Monthly Archives: June 2006

Online Liturgy Roundup

Here are some things that have been brought to my attention recently for one reason or another. bls is the source of a couple of them so thanks to her for those… The presence of an item here doesn’t mean I endorse it, it means I think it’s a good thing to know about. In no particular order, here are some liturgical resources online to be aware of:

Chad Wohler’s Books of Common Prayer. This one’s a no-brainer and I heartily endorse it. If you don’t know about this site, you should–I don’t care what denomination you are. Speaking of, I’d love to see other denominations do something like this with their worship books as well. [server problems today…GC related?]

Anglican Gradual and Sacramentary. This is a pretty massive project. I’m still trying to figure out what I think of this. Essentially, it’s an attempt by Affirming Catholicism folks to construct something like the Anglican Missal based on the American 1979 BCP and related uses (Lesser Feasts & Fasts/Occasional Services/etc.) In my opinion it falls short. Yes, it has extensive propers for a whole lot of days including lections, collects, secrets, postcommunions, etc. but it feels like a tack-on to the ’79 BCP rather than an organic whole. The propers are only a part of an Anglo-Catholic celebration. A larger part is the ceremonial and the prayers prayed privately by the priest. This is lacking that component as the Eucharistic liturgies are essentially from the BCP with only a few of the more standard Roman additions at innocuous points. Another thing that concerns me a bit is that so much of the additional material is from the 1974 Roman material. What’s the rationale for wanting to adopt modern Roman pratice? Anyway, there’s a lot here–some of it may be helpful.

Gregorian Liturgy. This is from a Tridentine Mass group in Bonn. Not for the faint of heart; you’ve got to know your psalm tones if you intend to try any of the Office material because they just give the traditional pattern–the incipit then the last few notes keyed to E U O U A E (from the last phrase of the Gloria Patria: …seculorum. Amen. If your totally hardcore you’ll be able to read their versions in traditional German notation (I can’t…). All in all, the main site is worth checking out even if your German is as rusty as mine. Many of the links go to the traditionalist English language Confraternity of Ss. Peter & Paul like this Breviary link which has parallel Latin and English.

The Anglican Breviary. Speaking of both Breviaries and people who want to be more Roman than the Romans, here’s the Anglican Breviary. The Breviary itself isn’t online, but the instructions for use are worth looking at.

Pointed Gospels. Here are Gospels pointed for singing. They are NRSV and (I believe) follow the BCP’s lectionary. Take the time to read the note; their tone varies a bit from that which is strictly traditional. They wanted theirs to have more musical interest which, frankly, isn’t the point of singing the Gospel. It should be sung to be better heard and understood, not so it can be performed. Annunciation and clarity ought to be paramount above all else. Actually, thy’ve got quite a lot of good links off this page but it has sound–so mute before you go there if you’re in a place where a chanting computer would be odd…

That’s all for now…

Carnival Announcement!

I’m announcing a blog carnival. Those who don’t know/aren’t sure what that is, it’s simply a collection of links to writings on a unified topic. And you have to eat cotton candy while you read them. This means anyone reading this may participate. If you choose to do so, just leave a comment to that effect here or email me at haligweorc hotmail with all appropriate punctuation.

Here’s the rationale…
In the build-up to General Convention, a view has been widely circulated beginning, I believe, with internet rhetoric and things like Kendall Harmon’s “Choose this day” video that there are really two religions in the Episcopal Church: one orthodox Christianity, the other anything goes Unitarian-Paganism that likes to take over Episcopal buildings. I’m always suspicious of simple dichotomies and this one is no exception. Now I see myself as being middle-of-the-road and my readership is fairly broad theologically-speaking. Some readers are more conservative, some more liberal, and others vary in ways that the conservative/liberal dichotomy doesn’t capture. My goal is to get a sense of where we are as individuals who take our faith seriously. What comes out in the end? Two religions or something else?

