat confusing process at times – I wasn’t always certain of the task; a new but positive experience; not really helpful and took up too much time; D – incongruent with BCP morning prayer

Open Space: 10 (x5); excellent! – gave room for the Spirit to move!; excellent; excellent; great; worked well for this purpose; 9 – just the right size; 8 (x5 – worked well); B – overall worked well; worked well – we mixed and were, I think, productive; 7/8 – An excellent group on the whole: the church may have its troubles, but its clergy are pretty impressive; an excellent process – though in the end my Sunday evening group proved a disappointment personally – it went where I don’t think I wanted it to go; helped discussion move along well; the best part – dealing with issues of interest & hearing great things from others; 7

Workshops (specify): new book –8, pushing the edges – 9, power – 7; ? rock and circle belaboured and tedious; 8; 8 – power issues, youth ministry, strengthening center/kicking out edges, book of common order; creative and energetic –all; liturgical documents, common order, defining the center; excellent conversations in metaphor and liturgical context, my first workshop was fuzzy however; 9 – esp. "strengthening center, kicking out edges"; 10; 8

Visit to Anishinabe Centre: 10 (x7) – Anishinabe was superb; a highlight; thank you for letting the aboriginal people lead us (Megwetch); 8 (x3 – should have been longer); wonderful; needed more time to explore; excellent; a helpful respite from the tasks and a wonderful worship event too!; good but it was hard to return to work – but we did it; 7 (x3) – wonderful celebration, but a long drive; a good time, but not related to the conference theme; 6; B- - if the aboriginal concerns had not been given so much emphasis elsewhere it would have been more appreciated. There are more pressing cross-cultural adjustments to be made in Southern Ontario/Chinese, E&W African, Latin American

Closing Eucharist: 10; 10; I expect it to be moving; excellent; it sounds like it will be awesome – fish and all!; excellent; fine, fine

Other – Did anything valuable happen that you didn’t expect? Yes, I couldn’t help talking and sharing (what an awful word!) with others each evening - the social time was very important to the weekend; we found the ice man – Shaun – very cool; 1. leading a workshop and 2. the dismantling of hierarchies, releasing and empowering each person to contribute to building the Body; Found more common ground amongst diocesan reps than expected; on the basis of Sunday evening – I am afraid that I discovered how far official :orthodoxy" and I have parted company. No one appears interested in dealing with the "faith content" issues which have resulted in many leaving the Church on the basis of "I can no longer swallow that!" - this saddens me very much; I’m not sure about finishing Sunday night - we might have had more energy if we had taken an evening off and finished in the morning; I learnt a lot that will be helpful in my parish; Yes – the possibility of actually being involved in developing some new liturgical materials; a greater understanding of depth of First Nations collective pain; strategies used to sort individual expectations effectively revealed the shared and commonly held expectations in a collaborative way. Compromises were more positively achieved; creative theological co-operation; old friendships renewed, new relationships formed; since I came with few expectations and found it a valuable experience the answer is YES.

Liturgy | Synoptic overview of the Consultation