Advent Days 2006

As the beautiful and mysterious season of Advent approaches, I link to some good new articles at Full Homely Divinity.

An excerpt from "Rediscovering Advent":

As the culture of the Church yields more and more to the priorities and the attitudes of the secular culture, and as Christmas becomes for many people a secular holiday that begins at Thanksgiving (at the end of November in the U.S.) and comes to an end shortly after dinner on December 25th, it becomes more and more difficult to observe the season of Advent with any integrity, even within the Church. Christmas concerts, Christmas parties, even Christmas services of lessons and carols are held from early December on, building to an almost anti-climactic series of services on December 24th and 25th. Those who insist on waiting to celebrate Christmas when it actually arrives are regarded as dreary pedants who are simply out-of-step with reality or insensitive to the feelings of those who prefer to follow their own traditions rather than the ancient cadences of the Church year. Although they have a high view of the faith and the feast, they are often dismissed as modern day Ebenezer Scrooges, who thought Christmas was humbug and did not even care that Advent existed.

Sadly, much is lost in this popular reordering of the Church year. In fact, Christmas itself is impoverished. The Church has appointed twelve days for the celebration of Christmas, from December 25th through January 5th. Those days include important feasts, including St. Stephen the first martyr, St. John the Evangelist, the Holy Innocents, and the Holy Name, which help to illuminate more fully the meaning of Christmas. If the celebration of Christmas ends after dinner on December 25th, we lose those great days and the mysteries they unfold. Moreover, by celebrating Christmas from the beginning of December on, we override Advent and lose it. And this is a terrible loss. Advent sets before us the powerful unfolding of God's plan for all of history, a plan that culminates not in the first coming of Christ, but in his second coming. Without Advent, Christmas is all too easily reduced to a sentimental story about a baby, and even Good Friday and Easter are in danger of losing their meaning. Christmas is the celebration of the mystery of the divine Redeemer who dwelt among us on earth. But he is truly the Redeemer only if he comes again to judge the world and establish for ever his new creation. Pascha, i.e., Good Friday and Easter, is the celebration of the mystery of the divine King who reigns from the Cross and rises from the dead on the third day. But he is truly the King only if he ascends the throne prepared for him by his Father from the beginning of time, the throne of his eternal Kingdom which will not be fully realized until the end of time.

There is also a long section in that article on the "Jesse Tree," something that's completely new to me. Not new, but worth reading: A Devotion for the Last Days of Advent and, on the same topic, The Great O Antiphons, an external link.

An expanded article for later in the season is the "Twelve Days of Christmas."

From another site, ChristusRex.org, here are the (Latin) chanted propers of the Mass for Advent 1, as sung by the Benedictine monks of Brazil. (Note: these are actual recordings of the monks in choir, so they are not "recording studio" quality.)

To me, the Graduale (an mp3 file) in particular ("Universi, qui te exspectant") is stunningly beautiful - full of gorgeous melismatic musical lines and lovely lilting phrases. Very evocative of the Advent hope and expectant waiting. Also glorious: the Alleluia (mp3), Ostende Nobis; this is taken from Psalm 85.

Here's an mp3 of the Introit, Ad te levavi, taken from Psalm 25, which is listed on the website as 24. (Caelius notes that "The numbering difference [between the Catholic and Protestant enumeration of the Psalms] is because Psalm 9 and 10 are one psalm in the LXX, but are apparently separate in the Hebrew manuscripts. There's probably a story there, especially since the two psalms form an alphabetic acrostic in Hebrew, just not a perfect one, suggesting a few errors in transmission.")

Psalm 25

1 Unto thee, O LORD, do I lift up my soul.

2 O my God, I trust in thee: let me not be ashamed, let not mine enemies triumph over me.

3 Yea, let none that wait on thee be ashamed: let them be ashamed which transgress without cause.

4 Shew me thy ways, O LORD; teach me thy paths.

5 Lead me in thy truth, and teach me: for thou art the God of my salvation; on thee do I wait all the day.

6 Remember, O LORD, thy tender mercies and thy lovingkindnesses; for they have been ever of old.

7 Remember not the sins of my youth, nor my transgressions: according to thy mercy remember thou me for thy goodness' sake, O LORD.

Notes on Collect for Proper 17

Lord of all power and might, who art the author and giver of all good things: Graft in our hearts the love of thy Name; increase in us true religion; nourish us with all goodness; and bring forth in us the fruit of good works; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

Structurally, this collect has an more lengthy naming of God than most: “Lord of all power and might” and extended attribute: “who art the author and giver of all good things”. The petition is fourfold; there are four different petitions that are roughly parallel. There is no result clause in the current version.

Alliterative pairs are fairly common: “art…author”, “giver…good”, “increase in us”, forth…fruit”.

Historically, this collect is based on the Sarum collect for the 7th Sunday after Trinity and was translated for the 1549 and subsequent books. It was not until this prayer book that it was moved to its present position.

Theologically, an interesting feature of this collect is the relation of the fourfold petitions. Are four different things being asked or are they shades or facets of the same request? This issue is cast into relief by this year’s (RCL) Epistle: James 1:17-27. Not only does the attribute resonate with James 1:17 (“Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above”) but the emphasis on good works as the product of true faith are reinforced and fully connected in v. 27: “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, [and] to keep himself unspotted from the world” uniting the second and the fourth petitions.

Office Quick-Reference

Check out this neat two-page PDF guide to the offices: here.

It follows a standard Rite II format and lays out the table of suggested canticles. Some of the suggestions--like saying the Jubilate Deo in place of the Venite in Christmas, Epiphany, and Saints' days--may come from Galley's The Prayer Book Office, an out of print work by the working editor of the American '79 BCP.

Notes on Collect for Proper 16

Grant, we beseech thee, merciful God, that thy Church, being gathered together in unity by thy Holy Spirit, may manifest thy power among all peoples, to the glory of thy Name; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, world without end.

This collect has a familiar shape to it; there is no attribute and the naming of God ("merciful God") is embedded within the petition. The majority of the collect is the petition itself, with the result being the final prepositional phrase ("to the glory of thy Name") before a standard doxological conclusion.

Only two alliterative pairs appear here, both clustered in the same phrase: "may manifest" and "power...people".

