Someone else has taken up my usual refrain at the Episcopal Cafe… I firmly believe that the more we talk about these things and bring the Office to people’s attention, the more will come to appreciate it.
Update: I have now added a new page on Promoting the Daily Office. It does not yet contain any new material, but it does gather together the Office stuff in a more convenient package.
The only part of the whole ghostwriting-for-bishops thing that I can’t understand is—out of all the bishops in the Anglican Communion, why haven’t any contacted me to help them? I’m available too! I’ve even got some lovely boilerplate about reviving the Offices, Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament, and a liberal and gracious implementation of 2000’s Resolution B-042 that I could drop into any minor communiques that need a little more spice… ;-)
The editors who write the headlines at the Episcopal Cafe have decided that my native genre is the encomium; my previous post received the title: “In Praise of the Daily Office” and now my latest is entitled: “In Praise of the Longest Psalm“…
In working on this piece I have been doing some thinking about where I am with the Psalms, particularly as regards the whole “monastic” vs. “cathedral” understanding of how to pray them. These terms arose a few decades ago but I know them best from Paul Bradshaw’s great book Two Ways of Praying (which I heartily recommend). As grand caricatures, these two classifications work, but lived liturgy never fits itself into such neat categories.
As a student of lectionaries, I find it more helpful to back off these terms and to return to the two main impulse that direct Scripture selection. One is the impulse to read in a way that is timely or apt (roughly corresponding to the “cathedral” style); the other is the impulse to read comprehensively (roughly corresponding to the “monastic”).
Since I’ve started doing the Offices years ago my preference has always been for the comprehensive and therefore my preferred way of reading the psalms is in course through Cranmer’s original 30-day pattern contained in the BCP’s psalter. Recently, however, I’ve been gaining an appreciation for using selected psalms, especially when memorized, in conjunction with the monthly rota. So, I’m trying to hold to the Prayer book offices as my mainstay with its comprehensive round, but supplementing it with selected psalms as in the Anglican Lauds that I pray on my commute.
I’d also like to—in the spirit of the EC post—try adding in some Little Hours through the day that use Ps 119 as well. We’ll see…
The Collects are up at the Liturgies of the Order of Julian of Norwich page. This completes the text I received entitled “The Divine Office according to the Use of the Order of Julian of Norwich.” I plan to add the Office Hymnal next in a format that will mesh with the Offices so that the whole set can be conveniently printed out (front-to-back ideally) and used with a minimum of book-juggling.
Following Josh’s excellent advice I’ve added more clutter to my side-bar… Down below the “Pages” box is now a “Pray the Office Online” box that has links to a few of the best online Office sites I know. If there are others that should be up but aren’t, let me know.
Once again over at the Liturgies of the OJN page, Fr. John-Julian’s plainchant customary is up. It’s a brief guide on how to sing chant and I added a short bit about the pause (caesura) at the asterisk in the psalms.
Over on the Liturgies of the Order of Julian of Norwich page, I have posted a PDF of the order’s plainchant psalter. It’s in the Daily Office section under the hours. Be warned, it’s a fairly big PDF (8.5 mb).
I still need to add the pointed collects and the Office hymns, then this material will be complete.
Over dinner last night, M mentioned a large Baptist church in the area that serves us as a landmark. Upon hearing it mentioned Lil’ G responded:
“We don’t go to church there; they don’t even like Mary!”
A story came across the email this morning about the state of the Episcopal Church’s seminaries. Unfortunately, this confirms everything that I’ve been thinking and gleaning from anecdotal evidence.
I hope to graduate in May with the intent of (eventually) teaching in an Episcopal seminary. I’m starting to wonder about the long-term viability of that plan.
Fr. Haller has an interesting post up where he looks at current Anglican issues in terms of realists and idealists. I agree with much that he writes, but I’m not sure I agree with this one… I think I can sense what he’s trying to set up, but it’s not quite there yet. One difficulty with the post is his initial rhetorical decision: to make the liberals the realists and the conservatives the idealists. In my experience, the liberals I know tend to be the idealists, then attempt to impose their ideals on those around them. I’m not saying conservatives don’t do this, I just think that both groups have both idealists and realists in them.
He presents a binary list of options. But, as I read through them, I found myself not only choosing freely from both, but just as frequently wishing for options not offered. Here are a few I offered in my comment–with a few new additions:
eschatology: sacramental
mood: optative
goal: maturity
pedagogy: experiental (i.e., liturgical)
gospel: Matthew
ecclesia: militans
theological school: benedictine
the church: “you are Christ’s body, and individually members of it”
creation story: John 1
I keep hearing about this spectrum but in an important sense…I’m not on it!
I’ve said before, I’m a moderate by default because I don’t fall into the camps described. Furthermore, I don’t think either of two camps should be the goal. To me, Anglicanism is about a set of boundaries defined broadly by the literal sense of the historical creeds and defined more narrowly (but still fairly broadly) by the theology encoded in the prayer book. I don’t want either liberals or conservatives to shoehorn me into their dogmatic statements; I’d much rather they join me in worshiping in the beauty of holiness and in works of mercy.
In short, I’d really like the conversation to move beyond the binary. We need to be challenged by those on all sides. All those who confess Christ crucified have something to teach me about loving and serving him and my neighbor. I need to be challenged by the “liberals” and the “conservatives” and by all those who don’t fit into either of these for my own growth and correction(…let the righteous smite me in friendly rebuke…)–and I’ll return the favor too.
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)