Jim Keith is, in effect, trying to give us the truth of Leslie Watkins Alternative Three without all the crap. However, in such tentative fields of study, this method is not always the best method. Readers of such kind of non-fiction (or is it?) don't often like thier information pre-chewed. At least I personally, would have rather been presented with all the information and deciphered it as I saw fit; how is the reader supposed to know that this, as well, isn't simply dis-information, or that Keith himself isn't just a tool of the government?

Keith's Casebook On Alternative 3 is a real eye-opener on the incredible labyrinthe of weird connections that, eg., led to the Jim Jones mass murder in Guyana, as much more than a vey curious psy-op; but moreover, Keith attempts to pull back the "social veils" that allow such horrendous things to occur, and why there may have been desires by those who supported Jones, to fulfill a dark mission. Keith has lots of interesting conjectures in this mysterious book that will leave the reader desirous to learn more, and this sure beats real fiction! It is not all imaginative, that is for certain....as fascism wears many disguises. Keith's books are for those not afraid to seek more insightful questions.

In the opening chapters of 'The Great Thanksgiving', Keith Watkins explores the history and theology of the pattern of worship. The patterns he describes are very much in concert with my own Anglo-Catholic tradition. Some of the issues he addresses in his first chapter are of particular relevance to Old Catholic jurisdictions, which strive to maintain a balance between responsiveness to current culture and a commitment to historical patterns and theological beliefs. These issues are also true for mainline churches (and seminaries!) that are facing falling numbers while certain other churches seem to be growing.

In exploring the history of liturgy and liturgical reform, Watkins addresses recent efforts such as the COCU liturgy and the Lima liturgy, explaining why these have not found more widespread use. He also addresses efforts at reform within particular denominations, as well as bilateral discussions and agreements of intercommunion among churches. One issue that Watkins does not address (and one that I have personally experienced, both inside and outside Old Catholic circles) with regard to intercommunion and eucharistic hospitality, is the problem of bureaucracy and (often defensive) hierarchy of the church - just how much of the problem really rests in theology and worship practice, and how much in very human limitations of personality and politics?

Watkins sums up his ideas of the theological norm for worship as: 'Thankful praise generates the church's full cycle of celebrative actions and serves as the criterion by which we measure all that we do in worship.' (p. 60) While this is true, it seems to me an insufficient statement. In discussing distinctions between mainline and evangelical churches, Watkins seems to point out a loss of the eucharist centre to worship in mainline churches has caused them to lose religious power present in the evangelical traditions. My experience shows a difficulty. In Bloomington, the Episcopal church, which has maintained a cycle of daily eucharist for many decades, has been losing members bit by bit each year, whereas the non-denominational 'mega-church' on the south side of town, which has communion no more frequently than quarterly, has gained thousands of members in less than a decade. What keeps a eucharist centre means is different to the two churches; one seems to hold the pattern without the spirit, and the other is reaching for the spirit without the pattern. Each church tends to be suspicious of the other in many respects theologically.

In the second section, Watkins explores the shape of the liturgy (borrowing from Dom Gregory Dix's title), how the prayers, the service of Word and the service of Table fit together, and the significance of the Great Thanksgiving. Watkins introduces some new emphases to me - the idea that offering is the beginning of the service of Table, and the change of emphasis that this can bring, gives new life to the portion of the prayers that offers our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving. Watkins also argues for a balance in the liturgy:

'The liturgy needs to be full enough that it can genuinely be called celebration. It needs to be spare enough that we can move through it with full attention and unflagging energies. The challenge to people who plan and lead worship is to establish that balance between simplicity and fullness of detail. (p. 73)'

My tradition often has a tug-of-war between high and low church liturgical styles; sometimes those who seem to have the strongest ideas about Sunday morning worship have the least tendency to connect it to anything beyond Sunday morning practice. Such worship can become an idol, a game, a performance, or even an escapism from life. None of this does justice to the liturgy.

Also in the Anglican tradition, there are members who recall the days when Morning Prayer was a standard Sunday service - I don't get a strong sense from Watkins what can be done to educate and include people in a revised practice of weekly eucharist when their emotional attachment is still to the Morning Prayer model. Historical and theological arguments, in my experience, rarely seem to win over emotional and 'traditional' attachment. Even if lip-service is paid by them to acknowledging the history and theology behind the decisions, how does one reach them on the levels that are going to make them feel included in the service?

I'd like to know more about how Watkins is received by those who have not had the same liturgical and eucharistic background I have had. Where are the points of disconnection with them? In many ways, Watkins is 'preaching to the choir' with me - there are minor points, to be sure, but nothing major.