Author Archives: Derek A. Olsen

More on CWOB

A new entry on the current CWOB (Communion Without Baptism) discussion so ably chronicled by bls (plus updated addenda of course…) has appeared this morning at the Episcopal Cafe.

Dr. Deirdre Good from GTS has posted a most thought-provoking work on hospitality. This is, of course, a virtue constantly emphasized in Benedict’s Rule that reminds us that love of neighbor is only realized when enacted–especially as we greet Christ in the person of the stranger. In this reflection, Dr. Good presents the open table as a central practice of Christian hospitality.

I like her reflection–but I’m not ultimately convinced. The Eucharist is not just a meal–it is a ritual meal. Christians believe that there is something categorically different between eating this bread and drinking this wine and eating other bread, drinking other wine. A non-Christian would presumably not agree. As Anglicans we believe that Christ is truly present in this meal in a way not found in others. I’m feeling something around this that I can’t articulate with the precision I’d like yet–but it’s something like this: If we believe that Christ is really present do we take the presence of divinity so lightly? So much so that we do not even warn those who are about to take it into their own bodies? Is this a domestication of divinity–an assumption of safety–that attempts to collapse an encounter with the Wholly Other?

Ok! I’ll Put Up a Benediction Liturgy!

I’ve been looking at my Google click-throughs… It seems that a rite of Benediction is desired for the trial liturgy page by more than a few. I’ll try and get to it before too very long.

(But how’s that for Fruedian slips–when I first typed the title it said “Benedictine” rather than “Benediction”…)

Actually–I have a bit of work to do over there… I need to correct typos that have been found so far, I need to post an adaptation of the Office of the Dead used as a liturgy for Memorial Day, I need to post seasonal variations for the Anglican Lauds & Vespers…

Oy… It won’t get done until ch. 4 gets finished–sorry!

Random Pedagogy Thought

If I ever get to teach an advanced exegesis class on a book of the NT where a knowledge of Greek is presumed (like a PhD-level course), I’ll not use Nestle-Aland/UBS as my base text. Rather, I’ll have them read (at least in part) from an uncial codex–preferably Vaticanus if it’s one of the gospels…

The CWOB Position

After looking at the comments both here and at the Cafe, I’ve come to the realization that most defenders of CWOB wouldn’t really see that piece as a criticism of the practice. Indeed, some may well be wondering what the one has to do with the other. As far as I’m concerned, that goes to show how different the starting places may be between those who stand for and against CWOB. Annie’s comments below have been helping me get a better sense of where that position is invested. What I will try to do in this post is to sketch a fairly accurate picture of what the supporters of CWOB hold in regard to this specific topic. So, let’s be clear on a few things–I don’t hold this position; my starting place is what I wrote in the Cafe piece–a fairly traditional catholic sacramental mysticism. On the other hand, I also don’t want to caricature this position either–if this is to be a real discussion then building up straw men to tear down completely defeats the purpose. Thus, I’m trying to understand what would motivate a thoughtful Episcopalian to hold CWOB and what theological premises might underlie that–whether consciously or not.

I think that the starting place for the position is (1) a conviction that the church and it’s clergy have no business serving as gate-keepers that keep seekers away from God’s mercy and grace.

Based on this premise, they (2) see an insistence on Baptism as a hindrance keeping a seeker who has been touched by the Spirit in a service from immediately coming forward and partaking in God’s grace through the Sacrament of the Altar.

As they see it, then, (3) an insistence on Baptism is a new form of legalism that keeps people from seeking and finding God.

Update:  The main biblical warrant that they use is (4) the notion of the eschatological banquet, most clearly put forth in the middle verses of Isa 25. From there, (5) they point to the feeding miracles of Jesus regarding them [correctly in my book…] as (a) connected to the eschatological banquet and (b) eucharistic in nature. Because Jesus feeds all who come to him without regard for their status, (6) it is concluded that we should do likewise. Thus, (7) if Jesus is the host of our eucharistic feasts then–like him–we should invite all without regard to the table.

Are these seven premises accurate construals of the position held by CWOB supporters?

On African Bishops

Okay, I may well have been wrong before–with the announcement of a North American Ugandan bishop it seems like there may well be a coherent plan that the “Global South” bishops are following to get a replacement province in place before September 30th so that on October 1 they can demand a new Anglican entity in North America.

If we are moving towards this new flat-earth (Friedman style) Anglicanism where we can all select the bishops we serve under regardless of continent or diocesan boundaries, ++Schori may have to worry about losing me to an African bishop… I quite liked this sermon which arrived over the wires the other day from ++Ndungane. Imagine, a primate who keeps his proclamation centered on the love of God, is open to modern (responsible) biblical interpretation, AND openly confesses a creedal understanding of who Jesus is…

Communion Without Baptism Discussion

My latest post is up at the Episcopal Cafe. It takes on the issue of Communion without Baptism. I feel strongly that this is a critical issue for the church to discuss. Thus–if you feel comfortable revealing your name per the Epoiscopal Cafe’s policy, please comment there; if you do not, then feel free to have the conversation here pseudonymously.

