au revoir

it has been six and a half years since i started this blog, and i think it's time for a last post.  when i started it, i was all new to the blogosphere, and i hung out with a lot of 'emergent types' and people for whom the da vinci code was not the fifth gospel but the gospel.  i still hang out with a lot of types of people, but i am no longer a stranger in the world of blogs:  i have two others that are 'finished' and two others that are active.

so, i'm keeping this one around as an archive for the many linked blogs and other sites that seem to participate in the discussion in which i was interested when i started it, but will make my posts either to  peregrinations with st. chad or to the orthodox pagan.

au revoir.

some thoughts on the world trade center

Genesis 11:  'And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.

2And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there.

3And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for morter.

4And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.

5And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded.

6And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.

7Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one anothers speech.

8So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.

9Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.'

29 july: translation of william laud, archbishop of canterbury, sometime bishop of st.david's, sometime chancellor of oxford

although charged with several crimes again and again, laud was always found innocent by the courts.  the puritan parliament had to pass a special bill to have him executed.  let us hope the long parliament will not soon return.

laud pretty much embodied everything the puritans opposed, and he did it insistently.  it was i suspect his determination most of all that led to his death.  tyranny can more easily overlook principled opposition of the quiet, scholarly type than it can embarrassment of those who simply do not recognize its authority.

i wonder what we would say about laud today.  i am not going to speculate on what he might have to say about contemporary politics, if for no other reason than that they probably could not have been imagined by him, although i suspect he would have been horrified.  i suspect we would see him as someone who was trying to impose his opinions on a diverse culture.  he did not himself see what he was doing as any such thing.  he saw himself, i believe, as one who was trying to preserve an old and wise culture from the fifty-one per-cent approval rating of the day.

it is fascinating that if he were alive today, laud would be considered a homosexual.  he was not so-called in his own time; then there was no such term.  it would have to wait for the more clinical nineteenth century, when sexuality began to replace love as the object of desire.  (i always wonder how our discussion might change if we used a term i prefer, homophilia, rather than homosexuality.)  he was well known to have 'male favourites,' one of whom was buckingham, also a favourite of the king.  so far as i know, no one wanted to behead james for his 'sodomy.'  and charles, who would lose his head, was one of the most chaste and faithful husbands to have worn the english crown.  (the present monarch seems also faithful, but then she is literally a queen.)

of course one could make a sort of jest that it was laud's fondness for decoration and dress-up that got him in trouble.  then of course we are left with a number of embarassments, one of which is what must we say about benedict and st. peter's.  but then of course we know what some already say about them, and the most vicious charge against laud, from the viewpoint of the puritans, was that he was a papist.  again, he saw himself as no such thing.  he saw the church of rome as discontinuous with the medieval church, and sought to assure the continuity of the church of england.

laud has been called bigoted, but in his defence it must be said that he opposed again and again the harsh sentencing of prominent puritans.  they would not oppose a harsh sentence for him.

the american episcopal church's lesser feasts and fasts 2006  has this to say about laud:

'Laud's reputation has remained controversial to this day.   Honored as a martyr and condemned as an intolerant bigot, he was compassionate in his defense of the rights of the common people against the landowners.  H was honest, devout, loyal to the king and to the rights and privileges of the Church of England.  He tried to reform and protect the Church in accordance with his sincere convictions.   But in many ways he was out of step with the views of the majority of his countrymen . . . .'

Lord forbid that anyone be out of step with the views of the majority.  parliament seems particularly unable to deal with one who notices that the parliament is naked.

 lesser feasts and fasts continues:

'He made a noble end, praying on the scaffold:  "the Lord receive my soul, and have mercy upon me, and bless this kingdom with peace and charity, that there may not be this effusion of Christian blood amongst them."' (p. 124)

he is buried under the high altar at st. john's college, oxford.

my apocalyptic summer: note one, the two kingdoms

last summer, i was walking about downtown victoria and in a little esoteric bookstore found zachary f. landsdowne's the revelation of saint john:  the path to soul initiation (san francisco, ca/newburyport, ma:  weiser books, 2006).  it was the shape and format of its pages, actually, that made me handle it for a few minutes.  it felt good.  i thought to myself, hmmm, self.  you're about old enough to try to read john's vision with perhaps some understanding. why don't you buy this book, and spend the fall reading the apocalypse?  besides, it was only about $3.98 canadian, two doonies and some change.  but i didn't read it last fall.  instead, over the fall and winter i gathered translations and commentaries of the last book in the bible, and have been working through them this summer.

it's been a wowser experience.  i've avoided as much as possible the obvious lunatic fringe stuff (please read 'lunatic' with the accent on the second syllable, and consider that by it i mean those folks whose understanding is limited by the lunar sphere in the classical understanding of the cosmos.); so, no left behind or late great planet earth.  what i have read has been very interesting.  much of it has mostly brought together some vague understandings i had had over the years but never considered together.  one of the first is that john of the revelation is a prophet.  by that i mean, as walter harrelson, in whose seminar i studied old testament prophets, would always insist, that john describes what will be because it what always is.  when he says these are ' the things which must shortly come to pass', they are the things which always must shortly come to pass.  the interpreters who say that john is writing about his own generation and the mysterious beast whose number is 666 is nero, the interpreters who say that john is writing about some specific time in the future and the mysterious beast whose number is 666 was napoleon or is whoever, and those who say that the situations john described are always coming to pass and the beast is within each of us, are all correct.

the kingdom of our god and of his christ is, as jesus said, at hand, here among us.  it is not out there in the future, only.  like the lord whose presence creates that kingdom, it is and was and is to come.  but the other kingdom, the one in which only those who serve the beast can trade in the great city of babylon, is also here.  and it was.  but it is not, in john's vision, to come.  the knowledge that it cannot last is what makes its citizens most desperate.  we must drill, drill, drill, because we know that in a day, it will all be gone.

