On the Articles: Article XXXIV

The Nineteenth Sunday after TrinityO GOD, forasmuch as without thee we are not able to please thee: Mercifully grant, that thy Holy Spirit may in all things direct and rule our hearts; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

XXXIV. Of the Traditions of the Church
It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one, and utterly like; for at all times they have been divers, and may be changed according to the diversities of countries, times, and men’s manners, so that nothing be ordained against God’s Word. Whosoever through his private judgement, willingly and purposely, doth openly break the traditions and ceremonies of the Church, which be not repugnant to the Word of God, and be ordained and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly, (that others may fear to do the like,) as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church, and hurteth the authority of the Magistrate, and woundeth the consciences of the weak brethren.
Every particular or national Church hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish, ceremonies or rites of the Church ordained only by man’s authority, so that all things be done to edifying.

The role of tradition has been one that has challenged the Catholic Church since its creation. At the time of the English Reformation, continental Protestants had been claiming to abandon tradition in favour of Scripture alone while ironically establishing new traditions. Some practices and doctrines of the Church were heavily rooted in tradition, but these traditions were not always universal and might vary from region to region even within one country.

This variability, for instance, led to the Synod at Whitby in the mid-7th century as there was at that time two different models for calculating the date of Easter, one brought by the Celtic missionary tradition in the north and one from Canterbury in the south rooted in the Roman practice. This could cause significant problems when you combined people from both traditions (as might happen in the case of nobility) when one spouse would be fasting for Lent while the other feasted for Easter.

The first thing that ought to be noted is that while the Article makes it clear that traditions of the Church may be enforced, they may be enforced only insofar as they are not, “repugnant to the Word of God,” which is to say that Holy Scripture holds a place of Primacy (Article VI) and the Church may not ordain or teach what is contrary to the Scriptures (Article XX). This differentiates it from the Eastern Orthodox which hold that Scripture is a part of Tradition and therefore Tradition can hold a dogmatic authority, and the Roman Catholic Church which argues its teaching magisterium holds the ability to promulgate Tradition as an equal authority, and separate from, Holy Scripture. Anglicans by contrast would suggest all authority is ultimately rooted in Holy Scripture and the authority even of the Ecumenical Councils and Creeds is rooted in their Scriptural authenticity, not merely in their reception by the whole Church.

This Article goes on to address other aspects of tradition, noting that tradition need not be uniform in all senses, particular as it approaches issues of ceremony. So long as everything remains rooted in the authority of Scripture, the Article argues, different places and times may allow for differences in ceremony and tradition. That said, it notes that like St Paul argues in I Corinthians, there must be order in the Church: these traditions and ceremonies must be, “approved by common authority.”

It rebukes the notion of private judgement (a term often applied to interpretation of Scripture but here applied to the acceptance of Tradition) where it says that such actions taken against the lawful authority of the Church not only assault the authority of the Church but, “woundeth the consciences of the weak bretheren.”

That said, while this Article defends the lawful diversity in the land, it is not to suggest that the practice of the English Church was one of disunity. Indeed, with the compilation and publication of the Prayer Book, uniformity was imposed in many respects on English clergy. What this Article defends is the historic legitimacy in differing practices in general, and thus the legitimacy of the English Church maintaining different traditions, ceremonies and practices than other parts of the Western Catholic Church where Rome had imposed its form of uniformity. This Article thus reaffirms Article XXIV on the use of the vernacular, or even Article XXX which allows for the people and clergy alike to receive the Eucharist in both kinds.

This is made clear in the final paragraph and should be noted the emphasis on the fact that ceremonies and rites of the Church are ordained through the Church, “only by man’s authority,” again emphasizing the distinction drawn between tradition and Scripture, which holds authority bestowed by God himself, versus what the Church ordains for the edification of the people, maintenance of unity and the general good order of the Church.

On Roads

The Sunday called Septuagesima

O LORD, we beseech thee favourably to hear the prayers of thy people; that we, who are justly punished for our offences, may be mercifully delivered by thy goodness, for the glory ofthy Name; through Jesus Christ our Saviour, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, ever one God, world without end. Amen.