The beginning part of the collect comes from the old Gelasian Sacramentary (7th cent.) but the original petition for the protection of the church was altered for its inclusion in the American '28 BCP for Tuesday in Whitsun-Week (the Tuesday after Pentecost). The resulting prayer is decidedly evangelical in character. There's a vague resonance with the end of Romans--compare Rom 16:25-26:

25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, 26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith

The only theological note I'll make (because I think it speaks for itself without the need for further comment) is to note the naming of God. Consider how the epithet "merciful" shapes the rest of it and configures the work of mission.

Notes on Collect for Proper 15

Almighty God, who hast given thy only Son to be unto us both a sacrifice for sin and also an example of godly life: Give us grace that we may always most thankfully receive that his inestimable benefit, and also daily endeavor ourselves to follow the blessed steps of his most holy life; through the same Jesus Christ thy Son our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.

This is a great collect and should be mandatory reading for those who believe that the Episcopal Church doesn't have any theology--just a prayer book. Clearly, this one touches on the atonement debate, one that has heated up a bit in recent years. Does the church have a stance on atonement? According to this collect it does... But we'll get to that in a second.

Structurally, this collect starts off with the naming of God and moves into a lengthy attribute--it stretches from the beginning to the first colon. The petition proper is short, a mere three words, and the lengthy result section takes us all the way to the semicolon and the doxological conclusion. (Confused? Review the collect parts here.)

Alliterative pairs are less common in this than other collects but we still have got some here: "sacrifice for sin", "Give us grace", "endeavor ourselves". In terms of verbal and theological resonances, this prayer shares some similarities with language in the Eucharistic prayers (note corresponding sense of "benefits" in the Prayer of Humble Access). The phrase "both as a sacrifice for sin and a model of the godly life" is quite familiar to me from its adoption into the Lutheran (LBW) liturgy.

Theology-wise, I'd first like to note this phrase: "to be unto us". For me, it implies that this isn't all that Jesus is; these two roles are not the sum total of his being. Here we speak of him who is, as Paul puts it, "the very image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation, the head of the church and the author of our salvation." He isn't just an idea whipped up by God to save things after the original plan fell through--as some (deficient) theories of atonement seem to suggest.

Now perhaps the theological heart of the collect. A Roman Catholic mentor of mine has suggested that the catholic path is not the "either/or" but the "both/and". In this colect, we've got a both/and. Both Anselm's notion of Christ as substitutionary atonement and Abelard's idea of Christ as moral exemplar are upheld, not as contradictory opposites but as parts of a whole. The prayer book chooses not one nor the other--but both. Indeed, one without the other might well be incomplete... I dare say that the Christus Victor theology of the patristic church--Christ as the one who,through the cross, conquers death and hell shattering the brazen gates and binding the fiend--rounds it out nicely.

Spend some time with the dual result clause. The first reminds me of the post-communion collect (prayer 67 on p. 834); the second calls us to the work of imitation. As the Church has taught from the earliest times, our surest path is the imitation of Christ in all things. And I think I'll end on that note, borrowing again the words of Paul, this time the words at the heart of his mystical theology: "Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children; And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savour." (Eph 5:1-2)

Really Brief Notes on Proper 12

At the beach--so I'm not kidding about the brief part...

* Notice the interesting naming of God in this collect--without whom nothing is strong, nothing is holy. I can't help wondering if it doesn't come from the Eastern acclamation, Holy God, Holy and Mighty, Holy Immortal one. (Strong and Mighty both being acceptable translations of the Greek word.)
* I like the treatment of "things temporal". It doesn't denigrate them--they're not bad or to be avoided. Rather, they must keep their proper place in reference to "things eternal". We don't hate the body or its needs, it just must keep a proper place as we strive towards our homeland.

The beach calls... ;-)

Really Brief Notes on Collect for Proper 11

* Note alliteration: "knowest our necessities" and "ignorance in asking" (all vowels alliterate by the old rules)
* Note parallels: "necessities...those things which for our unworthiness..." and ignorance...for our blindness..."
* Contrast our unworthiness with the worthiness of Christ. I'm seeing here two complimentary takes on salvation: 1) the alien righteousness that comes from God outside of ourselves, 2) the benefits of inclusion into the Body of Christ and participation in his risen life.

Hopefully more later... ;-)

Collects

For those of us who pray the Daily Offices on a more-or-less regular basis and who try to attend mid-week masses as we're able, one piece of this process is the weekly collect. Generally speaking, the collect for Sunday is used twice or more a day for the rest of the week. This either means allocating one of your prayer book ribbons to the collect page (not a real hardship by any stretch but it is one more set of page flips)--or memorizing it. If our theology is in our common prayer, then the collect is an important part of that process. To memorize and internalize the collects is to work at actively assimilating the faith and morals that lie passively awaiting our consumption.

Some texts we memorize passively. The Gloria in excelsis, the Collect for Purity, the post-communion prayer, all tend to get absorbed by osmosis. As a result, we know them, we can recall them to active memory, but without expending much effort on our part. Memorizing a collect requires some active effort that, at least in my case, means focusing on what words are used, how they balance one another, what the structure is, etc. As far as I'm concerned, the process of active memorization allows us to encounter the collect mnore fully than just hearing or just reading it.

Once we memorize them, we use them for a week, then it's on to a new one until the same time next year. In the intervening time, I'm sure that the collect will drop out of active memory. When you hear it again you may say--oh yeah, I remember that one... but you probably won't be able to haul it up again after a month or two have passed. And that's ok! The more BCP collects you have stuffed in your passive memory, they more they will arise naturally. You'll find their shape and character flavoring your own prayer and devotional thought.

Proper 10:
O Lord, we beseech thee mercifully to receive the prayers of thy people who call upon thee, and grant that they may both perceive and know what things they ought to do, and also may have grace and power faithfully to fulfill the same;
through Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen

* We'll note briefly a typical feature of prayer book prayer, doubles: "perceive and know" and "grace and power"
* We'll also note an alliterative moment, also pretty common: "faithfully to fulfill"
* Overall, the theology of the prayers reminds me strongly of a line from Augustine--the Confessions, I believe,--but I'm not positive of that.
* One final note--I find it interesting that while the prayer is 1st person plural, "we", it prays on behalf of a rather generic third-person plural: "they" with the antecendent of "thy people who call upon thee". So, here we're not praying for "me"; we're not even praying for "we"; rather it is a more general and anonymous "they" in whom we are included through the very act of prayer. Hmm, inclusion through common prayer. Not a bad thought for these days.