i have been impressed how much contemporary art is influenced by the imagery of john's vision.  i knew of course that it had had a huge influence over the years.  some of the most beautiful illuminated manuscripts from the middle ages are of the apocalypse,  and especially of manuscripts of the commentaries of beatus of liebana, an eighth century spanish monk.  but the images remain influential.  one of the more interesting one i found was a work by the rock band aphrodite's child, called 666.  lead by vangelis parathanssiou, it is a fairly straightforward representation of the revelation in song and word.   track 13, 'do it', as good a theme song for the kingdom of the beast as one might find.

la fiesta del santiago

 

el fumiero at the cathedral of saint james, compostela

'i am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.'  (jesus of nazareth)

 

life is more abundant at the edges, and more various, and more nourishing.  there one finds the live that is low on the food chain, that sustains the other life that sometimes seems much more 'important.'  (we were reminded of this often-over looked fact, over looked by us who think we find life in saran-wrapped packages at trader joe's, by last summer's oil spill in the gulf of mexico, one of the world's productive edges.)  i knew this well when i was a hunter.  the fence rows were where the game was.  now the fence rows have been cut to make room for more wheat fields, but those wheat fields that fill the bags at trader joe's are at the edges of 'civilization' and beyond.

the same thing is true of life in the spirit.  the lives that sustain the rest of us, or the portions of each of our lives that are sustaining, are at most often, most abundantly, at the edges.  the shamans of the world live at the edges of their villages.  moses, in the reading for the vigil of the feast of st. james, finds the holy one revealed not in egypt but in the wilds of midian, in a burning bush.  the desert fathers follow the same tradition.  and on the edges of the empire are to be found the places and practices that sustain us.

those who would 'rule' from the centers of the empire  either don't understand the true nature of abundant life or try to ignore it.  the irony of the eternal smoke that rises from babylon in the revelation to st. john (19:3) was lost on those who tried to build the roman papacy into a replacement for the roman caesaeracy.  no matter.  on the edges, in edessa and the thebiad, on the isles of glastonbury and lerins, there were places where the abundant life jesus had brought flourished.  such a place, i suspect, was compostela, the pilgrimage site for st. james, at la finisterra, the end of the world.

spain would by the time of the 'renaissance' become more and more encumbered with papal relationships in her struggles against england and france, but for centuries she enjoyed being at   the end of the earth.  i suspect that she offered a european alternative to romanism, an alternative whose remainders are still visible today.  mozarabic chant, the gallican rite, and the popularity of the pilgrimage to santiago, the cockle shell pilgrimage, all remind us of the abundance of life that flourished in the spanish church.

there is a tendency to explain some of the varied life of the spanish church by the long period of islamic rule.  but the variations predate the islamic invasion, and are connected to many other strands of the life of the church outside the roman tapestry.  the legend of st.james, with its complicated story of the voyage of the relics of the apostle to a creek at the end of the world, covers as much as it uncovers.  the celtic church made much of  being the church of st. john.  what we easily forget is that st. james the brother, the other of the three who were constantly with jesus, also probably carried the same traditions to spain that the irish cherished in britain.

this year, therefore, i suggest we look at the feast of st. james the greater as a celebration of life in its abundance, of the practices of the church that include the acts not just of the apostles and their successors (and of those who would claim to be their successors), but all the wonderful folk acts, the acts of the abuelas, the acts of the rustic pilgrims who made and still make the pilgrimage to the end of the world, where the largest dispenser of smoke in the world, the great  botafumiero at the end of the journey, and remember that the holy one is most often found not in blazing lights, but in clouds of streaming glory.

mary magdalene, apostle to apostles

the relics of the woman with the alabaster jar,

at the  basilica of s. mary magdalene, vezeley

long before she had been the basis for an industry, i found mary magdalene important, even if my devotion to her was based on feelings i did not quite understand.  so over the past two decades i have read much of what has been written about her.  even when it has been historically nonsense, it has been fascinating, because it seems that many others of her devotees are as non-linear in their approach to the apostle to the apostles as i am.

but i was particularly annoyed by what i found on the back of cynthia bourgeault's new book   the meaning of mary magdalene:  'was jesus' most important disciple a woman?--a thorough and provocative analysis of the evidence by one of today's most respected contemplative teachers.'  now let me say, first of all, that i realize that author's are not responsible for what publishers put on the backsides of their books to boost sales, and that from what i can tell from perusing the book, it is not what ms. bourgeault was really analysing.  more than that i will not say until i read the book, except that she does not seem to be particularly interested in the sort of understanding of the apostolic office as a competitive sport that so fills the pages of writers like marvin meyers.  rather she seems to be interested in exploring the role of love in the relationship of mary magdalene to the messiah, and the nature of that love.

much more helpful to understanding why there is no one disciple 'most important' is this passage from s. bernard of clairvaux' sermons on the song of songs,  '23, in the rooms of the king."  bernard seems particularly helpful to our understanding mary magdalene's relation to jesus, because although he is primarily discussing the anointing which the king grants his beloved, mary magdalene of course is the one who anointed the king.  'in speaking of the ointments i mentioned that many varieties of them are to be found in the bridgegroom's presence, that all of them are not for everybody's use, but that each one's share differs according to his merits; so, too, i feel that the king has not one bedroom only, but several.  for he has more than one queen, his concubines are many, his maids beyond counting.  and each has his own secret rendezvous with the bridegroom and says, :my secret to myself, my secret to myself."  all do not experience the delight of the bridegroom's private visit in the same room, the father has different arrangements for each.  for we did not choose him but he chose us and appointed places for us; and in the place of each one's appointment there he is too.  thus one repentant woman was  allotted a place at the feet of the lord jesus, another--if she really is another--found fulfillment for her devotions at the head.  thomas attained to his mystery of grace in the savior's side, john on his breast, peter in the father's bosom, paul in the third heaven.' (23,9)

i would, however, like to point out one particularly beautiful part of the mystery of mary magdalene.  we speak of jesus as the christ, the anointed one.  and it was mary magdalene who anointed him.  it was she who chrismated our lord.  this role has continued to be central to the apostles in succession ever since, as each new christian is encorporated into the body of the royal priest and king by the application of oil on our heads and breasts and hands and feet.  mary truly is an apostle to the apostles. 

