A question with a difference...

[The Liturgist]

Seems to me your OP is asking why we aren't doing them.

I'm just not sure that what you're looking for, is actually our job.

The public processions and so forth I've been part of, I have not experienced as a particularly positive public witness. Quite to the contrary; they seemed to me to mark Christians as weird and foreign to the culture we're trying to reach.

Weird and foreign can also mean exotic, mysterious and intriguing. Consider that the Hare Krishnas have basically relied on public performances as their primary tool for attracting new members with great success. That said, I do not propose we follow their approach to the letter, and indeed would actively oppose it, because the specific way Hare Krishnas conduct their public performances is extremely annoying and creepy for most people rather than edifying. But when Christians process with dignity on major events, that is something else. The Catholics, the Orthodox, the Lutherans in Germany and Scandinavia, and the Salvation Army, and also historically the Church of England and its Scottish, Welsh and Irish counterparts* with various ceremonies connected to the monarchy and to parish life, like “Beating the bounds” of the parishes, being excellent (of course the British excel at ceremonies; I suspect they invented Freemasonry so as to have an excuse to contrive additional ceremonies, and also to satisfy their passion for secrecy and to fill a void that existed in 18th century England in terms of the lack of an intersection between liturgics and mystical theology, something the Anglo Catholics would later rectify).

*Unfortunately in Northern Ireland, religious processions have developed a locally negative connotation, an association with political violence, due to Protestant Unionists and Catholic Nationalists using them as displays of political influence and intimidation, which is extremely tragic and which represents an abuse of what is an ancient form of Christian liturgy. It is worth noting that the Litanies of both the Eastern and Western churches were originally used in processions from station churches to the cathedrals, of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople and St. John Lateran in Old Rome.

 

[Paidiske]

Weird and foreign can also mean exotic, mysterious and intriguing.

Maybe, but that didn't seem to me to be the reaction I was registering around me. (The one exception I would make is funeral processions, which seem to be greeted with respect).

This may be partly a cultural thing. Australians, on the whole, are an informal, casual lot who tend to be suspicious of ceremony and formality. Despite our English cultural heritage, we do not have the English sensibility for such things as a large part of our cultural life.

 

[Lost Witness]

To mark Christians as weird and foreign to the culture we're trying to reach

Not sure being called weird or 'foreign' is a bad thing in a world headed the wrong way as the Lord has set his children apart from the world?
My pastor put it as dead things ,(fish etc) always go with the current.

 

[Paidiske]

Not sure being called weird or 'foreign' is a bad thing in a world headed the wrong way as the Lord has set his children apart from the world?
My pastor put it as dead things ,(fish etc) always go with the current.

There's weird in a way which shows forth something of the reign of God, and then there's weird in a way which just alienates.

For example, I remember, years ago, going to a palm Sunday service. This particular church had the custom of starting the service across the road from the church, and having a huge formal procession - robed choir, servers, verger, clergy, a donkey, the whole works - into the church. And by robes I mean very heavy robes multi-layered robes that wouldn't have been out of place in a stone church in the snowy English winter.

On this particular year, Palm Sunday fell early in the year and the weather was still very hot, like, more than 40 degrees Celsius hot. They're lucky no one passed out in the heat, standing in the full sun outside for the first part of the service. The little choir boys - as young as eight - had faces red like tomatoes. The whole thing honestly looked so out of place; like the people involved weren't able to adapt to something as simple as a southern hemisphere climate.

Good witness? Nope. It said, "Clinging to our non-essential traditions is more important to us than making sense in this landscape, this community, or even caring for the health and safety of the people involved." I remarked to the friend I was with that the donkey was the most human thing about that procession.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Well that’s obviously a problem, although correct me if I am wrong, I get the sense that, in line with other Polynesian populations, the Maori are converting to Christianity, which is the trend across the Pacific everywhere except Japan, where Christianity is growing at a glacial pace compared to Korea, Taiwan or the PRC.