Plainchant Thoughts

I put up some thoughts on my blog abut chanting the Gospels/Lessons and about psalmtones. Rather than split any interesting comments between both sites, I thought I'd direct you there. Part of the function of this post is an unabashed goad to bls and/or Charlotte to post intros to Chant which they've mentioned a time or two but never put up... ;-)

The Rogation Days

Today is the first of the Rogation Days, known in the Latin as the "Litaniae minores ". These were days of fasting and great processions in the medieval period. Their establishment is describe by Gregory of Tours in his History of the Franks (Book 2, ch. 34—regrettably not on-line as far as I can tell).

These three days before the Ascension were a time of blessing the crops—naturally, modern liturgical churches have taken this is a good opportunity to celebrate creation and the need for good stewardship of the environment. However, there is another aspect of these days that should not be ignored. According to much patristic and early medieval exegesis Acts 1:11:

"Men of Galilee," [the angels] said, "why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven."

Was widely interpreted to mean that Jesus would return for the Day of Judgment on the Feast of the Ascension. Thus, these three days were, for the Anglo-Saxon Church, days of intense catechesis and preparation. The evidence for preaching to laity in the vernacular is sketchy. We have plenty of Old English sermons, but we know little about when and where they were preached. That there was public preaching to the laity on the Rogation Days is not in doubt; a greatly disproportionate number of the vernacular sermons that survive are for these days. Their topics are basic: things like the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, and the Ten Commandments (a list that should sound really familiar to Lutherans…just glance back at the Small Catechism).

So, despite being in Easter, these days might be worthily celebrated by including the Exhortation and General Confession before the Offices and concluding Morning Prayer with the Litany. In addition, this would be a great opportunity to meditate on the basics of our faith—the Ten Commandments, the Creeds, the Lord's Prayer. Come to think of it, re-reading that Small Catechism might not be a bad idea—even for us Anglicans…

Lenten Sermon Excerpt

This is an excerpt from my wife's sermon for Lent 2. I'm a little tardy in posting it, but here it is:

. . .

The season of Lent is often associated with deprivation or giving something up. Our Prayer Book reminds us that Lent in the Early Church was about fasting and penitence and invites us today into a period of prayer, fasting, repentance, and self-denial. But Lent can also be a time to add things to our lives, especially holy habits. The Prayer Book also invites us into a period of self-examination, reading and meditating on God’s Word. If you’re like me, though, the idea of adding just one more thing to your life is almost unbearable. I mean—life is hard enough as it is with juggling children, jobs, and relationships. How can you hope to fit in more spiritual things?

The word Lent comes from an old word meaning springtime. One way to think about Lent without stressing yourself out is to think about it like an early springtime garden. In the early spring last year’s beautiful garden can look like quite a mess. Heaps of leaves from the fall lay around, dead plants from the previous year poke up, and maybe some industrious weeds have already gotten a head start on you. If you want a beautiful garden again this year, then it’s time to begin again. You have to start by getting rid of the stuff that’s there—maybe even stuff that once was living, vibrant, and beautiful but isn’t anymore. So you start raking…what activities in your life seem to just exist to fill space—and don’t really add anything to your life? And you start pulling up last year’s dead plants…what are those intentions that you always wanted to do but never got around to and now feel guilty about? Or those things that you use to do because they gave you joy and peace, but now don’t? Finally you go after those little weeds…what new little things are poking up in your life that you’re not terribly proud of?

Once all of the clutter has been cleared away, it’s time to put in some new plants. Now some people may just put in fully-grown plants right away but most start with new plants, with young plants that require care and nurturing or else they will die right a way. They have to be tended for a while until they can live on their own without constant watering and care. This is the helpful way to think about adding things to your life—not piling yet another thing onto an already full schedule. If you’re going to give something up, give away something that sucks up your time and energy, and plant something beautiful and life-giving in its place. Like taking a few minutes to read the Bible with your morning cup of coffee or reading one or more of the daily devotions in the Prayer Book with your kids, spouse, or a friend.

So instead of thinking just about giving things up or piling things on, think of Lent as your early springtime garden that needs cleaning up the old overgrowth and putting in some new things. These are the holy habits. Holy habits are the things that we are called to nurture and, like young plants, habits really do have to be nurtured before they become natural. These are the holy habits that discipleship demands and that today’s Gospel tells us to take up during Lent.

. . .

"The Lenten Fast"

From Project Canterbury, an article by by the Rev. Charles T. Stout (Milwaukee: Morehouse, no date [but sometime around the turn of the 20th Century, as Stout was a priest working in 1911]):

1. The Scripturalness of prayer and fasting is undoubted:

And when He had fasted forty days and forty nights (St. Matt. iv. 2).
Moreover, when ye fast be not as the hypocrites (St. Matt. vi. 16).
As they ministered to the Lord and fasted (Acts xiii. 2).
And when they had fasted and prayed (Acts xii, 3).
And when they had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord (Acts xvi. 23).
In stripes ... in fastings (II. Cor. vi. 5).

The testimony and practice of the Church from. Apostolic days is just as strong. But men are still found who repeat the trite objections to the observance of Lent. They say, "Dissipation is increased before and after as compensation for its restraints." This objection proves too much. It amounts simply to this: Worldly people in the Church abuse Lent, hence it ought to be abolished. The argument, if good for anything, is good enough to abolish Christianity. Sunday is a day of rest, spiritual enjoyment and peace, for many; some abuse it in every possible way. Hence Sunday ought to be abolished. The Bible is precious and sacred to the Church; but irreverent and unbelieving and fanatical persons have despoiled its pages, perverted its pure precepts, disregarded its teaching, abused it in every way. Hence, abolish the Bible! Services in God's house are made occasions for ostentation and display. Hence, close the churches! The only logical stopping place is to abolish Christianity because crimes have been done and are done in its name. We are thus left in a dangerous predicament.

