Monthly Archives: November 2012

SCLM: Initial Meeting

So—I’ve now had experienced my first meeting of the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music. I’ve been processing it now, both figuratively and literally. That is, I was appointed secretary so I’ve been literally processing the meeting by compiling my notes into a coherent set of minutes.

It’s an interesting group. On the balance, it’s very much weighted to the “liturgy” side rather than the “music” side. Of the members gathered, only two are full-time church musicians—there is a third who was unable to join us this time. Of course, two of the priests are quite musical as well and others of us have interests in the music area. Nevertheless, out of an appointed group of 12 that’s not too many. Musically, their interest and passion is in looking outside of the box (particularly the box represented by the ’82 hymnal) and gathering resources for world music.

On the liturgical side of things, I got only a slight sense of where people were. Clearly there are a range of views represented—as is proper—and, not surprisingly, I find myself on the more conservative side of the represented spectrum. Obviously, I don’t know how things were in the past, but I don’t think that the Commission in its current configuration can be accurately described as being united behind any one particular agenda.

Most of what we did was business stuff. We elected officers, hashed out priorities and budget requests, and tried to figure out meeting times. (And trust me, working out meeting times among 18 very full schedules is not an easy task!) Needless to say, our main priorities are those directed to us by General Convention. The four big areas that will require and demand most of our attention this triennium are 1) feedback and continued theological work on the rite for same-sex blessings, 2) work on resourcing congregational song, 3) continued work on Holy Women, Holy Men, and 4) revision of the Book of Occasional Services and materials heading into EOW (like the liturgies on the adoption of children and the creation materials). Other items that are not as front-and-center (but on which we still hope to get good work done) include material for combating Christian anti-Judaism particularly with reference to interpreting lectionary texts, criteria for acceptable biblical translations, and the electronic publication of resources.

While I’ll be involved with all of these, I signed up to work specifically on HWHM, Christian anti-Judaism, and electronic publication. While the working groups have been identified, the heads of the groups have not.

Clearly lots went on and I have thoughts and opinions on the meeting for which this is not an appropriate forum. I do want to say a little about meeting people. I’m really glad that it was a joint meeting gathering a whole lot of people into one group.  I had the opportunity to meet in person many whose names have become very familiar to me over the past six or so years. I got to meet Jim Naughton in the flesh for the very first time! The Presiding Bishop addressed us and I did pass her in the hall once—nothing to report there. Gay Jennings, on the other hand, I did cross paths with several times. She comes across as a very straight-shooter and as being quite grounded; I liked what I saw of her. In passing, I met Marshall Scott, Susan Snook, reconnected with Sam Candler, and met a number of readers. I enjoyed meeting my whole group; we’re an interesting lot but I think we’ll work well together. In particular, I got to meet and share meals with two people I’ve been wanting to meet for some time—Dr. Louis Weil, liturgy professor at CDSP, and Gregory Howe, custodian of the prayer book.  Here we are in a small camera phone pic: (from left to right—Louis Weil, Gregory Howe, and me)

 

One thing that I noticed overall across all of the many folks gathered and which I’ll probably write about further was a relative dearth of young laypeople. Liza Anderson and I were noting that so many of the younger folks there were ordained. It made me wonder if we, as a church, have succumbed to the notion that the clerical estate is the proper state for anyone that interested in church. Alternately, it underscores the difficulties that we laypeople face in participating in leadership: clergy can either get time off to travel to meetings like this or they’re on the clock while doing it. Me—it’s vacation time from work that then takes away from what’s available to spend with my wife and kids. (And I’m just glad I’m not an hourly employee anymore or it would mean lost wages as well!) At this point I have no point—I’m just putting out an observation that I hope to reflect on at leisure.

One last thing which falls under “business”… Regarding Holy Women, Holy Men, I would like to ask for your help. I’ve expressed my own opinions on the project, its overall shape, and some of its specifics both here and elsewhere. The resolution voted on at Convention (A051) directs its third resolve thus: “that the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music continue to seek responses from the wider Church during the coming triennium.”

I’m looking for your response here.

What do you like about it? What don’t you like about it? What do you find problematic about it? Where do you see it as an improvement over Lesser Feasts & Fasts?

Quick Note on the Christmas Proclamation

I have a post to post in the next day or two on my initial meeting with the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music and my thoughts coming out of that. In the meantime, a topic has popped up on the Society of Catholic Priests list that might be edifying beyond that group.

A question was asked about the Christmas Proclamation—what kind of beast is it, what is to be done with it, and where is the best place and time to use it?