a little more about sin, it's being so popular

catastrophically, it seems to me, much of the west that calls itself christian has lost any concept of the holy one who self-reveals as the holy trinity.  i walk around my little town of eureka springs, and find there a big 'christian store' devoted to jesus.  one of the historic 'churches' is the unitarians--there is no jewish synagogue--devoted to the one god, although the unitarians these days are not so sure it's the god of abraham.  out on the highway there are several 'charismatic churches'--we don't have a quaker meeting--devoted to 'the spirit.'  most of the protestants i know are historical jesus appreciators, including the episcopalians.  only the roman catholics and the nine remaining presbyterians, all around 80 years old, seem to hold to some understanding of the trinity, and for the presbyterians, it's an idea they mean and not the person of the holy one.  what has this to do with sin, i hope you're asking.

my summer with the apocalypse of st. john and its images led me to richard of st. victor's book of the twelve patriarchs, which in the edition i found (trans. & intro. grover a. zinn.  (new york/ramsey/toronto:  paulist press, 1979)) is included with book three of the trinity.  i found it a very insightful work, even though i am only beginning to plumb its depths.  to quote zinn's introduction, 'in reflecting on the nature of divine perfection and the presence of charity, [richard] shows that not only are two persons necessary for love, but three are necessary for the fullest of all loves, charity.  unless love is not only given and received but also shared in community it cannot be called true charity.' (p.9)

now if man is created in the image of god, and if sin is falling short of the glory of god, then we see that the original sin, the origin of all sin, is the breaking of communion with the rest of creation and its creator which the first parents choose in order to 'know.'  they make clothes because they have become ashamed to be seen by the animals in the garden.  they hide from the holy one in the evening rather than walk with him as they have done previously.  they have become the community of two which is the basis for the modern nuclear family, a smaller community than even the extended family from the time we dismiss as 'patriarchal' or 'tribal.'  at least those communities were more inclusive than those in which we find ourselves today.

it is ironic that one of the most popular readings for weddings is paul's paeon to charity in the 13th chapter of the first letter to the corinthians, a passage part of which reads, 'whether there be knowledge, it shall pass away.   for we know in part . . . .  but when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall pass away.  . . . for now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face:  now i know in part' but then shall i know even as also i am known.  and now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity."  (vv. 8-10, 12-13) 

it seems that a recognition of the essential community of the holy trinity is necessary if the church is going to be a bearer of the good news of the kingdom of god.  otherwise she will never recognize the kingdom, even though it is at hand, it is near, it is within us.  our recognition that we are created to be the image of the holy one can be the beginning of our 'being perfect as our father in heaven is perfect.'  without that recognition, we will continue to live against the world and against its creator.

a little bit about sin

and a little bit about the conversation many of my friends have been having about ron bell's little book love wins:  my contribution is the suggestion that what sin is, and how far the stain is found,and perhaps most importantly, how sin has been conquered, are not topics about which we all agree when we use the same words.  so, a link to a little essay about the sin or sinlessness of the theotokos, from the website of the monastery of st. tikhon of zadonsk.  what applies to the mother of our lord is a model for us all.  here's the link .  i hope it adds light to a world that often seems dark, and hope in a world that can seem hopeless.

the holy apostles: ss. peter & paul

lately i have been pondering the friendship between peter and john.  they are the two disciples who are most often portrayed together both in the gospels and in acts.  john's affection for peter seems to have exceeded even that for his own brother, james.  and it seems that peter returned the affection.  that would explain, for instance, his concern for the fate of john in the last chapter of the fourth gospel.  but peter and john have no feast day in common  (although there is a gospel for such a feast, shared with mary magdalene, which we read on easter morning:  the resurrection story in the twentieth chapter of john, and an epistle for the feast we might introduce, in the third or fourth chapter of acts;).

but to the feasts of peter, paul gets to come, a sort of new kid on the block.  in january, after the ancient feast of s. peter's chair (called by some the confession of s. peter) there is an octave, the baptism of s. paul (called by some the conversion of s. paul, the some being protestants who are uncomfortable with  apostolic succession or baptismal regeneration.)  and at the height of summer, amidst the celebrations of john the baptist and james the brother of john mary magdalene and before the transfiguration of our lord and the dormition of his holy mother, peter shares a feast with paul.  an odd couple, it seems. that paul is an addition is obvious from the readings for matins.  they are all about peter (with a bit of john, from the third chapter of acts).  paul has his own commemoration on the 30th of july.

but an importantly odd couple for a church that would come to be catholic, not in the sense of ruled by one man who lived in the capital of the empire and sits in peter's chair, but in the sense of embracing all the peoples of the world. this feast  recognizes that it is not just the home boys, the twelve who wandered around galilee with jesus for years, who are called to be apostles, but that such folk, to borrow from a children's hymn, as doctors and queens and sherdesses on the green are also and equally called to be saints of god, are called into the apostolic fellowship.

this feast has another importance of, i think, which is recognized in the traditional icon, a portrait of two very different men embracing.  they are instantly recognizable by the traditions of  iconography:  peter has his trademark blond hair, paul is bald.  we call them saint peter and saint paul, but their friends knew them as rocky and shorty, which is what their names meant.  peter, as is remarked in the fourth chapter of acts, was unlearned, but a passionate follower of his lord.  (and is so often true of passionate followers, given to periods of infidelity.)  paul as he proudly mentions from time to time in his letters, was educated in the best schools of judaism.  but there they are in the icon, embracing, an embrace we celebrate  on 29th july each year.

the insight to the importance of that embrace, i suggest, is provided by john's understanding of the importance of peter.  for much of the church, peter's 'primacy,' as it is called, depends on his 'confession' celebrated on the 18th of january, when we remember jesus' saying, 'thou art peter, and on this rock i will build my church,' a statement which has been used as much for division as building.  but for john, who probably in his gospel says more about peter than does even matthew, the importance of peter is built on that last breakfast scene on the seashore, when jesus asks peter, three times, 'dost thou love me?'  it is peter's love for jesus that qualifies him to feed jesus' sheep.

peter and paul both have spotted histories.  peter right after his 'confession' tries to talk jesus out of the crucifixion, cueing jesus' remarkable statement 'get thee behind me, satan.' peter denied jesus three times during the trial before the crucifixion.  paul  was first famous as saul, who held the coats of stephen's stoners, and who was a sort of prime grand inquisitor.  that makes their embrace even more significant, and it reminds us what sort of love is expected of us.  anyone can love the seemingly perfect, the obvious saints.  but to forgive and to love those who have famously failed is not only more difficult, it is redemptive.  it is the sort of love which lets the unlearned and unfaithful and the torturers become transformed into holy apostles.