2. "Uniform moderation of life is the Church's need."

True, it is. But that this can be better secured without Lent than with it, is not proven. All experience corroborates the Lenten principle that some period must be taken to examine our lives, and see whether they conform to the doctrines professed. The reasoning used above is applicable here. Sunday is a day set apart for religious work and worship. But uniform moderation of life can be better secured by making Sunday just like any other day--be religious every day and no need of Sunday! Now, nobody wants this except evil men. Lent is an opportunity a man can waste and abuse just as he wastes Sunday or any religious help. All days should be lived in accordance with Christ's teaching, but the duties of days and seasons differ.

3. The use and principle of Lent is denial of self for a certain season and for a certain purpose. These days of worship and self-denial are to make us strong with new spiritual power. That our daily life should be so lived weighs nothing against having a special season for the training of one's self into this habit. The idea involved is recognized in other ways by those who scoff at Lent. The athlete who hopes to win must submit to abstinence and training greater than he can get in ordinary life. The lawyer preparing for an important case shuts himself up with his books and papers, denies himself the usual harmless pleasures and even comforts until he is ready for trial. The artist who would reach a high place in art thinks the sacrifice of all that interferes with his special purpose none too great for the benefit gained. Illustrative cases are endless.

4. When bodies of Christians who dislike this yearly season for training, discipline, and spiritual culture, keep even one day set apart for special services they yield the whole principle on which Lenten observances rest. Instead of forty days they keep only one day of Lent. So by their revival seasons, when extraordinary services and means are used to awaken spiritual life and power. For such a season, too often a fictitious and violent excitement that must have a harmful reaction, the Church orders a regular and stated revival season wherein can be regained spiritual life and power by such quiet and well-ordered means as are not exposed to the danger of destructive reaction. Following the teaching of Apostolic days, she believes that religion founded on fact and principle and perpetually re-taught by the recurrence of festivals and fasts, is more likely to be lasting and of spiritual edification, than religion the inspiration of which is feeling, and opinions of theology too often its foundation. The Church Year founded on great facts forming our redemption, presents the Person of Christ for study and contemplation; hence actualities take the place of speculations.

5. Christ speaks of fasting as He speaks of prayer and almsgiving--as a matter of course for the Christian. We have largely lost the literalness of the first, as we are in increasing danger of losing the literalness of the others. The last two will increase when the first is made more real. Alone denying the stomach certain kinds of food, without a spiritual purpose, will issue in no moral strength. The denial must be a real struggle against appetite, pride, sin of life, or desire of whatever kind. Self-righteousness may starve the stomach and feed its unspiritual self. Fasting, in its broad meaning, is to cut the communications of the enemy with his base of supplies. Prayer is the bringing in of the stronger Spirit of God to assault the foe in his citadel and cast him out. The neglected Bible hunted up and studied, closets revisited for prayer and self-searching examination, the soul to recover its thoughtfulness and earnestness, public worship resumed, Christian work zealously done, the Sacraments made, in reality, means of Grace by the abiding presence and power of the Holy Ghost, will issue in a good, healthful, fruitful Lent. What was helpful to the Master will be helpful to His disciples.

Lent

From Pascha Nostrum, the newsletter of the Church of the Resurrection, New York City, a kind of Lent Plan and Checklist, which I thought people might find interesting and/or helpful.

MY LENTEN RULE

1. FASTING. The weekdays of Lent (not the Sundays) are all fast days, meaning that the amount of food eaten is reduced. A good rule might be no snacks, no seconds, no desserts and no alcohol. If you don't normally eat snacks or des­serts or drink, you may want to consider giving up some favourite food. The idea is to undertake something sacrificial, yet not overwhelming. In addition, Ash Wednesday and Good Friday are strict fasts: one full meal in the evening, and a light meal or collation in the afternoon. All those whose health, work, and age permit should fast.



This Lent I resolve to:







2. MASS. Lent is a good time to add a weekday Mass to your usual observance. The weekday Masses are of a rather more intimate and quiet nature than the Sunday ones. and this can be a great blessing. Masses are at 6:15 p.m. Tuesday, Thursday and Friday, 12:15 p.m. Wednesday, and Noon Saturday.


This Lent I resolve to:







3. STATIONS OF THE CROSS. Each Friday in Lent at 7.00 p.m., we will follow Our Lord's way to the Cross, us­ing the stations in the Church. This devotion makes His crucifixion ever more real for us. If you cannot be present with the parish for Stations, you can do the devotion privately. Stations closes with Benediction.



This Lent I resolve to:







4. SPIRITUAL READING. An ancient custom is to take a spiritual book for regular reading during Lent. This can be a book of Scripture. or one of the spiritual classics. Some are available from the book­shop. If you are not sure what might be good, ask Father Swain.



This Lent I resolve to:







5. DAILY OFFICE. If you do not now read Matins or Evensong from the Prayer Book, Lent is a good time to start. It takes a little effort and discipline to get the habit established, but once it is there, it can bear great fruit. The regular prayers and psalms and Scripture draw us out of our narrow spiritual views, and nourish us with the riches of the Faith.



This Lent I resolve to:







6. CONFESSION. A sacramental confession at the beginning and end of Lent is not only an opportunity for a thorough self-examination, but also a powerful weapon against the temptations which come our way in Lent. Nothing helps a shop-keeper plan for the future like a good stock taking.



This Lent I resolve to:







7. SERVICE. As well as giving-up in Lent, some wish to take on some special service, such as visiting the sick or shut-in, volunteering at a hospital, taking special care for a neighbour who may need it, or some special project at church.



This Lent I resolve to:







8. ABSTINENCE. Abstaining from flesh meat on Wednesdays in Lent as well as Fridays (required by the Prayer Book) is a common discipline for Lent. At the very least, no flesh meat should be eaten on the Fridays of Lent.



This Lent I resolve to:







9. SELF-DENIAL. You may want to give up some special pleasure or recreation for Lent, and perhaps give what you would have spent on it (if anything) to the Church.



This Lent I resolve to:







10. SCRIPTURE READING & CLASSES. Lent is a good time to take on Scripture reading and study, or indeed any study of the Faith. There will be an adult class offered in Lent on Tuesday nights at 7.00 p.m.