Here’s my take…

This proclamation was originally part of the martyrology. In the intentional liturgical communities of the medieval period—monastic establishments, priories, cathedrals, etc—the office of Chapter functioned both as a quasi-business meeting and a liturgical office. One of the components was the reading of the martyrology which informed those present of the saints who would be celebrated on the coming liturgical day. Outside of these environments (and even there over time) it was collapsed into the Office of Prime. So—this was the proclamation’s original habitat. It’s properly an Office “thing” rather than a Mass “thing.” Hence, you’ll not find it in the missals.

What do we do with it? I’m personally in favor of re-purposing good liturgical material as long as it’s done within the scope of prayer book theology and does not do violence to the rite. As was noted, the classical form of this is based on a faulty understanding of biblical dating and geological science. While I appreciate the intention and poetry of the original form, it ties us liturgically to a stance on the Bible and science that we just don’t believe. The version put out by the US Council of Catholic Bishops adheres much better to our own theology and biblical understanding.  The St Meinrad version mentioned by Fr. Steve Rice is different but takes the same factors into account: http://www.saintmeinradmusic.org/downloads/ChristmasProclamation.pdf

The notes in the bishops’ version suggest putting the proclamation after the initial greeting. That’s one option. I think a better option is to include it with any para-liturgical devotions before the service. For instance, a common custom is a Christmas carol hymn-sing before the Midnight Mass concluding with a blessing/censing of the creche—this would fit in perfectly and naturally at that point.

Fr. Tobias Haller recommended that his usual practice was to sing it (or have it sung by the deacon if you have a deacon who can sing) at the door before the processional hymn which is an excellent place for it as well.

Heading Out

I’m on my way to my first meeting of the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music since my appointment. I’ll know a lot more about the scope of the appointment this time next week! I’m not going to speculate on what I will or won’t be able to blog about. However, I do know that my computer access will be quite limited and the breviary will have to live without me the next few days.

More later…

Books of Hours: Scripture Content

I’m taking a quick break from posting on the images of the Books of Hours to say a little about the scriptural content of the books. This is, of course, one of the “protestant” questions about the BOH—how much “pure” Scripture was contained within these quintessentially catholic devotions in the late medieval period.

Again, levels will vary based on what items are included. That having been said, here’s a run-down based on Leroquais’ categories:

Essential

Little Hours of the BVM: [Matins] Pss 95, 8, 19, 24 (Ps 51 was printed here in the Sarum books as well as a Lenten alternative to the Te Deum); [Lauds] Pss 93, 100, 63, 67, 148-150; Dan 3:34-67 (Benedicite); Luke 1:68-79 (Benedictus) [Prime] Pss 54, 117, 118; [Terce] Pss 120-122; [Sext] 123-125; [None] Pss 126-128; [Vespers] Pss 122-126; Luke 1:46-55 (Magnificat); [Compline] Pss 13, 43, 129, 131, 130; Luke 2:29-32 (Nunc Dimittis)

The Penitential Psalms: Pss 6, 32, 38, 51, 102, 130, 143

 Office of the Dead: [Placebo] Pss 116, 120, 121, 130, 138, 146; Luke 1:46-55 (Magnificat); [Dirige] Pss 5-7, 25, 27, 40-42, 51, 65, 63, 67, 148-150, 30, 142; Job 7:16-21; 10:1-12, 18-22; 13:23-28; 14:1-6, 13-16; 17:11-15; 19:20-27; Isa 38:10-20 (Song of Hezekiah); Luke 1:68-79 (Benedictus)

Secondary

Sequences: John 1:1-14; Luke 1:26-38; Matt 2:1-12; Mark 16:14-20

John’s Passion: John 18:1–? (I’ve found the incipit, but the three books I’ve looked at don’t contain it…)

Hours of the Holy Spirit: TBD?

Hours of the Cross: TBD? (For these two, I haven’t found any clear references. When I turned to one of the books to glance at the Psalms of the Holy Spirit office I found what looked like the incipit of Ps 1—but not the rest of it. Where would that be? I can’t imagine you’re only supposed to use the incipt. I think these two will require some additional investigation…)

Accessory Texts

The Gradual Psalms: Pss 120-143

The Commendations: Pss 119, 139

Psalter of (Ps.) St Jerome: Extracts  from all of the psalms, but containing Ps 51 in its entirety.

Psalms of the Passion: Pss 22-31:5

Initial Thoughts

Clearly, there are a lot of psalms going on! Not all of them, but certainly most. Furthermore, there’s a certain amount of repetition going on. (Note the overlap between the Vespers & Nones of the BVM with the Gradual Psalms.) This is a reminder that specific sections were used for specific devotions—no page turning was needed to flip to a psalm contained elsewhere in the book.

