Lectionary Reflections, Part III

In Part I of this series, I asked a series of three questions. I answered the first to in Part II. In today's article, I intend to reflect on the final question:

3. If the Lectionary is a tool to serve the needs of the People of God, what form should the Lectionary take to ensure that said needs are met?

Part III

Ancient Faith on a Contemporary Mission

 

When we look back to the writings of the ancient Church, we see -both in Scripture and patristic sources - the idea of the main worship of the local Christian community being focused around the poles of Word and Table. Often, God's Word would be read late into the night on Saturday, with the visiting apostle or the pastor of the local church preaching for a lengthy period of time before the worship moved on to the Table where the Holy Supper was celebrated. As the Liturgy developed more fully, the first portion of the service became known as The Mass of the Catechumens in the Western Church. It was a time of instruction in the Word of God through Scriptural proclamation and preaching. Those preparing for baptism were then dismissed (as were other classes of believers who were not communing) and the Liturgy of the Faithful began.

 

The term 'catechumens' refers to learners. In the ancient Church it was typically used to refer to the unbaptized... the core word 'catechize' refers to instruction. The 'Mass of the Catechumens' is, thus, the time of instruction that the entire Church should share (yes, Children included! but that's a different topic). We all need ongoing catechesis in the essentials of the faith, and the best way - particularlly in our post-modern era - to provide that ongoing catechesis is to read Scripture in digestible sections, and to discuss thuroughly (at least as thuroughly as our congregation's understanding and tolerance of our preaching will take us) the implications of the Word for both our core doctrines and our modern life.

 

Neither the traditional one-year or contemporary three-year lectionary offer much in the way to support this ongoing mission, so what, pray tell, is to be done. Well, I wish I had a perfect answer, but instead, the remainder of this article will be dedicated to outlining a vision for what a lectionary could and should be.

 

The first statement I will make is that there will need to be two separate lectionaries. In reality, there already are in a sense - the readings surrounding the major feasts tend to be rather fixed, and with good reason. So, let's start there.

 
SUGGESTION 1
Use a 1 Year Lectionary Cycle Major Holy Days
 
At the very minimum, this would encompass 14 separate days:

• Christmas Day
• Epiphany
• Baptism of our Lord
• Ash Wednesday
• Palm Sunday
• Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday of Holy Week
• Maundy Thursday
• Good Friday
• Holy Saturday
• Easter Sunday
• Ascension Day
• Pentecost Day
• Trinity Sunday
• All Saints Day

On these days, the readings are fixed from year to year, or provide minimal variation, generally related to providing parallel accounts of the same event (i.e., the Passion Narratives from the Four Gospels). This makes sense because we are reinforcing a theological principle when we celebrate these festal days.
 
SUGGESTION 2:
Make Use of a 3 Year Ordinary Time Lectionary
 
"But wait!" I hear you saying... "Didn't you just say you don't like that?"  Well, you are right; sorta - I don't like the existant 3 Year Lectionary, but... what if you were driving a convertable? Have I lost you? That's OK. My 3 Year proposal goes like this:
 
Year A:  Chronological Overview of the Old Testament 
Year B:  Chronological Reading of the Complete Gospels
Year C:  Chronological Reading of the Complete New Testament
 
In this vision, small, digestible sections of Scripture would be be appointed to be read, allowing the true flavor and content of the Word to be savored. Further, they would be provided chronologically and, in many instances, in parallel. By following the unfolding of the narrative of Scripture in chronological order, we develop a contextualization behind what we are reading, and - I believe - come to a deeper appreciation of the Word and its power throughout the ages.
 
"Oh, but wait," you say. "Those would be awfully long readings if you were going to try to split them up over 40 or so Sundays..." Who said anything about Sundays? 
 
SUGGESTION 3:
Make it a Daily Lectionary
 
Here is where, honestly, the suggestion may fall apart for many. So be it. During Ordinary Time, the reading assigned for the day is assigned to a specific calendar date. I don't mean "Sunday between January 2 and 8", I mean "January 2". That's right, one reading a day. This has the added benefit of providing the overachiever with three pericopes a day (OT, Gospel, NT) to use at Morning, Midday, and Evening Prayer. It leaves the average family with a single reading of manageable size which they may use at family devotions in the home each day. Families would be advised of what year of the cycle one was in, and then they could read the readings at home (together with all the other families of the congregation), readings which will flow into and out of the Sunday readings at Church (and in a far better way than the RCL Daily Lectionary does).
 
Now, admittedly, this has one flaw - it only provides one reading for a given day. Well, Calvin preferred the idea of a single reading per day, but the liturgical among us would definately want at least one other reading... such a lectionary proposal fits better with our liturgical needs that way. Oh, but how to manage it.
 
SUGGESTION 4a:
Provide Suggested Add-On's
 
One way to handle it would be to add at least a second reading (from the Gospels in years A and C, and from wherever else in year B) that thematically relates to the central (i.e., controlling) reading of the day. To this could be added a Psalm and a Collect, as well as other necessary liturgical add-ons.
 