When the missionaries arrived 60% of Maori converted to Christianity. Colonialism sadly damaged the good work done and turned many back to their own traditions. However many elders worshiped Io the 'High God' before the gospel arrived so were very open to the message of Christ.

Now Maori mythology/spirituality is being more widely accepted as the Church declines and is modernized.

The Anglican Church I attend was the centre of a significant revival among Maori back in the 1850's.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Seems to me your OP is asking why we aren't doing them.

No not at all, I am asking why Church leaders are not dealing with the latent source of spiritual wickedness in public places after such a heinous crime which otherwise causes fear and unease in the population.

 

[Paidiske]

No not at all, I am asking why Church leaders are not dealing with the latent source of spiritual wickedness in public places after such a heinous crime which causes fear and unease in the population.

Ah. Do you know that they're not?

After all, your OP seemed to be questioning the lack of a public spectacle, but perhaps it's being done more discreetly.

 

[Carl Emerson]

There's weird in a way which shows forth something of the reign of God, and then there's weird in a way which just alienates.

For example, I remember, years ago, going to a palm Sunday service. This particular church had the custom of starting the service across the road from the church, and having a huge formal procession - robed choir, servers, verger, clergy, a donkey, the whole works - into the church. And by robes I mean very heavy robes multi-layered robes that wouldn't have been out of place in a stone church in the snowy English winter.

On this particular year, Palm Sunday fell early in the year and the weather was still very hot, like, more than 40 degrees Celsius hot. They're lucky no one passed out in the heat, standing in the full sun outside for the first part of the service. The little choir boys - as young as eight - had faces red like tomatoes. The whole thing honestly looked so out of place; like the people involved weren't able to adapt to something as simple as a southern hemisphere climate.

Good witness? Nope. It said, "Clinging to our non-essential traditions is more important to us than making sense in this landscape, this community, or even caring for the health and safety of the people involved." I remarked to the friend I was with that the donkey was the most human thing about that procession.

This is not the issue raised in the OP.

I have been asking why Church leaders are less visible these days carrying out legitimate and biblical ministry in public.

Even marriages are more and more conducted by 'secular priests' known as celebrants these days.

 

[Paidiske]

I have been asking why Church leaders are less visible these days carrying out legitimate and biblical ministry in public.

Possibly because there are fewer of us. I wear my collar in public a lot, but if there are fewer of us out there to start with, we won't be as visible.

Even marriages are more and more conducted by 'secular priests' known as celebrants these days.

That's not because of anything the clergy do, or choose.

For what it's worth, I suspect the popularity of civil celebrants is, at least in part, that they give the couple a lot more control of the ceremony than churches typically do. The freedom to craft your service exactly the way you want, write your own vows, and so on, is something a lot of couples find appealing (rather than feeling constrained by what the church expects or requires).

 

[Carl Emerson]

Ah. Do you know that they're not?

After all, your OP seemed to be questioning the lack of a public spectacle, but perhaps it's being done more discreetly.

Mmmm... you seem intent on putting words in my mouth...

I have already said I believe there are legit biblical ministries that correctly function in the public domain.

I have never advocated a spectacle as you put it.

If you don't get it - maybe consider others who do, rather than try to turn the topic into something it never was...

 

[Carl Emerson]

Possibly because there are fewer of us. I wear my collar in public a lot, but if there are fewer of us out there to start with, we won't be as visible.

I don't think it is about 'uniform' but rather exercising the authority of Christ in the public space.

 

[Paidiske]

Mmmm... you seem intent on putting words in my mouth...

I have never advocated a spectacle as you put it.

Then I'm confused about what you actually want. In your early posts, you seemed to want a public spectacle, something that couldn't be ignored by the wider public. As in post #31, where you said, "the vacuum of Church Leaderhip visible in public life speaks loudly the wrong message." And now you're speaking of "exercising the authority of Christ in the public space."

If that's not a spectacle, something done for the purposes of public display, what is it?

 

[Carl Emerson]

Ah. Do you know that they're not?