In terms of non-psalm content, there’s not a whole lot; there are extracts from Job for the Offices of the Dead and then the bits from each Gospel. As far as bits go, though, they’re not bad choices: we get the pre-existent Christ from John, the Incarnation from Matthew and Luke, the promises of the Post-Resurrection Christ from Mark, and the Passion itself from John. Again, as we see in the creeds and elsewhere, there is an emphasis on the narratives that relate to the core doctrines—less on teaching materials.

The English prymers tend to follow these selections. Some of the early protestant works add in quite a few more biblical canticles, though. There’s one very interesting outlier that deserves additional study: while the psalms in the protestant Marshall and other books mirror those of the classic catholic books, the psalm choices of Bishop Hilsey in his moderately catholic work are quite different. I don’t know why yet…

Announcement #3: Daily Office on iDevices!

(More) Big news!

Forward Movement has released their very first mobile app; it’s available for both the iPhone and the iPad. Named Forward Day by Day after their main product, it contains the full text of not only the Forward Day by Day devotional but also a full-featured—and customizable—Daily Office application!

As I mentioned before, Scott Gunn approached me a while back about adapting the St Bede’s Breviary code. With the help of an internet co-conspirator, we did the Daily Prayer site, but now the iPhone version is officially out.

And it looks great!

What we’ve got here is the regular BCP Office as you’ll find it on the breviary, but with a more limited set of options. You won’t find your Marian devotions here, but it’ll let you switch between rites and kalendars and a few other things.

The full details are laid out here in the official press release. It retails for $6.99 and that includes the full text of Foward Day by Day in addition to the awesome Office stuff and the kalendar extras we’ve built in, etc.  If you have an iDevice, you really need to get yourself this app… Click here to go to the iTunes app section and get yourself one! (And, yes, as part of the development team, I do earn a small amount from each sale so each one you buy is like a little thank-you note to the beautiful and long-suffering M who wonders out loud if I’m doing anything useful  at that computer… :-D)

If you’re like M and me, though, and have an Android device—I’m told that’s in the works and should be out in a little bit.

On All Souls

The modern church dearly needs All Souls. In particular, we need to see and understand that there is a distinction between All Saints and All Souls. Especially in a time when the Baptismal Covenant is being highlighted as an important part of our ecclesiology, we must be able to point out and explain the difference between the two days.

Baptism joins us to Christ, to the church, to the company of all faithful people. It invites us to the life hid in God.

It invites us to the life hid in God—but it does not thereby accomplish that life within us.

Baptism is a covenant. It is a set of promises. Christ makes promises to us, and we know that his word is trustworthy and true. But we also make promises. Our word isn’t as good.

Our promises—the ones that we take upon ourselves in Baptism—are confirmed in the cruciform life of discipleship. All Saints holds before our eyes the life of discipleship in every age and condition, and reminds us that discipleship does not end at the edge of the grave. The work of love, care, and intercession continues.

All Souls reminds us of the importance of Baptism, but also acknowledges that Baptism—indeed, salvation—is not the end of the Christian life. It is the beginning.

Does this mean that All Souls is the feast of the “also ran”? That it is the day for second-class Christians? It can come across that way, particularly when we only see from this perspective in contrast to All Saints. But there’s another important side of it as well. All Saints is a party; it’s a rejoicing. All Souls gives us a liturgical moment for grief. Yes, we have faith in the resurrection. But just as much we are embodied emotional beings who miss those whom we love and see no longer. We can’t pretend that death is all party. Death is pain; death is tragedy. Some deaths are better than others, but no death is easy. All Souls gives us space to offer and honor our sadness and grief.

This year is particularly poignant in our house following the death earlier in the year of M’s grandfather, Horace. His was a good death following a truly exemplary life.  As I celebrate these days this year, I can’t help but find him in both observances. A man virtually bristling with the Christian virtues, one who formed M strongly in the faith, and supported her in her ministry when no one else in her family did, he has been a beacon of Christ to us. I can’t help but believe that he is among the blessed—and that’s not a thing I say easily or lightly. On the other hand, we still mourn his passing; we weep for us and for the Christ-pointing presence that we lost. I thought of him last night at mass, and will remember him again tonight.

May all the faithful departed rest in peace—and may all the blessed company of heaven pray for us.

For your observance of the day, a BCP-style Morning Prayer for the Dead and Evening Prayer for the Dead are available. Also available are the traditional Offices for the Dead in Rite I (Matins, Lauds, Vespers) and in Rite II (Matins, Lauds, Vespers).