SUGGESTION 4b:
Allow for Local Variations
 
Perhaps, however, it would be best to allow pastors to choose a second reading, a psalm, and a collect to match the reading. Sure, sounds horribly Protestant, but it also sounds like a good idea. Providing the controlling reading mandates a thematic base for the service, and the pastor selects a text that reinforces the theme. Perhaps a text will apply or be recieved better in one congregation than another. Sure, this runs the risk of turning the pastor into a typological theologian, but any thematic lectionary is going to do that anyway, and in our era it is my conviction that people need themes to wrap their minds around, comprehend, and make their own.
 
SUGGESTION 5
Skip Nothing (Well, Almost Nothing)
 
So, it's the middle of November and the Passion narrative is starting to come around in your daily lectionary. So what? Sure it isn't the right liturgical season for it, but preaching 'out of season' may provide opprutunities to preach that preaching 'in season' does not afford. Yes, I'd find it odd to be preaching about the nativity of Jesus a week after we put away the nativity scenes... but so what.  Alternatively, omit only those items covered in the fixed liturgical seasons (thus the Nativity through Baptism of Christ and the Passion, Death, Resurrection, Ascension, and Pentecost).
 
This falls apart a bit for the Old Testament. I don't think most folks want to read three years of the Old Testament - those who do will do it for themselves. Provide a survey of the great stories and important concepts of the Old Testament, and make it a good one.
 
SUGGESTION 6
If Observing Liturgical Seasons, Provide Them as Thematic Times
 
Lent should be penetential. Easter a time of joyful exultation. The daily readings in these seasons, as well as at other times, can take on a different tone and method of selection.
 
SUGGESTION 7
Give Careful Consideration to Saint's Days
 
While commemorating non-biblical worthies is as simple as a collect in their honor and a biography, the question of how to handle Biblical saints with proper readings is sticky.
 
My initial thought would be to commemorate them as the reading traditionally assigned to their feast occurs in the Lectionary. (This is my solution for Transfiguration.) The problem is that many of the most significant Christian saints would only get mention in years B and C of the cycle. 
 
The other option is to simply mark those days out as festal days, give three proper readings and a psalm that unites them, and pick up the Ordinary Time cycle the following day. Thus, if I am commemorating Saint Thomas on July 3rd, I read the Ordinary readings on the 2nd and 4th, with the festal readings on the 3rd.  By my accounting, there would be around 30 festal days to work around. Not perfect, but doable.
 
A MORE SERIOUS PROPOSAL
 
Here is a proposal for a serious Lectionary revision:
 
THE CHRISTMAS CYCLE
15 Days, Beginning December 18 and Running Through January 1
These days would be strictly thematic.
Full Propers (Collect and Psalm) Provided
 

(*One will note that there is no provision for Advent. This would be simple to solve, by simply beginning on December 1st and expaning the thematic readings. I'd argue against it, keeping the week leading up to Christmas as more of an Advent-like time.)

 
THE PASCHAL CYCLE
103 Days, Beginning Ash Wednedsay and Running Through Trinity Sunday
(39 Days of Lent, 7 Days of Holy Week, 39 Days of Eastertide, 1 Day of Ascension, 9 Days after Ascension, 1 Day of Pentecost, 6 Days after Pentecost, 1 Day of Trinity Sunday)
These days would be strictly thematic.
Full Propers (Collect and Psalm) Provided
Would suggest reading Job in Lent, as its chronolgical place is sketchy
Would suggest reading Revelation in Paschaltide, as it points towards the ultimate goal
 
THE ORDINARY CYCLE
247 Days, Not Counting Any Feasts
(If Keeping Feasts, Approximatley 217 Days, Depending on What Feasts are Selected)
Readings assigned to Calendar Dates
Pastor/Preacher free to choose complimentary readings, psalms, and collects
Pastors could compose their own collects

Lectionary Disgruntlement

I am, apparently, not the only one who has recently been having some rather disgruntled thoughts about the Lectionary of late.

Jeffrey Tucker over at The New Liturgical Movement writes in opposition to the three-year lectionary system of the Novus Ordo Missae, suggesting a return to the previous annual cycle. The comments on the thread alone are worth reading.

Lauren Porter at Porter's Progress writes about the rise of lectionary preaching in the United Methodist Church and his concerns with the Revised Common Lectionary.

William Weston at Disgruntled Center writes, simply, Ditch the Lectionary.

Very intersting...

Lectionary Reflections, Part II

In Part I of this series, I asked a series of three questions. In today’s article, I intend to reflect on the first two:

1) What is the value of reading four passages of Scripture, two or three of which are ignored, marginalized, or even misappropriated to a specific theme?

2) What good is including such a significant amount of Scripture in the Liturgy of the Church when/if people largely tune it out?

PART II
The First Two Questions

Shortly after the interim edition of the Book of Common Prayer of my Synod was released, I got an e-mail from my bishop asking about the connections I saw in the readings for a particular day. To be fair, on that particular day I found the connections to be readily apparent. Yet a few months later, as I sat down to prepare for the coming Sunday’s homily, I read, re-read, and re-re-read the four passages appointed in the proper, to find that I couldn’t put together a cohesive homily on the readings.

