This is a phenomenon that has needed a name for a long time and now it does. It’s a version of Godwin’s Rule of Nazi Analogies–but the current Anglican version. As Godwin’s Law projects that the longer an internet debate continues the likelihood grows that Nazis and/or Hitler will be invoked, so Arora’s Law projects that in any Anglican online debate the longer it proceeds the likelihood grows that Jack Spong will be mentioned.The whole thing is here… (h/t Thinking Anglicans)
Category Archives: Anglican
Confessions
I had a “Duh–obvious” moment this morning–you know, one of those moments where something that you’ve always known bubbles up in a new and interesting way and makes a bunch of connections that you’ve never quite seen before…
My recent thinking about the sacraments–especially Baptism and Eucharist–has been moving very much to their communal nature and the importance of the covenant community both signified and enacted through these rites. What struck me this morning is how much the Confiteor participates in these same ways of ritual sense-making in ways that the more usual Anglican forms of general confession don’t.
For those unfamiliar with the Confiteor, it is a form of general confession that within the old (pre-Vatican II) liturgical paradigm would be used at least three times a day: at Prime, at the prayers at the foot of the altar prior to Mass, and at Compline.
My first point is that in its normative form, it’s a conversation between the principal (priest, abbot, or other) and the congregation that goes beyond the basic dialogue format found in most modern confessions. That is, it establishes communal patterns up front.
Even more than that, though, the text is redolent with community. It functions by naming elements of the community, bringing them to the attention of those gathered, reminding them of the constitution of the assembly that includes the invisible as strongly as the visible. Here’s the text:
First, the person of the greatest dignity (technically known as the Foremost or Prelate, ie. not a Bishop only, but in a Choir of layfolk any Priest who happens to be present, or in a Choir of Priests, the Superior, etc.) says the Confiteor, thus:
I confess to Almighty God, to Blessed Mary Ever-Virgin, to blessed Michael the Archangel, to blessed John the Baptist, * to the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, to all the Saints, and to you, brethren, * that I have sinned exceedingly in thought, word, and deed, (he strikes his breast thrice, saying:) through my fault, through my own fault, through my own most grievous fault. * Therefore I beseech Blessed Mary Ever-Virgin, blessed Michael the Archangel, blessed John the Baptist, * the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, all the Saints, and you brethren, * to pray for me to the Lord our God.
And the choir answers with the Absolution, thus:
Almighty God have mercy upon thee, forgive thee thy sins, and bring thee to everlasting life.To which the Foremost responds:
R. Amen.After which the Choir says the Confiteor, thus:
I confess to Almighty God, to Blessed Mary Ever-Virgin, to blessed Michael the Archangel, to blessed John the Baptist, * to the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, to all the Saints, and to thee, Father * that I have sinned exceedingly in thought, word, and deed, (they strike their breasts thrice, saying:) through my fault, through my own fault, through my own most grievous fault. * Therefore I beseech Blessed Mary Ever-Virgin, blessed Michael the Archangel, blessed John the Baptist, * the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, all the Saints, and thee, Father, * to pray for me to the Lord our God.
And the Foremost then says the Absolution, thus:
Almighty God have mercy upon you, forgive you your sins, and bring you to everlasting life.
R. AmenAnd then he signs himself with the holy Sign (as does the Choir) as he says:
The Almighty and merciful Lord grant us pardon, † absolution, and remission of our sins.
R. Amen.
In the full form, then, the sequence of the communion of the saints all the way from the Trinity, the angels, down to the local community is not invoked once but four separate times. In doping so, the liturgy grounds our action—here our sinful action—in terms of the whole. In what we have done, we have reflected badly upon all, not just on ourselves. However, then we affirm the care, concern—mercy, really—and intercession of the whole on behalf of the individual.
Compare now the Anglican version, first in the classical form:
DEARLY beloved brethren, the Scripture moveth us in sundry
places to acknowledge and confess our manifold sins and wickedness; and that we
should not dissemble nor cloke them before the face of Almighty God our heavenly
Father; but confess them with an humble, lowly, penitent, and obedient heart; to
the end that we may obtain forgiveness of the same, by his infinite goodness and
mercy. And although we ought at all times humbly to acknowledge our sins before
God; yet ought we most chiefly so to do, when we assemble and meet together to
render thanks for the great benefits that we have received at his hands, to set
forth his most worthy praise, to hear his most holy Word, and to ask those
things which are requisite and necessary, as well for the body as the soul.
Wherefore I pray and beseech you, as many as are here present, to accompany me
with a pure heart and humble voice unto the throne of the heavenly grace, saying
after me:A general Confession to be said of the whole Congregation
after the Minister, all kneeling.ALMIGHTY and most merciful Father, We have erred and
strayed from thy ways like lost sheep, We have followed too much the devices and
desires of our own hearts, We have offended against thy holy laws, We have left
undone those things which we ought to have done, And we have done those things
which we ought not to have done, And there is no health in us: But thou, O Lord,
have mercy upon us miserable offenders; Spare thou them, O God, which confess
their faults, Restore thou them that are penitent, According to thy promises
declared unto mankind in Christ Jesu our Lord: And grant, O most merciful
Father, for his sake, That we may hereafter live a godly, righteous, and sober
life, To the glory of thy holy Name.