This Lent I resolve to:







A LENTEN QUIET DAY will be offered on a Saturday in Lent to be announced soon. These last from about 10.00 a.m. to 3.00 p.m., and include Mass, a silent luncheon, three meditations and Benediction at the close. Setting aside five hours for God this Lent, no matter what else happens, is a very good plan.



This Lent I resolve to:



In addition to the above, I would like to:



Achieve:






Overcome:







Renounce:

"The Liturgical Spectrum"

A recently-published Full Homely Divinity article that discusses the use of color in worship and liturgy:

As the Church moves through the year, it provides many symbols to remind us of the significance of seasons and days. Color can be highly expressive and reflective of mood and meaning and colored vestments and hangings have been among the most prominent symbols used in many churches. However, as Percy Dearmer pointed out a good many years ago in his classic book, The Parson's Handbook, there is a great deal of misunderstanding, and sometimes even a misinformed dogmatism, about particular colors and color sequences. The aim of this article is to provide information about the history and meaning of the liturgical spectrum, particularly in Anglican use, and to encourage a practical and also creative approach to the use of color in divine service.

You'll find quite a number of nice color photos of vestments of all sorts, and discussions of current and historical customs.

As noted above, in the medieval English use, one of the ruling principles was that the best vestments a church owned were to be used on major feasts, no matter what color they were. This is a principle that would seem to make a good deal of sense. It need not be taken to extremes. For example, the use of black on a major feast, no matter how rich the vestments might be, would be too great a departure from conventional expectations to be acceptable in most situations. On the other hand, too strict an adherence to that which is familiar and conventional can have the effect of robbing liturgy of its natural and appropriate drama. Furthermore, feast days, "holidays", are supposed to interrupt ordinary routines, to provide relief. But if every day is a feast day, the extraordinary soon becomes ordinary, and this means that ultimately the significance of the occasion will also be lost.

In the Middle Ages, when the cult of the saints was in full flower, virtually every day was a feast day of some sort. In that context, the festal vestments would have been in perpetual use. Even allowing for the distinction between saints who were martyrs and saints who were not martyrs, red and white would have been the only colors in use outside of Advent and Lent. In smaller and poorer foundations, this almost certainly was the case. However, in cathedrals and other great churches, much greater variety of use was often found. Not only were there different vestments (i.e., different colors) for the feasts of martyrs and confessors (saints who were not martyrs), but there were distinctions for virgins and virgin martyrs, for matrons, for angels, and even more specific directions for particular saints such as John the Baptist (violet on the feast of his beheading because he went to Limbo) and Mary Magdalene (azure in some places, saffron in others).

The Office--what's the point?

Ever wonder *why* we do the Office?

Sometimes I forget and need to be reminded, and I think the very best quick summary is found in the exhortation to confession...

Rite I version:

Dearly beloved, we have come together in the presence of
Almighty God our heavenly Father, to render thanks for the
great benefits that we have received at his hands, to set forth
his most worthy praise, to hear this holy Word, and to ask, for
ourselves and on behalf of others, those things that are
necessary for our life and our salvation.

Rite II Version:

Dearly beloved, we have come together in the presence of
Almighty God our heavenly Father, to set forth his praise, to
hear his holy Word, and to ask, for ourselves and on behalf
of others, those things that are necessary for our life and our
salvation.

[I have no idea why we no longer "render thanks"...]

And--just to round it out--the 1662 version:

And although we ought, at all times, humbly to acknowledge our sins before God; yet ought we 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.

Thoughts?

Burping Up the Liturgy

The Rev. Cynthia Bourgeault, in her audiotaped series on Singing the Psalms (Sounds True), relates that the Latin translation of Psalm 45 (or 44, depending on whose psalter you're using), "My heart overflows with a goodly theme," uses the Latin verb eructavit, which can be translated, "to burp up." She goes on to note that, when we immerse ourselves in the Psalms (and other prayers of the Daily Office), bits of them tend to bubble up into our conscious minds at opportune times.

I was listening to this recording in my car, and her comments made me laugh out loud -- because I had my own experience of "burping up" liturgy. At the time I did not identify myself as a Christian. I had gone through a kind of half-hearted exploration of neopaganism that did not satisfy, and had decided that I was postmodernly irreligious. That's enough of that, I told myself.

Except that the prayers of my childhood kept inserting themselves into my consciousness -- as I was driving, as I was watching television, as I was doing my work.

Sometimes it would be the liturgy that we used (really) in our old Sunday School pre-class prayer:

The Lord is nigh unto all them that call upon Him;
all that call upon Him in truth.
O Lord, open Thou my lips.
And my mouth shall show forth Thy praise.

Sometimes it would be the Agnus Dei:

O Christ, Thou Lamb of God, that takest away the sin of the world, have mercy upon us.

Sometimes it would even be whole sections of the Eucharistic prayers, popping into my head:

It is truly meet, right and salutary that we should at all times and in all places give thanks unto Thee, O Lord, holy Father, almighty, everlasting God, through Jesus Christ, our Lord...therefore with angels and archangels and with all the company of heaven we laud and magnify Thy glorious name, ever more praising Thee and saying, Holy, holy, holy...

Why? Why is this happening to me? Stop it! Stopitstopitstopit!

Well...obviously it didn't stop. But if the Spirit can speak to us through these words even at our most obstinate and antagonistic points, how much more can they speak to us, encourage us, comfort us, remind us, inspire us when we continually nourish ourselves with them and invite them to keep coming back?

Playing in the Psalter

One of the most fascinating aspects of the Psalter is its function as a scriptural and theological nexus. Many different strands of theology and tradition create the Old Testament--most of them are represented in the Psalms. Indeed, a shared phrase, image or concept in a psalm can lead the astute reader to make connections between certain psalms and certain traditions, illuminating a host of texts through careful reading. Furthermore, citation of the psalms in the New Testament give the careful readers clues both as to how the early church interpreted Scripture and to how the psalms themselves shaped the Church's theology. I could go on about this, but I think that an illustrative example--some playing around with a couple of psalms-- will be more instructive.

Let's take a look at two psalms; we'll start with Ps 74.

