Sunday, December 24, 2006
Saturday, December 23, 2006
Can I brag about my anglo-catholic wife for a minute?
My beautiful wife came to Anglicanism through yours truly from a rather liberal Mennonite background. During our dating relationship and short year and a quarter of marriage it has been a joy to see her embrace and grow in the catholic faith in its Anglican expression. She now does it all... beats her chest, genuflects, makes the sign of the cross in all the right places, and she can explain the faith and worship to non-Anglican friends very well. On our very first date I spent a fair amount of time telling her about the Blessed Virgin Mary, and what she has meant to me in my life, and I think honoring Our Lady, and committing our relationship to her, and to her Son, of course, has brought much of this about. She's said and done a number of things that just warm my heart especially, and really make me smile. Here are a few:
When we were looking at wedding gifts after our honeymoon there was a big, huge, crusty old book in bag to us from my aunt. As we were opening the bag to see what it was Valerie said, "Maybe it's a missal!" (Turns out it was just an heirloom family old bible - which is also nice.)
We were watching something on TV the other day, and it showed an Episcopalian "womanpriest" talking about something, and Valerie goes, "Ewww, yuck." Then she changed the channel.
Recently a fellow choir member was loudly complaining about having to sing something that, in his mind, smacked of Marian devotion. So when Valerie comes home she says, "Why be Anglican at all if you do not believe that saints pray for you, or if you do not pray to them yourself?"
Indeed, I struck gold when I met and married Valerie!
When we were looking at wedding gifts after our honeymoon there was a big, huge, crusty old book in bag to us from my aunt. As we were opening the bag to see what it was Valerie said, "Maybe it's a missal!" (Turns out it was just an heirloom family old bible - which is also nice.)
We were watching something on TV the other day, and it showed an Episcopalian "womanpriest" talking about something, and Valerie goes, "Ewww, yuck." Then she changed the channel.
Recently a fellow choir member was loudly complaining about having to sing something that, in his mind, smacked of Marian devotion. So when Valerie comes home she says, "Why be Anglican at all if you do not believe that saints pray for you, or if you do not pray to them yourself?"
Indeed, I struck gold when I met and married Valerie!
Thursday, December 21, 2006
Confessions
The greatest part about being a priest is being with people and families at the critical moments of their lives, and bringing the sacramental presence of Christ to bear on whatever situation they are in. Whether it is offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, or annointing the sick for healing, it is a great blessing to be a shepherd of souls, and to continue the earthly ministry of Christ and His Church until He comes again.
Hearing confessions has been one of the most incredible experiences of God's grace and mercy. Many confessions I have heard have been a first confession, or from someone who hasn't been in years. It has been great to recommend the sacrament, and teach people about its necessity and place in the Christian life. I have found that most people do not mind making their confession at all. They may not go a lot, or maybe have never even been before, but when you ask them if they want to confess anything privately, and explain to them how it works and what it is all about, they gladly make their confession, and then are overwhelmed at the reconciling love they experience as they encounter Jesus in this beautiful sacrament. I firmly believe in the importance of regular confession in the Christian life.
I don't know how regularly other priests hear confessions (and I do not think priests should hear confessions if they are not regular penitents themselves), but if you do not, and would like to minister to people in this way, I would just make sure you ask people. Like a lot of other things in life, you have to ask people if they want to do it. They might say no, or have nothing to confess at that time, but at least you gave them the opportunity, and they know the offer is always there. But we have to ask. When you sense a moment coming on, where they are pouring their hearts out, why not gently recommend that it be done in the context of the confessional? It is like sales: you can have agreat presentation and product and so on, but if you never get to that point and ask, "Okay, so will you sign the contract?" You might miss out on a lot of sales. I do not like "sales" analogies very much, but it gets my point across. There is so much that we do not have simply because we do not ask.
Hearing confessions has been one of the most incredible experiences of God's grace and mercy. Many confessions I have heard have been a first confession, or from someone who hasn't been in years. It has been great to recommend the sacrament, and teach people about its necessity and place in the Christian life. I have found that most people do not mind making their confession at all. They may not go a lot, or maybe have never even been before, but when you ask them if they want to confess anything privately, and explain to them how it works and what it is all about, they gladly make their confession, and then are overwhelmed at the reconciling love they experience as they encounter Jesus in this beautiful sacrament. I firmly believe in the importance of regular confession in the Christian life.