Going back to my days as a server, I remember having the idea drilled into me that the homily pertained to the readings. A cardinal sin in homiletics is to start introducing tons of additional readings into the mix. It’s one thing to cite and share portions of other texts, but the pericopes of the Lectionary are present for a purpose – to be preached upon! I always found it odd when I would visit a congregation where the Lectionary was used for the readings, and then the preacher mounted the pulpit and read yet another reading, which had nothing to do with the preceding three or four, and which was to form the basis of his sermon (the only thing more pointless was re-reading the Gospel of the Day a second time before commencing the sermon, but I digress!). I wanted to scream from my pew “Preach what you’ve already read!” but I dutifully held my tongue.

Looking back, I can’t begin to count the number of times I have tried weaving tenuous threads together to form a cohesive homily on the texts, and I have to admit that it is very possible that, in doing so, I have fallen into the trap of crafting God’s Word to suit my thinking. This is an alarming prospect, for if I have misled the flock, I am a thief and a robber… which leads to the dilemma of how to handle lectionary preaching.

The problem is largely non-existent in thematically united times of the Liturgical Year. Certainly it would be difficult to argue that there was a discontinuity of message in the pericopes assigned, for example, to the Paschal Triddum or Ascension Day. But in the large ‘green’ swath of the year – and, to a lesser extent, on the Sundays within the preparatory/celebratory seasons of Advent, Lent, and Easter – the discordance between readings become more and more apparent.

The pericopes of the festal times, however, presents another problem – the regular association of specific texts with one another, which often results in the people being exposed to a single aspect of the text itself. Further, it does not allow for the introduction of other texts (perhaps lesser known ones) that serve to equally embrace and enhance the message found in the controlling text (usually the Gospel) for the day.

The result of using disconnected and discordant readings is less than appealing to me from a pastoral perspective. In a post-modern world, Christianity needs to fight the trend to multi-task in the midst of its own worship. Central core messages need to be exposed and explored for the benefit of the people. Many modern Church-goers cannot tell you what their pastor preached about, or what the readings were about, during their Sunday worship service. For some, it is because the pastor meanders between texts, displaying little or no unity, and confusing folks mightily. For others it is a result of a lack of attention. Admittedly, I have had such lack of attention when sitting in a pew. Heck, for that matter, I have had such a lack of attention from time to time when sitting in the pastor’s chair!

While I would strongly argue that abandoning the lectionary altogether is not a tenable solution (in spite of arguments to the contrary, I still believe that the lack of a lectionary allows pastors to cherry-pick favorite texts, much to the detriment of their parishioners), I cannot ignore the fact that neither the historic one-year or the contemporary three-year lectionary systems are optimal ways to present the Word of God in its fullness to God’s people.

Lectionary Reflections, Part 1

Preface to the Series

2010 marks my thirteenth year as a Presbyter of the Church. Since 1997, I have used several different ‘Sunday and Holy Day’ Lectionaries in various congregations and ministries I have served. They include:

• The Three Year Lectionary of the Novus Ordo Missae
• The One Year Lectionary of the historic Book of Common Prayer
• The Local Use Lectionary of the Syriac Rite Church of the Transfiguration
• The Three Year Lectionary of the LCMS’s Lutheran Service Book
• The Three Year Lectionary of the RESA’s Interim Book of Common Prayer

In all those years, I have never felt truly comfortable with any of these Lectionaries for a variety of reasons. My pastoral heart has lead me to ask myself why. This series is my attempt to answer some of those questions for myself, and to share those answers with the Christian community at-large. I hope that you, dear reader, will consider offering feedback to my posts and engaging in discussion concerning them.

PART I
Historical Overview and Questions to Consider

Since the late 1960’s, there has been a strong movement afoot in Lectionary development and refinement of providing more and more Scripture to the People of God in the context of the Sunday assembly. Not counting motets, hymns, and choral anthems based on Scriptural texts, most Western Christian congregations hear four portions (lections) from the Word of God when they gather – a Psalm, an Old Testament lesson, a reading from the Gospels, and a lesson from the New Testament. This practice is ancient, to be sure, going back to at least the time of Jerome in the West. Fragments of lectionaries used by many ancient Christian luminaries are known to historians and liturgists, and they tell an interesting tale.

Prior to the reforms instituted by the Second Vatican Council, only a few denominations included such copious amounts of Scripture on a given Sunday or Holy Day. Most Western Churches had snippets of the Psalms which served as introits, graduals, Alleluia verses, offertory verses, and post-communion chants. The Old Testament was rarely found in the Eucharistic lectionary (which was the default public lectionary, as it was the one most frequently used on Sundays) outside of the eves of Holy Days, and the idea of a multi-year lectionary was more a matter of alternate preaching texts (particularly in the Lutheran and, to a lesser extent, Reformed traditions) than regular liturgical texts.

