I purchased this item (which is actually a sugar bowl with lid) at the local Wal-Mart for $2.73. It is a plain bowl made of clear glass and includes a matching top. While the poor vicar might appreciate a brass, gold-plated, sterling silver, or gold host box, this one will fit his budget and reverently perform the job. However plain the box may be, it will not detract from the beauty of Anglican worship as it sits on the credence.

Based on my testing, the box will hold approximately 100 wafers. This should suffice for the poor vicar’s mission congregation.

Poor Vicar’s Sacristy in a Box cost to date: $7.61

The first item in the Poor Vicar’s Sacristy in a Box is a cruet set.

I purchased these cruets at the local Wal-Mart for $3.88 ($1.94 each). They are of plain clear glass; the stoppers are fitted with molded plastic to keep them tight in the necks of the bottles. Based on my testing, the cruets will each hold approximately 10 ounces of water or wine. This should suffice for the poor vicar’s mission congregation.

The tray came from the local Dollar Tree at a cost of $1.00. It has a silver finish, though you might find one with a gold finish in another store.

This simple cruet set will serve its function well at a fraction of the cost of those available from church supply retailers. The pair of plain glass cruets should match nicely with the host box that will soon be sitting on the poor vicar’s credence.

Poor Vicar’s Sacristy in a Box cost to date: $4.88

Elias Elias

Allen Jaynes

Mike Balsley

Alex Fuller

Brian Botello

Alex Funcheon

Jay Martin

Eric Snell

Mike Miller

Almighty God, our heavenly Father, in whose hands are the living and the dead; We give thee thanks for all those thy servants who have laid down their lives in the service of our country. Grant to them thy mercy and the light of thy presence, that the good work which thou hast begun in them may be perfected; through Jesus Christ thy Son our Lord. Amen.

The American Heritage Dictionary offers this definition, which I have abbreviated to the relevant portions.

1. 1. An administrative part of a diocese that has its own church in the Anglican, Roman Catholic, and some other churches.
   2. The members of such a parish; a religious community attending one church.
2. A political subdivision of a British county, usually corresponding in boundaries to an original ecclesiastical parish.

In the traditional sense, definition 1a is the best description. It was out of the church-established parishes that the government subdivisions, of definition 2, grew. In the contemporary sense, definition 1b is the one most used in the United States. I believe it is a corruption of the traditional sense of the word which has come about because of the historic lack of an established church in the federal system of the United States (realizing, of course, that there were established churches in some states in an earlier time and in the colonial era). The open market of religious beliefs has led to a lack of demarcation of geographical areas based on religious affiliation. Though some denominations are strong in certain areas, no single religious body has maintained absolute control over communities in the same way that has existed in the English church for centuries.

The Catholic Encyclopedia offers this definition, which I have also abbreviated:

A parish is a portion of a diocese under the authority of a priest legitimately appointed to secure in virtue of his office for the faithful dwelling therein, the helps of religion. The faithful are called parishioners, the priest parochus, curate, parish priest, pastor. To form a parish there must be (1) a certain body of the faithful over whom pastoral authority is exercised; the ordinary manner of determining them is by assigning a territory subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the parish priest.

I believe this would accord with the traditional view of the parish system in Anglicanism. Essentially, there is a geographical area, recognized by the bishop, which is led by a priest, and who ministers to those within the area. The impetus for forming a parish is the existence of a certain number of Christians who desire a parish church.

Consulting the trusty Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (third edition), I find this definition, which I have again shortened:

In England, an area under the spiritual care of a C of E clergyman …, to whose religious ministrations all its inhabitants are entitled.

Though there are many more things that could be said about the background of what we have come to know as a parish, these definitions (particularly that from the Oxford Dictionary) give us a succinct vision of what the traditional parish looks like. The parish from the English system is a territory whose residents are entitled to the spiritual care of a priest assigned to the area church. To expand this idea slightly, the ministry of the local church is not limited to those persons who attend that church’s services; instead, the local church ministers to the community at large, some of the inhabitants of which participate in the religious services of the church.