I don't know how regularly other priests hear confessions (and I do not think priests should hear confessions if they are not regular penitents themselves), but if you do not, and would like to minister to people in this way, I would just make sure you ask people. Like a lot of other things in life, you have to ask people if they want to do it. They might say no, or have nothing to confess at that time, but at least you gave them the opportunity, and they know the offer is always there. But we have to ask. When you sense a moment coming on, where they are pouring their hearts out, why not gently recommend that it be done in the context of the confessional? It is like sales: you can have agreat presentation and product and so on, but if you never get to that point and ask, "Okay, so will you sign the contract?" You might miss out on a lot of sales. I do not like "sales" analogies very much, but it gets my point across. There is so much that we do not have simply because we do not ask.
More Plugs...
In my effort to promote everything traditional and continuing Anglican I have a few new plugs to make everyone aware of:
Great new blog by an APCK Deacon - Words Like Stone
A fantastic new journal of Anglican life and worship - Earth & Altar
And finally, please vote for The Continuum as "best new Anglican blog" over at the Anglican Blog Awards. Continuum is run by Albion Land, Poetreader, Fr. Matthew Kirby, and Fr. Robert Hart. They hosted some lively, but edifying discussions in the past, and will continue to do so in the future.
Great new blog by an APCK Deacon - Words Like Stone
A fantastic new journal of Anglican life and worship - Earth & Altar
And finally, please vote for The Continuum as "best new Anglican blog" over at the Anglican Blog Awards. Continuum is run by Albion Land, Poetreader, Fr. Matthew Kirby, and Fr. Robert Hart. They hosted some lively, but edifying discussions in the past, and will continue to do so in the future.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Prayer Book Catholics
I have a lot of friends who are Presbyterian/Calvinist, and one of the things that they talk about and debate in their circles is the “regulative principle” in worship. Those who adhere to this principle believe that the only things that may be included in the public worship of the Lord are things that are explicitly stated in scripture. This debate goes back to the Reformers themselves, who disagreed on the subject. Now, I have tried, on numerous occasions, to get people who believe in this principle to draw up a sample worship “bulletin” so I can see exactly what the ideal “Reformed” worship service on a typical Sunday would look like. It sounds interesting in theory, but what does it look like in real life? What does it boil down to on a Sunday morning? Well, I have never gotten a sample bulletin/worship service… probably because it cannot be done. The bible, after all, is not a liturgical manual. It’s a paper theory. It doesn’t work out in real life.
Related to this is the problem of so-called “Prayer Book Catholicism” (Note: I speak of this topic in relation to the 1928 American BCP and “liturgy”). Fellow traditional and continuing Anglican bloggers get on their high horse from time to time and denounce anglo-catholic “innovations”, such as the use of the missal, certain vestment styles (showing they care more about clothing and fashion than any anglo-catholic), and more, as being not truly Anglican, or Rome-aping. But when you ask those who adhere to this principle what the Church Year would look like in an authentic “Prayer Book Catholic” parish, you get nothing. Dead silence. Is a Pascal Candle used? Is there an Exsultet? Is there a mass of the pre-sanctified on Good Friday? Are there Stations of the Cross? Is there a form for private confession of sins to a priest and a form for absolution? Are there lessons and carols in Advent? Is a priest vested in a chasuble at his ordination, if so, at what point? The list could go on and on. And the question is: where do we find any of these things in the BCP? Nowhere. Some of them aren’t even addressed in the anti-Ritual Notes book “The Parson’s Handbook”. But I’ll bet a lot, if not most, so-called “Prayer Book Catholics” would not object for one minute to these things. Like those who advocate the regulative principle, when you ask for specific details from the people who advocate this view there is no response. Why? Because Prayer Book Catholicism (in terms of liturgics, anyway) is a myth and a fantasy. If they want to use those things they undermine their position. It doesn’t quite work out in real life.