As a result, most of the Christian west heard (as the Christian east still does) the same lessons on the same Sundays and Holy Days year after year. This certainly has a positive impact in terms of impressing the precious truths found in the lectionary upon the hearts and minds of the faithful, but it left the vast majority of the Biblical narrative on the cutting room floor, so to speak – leaving it for the monks, pastors, and industrious laypersons to peruse and apply the more intensive daily lectionaries to their daily life and personal worship.

The Second Vatican Council rightly acknowledged that this was a wholly unsatisfactory situation, and the framers of the Lectionary of the Novus Ordo rite must at least be given credit for attempting to expose more of the Scripture to the people. Sadly, however, what little cohesiveness existed in the preceding lectionary system seemed to disappear in many respects with the adoption of the new lectionary. While the major feasts retain much that is good and valuable (and thematic), many ordinary Sundays now have readings with no seeming interconnectivity, leading to them being frequently ignored by preachers, and disregarded by the faithful.

This leads to three very striking questions:

1. What is the value of reading four passages of Scripture, two or three of which are ignored, marginalized, or even misappropriated to a specific theme?

2. What good is including such a significant amount of Scripture in the Liturgy of the Church when/if people largely tune it out?

3. If the Lectionary is a tool to serve the needs of the People of God, what form should the Lectionary take to ensure that said needs are met?

In my next post on this topic,

I will explore where so many Lectionaries break down in practical use

for both the people and the preacher.

Advent 6: The Annunciation of our Lord to Joseph

Today is the final Sunday of the Advent season, marked by the story of Joseph's encounter with an angel who announces to him the impending birth of the Messiah. In today's Office of Readings, we hear from Sermon 2 on Saint Joseph, composed by Bernadine of Siena, a Franciscian friar. In this work, Bernadine casts Joseph in a similar light with John the Forerunner - as the turning point between the Old and New Covenants of God.


***

From a Sermon of Bernardine of Siena.

A general rule that applies to all individual graces given to a rational creature is that whenever divine grace selects someone to receive a particular grace or elevated state, all the gifts for his state are given to that person.

This was verified in a particular way in the case of Joseph, a great and holy man, foster-father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and true husband of Mary. He was chosen by the eternal Father to be a faithful provider and guardian of the most precious treasures of God – his Son and his spouse – and Joseph carried out this task with great fidelity.

A comparison can be made between Joseph and the whole Church of Christ. Joseph was the specially chosen man through whom and under whom Christ entered the world fittingly and in an appropriate way. So, if the whole Church is in the debt of the Virgin Mary, since, through her, it was able to receive the Christ, surely after her, it also owes to Joseph a particular gratitude and reverence.

Joseph is the terminus of the Old Testament in whom the dignity of the prophets and patriarchs achieves its promised fulfillment. Moreover; he alone possessed in the flesh what God in his goodness promised to them over and again.

It is beyond doubt that Christ did not deny to Joseph in heaven that intimacy, respect, and high honor which he showed to him as to a father during his own earthly life, but rather completed and perfected it. Justifiably the words of the Lord should be applied to him, “Enter into the joy of your Lord.” Although it is the joy of eternal happiness that comes into the heart of man, the Lord prefers to say to him “enter into joy’ to indicate mystically that this joy is not only within him, but that it surrounds him everywhere and absorbs him, as if he were plunged into an infinite depth.

Advent 5: The Ancestors of our Lord

Today is the Fifth Sunday of Advent. "Fifth Sunday, you say?" Fret not. The calendar of the Syriac Churches (and of the Ambrosian rite, as well as some other historical western rites) feature a longer Advent season.

Today's readings pose an interesting look at the nature of faith and how justification by faith through grace truly operates. We are reminded in our Lord's genealogy (from the Gospel at today's Divine Liturgy) of the many sinner-saints who stand in our Lord's worldly lineage.

In the Office of Readings today, we once again hear from Augustine of Hippo (Sermon 185) who reminds us that it is God's grace that the Ancestors of our Lord needed for salvation, just as we do as well.

***

From a Sermon of Augustine of Hippo.
(Sermon 185)

Awake! For your sake God has taken on our flesh. “Awake, you who sleep, rise from the dead, and Christ will bring you new light.” I reiterate, for your sake, God became man!

You would have suffered eternal death if he had not been born among us in time. You would have never found freedom from sinful flesh if he had not taken upon himself our nature. You would have suffered everlasting unhappiness if it had not been for his great mercy. You would never have been reborn if he had not shared your death. You would have been lost had he not come to your aid. Likewise, if he had not come, you would have perished.

So, let us joyfully celebrate the coming of our salvation and redemption! “He has become our righteousness, our sanctification, our redemption.” Thus, as it is written, “All you who glory, glory in the Lord.”

“Truth, then, has arisen from the earth”: Christ himself, who said, “I am the truth” was born of a virgin. “And righteousness looked down from heaven”: because believing in this newborn child, we are justified not by ourselves but by God.

“Truth has arisen from the earth”: because “the Word was made flesh. And righteousness looked down from heaven”: because “every good and perfect gift comes from above.”