A few initial notes:
· First off, we can position it in the Psalter overall by its superscription. We don't know much about the history of the composition and collection of the Psalter. There are superscriptions that assign various psalms to certain people or groups. The antiquity of these is debated; some may be original, some may have been added by the editors of the collection; some may refer to earlier collections which were absorbed into the Psalter. There's a lot we don't know *but* the superscription does group this psalm with Pss 50, 73-83. Are these by the same person, the scribe mentioned in 2 Kings or the singer of Chronicles? Hard to say; it is perhaps safest to see them as coming from the same period of time
· Watch v. 5--the text is difficult there.
· Vv. 3-7 give us our main clue as to the circumstance and situation of the psalm: This appears to be referring to the destruction of the Temple by the Babylonians in 587 BC. Thus, we can set this psalm in relation to 2 Kings 25 and 2 Chr 36 which recount these events. Too, we can connect it with the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel who lived in those times and consider how they may be referring or relating to the same events. Lamentations as well is a crucial conversation partner.
· Vv. 12-17 are fascinating. Here the psalmist is reminding God of the primal work of creation--but it is a very different notion of creation than what we find in Gen 1 or 2-3 or even Prov 8 or Job 38. Here creation comes through combat, destroying the great Leviathan, chaos embodied. The psalmist calls upon God to act in the same way--to use His mighty right arm against the enemies. Is there a tie-in here? Indeed--Isa 27 and 51 use the same image; Ezek 29's oracle against Egypt casts that state in the same way, the dragon that God will subdue.
· Note also v. 9. This seems rather odd to us modern readers, knowing as we do of the great 6th century prophets like Jeremiah and Ezekiel...

We shall turn now to Ps 79 and notice some things there as well.

· This psalm is quite similar. Certainly it has many resonances and is talking about the same event--the destruction of the temple. So--first we note an overall similarity of theme.
· Vv. 2-3 focus on the image of bodies. This in turn reminds us of Lam, especially chs. 2 and 4.
· Vv. 8-9 beg for the forgiveness of God because of the sins of the people.

Now, for some blanket summarizations:
· Ps 74: It focuses upon Zion, the destruction of the physical space of the temple, makes no reference to sin (denying the presence of prophets) and makes an interesting mythic appeal for God's help.
· Ps 79: Talks about Jerusalem--not Zion--mentions the people's iniquities as a cause of the destruction, and focuses on the slaughter of the congregation.

The parallel of the two psalms makes for a very interesting contrast. Both of them are doing essentially the same thing--beseeching God to get off His duff and do something about the destruction of the Temple (ah, the refreshing honesty of the psalms...), but they do it in different ways and focus on different things.

In short, Ps 74 really strongly reminds us of the Zion theology of Isaiah. That is, Isaiah puts a lot of emphasis on the Zion Temple as the seat of God (think Isa 6 etc.). When foreign enemies threaten and Hezekiah wants to go running to other foreign allies, Isaiah's advice is--do nothing; fear not, for the Temple of the Lord is in Zion. The facility itself was important for him. Furthermore, the book of Isaiah is well-known for its frequent use of poetic and mythic imagery just like we have in this psalm.

Ps 79 reminds us much more of Jeremiah's style. Jeremiah literally poo-pooed a simplistic form of Isaiah's theological foreign policy. In his famous Temple Sermon in Jer 7ff, Jeremiah presents God's word reproaching and rebuking the people for their various sins--both social injustice and idolatry--and warns them that the presence of the Temple alone will not save them in their iniquity. The focus on people instead of place reminds us of Jer 9ff and a host of other passages including most of Lam (Lam has been attributed to Jeremiah mostly on stylistic and theological grounds. We can't say for sure, but it sure does sound like him...).

Well--that's enough for now. This is a taste of the fun to be had when we put the history of the text and the other parts of the Bible in play with one another. I just love a little romp through the OT! :-) This is the way I like to lead Bible Studies—I’m not necessarily sure how to help others replicate it, though, since it tends to come out all stream-of-consciousness… I’ll have to think about it…

Reading the Psalms

This is a continuation of the foray begun here on a curriculum for teaching people about the Psalms and the Offices... Again, improvements are needed.

I find that I tend to read very quickly, scanning for pertinent information. What I--and I imagine many of us--have gained through this practice is the ability to digest large amounts of information quickly. What I and perhaps we have lost is the ability to focus and to conduct a close reading of a text, living in it and absorbing nuances, turns of phrase, and the sheer beauty of the language. To read the Psalter profitably, this is a skill that needs to be rediscovered. Thus, here are a few nuts and bolts suggestions about how to read--specifically, how to slow down and to be truly attentive to the text.

I don't want this to be a theoretical reflection but a practical one; this is a lab portion. In that spirit, you might want to have at hand a piece of paper, a pencil, and--of course--a Psalter. If I going to show you something probably new and hopefully profitable, I want you to see as quickly as possible its application. Thus, we're going to turn to a text that I am sure all of us know so well that we no longer pay attention to it. We'll see if this exercise will actually help us read it and glean new insights. So--let's flip to Ps 23.

If I had to give this method a name, I'd call it a grammatical reading. This is because in this process we will attend closely to the grammar, structure, and compositional details that make up the text in order to see it more closely and carefully.

We will start by identifying some matters that relate to nouns and verbs, subjects, predicates, and objects in the parlance of grammar (but don't worry if it's been a while since your last English class--this isn't as hard or onerous as it sounds. If you really feel the need, though, check out these definitions with helpful exercises on the parts of speech and syntax...and feel free to teach yourself OE while you're there! ;-))

Two basic characteristics that all verbs have are person and number. Person identifies who is doing the speaking, number identifies how many. In terms of number, modern English only distinguishes between two possibilities: singular or plural; either one person speaks or a bunch do--we don't form our words a different way if two people are talking (like some languages do). Person identifies between three basic options: me, you, or somebody else. This can be summarized with this chart--one that may well be familiar if you've ever taken a foreign language:

Singular Plural
1st Person I We
2nd Person You (sing.) You (pl.)
3rd Person He/She/It They

Note that standard Modern English does not distinguish between the singular and plural--a potential source of misunderstanding since the biblical languages did. [nb: Southern American, of course, in the vocative/nominative cases recognizes a distinction between a small second person plural (y'all) and a large second person plural (all y'all).]