Christianity is often presented as a journey in Scripture. Whether navigating wide or narrow roads or gates (St Mt 7. 13, 14), we are travelling. St Paul’s conversion occurred on the road to Damascus, a phrase which itself has become synonymous with significant change in a person’s life course, and which will be celebrated tomorrow during the Feast of the Conversion of St Paul.

On the Road to Emmaus is an important journey in Scripture that takes place on a road, but tells a slightly different story. Told in St Luke’s Gospel (24. 13-32) and later referred to in St Mark’s Gospel (16. 12, 13), it tells the story of two disciples travelling from Jerusalem to the town of Emmaus who encounter Christ on that road. But looking more closely at the story, it shows us the unfolding of the mass, the service of Holy Communion, and is an important reminder of why we do what we do in our Sunday liturgy.

The story begins, “That very day two of them were going to a village named Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem, and they were talking with each other about all these things that had happened.” As with many stories in Scripture, it begins without the necessary context and the beginning of the chapter must be reviewed. That very day refers to the day of the Resurrection, Sunday. Two of Christ’s disciples are gathered on Sunday discussing him.

As Christ says in St Matthew’s Gospel, “For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them,” (18. 20). So it is and Christ comes among them. He joins them on the road. While the gospel account does not record the disciples inviting Christ specifically to join them, the fact that he is immediately included in the conversation suggests he was invited and welcomed to continue the journey with them. This mirrors the entrance rites, and particularly the Collect for Purity in which God is asked to come among his people as they gather.

Next the disciples, one of whom is identified as Cleopas, begins explaining, at Christ’s question, what had happened with Christ’s death and the early reports of his resurrection. These verses parallel another important part of the mass, that of community announcements! This simple view ignores more of what can be gleaned from a closer examination of these passages, however, which tie these verses to the penitential rite.

The two disciples are having an animated discussion, and Scripture tells us, “And he said to them, “What is this conversation that you are holding with each other as you walk?” And they stood still, looking sad.” (17) Christ calls his people to unburden themselves before him, just as we are called to unburden ourselves before him in the confession. Their response to Christ makes this clearer as they express their disappointed belief that Christ was not who they thought he was, and their scepticism over earlier reports in the day that Christ had risen.

Christ responds to their concerns in a bridge between the end of the penitential rite in which he gives absolution and comfort to them where he says:

“O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?” And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. (v 26, 27)

When Christ says it was necessary for these things to happen, he is directly responding to the sadness in their hearts where they were distressed that Christ was not the Messiah they believed him to be. This also forms a bridge to the Liturgy of the Word, as the then goes on to recount and explain the Scriptures to them. This also serves to highlight the importance of the lectionary. He began at the beginning and moved on through the Prophets; he did not simply teach a 15 part series on his topic of choice, but the Word in its fullness was proclaimed and explained in his sermon.

As he finished explaining the Word to them, the next verse tells us they drew near to where they were going. This is a reference to the village of Emmaus, but in the context of this exploration of parallels, it also holds true that  following the Liturgy of the Word is the Liturgy of the Table, that place which truly represents the destination of the mass itself.

When they come to the table, Christ, “took the bread and blessed and broke it and gave it to them. And their eyes were opened, and they recognized him.” (30, 31) Here he mirrors the four actions of the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, he takes it, blesses it, breaks it and distributes it. The next verse says that upon receiving it, their eyes were opened and they recognized him. It was not when he first appeared, not when he explained the Scriptures to them but in the sacrament that they came to truly know him. Just as Christ is present with us always, abiding within us, and as well comes among us when two or three are gathered, it is through the Eucharist that he comes in a particular and special way.

In the Litugy of the Table the eyes of the disciples are opened in faith, while during the Liturgy of the Word, their hearts began to burn within them as the Scriptures were opened to them. Mirroring the dismissal, in which the people gathered are sent forth, the disciples hurry back to Jerusalem to find the Apostles. “Then they told what had happened on the road, and how he was known to them in the breaking of the bread,” (35)

At the end of the mass, the priest dismisses the people saying, “The peace of God, which passeth all understanding, keep your hearts and minds in the knowledge and love of God, and of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord,” and in the Book of Alternative Services the dismissal is made even more clear where it says something to the effect of, “Go in peace to love and serve the Lord.” In both cases it is clear, the people are being commissioned to go forth, like apostles, and share the love of God they have received with others.