“Truth has arisen from the earth”: flesh from Mary. “And righteousness looked down from heaven”: for “you can receive nothing unless it has been given to you from heaven.”

“Justified by faith, let us be at peace with God”: for “righteousness and peace have embraced one another. Through our Lord Jesus Christ”: for “Truth has arisen from the earth. Through whom we have access to that grace in which we stand, and our boast is in our hope of God’s glory.” He does not say, “of our glory,” but “of God’s glory”: for “righteousness” has not proceeded from us but has “looked down from heaven.” Therefore let those who glory, glory not in themselves but “in the Lord.”

For this reason, when our Lord was born of the Virgin, the message of the angels was “Glory to God in the highest, and peace to his people on earth.” How could peace reign on earth unless “Truth has arisen from the earth,” that is, unless Christ was born of our flesh?

Let us rejoice in this grace, so that our glorying may bear witness to our good conscience by which we glory, not in ourselves, but in the Lord. That is why Scripture says, “He is my glory, the one who lifts up my head.” For what greater grace could God have made to dawn on us than to make his only Son become the Son of Man, so that we might in turn become children and heirs of God?

Ask if this were merited.
Ask for its reason and justification.
Behold, your only answer is grace.

Advent 4: The Birth of John the Forerunner

Today the Church celebrates the Fourth Sunday of Advent, which marks (in the Syriac tradition) the Birth of our Lord's Forerunner - John. Today's Office of Readings features a reading on the Forerunner, taken from Sermon 293 of Augustine of Hippo.

***

From a Sermon of Augustine of Hippo.

The Church observes the birth of John as in a holy event. We do not celebrate the birth of any of the other fathers, but we do celebrate the birthdays of both both John and Christ. This point cannot be passed over silently. Perhaps I may not be able to explain it in the way that such an important matter deserves, but it is still worth thinking about it a little more deeply and fruitfully than usual.

John was born of an old, barren woman; Christ was born of a youthful virgin. The news of John’s impending birth was met with incredulity, and his father is dumb-struck; Christ’s birth was believed, and he was conceived by faith.

Such is the topic, as I have presented it, for our discussion and study. I have introduced these points even if we are not capable of examining all the twists and turns of such a great mystery, either for lack of capacity or for lack of time. You will be taught much better by the Holy Spirit, the One who speaks in you even when I am not here. (It is the Spirit whom you contemplate with devotion, whom you have taken into your hearts, and whose temple you have become.)

John, it seems, has been inserted as a kind of boundary between the two Testaments, the Old and the New. Our Lord indicates as much when he says, “The law and the prophets were until John.” Thus, John represents the old and heralds the new. Because he represents the old, he is born of an elderly couple; because he represents the new, he is revealed as a prophet in his mother’s womb. You will remember that, before he was born, at Mary’s arrival he leapt in his mother’s womb. Already he had been marked out, designated before he was born; it was already shown whose forerunner he would be, even before he saw him (with his eyes). These are divine matters, and exceed the measure of human frailty. Eventually, he is born, he receives a name, and his father’s tongue is loosed.

Zechariah is struck dumb and loses his voice, until John, the Lord’s forerunner, is born and releases his voice for him. What does Zechariah’s silence mean? The silence of Zechariah is nothing but the age of prophecy laying hidden – obscured, as it were – and concealed before the preaching of Christ. At John’s arrival his voice is released, and it becomes clear when the one who was being prophesied is about to come. The releasing of Zechariah’s voice at John’s birth has the same significance as the tearing of the veil of the Temple at the crucifixion of Christ. If John were meant to proclaim himself, he would not be opening Zechariah’s mouth. The tongue is released because a voice is being born – for when John was already heralding the Lord, he was asked, “Who are you” and he replied “I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness.”

John was a voice that lasted only for a time.

Christ, who is the Word from before all time, is eternal.

Advent 3: The Visitation of Mary to Elizabeth

Today we celebrate the Third Sunday of the Advent season, commemorating the Visitation of Mary to Elizabeth, and of Christ Jesus to his Forerunner, John. Often times the latter portion of this great mystery remains unspoken, but in today's Office of Readings, Ambrose of Milan's words from his Commentary on Luke speak eloquently of the double visitation that occured on that day in the Judean highlands.

***

From a Commentary on the Gospel of Luke by Ambrose of Milan.

When the angel revealed his message to the Virgin Mary he gave her a sign to win her trust. He told her of the motherhood of an old and barren woman to show that God is able to do all that he wills.

When Mary hears this, she sets out for the hill country. She does not disbelieve God’s word; she feels no uncertainty over the message or doubt about the sign. She goes forth, eager in purpose, dutiful in conscience, hastening for joy.

Filled with God, where would she rush but to the heights? The Holy Spirit does not proceed by slow, laborious efforts. Quickly, too, the blessings of her coming and the Lord’s presence are made clear: as soon as Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting the child leapt in her womb, and she was filled with the Holy Spirit.

