SYMBOLIC LANGUAGE - A SUGGESTION Ronald Pearse May I turn again to my problems about fixed liturgical language and thoughts about an alternative form of corporate religious expression (SOF Magazine, Autumn 1990). I am still convinced of the need to develop such an alternative. I also have much sympathy with Stephen Mitchell's even wider questions and suggestions about forms of religious activity (SOF Mag., Winter 1991). Work needs to be done in both these areas.
It will take time. I suggest a third area to receive attention - that of articulating and promoting the legitimacy of taking liturgical language symbolically. It probably needs to be done within all Christian Churches. I offer a way of doing it within the one I know, the Church of England.
The Canons of the Church of England are amended and supplemented from time to time. I suggest an additional paragraph to Canon B9 as follows :
B9 OF REVERENCE AND_ ATTENTION TO BE USED IN THE TIME _OF DIVINE SERVICE 3. Save in the matter of the vows and associated material in the Marriage Service, shall be /awful /or all persons present in the time of divine service to interpret in/ere/714f and responsibly in their own minds and consciences all that is said or sung in the service whether Mei?' interpretations be symbolic or otherwise.
As part of a campaign to achieve this and as relief to existing members of congregations and encouragement to some would-be members, sympathetic parish priests and, where possible, their parochial church councils might publish on their own authority a less formal statement to the same effect - i) in their parish magazine, ii) on a card in the church porch, iii) at the beginning of each service.
RONALD PEARSE is a retired Anglican parish priest living in Loughborough where he administers SOF's Mailing List.