98 days and counting later: trinity sunday and after

how do we know "god"?  what do we mean or begin to mean by that three-letter word, these days as often as not profaned by a three-letter abbreviation that is popular with young girls when they see particularly unusual shoes, or receive a surprising tweet?

for the christian church, the answer is the holy one who has self-revealed as three persons, the son whom we have known in the man jesus, the father of the son, and the spirit who proceeds from the father, whose arrival amidst the church we celebrated last week at the festival of pentecost.  and we can know him because he has revealed himself and in the ways that he has revealed himself.

this is dogma,  which we so often forget is not something which and only which must be believed to be "go to heaven," but as even wikepedia notices, is rooted, in a greek word that means the best we can imagine.  so we do the best we can, and use the  the words of the athanasian creed.  if we would be whole, holy,( the concept behind the latin word salvus which transliterates into our english "saved")  what we "need before all things" is the catholic faith.  for us, this is good news:  the holy one, the almighty, the creator of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen, shows himself to us as a communion of love.

you know how we have belittled such understanding in our modern, self-centered way of looking at things.  (indeed, has it ever been otherwise?)  the door bell rings, and there's the (undeniably brave and probably sincere) man in the cheap suit and unfashionable tie holding a hand-full of tracts containing the 12-step program to salvation and the niv translation of the gospel according to john.  "are you saved?"   i try to invite such folks in for a nice cup of tea and a discussion of why one would want to be saved.  because i always answer, "yes, but do you know what for?"  the quote from the gospel according to john that makes is so convenient for the man with the tracts is of course "3:16."  i see those numbers on bumper stickers or window decals of sub's and giant pick-up trucks and the usually rather large t-shirts of harley-davidson riders.  it has become a short-hand for our misunderstanding of the good news, a reduction of the whole of the wonders of the creation and sanctification  of the whole of creation, to one of st. anselm's sentenced--although i suspect that few of the people with the bumper sticker/t-shirt theologies would know about the castratti's sentences

eternal life.  that's what jesus tells nicodemus people who believe in the son of god will have.  that's what it says in the final verse, the 15th verse, of the gospel reading for trinity sunday, and of course it is repeated like the theme in a song in the 16th verse.  and the theme returns in the seventh chapter of the gospel, with the third verse:  "and this is life eternal, that they might know god, and jesus christ whom thou  whom thou hast sent."  now jesus said these words in a prayer as he began 'the one oblation of himself once-offered' because he recognized that they would soon experience the same contempt from the world as he did, that their witness to them would cost them their lives.  a martyr is literally, a witness.  so this eternal life would be a mystery from the beginning.  we certainly seem to die.  they words he spoke before this prayer were, 'in the world ye shall have tribulation:  but be of good cheer, i have overcome the world.'

tribulation, indeed.  the photograph at the head of this post is of holy trinity monastery at meteora, in thessaly.  many western christians forget about thessaly after paul's letters.  the church at thessalonika was having tribulation when paul wrote to her, and the tribulation continued.  the monasteries on the tops of the rocks were built to escape, among other tribulations of the world,  pirates.

but be of good cheer.  despite the horrors of the world, and anyone can come up with a list as well as i, the holy one, who is love,  reveals himself to us, not as one who engages in the conflicts which lead to piracy and envy and hatred, but as love:  a community of love.  and so on the sunday after trinity we continue to hear from s. john, the beloved disciple, who listened to the heartbeat of god, these words:  'beloved, let us love one another:  for love is of god; and every one that loveth is born of god, and knoweth god.'  we know god, the holy trinity, a communion of love, by loving.  more than that is not required.

pentecost: the first fruits (of the spirit)

at soup night thursday, which was a fruit salad night in a pun on some of the meanings of the feast of pentecost, a fruit salad served on a bed of newly-harvested grain, we discussed some of the layers of meaning of the feast.  as "scholars" these days are so happy to point out, it started as an agricultural festival, to which they say were "added" religious meanings.  as if harvest is not religious, as if the holy one does not bring from the earth grain to strengthen our heart, as if really religious people do not hold the parts of their lives together--that, to bind back together, being the basic meaning of religion.

the second layer of meaning is the giving of the law on sinai's height, graven on tablets of stone by, as the advent hymn reminds us, by the lord of might.  but ezekiel prophesies that the laws will eventually be graven on our hearts, our living hearts, by the lord of love.  we read, many of us, that prophesie about fifty days ago at the paschal vigil.

and on the feast of pentecost, when it is, as s. luke writes, 'fully come,' suggesting that the events in the upper room in jerusalem is the climax, ezekiel's and joel's prophesies are fulfilled. 

but of course what is true for the church in the first century must be true for us today, and for each of us.  as s. gregory the great reminds us, it is when we ascend to the upper room of our own hearts, in the communion of all the saints gathered about the theotokos, we too wait for the gift of the spirit, and we will not be disappointed.

but there is a smaller part of pentecost that struck me this year, although in many ways it is the most important.  it is the conclusion of the epistle for the feast in the western lectionary:  'we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of god.'

if as s. john reminds us so often in his many writings that we have heard over the fifty days, the most important, indeed the decisive, the definitive, gift of the spirit is love, then it is love which let the church speak in the tongues of all the assembly in jerusalem, and which will allow the church to speak to the world today.   love involves patience, as s. peter's epistles remind us, and waiting, as s. luke reminds us.  when the church speaks in the love of god, she will witness to the resurrection of christ and people will hear the good news of 'the wonderful works of god.'  when she speaks in any other voice, whether it be condemnation or revenge or simply impatience, she stifles the spirit.  how are we doing today?