Here’s the topic…
The Carnival topic is Christian Identity. I’m inviting posts that wrestle with five topics–you can address anywhere from all to only one. My preference, of course, is to see you engage all five to get a holistic sense of how you construct Christian identity. Here are the five:

  • Canon

  • Creed

  • Apostolic Succession

  • catholicity

  • reformation

And yes, the last two are intentionally lower-case. Great tomes can and have been written on each of these topics; that’s not what we’re after. Indeed, I think that clarity can come with brevity–so I’m asking that you hold your response to around 1500 words (approximately 3 single spaced pages) allotting therefore about 300 words per topic if you’re going for even distribution. Entries can be reflective, occasional, systematic, apologetic, polemical, whatever–even a catena of quotes from revered authorities past or present (properly notated, of course). Anyone is welcome to play along. The Carnival itself will occur on (I’m being arbitary here…) June 28th. So, if you’re interested in participating, write something up according to these guidelines, post it on your blog, and let me know about it any time before then.

Word to the Republicans

I’m an official, registered, voting Republican. And yes, that makes me a serious minority among Episcopalians (and academics). (M and I typically just cancel out the other’s vote…)

My party’s been wasting a lot of time on the whole failed “Defense of Marriage” thing. Yes, it’s a shallow political move. I just wish it weren’t. Marriage is an important American institution and it should be preserved. Instead of scapegoating–how about a defense of marriage suggestion that might actually help marriages? Here’s my proposal…

Every couple receiving a valid civil marriage will receive a voucher for three free marital counseling sessions from a properly accredited provider good for two years from the date of the marriage.

IMO–this would be defending marriage. My logic goes something like this: It’s got to be tied to marriage, not divorce. Offering counseling for people in a divorce process is shutting the barn door after the cows have aready split. Relationships fall into their patterns in the first few years and if a couple learns to fight and disagree in appropriate and health ways then, I think it’d be far more effective. The other problem with tying a requirement to divorce is spousal abuse. If there is an abuse situation going on, delaying a divorce won’t help anything.

My other thought would be to ease the treasury a bit. Couples who do divorce would have to pay a “divorce tax”–in an amount equal to 1.5 counseling sessions. But again, I’m not sure that would be helpful or fair.

So, for what it’s worth, party, if you say you want to defend marriage, start thinking about how to go about it beyond pointing fingers…

Pet Peeve Correction

One of my pet peeves is popping up all over the place with General Convention right around the corner: experience as a criterion for theology. Let’s be real clear on what this is and what this isn’t.

Some Anglicans talk about Hooker’s stool, suggesting that theological reflection is equal parts Scripture, Tradition, and Reason. This is a modern construct. Hooker placed Scripture first as read through Tradition as aided by Reason.

Others talk about Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience. This was labelled the Wesleyan Quadralateral at the Methodist seminary where I did my MDiv. To the best of my understanding–and I skipped all the Theology of Wesley classes–this too is a modern construct approximating something vaguely Wesleyan. My sense of what Wesley meant when he said “experience” is not individual experience but the Church’s collective experience of the Holy Spirit. Again, I’m not enough of a Wesleyan to know what scope of “Church” he meant–local, denominational body, global-in-this-age or the Church as the collected Body of Christ throughout all ages.

Why the distinction? Because if we’re gonna split hairs about stuff, let’s be precise in how we go about it. You cannot invoke Reason–or, actually, Scripture or Tradition–without personal experience being an aspect of it. How we think, perceive, and comprehend is all conditioned by our experience. Whatever we know of Scripture and Tradition is filtered through our experience of it, of the world, and of what we have experienced others teaching us. Furthermore, our knowledge and understanding of Scripture and Tradition is conditioned by Reason.

So let’s just lose the claim that Experience and Reason are being used by one side in this dispute and not the other, shall we? What it is perfectly fair to argue about is the place of Reason and its admixture of personal experience and of Experience especially on the local church and denominational levels.

That clarification having been made, you may return to your regularly scheduled feuds.