After all, your OP seemed to be questioning the lack of a public spectacle, but perhaps it's being done more discreetly.

More than likely no one is, and the opportunity goes begging because Church leaders don't chat to the mayor and/or police about doing it as the Maori Elders have.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Then I'm confused about what you actually want. In your early posts, you seemed to want a public spectacle, something that couldn't be ignored by the wider public. As in post #31, where you said, "the vacuum of Church Leaderhip visible in public life speaks loudly the wrong message." And now you're speaking of "exercising the authority of Christ in the public space."

If that's not a spectacle, something done for the purposes of public display, what is it?

When Paul or Jesus dealt with the demonic in public it wasn't about creating a spectacle as you put it - It was about setting folks free from the demonic.

 

[Paidiske]

When Paul or Jesus dealt with the demonic in public it wasn't about creating a spectacle as you put it - It was about setting folks free from the demonic.

Oh, well. I can tell you this; if I were engaging in deliverance ministry, I sure wouldn't be doing it in a way that would be noticeable for a bystanding audience.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Oh, well. I can tell you this; if I were engaging in deliverance ministry, I sure wouldn't be doing it in a way that would be noticeable for a bystanding audience.

Paul and Jesus did...

 

[Lost Witness]

Trying to learn it's not what others think that's important but what the LORD thinks and the intent behind our actions

 

[Paidiske]

Paul and Jesus did...

So what? If the aim is setting people free from the demonic, we don't need to make a spectacle of our prayers.

 

[returntosender]

Can you explain your point a bit more please?

I've noticed criticism coming from other countries about our country. I don't like it. I don't do that to yours and other countries.

 

[The Liturgist]

Paul and Jesus did...

That’s true, but in fairness to both you and @Paidiske I think the wishes of the person receiving Holy Unction for healing, or due to a terminal illness, or receiving an exorcism, or certain other sacred mysteries of the church that exist to provide healing should be respected. With holy unction, most Orthodox parishioners who have a special service, which could also include an akathist and/or a moleben or paraklesis (the latter are supplicatory prayer services and the former is a hymn, usually a Kontakion, the predecessor to the Canon, which is the principle Orthodox hymn at Matins and many other services including Holy Unction), do want the congregation present, and I would imagine that the situation is the same at Anglican healing services, which correct me if I’m wrong consist of Holy Unction and other things (in the US, many Episcopal parishes do these on Wednesday, but I’ve never been).

However with an exorcism, while some demonaics are willing for their story to be made public, and thus we have a documentary which shows the beloved exorcist Fr. Gabriel Amorth, memory eternal, who was considered the leading Catholic exorcist in Italy, repeatedly exorcising a woman determined by the Roman Catholic Church to have a demon, and the case was quite frightening. I’ve never heard of an Orthodox exorcism being done publicly however, and I am not sure if its something Orthodox clergy would want to publicize, although in the Eastern Orthodox church the prayers themselves are attributed to St. Basil and St. John Chrysostom, who of course are also credited with the two main settings of the Divine Liturgy (I’ve never seen the text of an Oriental Orthodox exorcism prayer but perhaps @dzheremi or @coorilose has; I think they are one of the few things missing from my Coptic liturgical library and one of the many things missing from my Syriac Orthodox liturgical library; most things alas are missing from my Armenian and Ge’ez libraries although given chatGPT can apparently translate these languages I hope to change that at least somewhat).

Also if we see someone in public who could be a demonaic, one could try an exorcism I suppose from a safe distance, but if it was a person with a mental health condition that could be embarrassing or even harmful to do it in the most rigorous form. It should be stressed that some cultural conditions are different today vs. the 1st century, and most cases of potential demonic possession turn out to be mental illness, although possession is real and does need to be taken seriously, and I believe that only Christian clergy are capable of dealing with it, and at that, only clergy from denominations that have a tradition of dealing with the problem and a robust training and supervision system in place, to avoid abuses. There are some churches that blame everything on demonic possession, and exorcise people who have minor or major medical complaints, and this is improper.