Notice the contrast and the choice of words. Elizabeth is the first to hear Mary’s voice, but John is the first to be aware of grace. She hears with the ears of the body, but he leaps for joy at the meaning of the mystery. She is aware of Mary’s presence, but he is aware of the Lord’s: a woman aware of a woman’s presence, the forerunner aware of the pledge of our salvation. The women speak of the grace they have received while the children are active in secret, unfolding the mystery of love with the help of their mothers, who prophesy by the spirit of their sons.

The child leaps in the womb; the mother is filled with the Holy Spirit, but not before her son. Once the son has been filled with the Holy Spirit, he fills his mother with the same Spirit. John leaps for joy, and the spirit of Mary rejoices in turn. When John leaps for joy Elizabeth is filled with the Holy Spirit, but we know that though Mary’s spirit rejoices, she does not need to be filled with the Holy Spirit. Her son, who is beyond our understanding, is active in his mother in a way beyond our understanding. Elizabeth is filled with the Holly Spirit after conceiving John, while Mary is filled with the Holy Spirit before conceiving the Lord. Elizabeth says: Blessed are you because you have believed.

You also are blessed because you have heard and believed. A soul that believes both conceives and brings forth the Word of God and acknowledges his works.

Let Mary’s soul be in each of you to proclaim the greatness of the Lord. Let her spirit be in each of you to rejoice in the Lord. Christ has only one mother in the flesh, but we all bring forth Christ in faith. Every soul receives the Word of God if only it keeps chaste, remaining pure and free from sin, its modesty undefiled. The soul that succeeds in this proclaims the greatness of the Lord, just as Mary’s soul magnified the Lord; just as her spirit rejoiced in God her Savior.

Elsewhere in Scripture we hear the words “Magnify the Lord with me”. The Lord is magnified, not because our voice can add anything to God, but because he is magnified within us. Christ is the image of God, and if the soul does what is right and holy, it magnifies that image of God, in whose likeness it was created and, in magnifying the image of God, the soul has a share in its greatness and is exalted.

Advent 2: The Annunciation of our Lord to Mary

Today is the second of six Advent Sundays in the calendar of the Church year of many Syriac Churches, and in our own local calendar. Our readings retell the marvelous day of the Incarnation, when Christ Jesus was made flesh in the womb of the Virgin Mary.

Instead of giving you my own words today, I would like to share words that are far wiser and more ancient than anything I could come up with on my own. These words are taken from today's Office of Readings, and come from a letter penned by Leo of Rome (i.e., Leo the Great) to Flavian.

***

Majesty took on humility, strength weakness, eternity mortality; and for the paying off of the debt belonging to our condition a nature that is incapable of suffering was joined to one that could. Thus, in keeping with the needs of our case , one and the same Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, was able to die in one nature, and unable to die in the other.

Thus in the whole and perfect nature of true man was true God born, complete in what was his own, complete in what was ours. And by ours we mean what the Creator formed in us from the beginning and what he undertook to repair. For what the Deceiver brought in and man, being misled, committed, had no trace in the Savior. Though he partook of man’s weaknesses, he did not share our faults.

He took the form of a slave without stain of sin, increasing the human and not diminishing the divine. He emptied himself; though invisible he made himself visible, though Creator and Lord of all things he chose to share our mortality. This was the condescension of pity, not the loss of omnipotence. Accordingly he who while remaining in the form of God made man, was also made man in the form of a slave. Both natures retain their own proper character without loss: and as the form of God did not do away with the form of a slave, so the form of a slave did not impair the form of God. Thus the Son of God enters into our lowly world, descending from his heavenly home and yet not relinquishing his Father's glory. He is born in a new condition, by a new birth.

He was born in a new condition, for, invisible in his own nature, he became visible in ours. He whom nothing could contain was content to be contained. Existing before all time, he began to exist at a moment in time. Lord of the cosmos, he obscured his immeasurable majesty and took upon himself the form of a servant. Incapable, as God, of suffering, he did not disdain our humanity which is capable of suffering. Immortal, he chose to be subject to the laws of death.

The Lord Jesus assumed his mother’s nature without her faults; and, in spite of his wonderous virgin birth, his human nature is not unlike our own. He who is true God is also true man. There is no falsehood in this unity as long as the humility of manhood and the loftiness of the Godhead co-exist together.

As God is not changed by the showing of pity, man is not swallowed up by God’s dignity. Both natures exercises its own activity, in unity with the other. The Word performs what is proper to the Word, and the flesh performs what is proper to the flesh. One nature shines forth with miracles, while the other succumbs to injuries. And as the Word does not loose equality with the Father’s glory, so the flesh does not leave behind the nature of our race. It must again and again be repeated: one and the same is truly Son of God and truly Son of Man.

God in that “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”; man in that “the Word became flesh and dwelt in us.” God in that “all things were made by Him, and without Him was nothing made”; man in that “He was made of a woman, made under law.”

The nativity of the flesh was the manifestation of human nature: the childbearing of a virgin is the proof of Divine power.