On page vii of the 1928 BCP there is a note that says that the bishop is allowed to authorize certain “forms” that are not in the BCP. This is good, because the 1928 BCP is too stripped down for solo contemporary use. Even the most low church REC parishes I have attended have always added things to the BCP (usually some sort of adlibbed exhortation after the people have received communion and are still kneeling at the altar rail, but also other things). Personally, I am glad that there is no such thing as a liturgical “prayer book catholic”, because not only do I like the Stations of the Cross and Benediction, but I also like Advent Lessons and Carols, the Blessing of the Hounds, and many other English traditions that Anglican parishes do throughout the year that are not in the BCP. And if the Eucharistic liturgy must be supplemented, I would much rather it be supplemented with the use of the missal’s minor propers, which are mostly Psalms, and if not, are very ancient prayers used during the time of the undivided church (see “The Mass of the Roman Rite” by Jungmann, the authoritative commentary on the development of the Roman mass) than a prayer made up on the spot by the priest. So, to the “prayer book catholics” out there: go ahead and add things to your liturgy and to your Church Year, but realize that in doing so you are right there with us anglo-catholics!
Related to this is the problem of so-called “Prayer Book Catholicism” (Note: I speak of this topic in relation to the 1928 American BCP and “liturgy”). Fellow traditional and continuing Anglican bloggers get on their high horse from time to time and denounce anglo-catholic “innovations”, such as the use of the missal, certain vestment styles (showing they care more about clothing and fashion than any anglo-catholic), and more, as being not truly Anglican, or Rome-aping. But when you ask those who adhere to this principle what the Church Year would look like in an authentic “Prayer Book Catholic” parish, you get nothing. Dead silence. Is a Pascal Candle used? Is there an Exsultet? Is there a mass of the pre-sanctified on Good Friday? Are there Stations of the Cross? Is there a form for private confession of sins to a priest and a form for absolution? Are there lessons and carols in Advent? Is a priest vested in a chasuble at his ordination, if so, at what point? The list could go on and on. And the question is: where do we find any of these things in the BCP? Nowhere. Some of them aren’t even addressed in the anti-Ritual Notes book “The Parson’s Handbook”. But I’ll bet a lot, if not most, so-called “Prayer Book Catholics” would not object for one minute to these things. Like those who advocate the regulative principle, when you ask for specific details from the people who advocate this view there is no response. Why? Because Prayer Book Catholicism (in terms of liturgics, anyway) is a myth and a fantasy. If they want to use those things they undermine their position. It doesn’t quite work out in real life.
On page vii of the 1928 BCP there is a note that says that the bishop is allowed to authorize certain “forms” that are not in the BCP. This is good, because the 1928 BCP is too stripped down for solo contemporary use. Even the most low church REC parishes I have attended have always added things to the BCP (usually some sort of adlibbed exhortation after the people have received communion and are still kneeling at the altar rail, but also other things). Personally, I am glad that there is no such thing as a liturgical “prayer book catholic”, because not only do I like the Stations of the Cross and Benediction, but I also like Advent Lessons and Carols, the Blessing of the Hounds, and many other English traditions that Anglican parishes do throughout the year that are not in the BCP. And if the Eucharistic liturgy must be supplemented, I would much rather it be supplemented with the use of the missal’s minor propers, which are mostly Psalms, and if not, are very ancient prayers used during the time of the undivided church (see “The Mass of the Roman Rite” by Jungmann, the authoritative commentary on the development of the Roman mass) than a prayer made up on the spot by the priest. So, to the “prayer book catholics” out there: go ahead and add things to your liturgy and to your Church Year, but realize that in doing so you are right there with us anglo-catholics!
Sunday, December 17, 2006
The Lord Be With You, HON.
I am from Baltimore, and after years of denial I finally have the courage to admit that I have a Baltimore accent. It's not awful, but it's there. It is difficult to describe the Baltimore accent, but if you rent a classic John Waters movie like Pink Flamingos you will get an idea of what it is like.
So, my constant struggle is to say mass in such a way that my accent doesn't take over and make the whole thing a terrible mess. This involves careful enunciation, such as making sure I say the "D's" at the end of "and" in just the right way, and so on. But then you can spend so much time focusing on pronunciation that you mispronounce various words... you sort of overcompensate. Or even worse, some men do "fake" English accents, or sound like James Earl Jones when they say mass. There is a balance to be maintained. The key is to say it just right, which is easier said than done.