Two more characteristics of the verb should be addressed, tense and voice [yes, classicist friends, I'm omitting mood for now...] The tense is simply the time when the verb occurs--past, present, or future at its most basic. Voice is whether the verb is active or passive. That is, is the subject doing the action or receiving the action (Peter hit the ball: active; Peter was hit by the ball: passive)?

Moving from the verb to the nouns of the sentence, we must identify what is the subject and what are the objects. In the Psalter in particular this often becomes *who* is the subject and the objects. Pay particular attention to the speaker of the Psalm and God. Looking at the various pronouns will also aid in this task. Don't worry if this seems confusing right now, I'll demonstrate it in just a moment.

That's the basics in terms of grammar--analyze the verbs, identify how the nouns are functioning in the sentence with an eye on the pronouns for assistance.

The last part of the procedure is to look for figures of speech. In Antiquity and the Medieval period, the identification of schemes and tropes was considered advanced grammar and often served as a segue into the art of rhetoric. Careful attention to and identification of schemes, tropes, and figures of speech can assist in answering whether a certain passage is to be understood "literally" or not.

Alright--enough theoretical talk--it's time to turn to your Psalter. Keep the pencil and paper handy for jotting down notes or things that occur to you as you go. The best way I know to do this is to read the psalm three times. First, just read it to get an overall sense, not looking for anything in particular. Then, read it through paying close attention to the grammar. Then, read it through looking for figures of speech that may help you illuminate the meaning.

As an aside, I'm using the KJV here for a number of reasons. One, it's beautiful; two, the brackets let you know what words have been supplied by the translators; three, the Early Modern English of the KJV preserves the distinction between the plural and singular you. The singular is thou/thine/thee while the plural is you/your/you. If you don't have access to the original languages, the KJV has a degree of transparency that other English translations don't. (I'll write about its problems another time...)

So--go ahead and read Ps 23 through. I'll wait...

Okay. Now we'll start again, analyzing as we go.

23:1 (A Psalm of David.) The LORD [is] my shepherd;

We start with the simplest possible verb--"is"--which in the original is completely lacking (Hebrew doesn't require it). It's a third person singular present active. The Lord is the subject; shepherd is a predicate nominative. The "my" sends a signal. The speaker is in the picture but it's not about him...yet. To whom is the speaker speaking? We don't know.

I shall not want.

There "I" am... Here we've got a first person singular active. The "shall" seems future...but is it a statement or a wish [herein I rethink not discussing moods...]? It could be a statement, or a wish, or a hope--or even a command to myself (a jussive...). [Technically, I think that Early Modern English uses "shall" for subjunctives but I'm an Early Medieval guy, not an Early Modern guy...] What's our object? We don't have one...we don't know what we might want/lack; "everything" seems implied.

2 He maketh me to lie down in green pastures:

"Maketh" is a third person singular present active. The Lord is the subject; "me" is the direct object. "To lie down" serves like a verbal object providing more info on the "maketh" bit. The concluding prepositional phrase adds some nice color.

he leadeth me beside the still waters.

Same as above; Lord as subject of a 3rd sing pres act with "me" as the object. The prepositional phrase again rounds it out.

3 He restoreth my soul:

Ditto but no prep phrase and the object has changed. The focus is still on "me" but has shifted slightly.

he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.

Same as before but now there's some variation. In addition to the prep phrase, there's another one that touches on motive. We finally have a sense of why the Lord does these things--it seems the focus is still on Him...

4 Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou [art] with me;

Major shift. We have a sort of conditional sentence here with two clauses. Now "I" become the subject and the verb is a 1st sing act. While the first verb looks like a regular present verb, we know it has a conditional (subjunctive) sense that does care when it is that "I" go there...the important verb is in the second half and it's a future--when ever this occurs in the future it won't be a problem. This second part is modified by an explanatory clause that further changes things. Not only is "I" the subject, now "thou" art the object. Up until this point we've had no idea who the speaker was speaking to, we just knew that it couldn't be "the Lord" (Since the psalm *doesn't* lead off "Thou art my shepherd...") Now the speaker is speaking directly to "the Lord."

thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.

The pronouns identify that the shift has remained. The "rod" and "staff" are now the subject and our verb is a fairly predictable 3rd pl pres act with "me" as the object.

5 Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies:

Here's another alteration congruent with the previous shift... We now have "Thou" as the subject and a 2nd sing pres act verb with "me" as the indirect object.

thou anointest my head with oil;

Similarly, another 2nd sing pres act verb with "me" receiving the action.

my cup runneth over.

A basic 3rd sing pres act.

6 Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life:

Here's another 3rd pl act verb--but the same question remains as in the first verb. Is it a statement or a wish?

and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever.

This seems to be a pretty definite statement issued with a 1st sing fut act verb. One final question, though; with the reappearance of "the Lord"--to whom is the speaker speaking? A quick look back confirms that verse 5 still has "me" speaking to the Lord; the shift logically occurs at "Surely..." [and by the way, while verse divisions are handy, don't make the mistake of thinking they're inherent to the text; they were added in the mid sixteenth-century. That having been said, they're more dependable in poetic texts like the Psalter than in narrative because Hebrew poetry *does* use discernable line patternings. ]

So...what have we noticed in reading the psalm this way? At the most basic level, we've noticed the psalm itself because we took the time to read it carefully. Beyond that, we note the way that the audience shifts in the middle of the psalm. The speaker begins by addressing no one/everyone at the start of the psalm. At the interjection "Yea" in v. 4, the psalmist addresses God directly. The address to God continues until the beginning of v. 6; just as the beginning is addressed generally, so is the end.

We also note that the speaker plays an essentially passive role. The most active thing he does is to "walk" (v. 4). Predominately, the speaker plays the role of the direct or indirect object, receiving the action rather than generating it.

So--does this give us anything that we didn't know before? Not necessarily; but it's worth taking the time to be intentional about it and to identify features like audience shifts.

Please note one thing, though, before we move on. I was intentional in referring to the speaker and never used "I' or "me" without putting them in quotes. There was also no "us" or "our" in there either. Why? Because I'm resisting an standard *unconscious* act of interpretation. Often we assume that whenever the text says "I", "me", or "we", we should substitute ourselves into the text. But we shouldn't. At least, not without thinking about it before we do. Don't leap too quickly in identifying or finding yourself in the text. Let the text be the text first...