rogation days: taking the prayers of the earth to heaven

the 'meaning' of the days before the ascension, the rogation days, pretty much depends upon how we understand the ascension.  the more thoroughly we ponder and understand the wonder of our lord's taking the human body he received from the blessed virgin, taking our very nature as the human one, into heaven, the richer the rogation days become.

one tradition expressed on rogation days is prayer for crops, for agriculture, for 'the garden.'  in many places there are processions around the fields, and prayers for rain in due season, and general fecundity.

but they are also days to ponder prayer in general.  so on these rogation days, as i weed my garden, overgrown with strange things that appeared while i was out of town, and plant new seeds to replace those washed away in the recent deluge, i am also considering prayer, using fr. lev gillet's wonderful little book, in thy presence (crestwood, new york:  st. vladimir's seminary press, 1977).  i would love to put the whole thing in this post, but i will be content to one short chapter:
'first thing in the morning, lord . . . .
'lord love, may my first word this morning go out to thee, blessing thy name!
'as this day begins, i believe, i feel, that thy immense goodness is falling on all that exists.  the spring of love continues to pour forth even when we seem to see nothing but evil and suffering around us.  whether it be visibly, whether it be secretly, thou art never weary of helping and of loving.  today, again, thou wilt b fighting for us.
'we await from thee the graces needed for this day.  with our earthly bread, give us thy heavenly good, the pure wheat of thy limitless love, the true sustance of our life.  with trust, we place in thy hands our practical difficulties, our sorrows, our fears born of little faith.
'we have no other succour, we have no other hope than thy love.  may it guide our steps today, a column of light going forward into the heart of apparent darkness!
'lord,  a sense of life that is given, of sacrifice, inspires everything which, each day, comes to us from thee.  redeeming love wished to suffer for us, to die for us.  make me share this desire to give the live i have received.
'lord, may the purifying action of redeeming love wash from my soul the multitude of my sins.  unite around thy love, in thy love, those who know thee, those who seek thee without kowing thee, and those for whom thou seekest.  we want to be thine.  take us.'  (p. 31)

the holy ghost, the holy catholic church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sin, and the resurrection of the body: st. venantius

venantius is one of my favourite kinds of saints.  his legend starts, "venantius is said to have been a martyr at camerino during the third century, but nothing whatsoever is know for certain about him."  yet he remains on the calendar, being called to mind every year, with a proper hymn for both matins and vespers, even if neither has yet made it to youtube, and this collect:

"o god, who has consecrated this day with the triumph of thy blessed martyr venantius:  mercifully hear the prayers of thy people; and grant that we who venerate his righteousness, may imitate the constance of his faith in thee."

now, you might wonder--i hope you wonder--why such as venantius would be one of my favourites.  first, i don't need to know anything about him to enjoy the benefits of his life.  he is one of the great cloud of witnesses who have gone before without whom i might not be at all.  in that sense, he resembles, for instance, my welsh ancestors who sometime left wales and went to michigan--i imagine much like one of the sons let off from the mines in how green was my valley, or one of the englishmen in my mother's family who, probably to pay off debts, left for georgia.  the opportunities i have today are the result of the consance of the faith of venantius and of them.

but also he is one of my favourites because of s. john's image of the prayers of the saints around the throne, rising like golden bowls of incense, longing for their number to be complete.  venantius is one of their number.  and, he prays for me.  by that i don' mean so much that he intercedes for me but that he with the others who have finished the race pray as it were in my place all of those times when i am lax or sleepy or forgetful or just lazy.

but perhaps most importantly, venantius and the others in his great cloud--do we get the idea of saints in clouds from the book of hebrews--are truly witnesses.  if the son is the witness to the father, and the holy ghost is the witness to the son, it is the church in her fullness who is the witness to the holy ghost.  the sequence of the creed, which i borrowed as a title for this little essay, is i think very important. the resurrection of the body is only possible because of the forgivenessof sins (love does indeed win), and the forgiveness of sins only happens within the communion of saints, which is the product of the holy catholic church, which is filled with the holy ghost.

i don't need to know much about venantius to rejoice in his triumph, but i can rest in the assurance that his triumph ultimately benefits us all.  thanks be to god.

islam and harvard and princeton and boston

i am deep in the heart of texas for a few weeks, visiting friends and enjoying the hospitality of the booher library at the epscopal theological seminary of the southwest.  sunday after "making my communion" as episcopalians sometimes say at all saints church, rite one in an historic building,  i went with friends to st. michael's, which is properly on a hill appropriate to it's patronage, and where there were lots of bells and whistles and howard galley's "star trek prayer," as it's fondly called, which i thought had found a happy rest.

there was also a guest preacher, the rev. jeffrey samuel, of the diocese of peshawar, in pakistan, who has been working on a diploma in theological studies at the seminary.  although english is not fr. jeffrey's first language, he was very eloquent.  one of the things he discussed was "the islamic concept about jesus."  there are, he said, two concepts.  the first concept held by many muslim people is that "they don't believe that he died on a cross.  why--because prophets were innocent people. this insulting death is against their prestige."  the second concept, "accepted by the ahmadi sect of the muslims [is that] . . . jesus [was]brought to the point of death on the cross, but he did not die on the cross.  jesus was just unconscious on the cross due to his suffering and persection.  people thought that jesus was dead, but he was not.  so they took jesus from the cross and after a few days jesus was healed and jesus went to kashmit.  and he lived 120 years in kashmit and then he died a natural death."

this, i thought, sounds familiar. over the past several months i have read several books claiming to be "christology," written by professors at universities as harvard and princeton and boston, which have suggested the same or very similar ideas.  these books were published by respectable publishing houses, and someof them are used as text books in respectable seminaries.  indeed the lesson from acts was described in the service leaflet as "written by the (unknown) author of luke-acts sometime between 90 and 110 ad.  . . . it is 'late second generation' and begins to reflecton the history of the jesus movement and how far it has come since the days when the church was founded . . . "  l. michael white.  from jesus to christianity (harpersanfrancisco:  2004), p. 252.