I won’t be around much today, regretably, but y’all know the protocol here: comment as you like, feel free to disagree, just be respectful to one another…

The Weekend

We had a great–though completely exhausting–weekend.

Saturday was The Party; Lil’ G is turning 4 this week and we had a big party for G in conjunction with one of the other girls at her daycare who was also turning 4. The kids had great fun. It was at a sort of place I never knew existed until last year–essentially a big recreation hall with giant inflatables specifically for children’s parties. As for the adults, a few knew each other–but most didn’t. We only see each other in passing at drop-off in the morning except for those who live near each other or who have older children of an age. I quickly labeled it: Suburban Hell, Party Edition. That’s not to say M and I didn’t know anybody–Anastasia came bringing Kizzy and Thumper, and they came over to the house after the party concluded. All in all, a fun–if slightly surreal–time.

There’s a post in me somewhere about princesses and the marketing of northern European mythology. For those without preschool and primary school girls, princesses are a huge industry. All of the girls know all of the princess. The Disney princesses, that is. And the stories–as Disney tells them…or Barbie…or whoever is doing the packaging. What I find odd is that I see in and through these princess narratives bits of Germanic and Scandinavian epic cycles and elements. On one hand I’m glad something of these ancient stories is being passed down; on the other, they appear in their altered state for the sake of selling units that contribute to sucking children into a consumer culture that undercuts the very virtues, values, and realities encoded in those epics. Maybe we should sic Dr. Nokes on it as a warped materialistic form of medievalism…

Father’s day was grand. I grilled steaks, played with the girls and received–not a tacky tie–but an iTunes card and this: The English Office

A review will be forthcoming…

Benediction Question

The on-going motu proprio discussion thread has made its way around to Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament (the paraliturgical adoration of Jesus in the consecrated host most often attached to Solemn Evensong) and has brought up questions for me on use and official policies.

As we all know, the BCP is the official source for all public liturgies within the Episcopal Church supplemented by the Book of Occasional Services.

Neither of these contain Benediction.

That means that to officially do Benediction, the parish must receive permission from the bishop or else do it under the radar.

My sense is that most bishops turn a blind eye to parishes doing Benediction—but I don’t know that for sure. So, here are my questions:

  1. Are there any Episcopal dioceses where the bishop has given permission for Benediction?
  2. How does your bishop handle Benediction (if at all)?
  3. Has anyone heard of a bishop disciplining diocesan clergy for doing Benediction?

Dissertation Update

The Original Plan…

The plan coming out of my year-end review at the beginning of May was to try and have a full draft before I start teaching again in the Fall. At that point I had a mostly finished draft of ch 1 and a large and diffuse ch 2 that would be divided into two manageable and logically structured chapters. Ch 2 would become a comparison of modern academic and medieval monastic culture, ch 3 would become an exposition on the liturgical practices that shape early medieval monastic interpretation. The hard work would be chs 4 and 5. Each of these would be split in half. Each of these halves would tackle a Matthean text, walk through representative modern interpreters, look at Ælfric’s sermon on the same, reconstruct and analyze the liturgical environment, then synthesize what I found.

To keep on schedule I’d essentially have to do one of these halves a month…

I just got back from a meeting with Fr. Director before he heads out of state for several weeks. He has looked with favor upon the results of my most recent work; while some minor editing and the reworking of one page need to be done–my first half chapter is complete.

Weighing in at a healthy 29 pages (and 109 footnotes) my analysis of the first pericope is done. And I’m still more or less on schedule.

Why We Rock… (h/t Anastasia ;-))

I’m quite pleased with my progress since my review. It’s not been terribly easy going; I’ve been working 65 to 70 hour work-weeks and writing in addition to that, reserving my weekends for M and the girls. Of course, if you do the math on that you’ll see two things–first, I’m not sleeping a whole lot and second, I’m not home a whole lot. Most days I’m there for an hour and a half for dinner between jobs, then arrive back after midnight to write an hour or two before snatching some sleep and doing it all over again.

What this means, of course, is that during the week M is by herself with both girls during their entire waking hours (The hour/hour-and-a-half I’m home hardly counts as parenting…). And working on finding a job. And writing sermons for supply work. And paying all the bills, maintaining the household, buying all the groceries (with two wild ones in tow), etc…

I do try and give my entire attention to the girls and M on the weekends–but without sleep I’m not exactly my usual cheery self… I usually find myself spending the day with the girls and only getting to spend time with M in the evening when we’re both completely worn out.

This whole time has not been an easy one for M at all and she has done an amazing job trying to juggle everything she has going on. There is absolutely no way I could get half of what I get done without all of the work she puts into it. I literally could not do it without her. I don’t thank her enough for everything that she does–so here’s a big public thank you for everything that you do, M! I love you!