Some people out there might think that worrying about how to pronounce words, and where to pause in the canon and other prayers, is a waste of time. But we have such a great treasure in the Anglican liturgy that we must, I think, be very careful with such things. It would be like having a great old classic car that is in great shape, but is just a dirty mess... covered in mud, and full of empty candy wrappers inside. I hate it when our liturgy is rushed through, and words are not pronounced correctly, and everything is sloppy. With the Roman Mass it is one thing, or with Rite II, but with the 1928 BCP it just doesn't make sense. Why butcher the pronunciations, and rush through everything when it is written in this beautiful, poetic language? It would be like going to a Shakespeare play and hearing the actors rush through everything. Moreover, I think rushing and mispronouncing actually makes the mass harder to understand.
I can't axe my Baltimore accent completely, but I can at least work on controlling it so it doesn't rear its ugly head at the wrong time - namely at the altar!
So, my constant struggle is to say mass in such a way that my accent doesn't take over and make the whole thing a terrible mess. This involves careful enunciation, such as making sure I say the "D's" at the end of "and" in just the right way, and so on. But then you can spend so much time focusing on pronunciation that you mispronounce various words... you sort of overcompensate. Or even worse, some men do "fake" English accents, or sound like James Earl Jones when they say mass. There is a balance to be maintained. The key is to say it just right, which is easier said than done.
Some people out there might think that worrying about how to pronounce words, and where to pause in the canon and other prayers, is a waste of time. But we have such a great treasure in the Anglican liturgy that we must, I think, be very careful with such things. It would be like having a great old classic car that is in great shape, but is just a dirty mess... covered in mud, and full of empty candy wrappers inside. I hate it when our liturgy is rushed through, and words are not pronounced correctly, and everything is sloppy. With the Roman Mass it is one thing, or with Rite II, but with the 1928 BCP it just doesn't make sense. Why butcher the pronunciations, and rush through everything when it is written in this beautiful, poetic language? It would be like going to a Shakespeare play and hearing the actors rush through everything. Moreover, I think rushing and mispronouncing actually makes the mass harder to understand.
I can't axe my Baltimore accent completely, but I can at least work on controlling it so it doesn't rear its ugly head at the wrong time - namely at the altar!
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Lessons from Television
One of the shows my wife and I love to watch is A Haunting, which is on the Discovery Channel on Thursday nights. This show has reenactments of various true hauntings and demon possessions/activities, mostly in America, but sometimes in other countries too. They interview the actual people involved, and do the whole thing in a really nice way. It is pretty creepy.
I have learned a few things from watching this show, and thought I'd share them with you all:
1) If there is a ghost in your house it always thinks the house belongs to it and wants you out.
2) Don't try to get the house blessed because it only quiets things down for about one month and makes the ghosts more angry and annoyed.
3) Don't call a Wiccan practicioner to come and help you because that also only makes the ghosts more angry and annoyed.
4) Don't presume a Catholic priest can help you, because half the time they are just as scared as you and don't stick around to help.
5) Don't waste time and money on hiring a psychic, because in the end they never do anything except affirm that you are not crazy, and that these things are indeed happening in your house (well, duh).
6) Burning sage leaves does nothing to get rid of ghosts.
7) Basically you just have to move and eat the loss!
I have learned a few things from watching this show, and thought I'd share them with you all:
1) If there is a ghost in your house it always thinks the house belongs to it and wants you out.
2) Don't try to get the house blessed because it only quiets things down for about one month and makes the ghosts more angry and annoyed.
3) Don't call a Wiccan practicioner to come and help you because that also only makes the ghosts more angry and annoyed.
4) Don't presume a Catholic priest can help you, because half the time they are just as scared as you and don't stick around to help.
5) Don't waste time and money on hiring a psychic, because in the end they never do anything except affirm that you are not crazy, and that these things are indeed happening in your house (well, duh).
6) Burning sage leaves does nothing to get rid of ghosts.
7) Basically you just have to move and eat the loss!
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Love After Love
A very dear friend gave me this poem by Derrick Walcott a few years ago for my birthday, and recently I redisovered it in my desk drawer. It meant so much to me when she gave it to me. Now, I share with you all. Notice the "eucharistic" imagery.