Advent 1: The Annunciation of John the Forerunner

Today, those of us who are beginning Advent are celebrating the Annunciation and Conception of John the Forerunner. I wanted to draw your attention to an outstanding and timely homily on the topic at the website of St. George Orthodox Christian Cathedral in Wichita, Kansas.

You can read the homily at this link.

Over the next several weeks, we will be hearing about the unfolding of our Lord's first Advent on the Sundays of the season, while recalling that his second Advent is immanent throughout the weekdays that follow.

May God bless you and your families during this Advent Season.

Some Railings on the RCL

Yesterday, my wife and I visited a Church in our neighborhood (relatively speaking).

But this post isn’t about the congregation, or the pastor, or the way they conducted the service. While I could choose to write on those topics, I won’t.

This post is, instead, focused on the contemporary western Lectionary, the Revised Common Lectionary… and my continued contempt for it.

The Revised Common Lectionary (RCL) is the Protestant version of the western Lectionary that was prepared in the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council. As a result, with amendments here and there, the Roman Catholic, Anglican, and Lutheran world (together with a smattering of Presbyterians, Methodists, United Church of Christ folks, and others) use, essentially, the same readings every week. (Within the RCL itself, two varying tracks -unlike the Roman lectionary- which allow for either loosely thematic or semi-continuous readings from the Old Testament during most of Ordinary Time.)

During the Sunday service I attended, the second reading (the Epistle) was utterly ignored. It wasn’t given a second thought or mention in the homily, and probably by the congregation. The first reading didn’t fare much better. Only the Gospel got any real substantial face time in the homily.

Scripture scholars and liturgists have, over the years, decried placing the Scriptures into ‘artificial’ thematic constructs, but I have to ask the question… Why?

As we look around the Christian world today and assess the landscape, what do we see? Large numbers of people falling away from essential truths, truths that often get glossed over because of our rush to focus on the Gospel in the homily (or at least the predominant theme) because of a duty to the words of Jesus (or the overarching theme). The moral teachings of Paul, Peter, James, and Jude often get overlooked as the ‘third-wheel reading’ that they are (and heaven forbid that the Psalm get a mention!).

Consider this a plea for, at least in the west, returning to thematic pericopes for the proclamation of Scripture in the midst of the assembly. I understand and embrace the desire for a more comprehensive lectionary in the Church (personally, I prefer a 4 year cycle), but the RCL and modern Roman Lectionaries fail... the only redeemable version of the so-called Common Lectionary that I can even come close to endorsing is the one from the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod's new Christian Worship Supplement, which does radical surgery on the three year lectionary and ensures that more themes are present.

Christmas in... Tishrei?

Late last year, I shared an article about recomputing the Christian calendar based on a more plausible sequence of events - specifically as it surrounds the celebration of Christ's birth. As I noted then:

When was Christ born? It is my belief that the best avaliable evidence tells us
that it was 29 September 2 BC (15 Tishrei 3760), which was the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles that year. What a magnificent day for our Savior to Tabernacle among us (as John 1 teaches)! An alternate date, especially if adopting an earlier Crucifixion date, would be 29 September 5 BC (15 Tishrei 3763).

I am not so much worried about the date on our civil calendar as I am the date on the Hebrew Calendar. This year, 15 Tishrei falls in October (sunset on the 13th to sunset on the 14th according to our civil calendar) and thus that would give us Christmas in October.

Theologically, the connection with Sukkot (the Feast of Tabernacles) is striking (as noted in the above quote), so this year, in my home, I will be celebrating the Nativity of our Lord in October. I'll still (begrudgingly) celebrate a public service at the hospital in December, but for me, it's Christmas in Tishrei... ur... October... at least this year.

One Date for Pascha/Easter

This weekend, Orthodox Christians will celebrate Pascha... over a month after their Western counterparts have done so. This continued division between East and West is a grave sin against the witness of the Christian faith in the world today. I share the belief, as do many others, that we need a better way to calculate Pascha (Easter).

Some ideas:

1. Celebrate Pascha in the Sunday immediately following the Jewish Passover


2. Celebrate Pascha on the last Sunday in April


3. Celebrate Pascha on the first Sunday in April

Celebrating on the Sunday after the Jewish Passover helps maintain a continuity with the foreshadowing of the Paschal Mystery. Celebrating on the last Sunday in April allows for warmer (somewhat) weather in order to celebrate baptism outdoors in a natural setting (stream, creek, river, etc...). Celebrating on the first Sunday in April is probably the ecumenically-sensitive option, since that is what most folks would seem to prefer.

You can register your support for a single day to observe Pascha by visiting onedate.org.

One Season Ends... Another Begins

Well, football season officially ended just a few minutes ago with the New York Giants ending the New England Patriots quest for perfection with a three point victory at University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale, Arizona. Tom Brady and the Patriots came up short on their closing drive, giving the game to New York. As a Patriots fan, it was a dissapointing way to end an otherwise stellar season. But, that's football... and that's 'why they play the games.'

With this night being ended, its time to turn our attention to preparing for Pascha. Lent begins tomorrow (for those of us in the Syriac rite) with Ash Monday. Football cannot compare to the joy of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ... not even a Super Bowl win can come close. Let us now enter into Lent with a certainty of purpose, focusing on Christ, the author and finisher of our faith.