The account of the encounter with Christ on the Road to Emmaus is one of many roads in the Scriptures. It is one of many events and encounters which hints at how Christ wants us to act, and how we are to love and serve the Lord. It is also a reminder that the way we worship on Sundays is not just an accident of history, but is the clear teaching of not just Scripture but Christ himself.

On Pudding

Feast of St Luke the Evangelist

ALMIGHTY God, who calledst Luke the Physician, whose praise is in the Gospel, to be an Evangelist, and Physician of the soul: May it please thee that, by the wholesome medicines of the doctrine delivered by him, all the diseases of our souls may be healed; through the merits of thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Twentieth Sunday after Trinity

O ALMIGHTY and most merciful God, of thy bountiful goodness keep us, we beseech thee, from all things that may hurt us; that we,being ready both in body and soul, may cheerfully accomplish those things that thou wouldest have done; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Last month, the lectionary took us through the Epistle of James. James contains a number of verses many Christians are familiar with. One that really strikes me is Jas 2. 17: “So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.” This verse, and the broader discussion of faith, works and salvation from Jas 2. 14-26, was mentioned in a homily by my priest who suggested the way to view this is that St James is saying, so far as faith is concerned, the proof is in the pudding.

This verse in itself leads to a number of interesting discussion topics on the nature of justification, saving faith or true faith versus the profession of faith and whether works proceed from true faith or play some role in salvation, justification and sanctification.

A perhaps more interesting question is can this verse be applied more generally to the Church or just to the individual? If the proof is in the pudding for the individual, how might that apply to the Church?

To begin, what specifically does St James suggest? “If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled”, without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that?” (Jas 2. 15, 16). Here St James suggests that our faith and deeds must connect, but to break that down a bit more, what is he saying? The faith is to be rooted in Christ’s teachings.

The fact that you would be concerned for a brother or sister who is lacking in basic necessities is related to the faith imparted by Christ. So it is not enough to have some kind of faith, it must be true faith, rooted in Christ’s teachings. Next, it is insufficient to simply teach or preach Christ’s teachings, they are to be lived out if they are to be truly taught.

The real key is not simply that something should happen based on our faith, but that part of that faith is doing something. If you truly believe in Christ Jesus then you will want to do these things. This is perhaps made clear further on in the chapter, where he writes, “You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works,” (Jas 2. 22). Here he introduces the discussion of Abraham and the sacrifice of Isaac to show the connection between Abraham’s faith in God and his willingness to act on that faith by sacrificing his son Isaac.

So to conclude, there are really three things being discussed here. Christ’s teachings, belief in them, and willingness to act upon them based on that faith.

How might this be seen to apply to the Church?

Christ’s teachings are simple enough. It is clear the Church cannot teach what is contrary to Christ. Article XX of the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion says, “it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God’s Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another.” That is simple enough, until you realise that God’s Word written is not always clear.

Just as the term true faith was used previously to describe the type of faith which reflects the teachings of Christ and moves the individual to good works to live out that faith, so to must there be good doctrine.

Luckily, there is a way of deciding whether or not an interpretation of Scripture is good or not and that is to test it against the understanding of the Church Fathers. If you look back and since the patristic age it has been taught that a given verse means A and you suggest it means B, it is likely that your interpretation is somehow in error. While it is true that not all of the fathers were always correct—some fell into error quite often, St Augustine of Hippo even revised many of his early views as he matured in faith—the greater body of their work is an accepted standard by which Christians today can judge the interpretation of Scripture. The Creeds are another great example of something by which we can test interpretation of Scripture. For centuries, the Nicene Creed has been the sufficient Christian statement of faith accepted East and West. If a doctrine similarly runs counter to the Nicene Creed it is incorrect.

It is important to remember this grounding in Scripture. In modern times, arguments for innovation are often presented in the form of “I sense it is the movement of the Spirit that we do X.” This view seeks to ground doctrine not in God’s word, but in personal revelation. For those who have a background in some charismatic protestant denominations, this can actually be a common occurrence leading to discord within a local church community. When you claim authority directly from the Spirit, you are claiming it cannot be tested simply against Scripture because it is a new revelation.  However, Scripture itself points in some cases to this being untrue.