Now let's go through it again. This time, we'll use a combination of individual lines and chunks to look at the figures of speech and a few other literary items that catch our attention.

23:1 (A Psalm of David.) The LORD [is] my shepherd; I shall not want.

Looking for figures of speech, are we? Then you can't miss that first sentence. There's a big whopping metaphor clear as day here; the psalm begins by setting forth a premise: The Lord is my shepherd. Duly noted. Now that the author has been explicit about this metaphor, we'll see how long it lasts...

2 He maketh me to lie down in green pastures:
he leadeth me beside the still waters.
3 He restoreth my soul:
he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his
name's sake.

In English, at least, we seem to have quite a bit of parallelism. The subject-verb-object structure of these verses builds on the metaphor and continues it. The sentences are simple--simplistic, even. Sheep-like. So far, everything's consistent. In v. 2 the psalmist comes across as quite sheep-like. Physical needs (v. 1) certainly are being provided for. V. 3 brings a shift and reminds us that we're dealing with a metaphor that is actually pointing to something else. How exactly is "soul" functioning? Is it a synecdoche (referring to the whole by means of a part or vice versa) for the whole body or is the psalmist literally just talking about his soul here? Do we have a shift from physical to spiritual sustenance? The text doesn't tell us, but it's still a useful question to consider briefly. As v. 3 continues, a bit more reality starts showing through the metaphor. Sheep don't go in paths "of righteousness," nor do the actions of the sheep reflect upon the shepherd's honor--for "name's sake" is a metonymy (using a closely related thing to signify another thing) for honor

4 Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou [art] with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.

In our grammatical run through we noticed a shift at this verse. This time around we notice another--we have a break from the simple subject (He)-verb-object (me) pattern. Instead of another simple sentence, we have a rather complex multipart one. The metaphor holds; the imagery continues to be pastoral invoking the "valley," the shepherd's rod and staff.

5 Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies:
thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.

We're back to more simple, more parallel constructions, but suddenly we notice that something has happened. Sheep don't eat at tables nor do shepherds set them. We've had a metaphor shift. Suddenly, our psalmist is human again and our controlling metaphor for the Lord has changed. "Table" is another metonymy. It's not really a table, it's a feast. Our suspicion is confirmed by the presence of other guests--albeit enemies--and a cup. We might take a guess that anointing takes place at feasts--and that it's probably an honor bestowed upon a favored guest. Another metonymy involves the cup--the cup isn't running, the wine in the cup is. Certainly a sign of bounty as well as favor. (We may recall from other passages in the Psalter that the cup is a way of honoring someone at a feast--see Ps 116:13) The metaphor for God isn't explicit but it sure seems to be "The Lord is a generous host." This is different from but quite related to the first. In both cases, a la v. 1b, all wants are supplied.

6 Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever.

We recall from above that there was another shift here in who is being addressed. Is there a shift in the metaphor as well or is it holding true? Goodness and mercy are personifications--abstract qualities can't follow one around otherwise. Do these connect to the feast/host concept? Hard to say... Dwelling in the house of the Lord is equally tricky. One familiar with the biblical language will recognize "house of the Lord" as a standard antonomasia (an epithet disconnected from its object) for the temple in Jerusalem. But, if we take it as a literal-metaphor, dwelling in another's house without restriction clearly is the action of a generous host. This last line here is a good example of a multivalent passage, one that can legitimately be read in more than one way. Does it continue the hospitality metaphor, does it express a desire to remain in the Jerusalem temple--or is it doing both at the same time? Resolution need not occur; there may not only be one right answer...

So--what did we see in this run through the psalm? We saw the use of two main metaphors. The psalm began with God as a shepherd, used simple parallel sentences to develop the idea, then presented us with the most complex part of the metaphor, and the part of it that we tend to remember the most, the valley of the shadow of death. Then, the metaphor transitions in v. 5 to that of God as a magnanimous host. Again, some simple sentences build the metaphor and end with the other major concept, dwelling in the house of the Lord which is the exact opposite kind of action and place than walking through the valley of the shadow of death. Thus, we have two metaphors of generous protection (shepherd/host) paralleled with one another.

There you have it--my proposal of a relatively simple method for reading the psalms. It needs some fine-tune (or perhaps over-haul) but that's where you come in… What parts of this did and didn't make sense? I'm still trying to figure out a way to communicate the basic and most common figures of speech without turning it into an English class…

Reflection on the Change of Seasons

Whilst composing chapter 2 of my dissertation, I wrote a paragraph that struck me as particularly pertinent for this venue. It reflects on the importance of the seasons of the Church Year. As most are aware, we are about to turn the year of the Church, moving from Trinity-tide to Advent. I thought it might be an appropriate time to consider what the seasons do for us theologically, so here's a selection from the paragraph that struck me...

Within the life of the early medieval monastic establishment, a change of liturgical seasons signalled a change in life--liturgical and otherwise. The beginning of a season marked a change in the biblical texts that a community read, a change in the musical settings and the textual contents of the life of prayer, possibly changes in the colors of vestments in the oratory, even changes in what the monastics ate and wore. The changes of seasons affected life around the monastery; as a result, they affected thinking around the monastery. The seasons were comprehensive periods of formation, mimetic modeling of an aspect of Israel, her Christ, or his Church that engaged the mind with doctrines, the heart with religious affections, and the body with acts of penance, ascesis, or holy joy.

My point here is equally applicable to modern-day liturgically minded Christians although it doesn't hit us with the same daily impact as it did the early medieval monastics. A church season isn't just about what color stole the pastor/priest wears, it's a whole body/whole self engagement with theology, affections, and actions that fundamentally model for us one aspect of what it means to be a Christian. (That's what the 50c word mimesis is about--imitation or modelling.) It's from focused reflections on these doctrines and affections that we learn what it looks like and what it feels like to be Christian and to enter deeper into the mind of Christ.

Book 'Em

I just found out about this book,, The Daily Prayer of the Church by Philip H. Pfatteicher. It looks like a very promising ecumenical resource for daily prayer, for individuals as well as faith communities.