fr. jeffrey concluded:  "we all are called to be witnesses about jesus.  we, you and me, have to proclaim the good news not only to the christians, but also among the non-christians and save their souls for christ.  we are working very hard in pakistan to keep our faith and give testimony to non-christians.  we need your prayers and support.  thank you."

it does not seem that we are working very hard in this counry.  we need prayers and support, too.

friday in bright week: the life-giving spring

one of the many wonderful things about living in eureka springs is, of course, the springs.  so i am particularly pleased that on friday in bright week the icon of the theotokos as the "life-giving spring" is celebrated.
my more or less "official" icon of the mother of god, as a monk, more or less, in the british tradition, more or less, is our lady of glastonbury, surrounded by celtic saints:

that icon has its own little shrine, where i also commemorate the seasons and feasts.

but the icon of the life-giving spring is in my beautiful corner.  here is the story of this icon, as described by st. isaac of syria skete.
"it shows how god is merciful and compassionate towards all men.  once a soldier named leo assisted a blind man who had lost his way.  while looking for water for him, he heard a voice from an unseen person say, 'emperor leo, take water and give it to the thirsty man; then dake some of the slime by it and put it in his eyes.'  to the soldier leo's surprise, a nearby spring gushed out before him.  when he did as the voice commanded him, the blind man received his sight.  this soldier later became the christian east roman or byzantine emperor leo i (457-473).

"when leo became the emperor, he erected a church in honor of the mother of god as this life-giving spring near the 'golden gates' in constantinople, where the spring had come up.  later the church was destroyed by the turks, but in 1835 a new church was built at the same site and consecratd by the ecumenical patriarch constantine.  this spring still flows for the salvation and healing of all who come there to visit mary's son."

the troparion for the feast (third tone):  "as a life-giving fount, thou didst conceive the dew that is transcendent in essence, o virgin maid.  and thou didst pour forth for us the immortal nectar.  and as  ever-flowing streams from thy fountain, thou broughtest forth the water that springeth up unto life everlasting; wherein, taking delight, we all cry out:  rejoice, o life-bearing fount."

and the kontkion (eighth tone):  "from thine un failing fount, o maiden full of grace, thou dost reward me by pouring forth of the unending streams of thy grace that passeth human understanding.  and sinc thou didst bear the word incomprehensibly, i entreat thee to refresh me with thy grace divine, that i may cry to thee:  rejoice, o water of salvation."

and here is a link to a greek hymn for the feast.

thursday in bright week: s. mary magdalene and easter eggs

thursday in bright week is the day the church takes special notice of s. mary magdalene.  in the gregorian lectionary of the west, today's gospel is from john (20:11-18).  although the orthodox gospel for today is from the third chapter of john, it is nevertheless the traditional day for easter eggs, which are first attributed to mary magdalene's missionary trip to rome, much before peter and paul. 

i have long been fascinated by mary magdalene;  in fact i made a small contribution to the writing of the icon above, by robert lentz, which is not in grace cathedral (episcopal), san francisco.  i had some knowledge of the importance of the role of mary magdalene, at least in the eastern church, when that icon was installed, around 1990, but i did not begin to understand how widespread her importance was.  so i was excited when a friend who worked for bear publishing gave me a preview copy of starbird's the woman with the alabaster jar  .  i was however, horrified when i read the book and found her history so hokey.  more horrified was i when i found so many people accepting her mis-history as it was presented in the da vinci code.    there is so much more that is available about mary magdalene than seems to be known by the princeton pharisees (by whom i mean the self-appointed "scholars," not all of whom are at princeton, who claim to know far more about scripture than the church.  hereafter i shall refer to them simply as pp"s.)

consider, for instance, the contrast so often drawn between s. gregory's description of s. mary m. as a reformed prostitute and the supposed supreme role of mary in what is called "the gospel of mary magdalene."  again and again i have heard or read the pp's telling  us that the connection between the woman from who was a known sinner--the woman with the alabaster jar who starbird claims to be not only mary madgalene but mrs. jesus of nazareth--is not assumed because the first naming of mary magdalene comes in the eighth chapter of luke right after the woman with the jar is described by simon, the host, as "a sinner."  but then the pp's never seem to tell us that indeed the document they call "the gospel according to mary magdalene" is not really a gospel at all, nor is the mary of the document identified as mary magdalene.

it is therefore, i think, interesting to look at some of the things s. gregory wrote about s. mary magdalene which are included in the readings for this day in the benedictine lectionary:

"mary magdalene, (if we may be permitted to identify her as) the woman of the city who was a sinner, through love of the truth, washed away by her tears the befoulment of her sin; and thereby the word of the truth was fulfilled which he spake:  her sins, which are many, are forgiven:  for she loved much.  . . .
"in connection with this matter, we ought to ponder on this, namely, the great store of love which was in that woman's heart.  for she, when even his disciples were gone away, could not tear  herself from the grave of the lord.  she south him whom she had not found there, and as she sought, she wept.  and the fire of love in her heart yearned after him, who (as she believed) had been taken away.  and so it came to pass that she, who had lingered to seek him, was the only one who then saw him.  for . . . the voice of the truth himself hath said:  he that endureth to the end shall be saved."  (as found in the anglican breviary (mount sinai, long island, new york:  the frank gavin liturgical foundation, inc., a. d. mcmlv), pp. c333-34)

now, i want to cut the pp's some slack.  they are victims, not of the catholic church, or of orthodoxy, but of the sort of confusion that inhabits so much of this post-human era. i was struck by this on easter sunday night, watching "jesus christ superstar" on turner classic movies.  it seemed to me to capture the essence of both the popularity and frustration of  the "historical jesus project."   mary magdalene is the first one in the movie to sing  "i don't know how to love him", but it is really judas iscariot who captures the real problem, who sings " i don't know how to love him,"  and then < "only want to know."  we fail to understand what real love is, or what real knowledge is.  it struck me that really all of the questions raised by the "historical jesus project" are pretty well contained in the movie.  in a time when love means sex and sex means, mostly, rape, then it is easy to understand how we cannot understand how mary can be said to love jesus without having sex with him.  we only want to know.  we're gnostics of the most materialistic sort.  (and i want to add a disclaimer here about one of the princeton scholars, elaine pagels, whose work has consistently exhibited an intellectual and emotional honesty despite her ignorance of the real traditions of the church.)