Amen.The Absolution or Remission of sins to be pronounced by the
Priest alone, standing: the people still kneeling.ALMIGHTY God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who
desireth not the death of a sinner, but rather that he may turn from his
wickedness and live; and hath given power and commandment to his Ministers, to
declare and pronounce to his people, being penitent, the Absolution and
Remission of their sins: He pardoneth and absolveth all them that truly repent
and unfeignedly believe his holy Gospel. Wherefore let us beseech him to grant
us true repentance and his Holy Spirit, that those things may please him which
we do at this present, and that the rest of our life hereafter may be pure and
holy; so that at the last we may come to his eternal joy; through Jesus Christ
our Lord.
And now a current form:
The Deacon or Celebrant says: Let us confess our sins against God and our neighbor.
Silence may be kept.
Minister and People: Most merciful God,we confess that we have sinned against you in thought, word, and deed,by what we have done,and by what we have left undone.We have not loved you with our whole heart;we have not loved our neighbors as ourselves.We are truly sorry and we humbly repent.For the sake of your Son Jesus Christ,have mercy on us and forgive us;that we may delight in your will,and walk in your ways,to the glory of your Name. Amen.
The Bishop, when present, or the Priest, stands and says
Almighty God have mercy on you, forgive you all your sins through our Lord Jesus Christ, strengthen you in all goodness, and by the power of the Holy Spirit keep you in eternal life. Amen.
While the texts are in the first person plural—“we”—it could just as easily be “I” with no change of meaning or theology… In contrast with the Confiteor, these come across as very, well, individualistic. It’s me and Jesus and while there might be a bunch of other people kneeling around, it’s still pretty much just me and Jesus…
I’ll have to chew on this a bit more to draw out the implications. My initial thought, however, is that the Confiteor seems to do a much better job of placing action, repentance, and forgiveness in view of the whole gathered covenant community, integrating it all much better in the context of the Body of Christ.
(Sources: Confiteor, 1662 MP Confession, and ’79 Eucharistic Confession.)
CWOB Continues at the Cafe
My latest post on CWOB is up at the Episcopal Cafe.
It seems like all I’m posting over there recently is material on CWOB… That certainly wasn’t my original intent. I was brought on to write primarily “spirituality” stuff like my posts on the canticles and psalms and on the place of liturgy in the Anglican life.
After a series of comments on a post there I had conceived a three post series that turned into four–this current item is the next to last. So, one more post then I’m moving on to other topics…
Eight Plainsong Masses (OJN)
I now have posted eight plainsong masses that Fr. John-Julian arranged, setting the words of the Rite II BCP to medieval settings. Please feel free to not just reference these but to use them as well.
The graduals, sequence, and tracts mentioned on the title page coordinate with the old BCP calendar; with the change to the RCL they are now out of date. Replacements are in the works but will not be available for quite a while…
One hindrance to the use of the masses may be that they—like the other files on the page—are in square-note plainsong notation. While square-note is (and should be) considered normative for writing plainsong, it clearly requires a congregation familiar with it—and few these days are. If anyone has the software and capability to transcribe these masses into the modern form of stemless notation used in contemporary hymnals to write chant (like the material in the front service music section of the ’82 Hymnal), please do so that these masses may be more broadly used and known.
As far as use goes, this material (and everything else here) falls under the Creative Commons license that appears on my side bar: you can use it and adapt it but must give attribution to Fr. John-Julian and the order, and you can’t sell the material or your adaptation (without contacting the author and making arrangements). Given the nature of the material, if you do use it I think it would be only fitting to include a prayer for the order in your Prayers of the People as well…
OJN Liturgical Materials
Fr. John-Julian has graciously allowed me to post some of the Order of Julian of Norwich‘s liturgical materials on my Trial Liturgies page.
At the moment, I have put up the order’s Offices of the Dead (which also includes a procession) and their use for Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament.
There is much more great material–much of it freshly translated and arranged by Fr. John-Julian himself–to go up, but it will appear in bits and pieces due to my rather full current schedule. I’ll let you know as items appear.
Once again, my heartfelt thanks to Fr. John-Julian. Please keep the order in your prayers and, if you are able to do so, consider a contribution to assist them in their work.
Update: I’ve already changed things around… Upon reflection I decided that it would be more fitting for the Materials from OJN to have their own page since they really aren’t “trial” liturgies—they’re “actual” liturgies in continuous use. So, for these liturgies, please visit my new Liturgies of the Order of Julian of Norwich page. (I’ll try and transfer the pertinent comments there too but haven’t tried doing that before…)
Dissertation Distraction Project N+4
I’ve been having an interesting discussion with Fr. Knisely in the comments of this post at the Cafe on major and minor doctrines and the authority of the Ecumenical Councils.
Add to that the recent thoughts from Fr. Jones on teaching the doctrines we hold…
So what doctrines do “we” hold? Or, what are the chief sources of authority for deciding doctrinal issues?