This is certainly a different idea of the parish than most Anglicans have today. Instead of viewing our ministry as being oriented to the community, we see our ministry as being oriented to those who attend Sunday services. I contend that the responsibility of ministry does not stop at the boundary of the church precincts, but that it extends to the territorial limits of the community.

It is common in the Continuing Anglican churches for clergy to work secular as well as ecclesiastical jobs. Often, priests or deacons set out by themselves–but with the support of their bishops–to plant new parishes. Because of limited funds, it is often difficult to provide for some of the typical resources for the new mission. Paying $900 for a set of brass candlesticks, cross, and vases is usually beyond the reach of those who are in this situation. Missions start off small, sometimes with only the cleric’s family members, but will hopefully grow as the pastor reaches out to the community with the truth and love of Christ. After all, small beginnings in the way of accoutrements is only a minor concern if the deacon or vicar is doing the real work of spiritual ministry.

We wish not, however, to neglect the service of the church in providing suitable furnishings and instruments for such sacred purposes. But with limited resources, it may not be possible to be as discriminating as one would like when selecting the implements used in a new mission. This does not mean, of course, that the vicar should be careless or sloppy in selecting the items for worship. Instead, he should be intentional in choosing items that, though they may be modest, are useful, practical, not gaudy, and otherwise suitable for their purposes.

With this in mind, I propose to demonstrate to any interested deacon, priest, or vestryman how he may compile a suitable set of service items for use in a new mission. The “Poor Vicar’s Sacristy in a Box” is composed of items found in the typical surroundings of any American cleric and all of which may be purchased for not more than $100.

The Poor Vicar’s Sacristy in a Box includes the following items:

• Chalice
• Paten
• Host box
• Cruet set
• Lavabo bowl
• Lavabo pitcher
• Baptismal font
• Baptismal shell
• Ash bowl
• Candlesticks
• Candles
• And more.

There will be additional add-on components that may be secured at minimal cost.

I will also feature in the future the “Poor Parson’s Sacristy in a Box”. This is designed for the mission or parish that has become established financially such that it can procure more suitable items for worship services than those in the Poor Vicar’s kit. These are still intended for those clerics and churches that have very limited funds, but who are able to allocate more than the meager amount necessary for the Poor Vicar’s kit cost of $100.

Please offer your suggestions and they may be incorporated into the articles. If you have found some inexpensive items that served your purposes well, please share your suggestions so that others may benefit. Keep in mind that our purpose is to outfit the church with tools for worship and to do so in a cost-conscious way but in a manner that does not denigrate the dignity of the sacraments.

This model of ministry in the military reminds me of the old parish system. Most Anglicans seem to remember it and assume we still have it, but it doesn’t really exist, at least not in the United States. Yes, we have a parish system of sorts, but these “parishes” are composed only of those persons who attend our local churches. What about the old system that held that everyone within a certain geographical territory belonged to this parish? What about the old system that held that clergy ministered to every soul in that territory, regardless of whether they were Christian or not?

I hope to explore this idea more in a series of short articles here. In reflecting on the old parish system and how it should apply today, I suspect that I shall reach some conclusions that offend today’s milquetoast sensibilities that seem to abound in the Church. However, I can’t help but think that the Church of C.S. Lewis’ day, or even earlier, though not much later, was a Church which had much to offer the world. In our striving toward ignorant politeness, have we lost the prize?

I suggest that the old parish system is a suitable way of thinking and working for the Church today. Let the Church’s priests take up this forsaken system, this “outdated” paradigm, to honor God in the world. Join with me, reader, in reflection and meditation on this topic; join with me, priests, in becoming, as St. Paul, “all things to all men”.

Interestingly, he apparently makes the argument that the display of white crosses–which typically represent the number of children who have been killed by abortion in the U.S.–would cause trauma to any student on the campus who was considering abortion or who had an abortion. This is interesting because his obvious support for abortion would imply that it is an acceptable and healthy method of birth control; however, his statements on the video imply that reminders of abortion are traumatic to women who have had abortions.

Watch the video and read the WND article for yourself. This student’s behavior is shameful, and so is the fact that our nation continues to allow the murder of millions. We have no right to shake our heads at Hitler.