so i was very happpy to find that this link" to "love is come again" is illustrated by mary speaking to peter.  but i am also reminded that in the gospel according to john the most important question jesus will ask peter is not "do you know me?" or "do you think i am who they say i am? but "do you love me?"

we are all hard-hearted egyptians

i have been reading the second book of moses, the book of exodus as the days approach pascha.  this morning was chilling.  i read chapter seven, which tells of the first sign, the turning of the waters of the nile into blood.  i of course am reminded of the first sign of our lord, who turned the water of cana into wine.  i know where this is headed, and am amazed every time by the parallels of the exodus with john's gospel.  next friday, as the firstborn of the king of egypt is killed, we will read in the gospel according to john of the killing of the firstborn of god by the sons of aaron.  chilling stuff.  then on sunday i will read the fifteenth chapter, the song of miriam, and it will be part of the mass as well.

the psalms of the morning were 79, 80, and 81.  psalm 81 pretty much tells the story of all of us, the egyptians, the first israel, and the second israel, the church, as well:

Psalm 81. Exultate Deo.


SING we merrily unto God our strength; * make a cheerful noise unto the God of Jacob.

Take the psalm, bring hither the tabret, * the merry harp with the lute.

Blow up the trumpet in the new moon, * even in the time appointed, and upon our solemn feast-day.

For this was made a statute for Israel, * and a law of the God of Jacob.

This he ordained in Joseph for a testimony, * when he came out of the land of Egypt, and had heard a strange language.

I eased his shoulder from the burden, * and his hands were delivered from making the pots.

Thou calledst upon me in troubles, and I delivered thee; * and heard thee what time as the storm fell upon thee.

I proved thee also * at the waters of strife.

Hear, O my people; and I will assure thee, O Israel, * if thou wilt hearken unto me,

There shall no strange god be in thee, * neither shalt thou worship any other god.

I am the LORD thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt: * open thy mouth wide, and I shall fill it.

But my people would not hear my voice; * and Israel would not obey me;

So I gave them up unto their own hearts' lusts, * and let them follow their own imaginations.

O that my people would have hearkened unto me! * for if Israel had walked in my ways,

I should soon have put down their enemies, * and turned my hand against their adversaries.

The haters of the LORD should have submitted themselves unto him; * but their time should have endured for ever.

I would have fed them also with the finest wheatflour; * and with honey out of the stony rock would I have satisfied thee.

i only wish i did not have such a large selection of children we are killing now, putting their blood in our gas tanks, selling their "governments" and them weapons, glutting our bellies and our cars with grain while they starve.  this nigerian child came on the first row of pictures of such children on google:
 

 
 
lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep thy law.

crones, wise old men, and calvin klein padded bikinis for infants

as many of you know, i am intrigued by the character of merlin.  in one of his many insightful essays, r. j. stewart, who seems merlin as a prefigurement of christ in many ways, reminds us that to think of merlin only as a wise old man is to miss the real importance of what his story has to tell us.  before merlink became the wise elder, he was a bright youth and a mad prophet.  (there are limits of course to merlin-christ parallels.  before moses was, jesus says, i am; but he was crucified as the beginning of his career as a mad prophet.)

but in most times and most places, it is expected that life will be a sort of on-going initiation, with each phase of our lives contributing it's own gift.  (for women, the phases are often described as maiden, mother, and crone.)  we often say of some one that he or see is "just going through a phase," but we seldom recognize the importance, indeed, the necessity of those phases.  and because sexuality is such a power in our lives, the phases are often described sexually.  often i am reminded of their necessity when some friend or another "comes out" as a lesbian or a homosexual.  my half-uncle frank told me wisely many years ago that when this happens, one must first relive one's teen-aged years.  painful, and foolish looking, but true.  also, it is important to remember that the wisest of us can be caught up in yearnings to skip the earlier phases, or to return to them.  the story of merlin and nenue is perhaps part of that temptation.

we seem to live in a time when the sexual part of the phases is the only one we really value.  if you doubt this, go to the grocery store and read the magazines in the check-out lane.  watch cable news as the story of something important to the lives of thousands of people, such as the earthquake in japan recently, has a footer about some movie star who has a new boy friend.

another part of our time's discontinuance with history is that we seem to value not only the sexual part of the phases of life, but only the mature first phase, the time when one is still a maiden or a bright youth, but has reached puberty and is in the full grasp of sexual desire.  as many writers have noted over the years, although because it is lent and it is the book i am reading right now, st. john climacus' book of the ladder, i tend to think about he has to say about the ability of appetite for good to open sexual appetite which opens us to other appetites.  advertisers well understand this, and make a lot of money from keeping us thinking we are still 19.  and, they put those sexually seductive magazines in grocery stores.

this leads us to all sorts of traps.  as moore and gillette noted in the king within, we tend to elect boy kings as presidents.  and it seems that we have far more boy bishops now than we ever had in the middle ages.   and we think that sexuality has benefits, that being proud of our desires is like having an american express gold card.

so we hear of people claiming that homosexuals have the right to be preists, or bishops.  one of the arguments is that they have always been  ordained "gay" people, so we should continue the practice.  but there is an important difference between our attitudes and the way we live and that of say, sixteenth century britain, and how they lived.  william laud was a bishop, and a man who had a fondness for men.  indeed it is reported that he had a particular fondness for the duke of buckingham, james (vith and ist)' "favourite."  but no one claimed that laud had a right to be bishop because of his sexual appetites.  it was not then the defining part of one's life.  sometimes i wish it might have been more important:  charles was sexually about as pure as any english monarch known, but it didn't save him his head.