Folks who’ve been here a while know that I love to go back to Lancelot Andrewes on this one: 1 Canon, 2 Testaments, 3 Creeds, 4 Councils, 5 centuries and the Fathers who taught therein. And yet, as I look this list over, I find myself embarrassed by my general ignorance of the teachings of those four Ecumenical Councils. I know our major Christological definitions are in there–but what else? Furthermore, according to the classic Elizabethan Settlement,an Anglican heretic is one who contradicts these four Councils, making them a pretty important touchstone for what “we” believe.
So what do we do about this? There’s an ancient solution–or at least a big step in the right direction–for those who slept through the Ecumenical Council class in seminary or who didn’t have one altogether (yours truly among them). There’s a summary of the canons of the first seven councils (those recognized by the Romans, Orthodox, and Anglo-Catholics) called the Ancient Epitome which gives a line or two to indicate what each canon is up to. And–these are both contained and translated in the NPNF volume on the Councils.
It would be a relatively easy task to:
- Download the flat file of this volume from CCEL.org
- Write a macro/VBA script that would search for the text “ancient epitome” and then copy the paragraph where that was found and the next paragraph (i.e., the title, then the contents)
- Proofread for accuracy and clarity
- Add “new” epitomes for the ones that are unclear
- Format for ease of reading and reference
- Construct a thorough index/cross-reference
- Distribute as a PDF/Lulu Press publication
On the other hand–such a thing may already exist and I just don’t know about it…
Discussion Question on the Apostolic Faith
I ran across this recently and found it quite interesting. This is from the editor’s intro to the records of the Seven Ecumenical Councils in the Nicene/Post-Nicene Fathers series. See what you think…
The history of the Council of Nice has been so often written by so many brilliant historians, from the time of its sitting down to to-day, that any historical notice of the causes leading to its assembling, or account of its proceedings, seems quite unnecessary. The editor, however, ventures to call the attention of the reader to the fact that in this, as in every other of the Seven Ecumenical Councils, the question the Fathers considered was not what they supposed Holy Scripture might mean, nor what they, from à priori arguments, thought would be consistent with the mind of God, but something entirely different, to wit, what they had received. They understood their position to be that of witnesses, not that of exegetes. They recognized but one duty resting upon them in this respect—to hand down to other faithful men that good thing the Church had received according to the command of God. The first requirement was not learning, but honesty. The question they were called upon to answer was not, What do I think probable, or even certain, from Holy Scripture? but, What have I been taught, what has been intrusted to me to hand down to others? When the time came, in the Fourth Council, to examine the Tome of Pope St. Leo, the question was not whether it could be proved to the satisfaction of the assembled fathers from Holy Scripture, but whether it was the traditional faith of the Church. It was not the doctrine of Leo in the fifth century, but the doctrine of Peter in the first, and of the Church since then, that they desired to believe and to teach, and so, when they had studied the Tome, they cried out:
“This is the faith of the Fathers! This is the faith of the Apostles!…Peter hath thus spoken by Leo! The Apostles thus taught! Cyril thus taught!” etc.
Now—here’s Article XXI of the Articles of Religion as annoted by the current American BCP:
XXI. Of the Authority of General Councils.
[The Twenty-first of the former Articles is omitted; because it is partly of a local and civil nature, and is provided for, as to the remaining parts of it, in other Articles.]
The original 1571, 1662 text of this Article, omitted in the version of 1801, reads as follows: “General Councils may not be gathered together without the commandment and will of Princes. And when they be gathered together, (forasmuch as they be an assembly of men, whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and Word of God,) they may err, and sometimes have erred, even in things pertaining unto God. Wherefore things ordained by them as necessary to salvation have neither strength nor authority, unless it may be declared that they be taken out of holy Scripture.”
And now—two words to further stimulate conversation: Oral Torah.
Discuss…
The Anglican Rosary
I’ve never been a true fan of the Anglican Rosary. It’s always seemed like one of those half-measure flirts with our catholic roots that is neither one nor the other and ends up being a totally modern practice in search of a spirituality.
In the interest of full disclosure, I’ve never been sold on the classical rosary either(instructions here include the new “Luminous Mysteries” add by JP II)… Those who know me won’t be terribly surprised at my reason–it’s one of those “recent” innovations. You know, a new-fangled 13th century thing that didn’t seriously catch on until the end of the 15th century… (See here for details.)
However, Catholic in the Third Millennium brings to our attention a devotion using the Anglican Rosary that I can really get behind–a means of praying the St. Patrick’s Breastplate. This hymn has long been a favorite of mine and holds a lot of personal meaning for me. It’s associated of General, was sung at M’s ordination and was one of the few things that would put Lil’ G to sleep as a baby. I had the *whole* thing [midi alert!]–not just the few verses that appear in the hymnal–memorized from singing them nightly for several months. (I’ve since forgotten bits…)
In any case, this may actually move me to try my hand with the Anglican Rosary…
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…
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:
- Are there any Episcopal dioceses where the bishop has given permission for Benediction?
- How does your bishop handle Benediction (if at all)?
- Has anyone heard of a bishop disciplining diocesan clergy for doing Benediction?