Love After Love
By Derrick Walcott
The Time will come
When with elation,
You will greet yourself arriving
At your own door, in your own mirror,
And each will smile at the other's welcome,
And say, sit here. Eat.
You will love again the stranger who was your self.
Give wine. Give bread. Give back your heart
To itself, to the stranger who has loved you
All your life, whom you ignored
For another, who knows you by heart.
Take down the love letters from the bookshelf,
The photographs, the desperate notes,
Peel your own image from the mirror.
Sit. Feast on your life.
By Derrick Walcott
The Time will come
When with elation,
You will greet yourself arriving
At your own door, in your own mirror,
And each will smile at the other's welcome,
And say, sit here. Eat.
You will love again the stranger who was your self.
Give wine. Give bread. Give back your heart
To itself, to the stranger who has loved you
All your life, whom you ignored
For another, who knows you by heart.
Take down the love letters from the bookshelf,
The photographs, the desperate notes,
Peel your own image from the mirror.
Sit. Feast on your life.
Monday, December 04, 2006
Once and Future Priest
This past Sunday Rev. Al Kimel of Pontifications was ordained as a priest of the Roman Catholic Church. I, for one, am happy for him and wish him a long and fruitful ministry in the Roman Church. It is a hard thing to leave behind the security of a ministry in one church and enter another church with the possibility of not being ordained in that new church. How does one make a living? How do you put food on the table for the family? It is all very risky, and one cannot help but admire someone like him who lives according to his conscience despite the difficulties that it can bring.
So on that note, I want to take this time to pay tribute to other priests who left ECUSA long before people like Al Kimel did. I want to remember the men who left to join the American Episcopal Church, and the Anglican Catholic Church, the APCK, and other continuing churches, who never received any recognition from anyone. These men were faithful to God and to their consciences. They were faithful catholics who understood the nature of the church as a communio, and that they could not be in communion with "womenpriests" and the bishops who ordained them. And they were faithful Anglicans, who recognized the catholicity of the English Reformation and the Book of Common Prayer, and who sought to preserve the great Anglican tradition. These men gave up rectories, secure livings, and pensions long before Gene Robinson, Barbara Harris, and all of the other yahoos came along, and long before these more recent people have. They saw the writing on the wall back in the late 60's. They were prophets, and like the prophets of old, they were often laughed at, and scorned by everyone else. But in the end, they were right... ECUSA ended up exactly where they said it would. Maybe one of the reasons continuing Anglicans are so maligned by others sometimes is because we were right about these things all along. And if these men were right about that, then maybe they were also right about the catholicity of Anglicanism, and how Anglicans always have been, and always will be a branch of Christ's one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. We would do well to listen to their witness. May the sacrifice that these brave men made for the Kingdom of God never be forgotten. Who knows how their lives and ministries have borne fruit, and will continue to bear fruit for the glory of Jesus Christ until He comes again.
So on that note, I want to take this time to pay tribute to other priests who left ECUSA long before people like Al Kimel did. I want to remember the men who left to join the American Episcopal Church, and the Anglican Catholic Church, the APCK, and other continuing churches, who never received any recognition from anyone. These men were faithful to God and to their consciences. They were faithful catholics who understood the nature of the church as a communio, and that they could not be in communion with "womenpriests" and the bishops who ordained them. And they were faithful Anglicans, who recognized the catholicity of the English Reformation and the Book of Common Prayer, and who sought to preserve the great Anglican tradition. These men gave up rectories, secure livings, and pensions long before Gene Robinson, Barbara Harris, and all of the other yahoos came along, and long before these more recent people have. They saw the writing on the wall back in the late 60's. They were prophets, and like the prophets of old, they were often laughed at, and scorned by everyone else. But in the end, they were right... ECUSA ended up exactly where they said it would. Maybe one of the reasons continuing Anglicans are so maligned by others sometimes is because we were right about these things all along. And if these men were right about that, then maybe they were also right about the catholicity of Anglicanism, and how Anglicans always have been, and always will be a branch of Christ's one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. We would do well to listen to their witness. May the sacrifice that these brave men made for the Kingdom of God never be forgotten. Who knows how their lives and ministries have borne fruit, and will continue to bear fruit for the glory of Jesus Christ until He comes again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)