now, laud was not a perfect bishop.  i and many others find his goals for the british church to be correct and congruent with truth.  but laud never became a wise old man.  he remained a mad prophet, and that would cost him his effectiveness, and perhaps also his head, although of course the puritans were taking heads like wild men of borneo are accused of doing.

it therefore seems to me, given the general flavour, shall we say, of contemporary society--or "the economy"--that we should not be the least bit surprised when the lords advertisorial not only want grandma to have her wrinkles removed but baby girls to have fake breasts. 

of course, there is an easy solution, although not a popular one.  don't buy it.  what is "it?"  well, most nearly everything.  it's very rare for me to buy anything i really need.  perhaps you're a better"consumer."  and recognize that desires do not necessarily need to be immediately or even eventually satisfied.  of course there is not a lot of support for such an attitude.  am i foolish to think that the church might consider it?

the visitation, f. d. maurice, and dammed justice

can anything good come out of gallilee?  well, mary, the mother of our lord, did, even though the church from early centuries found pious legends to put her in jerusalem.  last year i was wondering whether there were any cradle anglicans in anglican seminaries.  i am reminded by j. f. d. maurice that it is often the converts who make the most important contributions to the big church.

maurice was born into a unitarian family, although not a confident one, it seems:  he was baptised by his unitarian father in the name of the trinity; two of his sisters became baptists.  but he eventually was himself ordained in the anglican church, and although he is probably most widely remembered for his role in christian socialism, his teaching covering many areas have become influential in the decades since his death.  while marx would claim religion to be the "opiate of the people," maurice suggested that "we have been dosing our people with religion when what they want is not this but the living god." 

the controversies which caught up maurice seem to recur:  he was dismissed from his post at king's college for positions similar to what is today getting rob bell in trouble.  but the beginning of maurice's thought was always the creation of mankind in the image of god, and our restoration to the same in what the collect for his feast calls "the perfect obedience of our saviour jesus christ."  it is the recognition of the image of god in all people which requires our reponse to all people with "a passion for justice and truth."

in the celtic orthodox calendar, the visitation of the blessed virgin also occurs on 1 april.  it seems good to remember the fierce call to justice that mary sings as she visits elizabeth:

"my soul doth magnify the lord, *
    and my spirit hath rejoiced in god my savior.
for he hath regarded *
    the lowliness of his handmaiden.
for behold from henceforth *
    all generations shall call me blessed.
for he that is mighty hath magnified me, *
    and holy is his name.
and his mercy is on them that fear him *
    throughout all generations.
he hath showed strength with his arm; *
    he hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
he hath put down the mighty from their seat, *
    and hath exalted the humble and meek.
he hath filled the hungry with good things, *
    and the rich he hath sent empty away.
he remembering his mercy hath holpen his servant israel, *
    as he promised to our forefathers,
    abraham and his seed for ever."  (the holy gospel according to st. luke, 1: 46-55)

these are fearsome words, even though we often make them into   conforting-sounding songs .   but then the fear of god is the beginning of wisdom.  i am convinced that there is much more to christianity than  social justice.  but we must start there.  otherwise when we seek the kingdom of heaven, we are like the arkansas traveler, who when he asked for directions from the old geezer on the porch, was told, "you just can't get there from here."

here is the collect for frederick denison maurice from the american book of lesser feasts and fasts:

almighty god, you restored our human nature to heavenly glory through the perfect obedience of our saviour jesus christ:  keep alive in your church, we pray, a passion for justice and truth; that, like your servant frederick denison maurice, we may work and pray for the triumph of the kingdom of your christ, who lives and reigns with  you and the holy spirit, one god, now and for ever.  amen.

amen!

joseph and st. patrick

in my wandering through the book of genesis, i have come to the story of joseph.  he is seventeen, and sold into slavery.  since it is the feast of st. patrick, i started to put off joseph until tomorrow and pay more attention to the propers for the feast.  but then i realized that their stories had enough in common that they might illuminate each other.

so, joseph is seventeen when he is sold into slavery, just a year older than patrick.  both came from well-to-do families more accustomed to having slaves than being one.  both are outstanding dreamers.  both, in their youth, are less that perfect sorts of folks.  joseph is famously arrogant; the exact nature of patrick's big sin of an hour remains unknown to us.  patrick at least recognizes that he deserves his fate, that he had been sinful.  joseph's repentance of his attitude towards his brothers is not spoken, but made very explicit by their tearful reunion. 

in both of their lives, their period of slavery allows them to bring great benefits to many people.  unfortunately, in joseph's case, and perhaps this is part of his non-consciousness of his own attitudes towards his brothers, he ends up leading many others into slavery.  but, even for them, the children of israel in the larger sense, their period in bondage gives them a basis for compassion for other people.

the proper gospel for the day in the 1963 episcopal lesser fasts and feasts is from the sermon on the mount:

 ye have heard that it hath been said, thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.  but i say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; that ye may be the children of your father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.  for if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? and if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?  be ye therefore perfect, even as your father which is in heaven is perfect.

a bit more challenging response to st. patrick's day than drinking too much green beer--although i confess i do look forward to sharing a guiness with some friends tonight--but one with a much better after effect.

hanging out with abraham on his feast day.

 

i've been reading the book of genesis since epiphany, and i've reached the stories of abraham.  i may never get through them, they are so rich.  and since today is his feast, i thought it would be a good time to try to clarity some of my findings from his stories, and posting a blog usually helps me clarify my thought.

there are many books of varying value about abraham and the other genesis stories.  particularly i enjoyed reading bruce feiler's abraham:  a journey to the heart of three faiths.   feiler mentions that one of the things about abraham that is much noticed by jews today is that he argued with the holy one.  but it struck me that the reason abraham had the standing to argue, as he famously does when the holy one told him of his plans to destroy the cities of the plain, is that abraham had been faithful in following the holy one's command.  indeed again and again the biblical text says that abraham immediately did whatever he had been asked to do.  only when he is asked to send ishmael and hagar into the wilderness did he even wait until the next day.

this makes me wonder whether the first thing we, or at least i, might learn from abraham is that in order to become a friend of the holy one, whose voice he might recognize when i say "here am i," is to recognize his voice, and say "yes" to his requests.