During this Lenten season, fasting and abstinence from meats are some traditional means of marking the season, but instead of giving things up, perhaps you might consider taking something up... perhaps reviving your daily prayer life, spending more time reading Sacred Scripture, or volunteering time with the homeless, the sick, or the hungry.

Whatever way you choose to mark the Lenten Season, do so with the recognition that what you do you are doing in the power of the Holy Spirit to make your relationship with Christ more intimate, and remember that by making self sacrifices, we find ourselves conformed more and more to the heart of Jesus.

May your Lenten observance be blessed.

And, to my fellow Pats fans... there's always next season.

Creating a New Christian Calendar

Is it time to develop a new Christian Liturgical Calendar?
The Bible itself is repleat with reasons to believe that our commemoration of the Nativity on 25 December is wrong. That's not to say it is sinful to commemorate the Birth of the Lord on that day - as I doubt we'll ever know for certain in this world when Christ was actually born... but I feel pretty comfortable with some answers I have recently discovered; answers that could compel us to revise our Liturgical Calendars... and for the better.

Inspired by the Hebraic roots of Syriac Christianity and the Jewish learning of a bishop I respect, I have been delving deeper into the question of how we celebrate the Liturgical Year. I have a strong desire to see the Liturgical Year as a time of learning. We know the early Church read the Scriptures as they had them in course and exposited them in the midst of the assembly.

If we were to look at some alternate dates for our Feasts, we might well have an excellent Liturgical Calendar that would allow us to reclaim this ancient practice.

Such a calendar would be based on two poles that fall about six months apart. These are the Birth of Christ and his Resurrection.

When was Christ born? It is my belief that the best avaliable evidence tells us that it was 29 September 2 BC (15 Tishrei 3760), which was the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles that year. What a magnificent day for our Savior to Tabernacle among us (as John 1 teaches)! An alternate date, especially if adopting an earlier Crucifixion date, would be 29 September 5 BC (15 Tishrei 3763).

What about his death? Two options present themselves, but I tend to favor 3 April 33 AD (14 Nisan 3793). The other option would be 7 April 30 AD (14 Nisan 3790). In both of these years, 14 Nisan fell on a Friday, permitting Christ to eat the Passover on the day of his death (remember, Hebrew days were strictly from sunset to sunset). The Synoptic vs. Johannine issue rears its ugly head here, but an adequate explanation is that there were several varying calendars in use among the varying sects of Jews in Jesus' time.

Now, how does this help us with celebrating the life of Christ?

If we are able to teach the life of Christ chronologically during the first portion of the year (about six months), and about the growth of the Church (chronologically) in the remaining half of the year, we would be well on our way to developing a deeper understanding of how the life of Christ unfolded and how the Church grew and explained her teaching in an ever-increasing sphere of influence.

Perhaps for some this is too radical, but my proposal for consideration would be:

29 September - The Nativity of our Lord
Sunday on or after 7 April - The Resurrection of our Lord (7 April is the Median Day between the two possible Resurrection Sundays in 30 and 33 AD, 5 and 9 April.)

This has the virtue of remaining relatively simple in relation to the complex Lunar calculations and extra months that would require a significant alteration to Lectionary Cycles.

Readers thoughts are, as always, welcome.

UPDATE: I have worked out the following Cycle of Feast Days surrounding the Incarnation, Pascha, and Pentecost for a calendar in keeping with my above-noted suggestions. In this I also include the 29th of February leap day as a day outside the calendar, kept as a day of special praise for the Trinity. All other days are considered Ordinary Time.

THE INCARNATION CYCLE
(Fixed)
15 Days

September 22 The Holy Trinity
September 23 The Annunciation of the Forerunner
September 24 The Annunciation of our Lord
September 25 The Visitation of the God-bearer
September 26 The Nativity of the Forerunner
September 27 The Ancestors of Jesus Christ
September 28 The Annunciation to Saint Joseph
September 29 The Nativity of our Lord
September 30 The Presentation of our Lord
October 1 The Visitation of the Magi
October 2 The Holy Innocents
October 3 The Return to Nazareth
October 4 The Finding of our Lord in the Temple
October 5 The Ministry of Saint John the Forerunner
October 6 The Theophany of our Lord

LEAP DAY
(Fixed)
February 29 Praises of the Holy Trinity

THE PASCHAL CYCLE
(Variable)
14 Days
Begins on the Sunday between March 31 and April 6
Ends on the Saturday between April 13 and April 19

Palm Sunday
Holy Monday
Holy Tuesday
Holy Wednesday
Holy Thursday
Holy Friday
Holy Saturday
Pascha
Bright Monday
Bright Tuesday
Bright Wednesday
Bright Thursday
Bright Friday
Bright Saturday

THE PENECOST CYCLE
(Variable)
11 Days
Begins on the Thursday between May 16 and May 22
Ends on the Sunday between May 26 and June 1

Ascension Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Pentecost Sunday