I’m not a fan of the make-over “reality” tv shows. From the few I’ve had the misfortune to catch, I see what I consider a fundamental flaw in the process. Typically, the show begins by showing a person whose wardrobe has not been updated since the late ’80s. Yes, scary. By the end of the show, the person has been “transformed” into a hip, cutting-edge, fashionable modern person. My suspicion, however, is that in another twenty years, you could haul up the very same person and see some one whose wardrobe has not been updated since the early ’00s… My fear is that the trimmings change but the essence is left untouched.

I’ve been thinking about this especially as it applies to liturgy. My class has really helped my focus certain aspects of my liturgical thought especially as it applies to liturgical change in parishes. The point I’ve
found myself making over and over again to my students is this: there are no liturgical changes in a congregation–there are theological changes that have liturgical implications and repurcussions. We don’t do–or *shouldn’t* do liturgy or liturgical actions or rites because they’re “cool” or even “neat”–i.e., the trimmings, we do them because they are the communal expression of the local church’s theology–i.e., the essence. Because of this, one of the most important jobs that church leaders (which means clergy, vestry, and anyone who cares enough about the church to spend their time reading geeky religion blogs like this one) have is basic
catechesis–what do we do and why do we do it. We have to teach people the Gospel–that’s key–but also the the communal implications of the Gospel and how those implications about God and us come together in the liturgy. If “liturgical changes” are made they can and all too often are simply cosmetic and even if they mimic an authentic spiritual tradition without the theological heart and core they’re just as useless as a tv makeover.

Here endeth the sermon.
For now.

I just finished reading the Aeneid again. I do believe it’s an unwritten law that great Classical epics have to have abrupt endings… Virgil had the bad timing to die before he finished; I wonder what Homer’s excuse is for the Odyssey.

As with the Odyssey, I’m struck by the liveliness of the world that Aeneas and his buddies inhabit. Everywhere there are gods, sacred springs, nymphs, demi-gods, etc. It’s a fully populated world and a world in constant contact with the divine. Certainly the average Roman of the time didn’t necessarily think of their world that way–I’m thinking particularly of Seneca’s comment that nobody seriously believed that a man held the world on his
shoulders–but the worldview that Virgil paints is a very compelling one.

To a degree, I wonder how his conception of a world permeated with deity fed into the monastic worldview. Virgil was huge with the monks as Leclercq notes (Aside: if you have any interest in things monastic or contemplative
or historical you *must* read Leclercq’s _Love of Learning and Desire for God_ if you haven’t already…). There’s something of the medieval hagiographical material that feels much like how Virgil’s world feels. How dead our worldview feels in comparison…

Things here have been quiet; life off-line has not been.

M is taking a leave of absence from her parish. Our bishop is being very supportive and is going to assist her in locating a more healthy parish setting. In the long run, this is going to be a very good thing; in the short term it’s going to suck as we’re back down to one salary with expenses intended for two.

One bit of good news both financially and otherwise is that I’ll be teaching the main intro class for my secondary field next term and am looking forward to that. And yes, de doctrina *will* be a required text…

So–please keep us, and especially M, in your prayers as we negotiate this time.

Life has sucked the past few weeks and I’ve mostly been off-line. Please keep M in your prayers

The class is going well, at least. I’m running it fairly fast and loose and encouraging lots of participation from the students to drive our conversations. I think there were some fears from some quarters (myself included) that it’d be too…medieval/Ritual Notes or something. I think we’re doing a good job of both displaying the wealth of the tradition and keeping it applicable to people’s local congregational settings.

Haven’t read the bio of ++Akinola described by Thinking Anglicans and don’t intend to. What strikes me odd–yet again–about what TA reported are the comments attributed to +Ackerman. What about this situation do Anglo-Catholics not get?? From what I understand, ++Akinola is about as protestant as it gets…why laud him as a savior figure?

Check this out: CanticaNova Publications.

I commend to you Fr. Gerth’s comments in the last communique from Smokey Mary on inclusive language and the proliferation of trial liturgies. For those unfamiliar with him, he knows the liturgy backwards and forwards, reveres the tradition without being an antiquarian, and stands solidly within the tradition of orthodox Christianity. I particularly appreciate his take on how the traditional language can provide solace for those damaged by abuse, patriarchy, et al. I’d even wager that seeing Christ as the true high priest may also be a way to call into question and relativize the power-hungry in purple shirts and the harm our political wranglings are inflicting on the Body of Christ.

I had my first class today. I only got through half the stuff I planned to cover but that’s ok since I budgeted time at the beginning of next class for spill-over. It was great; I had fun–I think they had fun. The test is how many come back for the next class session… :-D

St. Francis today. Yay, Francis! M is big for him–I’ll still take Benedict anyday…

Cool liturgical mp3’s at bls’s place.

Speaking of music–let’s see: drugs, depression, failing/ed relationships, driving guitar work, religious overtones…sounds like some goth rock to me! M got me the new Evanescence album. Which got left at work due to meetings all day and no chance to go back to the office before heading home. I may give a quick review of it later–so far I like it.

Life is short. We only have so much time to appreciate its richness in all its varieties. Life is too short to drink perfumed rice water that is foisted upon the American consumers (who really ought to know better) as “beer”–particularly the mispelled variant known as “‘lite’ beer.”

Mini-rant inspired by Lee at Ipsum Verbum…

The on-going soap opera that is the Anglican Communion continues. Shortly
after exoneration for abandonment of communion, +Schofield turns right
around draws up plans to do just that. The Archbishop of South Africa
preached a great sermon on what sums up for me being an Anglican. Catch all
this over at Simon’s (Thinking Anglicans)–I’m trying to ignore it all best
I can…

My class starts tomorrow so I have liturgical cycles on the brain. Oh–and
the 25th is the equinox in the *Julian* calendar. I doubt this needs to be
said in this company, but the church year–like all good liturgy–is not
just about what happens on Sunday; it’s a comprehenesive way of life life
entangled in the mystery of Christ. That’s what I’d rather focus on today…

_________________________________________________________________
Share your special moments by uploading 500 photos per month to Windows Live
Spaces
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.get.live.com/spaces/features

The Daily Office Rant is coming but this has been on my mind a while and I thought I’d just throw it out there. The expression “Prayer book
Anglo-Catholic” or even “Prayer book Anglican” is, I believe, English in
origin. It’s not American. That makes a pretty big difference. Remember
that the *official* English BCP is none other than the 662—especially since the 1928 attempt was kicked back by Parliament. As a result, England has always had more leniency concerning supplemental and other books. Even the new “official” book is not technically “official”… To be a “Prayer book Anglo-Catholic”, then, was to be one who followed the 1662 rather than the English Missal or other texts (a la the Directorium Anglicana…).

For someone on this side of the pond to call themselves a “Prayer book Anglican” or whatever—what does that really mean? It seems after the ’79 BCP that the original and current meanings of the term are somewhat at odds. The ’79 follows the mainstream of ecumenical liturgical thought in the halcyon days after Vatican II and the attempt to re-enthrone the 4th century—but in doing so it makes some changes distinctly out of line from the classical Anglican tradition represented by the 1662 and the 1549 books.

So—where are we in this? If you’re a “Prayer book” person, what sort are you
and why??