CE St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle Wed, 12th Oct 2016

[DracoM]

CE St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle



Order of Service:


Introit: Laudate nomen Domini (Tye)
Responses: Radcliffe
Psalms 65, 66, 67 (Day, Atkins, Bairstow)
First Lesson: 2 Chronicles 34: 19-33
Canticles: The Sixth Service (Weelkes)
Second Lesson: John 15: 18-27
Anthem: The Spirit of the Lord (Elgar)
Hymn: Ye holy angels bright (Darwall’s 148th)


Organ Voluntary: Fantasia and Fugue in G (Parry)


Richard Pinel (Assistant Director of Music)
James Vivian (Director of Music)

[Pulcinella]

BCP psalms for the 12th evening!

[Roger Judd]

I think 'psalms for the day' are a requirement for broadcast evensongs.
I heard Richard Pinel's realisation of Elgar's orchestral score at a service in St G's a year ago, and it was splendid - much looking forward to this!
RJ

[EdgeleyRob]

Re the Parry Organ piece,presumably Op 188.
36 years in the making but it was worth it IMO

[Vox Humana]

I think 'psalms for the day' are a requirement for broadcast evensongs

If so, hooray!

[jean]

I think 'psalms for the day' are a requirement for broadcast evensongs.

Ah, but according to which lectionary?

(See discussion elsewhere)

[underthecountertenor]

Ah, but according to which lectionary?

(See discussion elsewhere)

My understanding (without wanting to sound like a 'know-it-all') is that the BBC is happy to go with the psalm cycle of the establishment it is visiting (in keeping with the idea that the broadcast is really meant to be 'dropping in'), and that there is no requirement that the BCP cycle be observed for broadcasts. How use of the BCP 12th evening psalmody squares with Windsor's lectionary (as mentioned by Roger Judd himself on the now notorious other thread), I don't know (though I suppose I could ask...).

[Roger Judd]

ah, but according to which lectionary?

BCP.
Rj

[ardcarp]

There seems to be much ado about Psalmody at the moment! It is probably stating the obvious, but the BCP simply goes through the Psalms in numerical order,* dividing them between Morning and Evening prayer. So Day 1 has Ps 1 -5 for a.m and 6 -8 for p.m. etc, etc. In Feb you just miss out days 29 (except in leap years) and 30. In the 31-day months the idea was to repeat day 30, but in practice, many places 'shared out' Ps 144 - 150 between the two days.

I always thought of a 'lectionary' as a Parish Church thing, i.e. to choose a smaller chunk of Psalmody for appropriate days of the church's year. No doubt someone will correct me!

*Rubric: Then shall be said or sung the Psalm in order as they be appointed.

[underthecountertenor]

There seems to be much ado about Psalmody at the moment! It is probably stating the obvious, but the BCP simply goes through the Psalms in numerical order,* dividing them between Morning and Evening prayer. So Day 1 has Ps 1 -5 for a.m and 6 -8 for p.m. etc, etc. In Feb you just miss out days 29 (except in leap years) and 30. In the 31-day months the idea was to repeat day 30, but in practice, many places 'shared out' Ps 144 - 150 between the two days.

I always thought of a 'lectionary' as a Parish Church thing, i.e. to choose a smaller chunk of Psalmody for appropriate days of the church's year. No doubt someone will correct me!

*Rubric: Then shall be said or sung the Psalm in order as they be appointed.

I think the issue here is not how the BCP cycle works, but whether (with reference to the St Paul's thread), Windsor normally has its own cycle and, if so, whether it is broadcasting the BCP-appointed psalms today as a result of a BBC diktat. As to the latter, my hunch is no (for reasons set out above), but that then begs a further question.

I'll get my anorak.

[Vox Humana]

I think the issue here is not how the BCP cycle works, but whether (with reference to the St Paul's thread), Windsor normally has its own cycle and, if so, whether it is broadcasting the BCP-appointed psalms today as a result of a BBC diktat. As to the latter, my hunch is no (for reasons set out above), but that then begs a further question.

I'll get my anorak.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but I rather thought that Roger rather implied above that it was. As for whatever cycle Windsor normally observe, being a Royal Peculiar, don't they have a fair degree of latitude to do their own thing liturgically if they so choose? Ditto Wabbey?

[ardcarp]

Royal Peculiar or not, it was a great CE, so thanks all at St George's for singing so well. Choir obviously in fine shape in the hands of James Vivian. And the Parry was most excitingly played at the end.

[Dafydd y G.W.]

As for whatever cycle Windsor normally observe, being a Royal Peculiar, don't they have a fair degree of latitude to do their own thing liturgically if they so choose? Ditto Wabbey?

Strictly speaking, probably not. It's a common misapprehension, but being a peculiar (royal or otherwise) does not confer exemption from canon law (whether in relation to liturgy or otherwise).

As I mentioned on the other thread, Canon B5(1) allows "variations which are not of substantial importance." Quite what is and isn't "of substantial importance" hasn't yet been tested, so in practice it allows considerable latitude. But that is equally the case in the humblest village church as it is in a cathedral or royal peculiar.

[Vox Humana]

Royal Peculiar or not, it was a great CE, so thanks all at St George's for singing so well. Choir obviously in fine shape in the hands of James Vivian. And the Parry was most excitingly played at the end.

Agreed. A thoroughly enjoyable and mostly quite gentle service, which actually sounded like an act of worship - even if we did only get two out of the three advertised psalms!

Strictly speaking, probably not. It's a common misapprehension, but being a peculiar (royal or otherwise) does not confer exemption from canon law (whether in relation to liturgy or otherwise).

As I mentioned on the other thread, Canon B5(1) allows "variations which are not of substantial importance." Quite what is and isn't "of substantial importance" hasn't yet been tested, so in practice it allows considerable latitude. But that is equally the case in the humblest village church as it is in a cathedral or royal peculiar.

OK. Thanks for the clarification.

[Miles Coverdale]

There seems to be much ado about Psalmody at the moment! It is probably stating the obvious, but the BCP simply goes through the Psalms in numerical order,* dividing them between Morning and Evening prayer. So Day 1 has Ps 1 -5 for a.m and 6 -8 for p.m. etc, etc. In Feb you just miss out days 29 (except in leap years) and 30. In the 31-day months the idea was to repeat day 30, but in practice, many places 'shared out' Ps 144 - 150 between the two days.

*Rubric: Then shall be said or sung the Psalm in order as they be appointed.

Actually it's slightly more complicated than that, or was. This comes from the BCP of 1549: ‘The Psalter shalbe red through once euery Moneth, and because that some Monethes, be longer then some other be: it is thought good, to make them euen by this meanes.

To euery Moneth, as concernyng this purpose, shalbe appoynted iust .xxx. daies.

And because January and Marche hath one daie, aboue the saied nombre, and February whiche is placed between them bothe, hath only .xxviii. daies, February shall borowe of either of the Monethes, of January and Marche one daie, and so the Psalter which shalbee redde in February, muste bee begun on the last daie of January, and ended the firste daie of Marche.

And where as Maie, July, August, October, and December, hath .xxxi. daies a pece, it is ordered that the same Psalmes, shalbee red the last daie of the saied Moneth, which were redde the daie before, so that the Psalter must be begun again the first daie of the next Moneth ensuying.’