In St John’s Gospel, Christ offers a prayer for the Church: “And I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one,” (St Jn 17. 11). This is Christ’s singular prayer, that the Church be one, be united. Also here, he reaffirms the previous teaching that he and the Father speak as one. It suggests that when the Holy Spirit comes, the helper Christ spoke of when he had just said:

When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you. (St Jn 16. 13-15)

Here, Christ again says that there will be unity between what he has said and what the Spirit has said. Just as he says in Chapter 17 that he and the Father are one, here he had said that he and the Spirit are one. What the Spirit reveals will not contradict what Christ has taught. Similarly, Christ’s prayer was that the Church would be one, and if that is the case, God would not send the Holy Spirit to grant new revelation only to small subsets of Christians, but to all Christians.

So if doctrine is to be rooted in the teachings of Christ that is held in accord with orthodox faith and understanding of those teachings, what then is works? The work of the Church is found in the liturgy, which encourages and nurtures the body to do good works.

Doctrine of the Church ought to be reflected in the words said each week, and ought to inspire the people to fulfil those doctrines throughout the week. As St Teresa of Avila once said, “Christ has no body on earth but yours, no hands but yours, no feet but yours. Yours are the eyes through which Christ’s compassion is to look out; yours are the feet with which He is to go about doing good; and yours are the hands with which He is to bless us now.” The liturgy is when we gather each week to be nourished in God’s grace and then go forth to do what he teaches. To evangelize, to comfort the sick and afflicted and to care for the poor.

Doctrines of the Church, and our understanding of them, ought to be rooted in the same understanding of our personal faith that sees the need for true faith to give birth to good works. Perhaps the most important consideration here then becomes, if faith without works is dead, what might that imply for the Church if it strays from the model which St James provides with respect to true faith?

The Wisdom of Saints: St Justin Martyr

Feast of Justin Martyr, Doctor, 165

ALMIGHTY God, by whose grace and power thy Martyr Justin was enabled to witness to the truth and to be faithful unto death: Grant that we, who now remember him before thee, may likewise so bear witness unto thee in this world, that we may receive with him the crown of glory that fadeth not away; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who with thee and the Holy Spirit liveth and reigneth, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

 St Justin Martyr stands out among the saints of the second century in that many of the details of his life are recorded. He was born in the first years of the second century to pagan parents in the city of Flavia Neapolis in Judea. The city had been established by the Romans in AD 72 shortly after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. In some of his writings, St Justin records that his father and grandfather were also of Flavia Neapolis, which further suggests a pagan origin.

He was given an excellent education in all the classics of philosophy, poetry, rhetoric and history. His education was completed at Alexandria and Ephesus where he engaged with the various philosophies of the day seeking both to complete his education and to find God. At Ephesus, while studying under a Platonist, he had his first broad exposure to Christianity where he was impressed by the Christian martyrs being killed there.

His conversion to Christianity occurred around AD 130, and in his own words he converted due to his desire for both beauty and truth, both of which he found in Christianity. Using his background in philosophy and rhetoric, he began to engage in debates with non-Christians and eventually opened a school for Christian philosophy, first in Ephesus and then eventually in Rome after he moved there later in life.

While in Rome he continued in his debates and defence of Christianity to non-Christians, while continuing to run his school and teach his students. He debated and beat a philosopher named Cresens who later denounced him to the authorities for practising an unauthorized religion. He was tried before the Roman authorities, where he refused to renounce his faith. The Roman prefect Rusticus pronounced a sentence of death on St Justin and he and six of his students were beheaded.

St Justin Martyr, beyond his martyrdom, is remembered for his apologetics which survive to this day. In the earliest days of the church, there was some level of secrecy around Christians and Christian rites. Justin Martyr’s apology, beyond simply helping to defend the merits of Christian doctrine, helped to dispel some of the terrible rumours which had been spread, and largely believed, about what went on between Christians.

St Justin’s first apology was addressed to the Emperor and his sons in the Senate. The introduction explains that the apology is a petion to the Emperor, “on behalf of those of all nations who are unjustly hated and wantonly abused, myself being one of them.” Namely, he was writing on behalf of Christians who were being accused of gross acts without merit, and faced persecution for it.

St Justin sets the tone of his apology, which speaks to the virtues of truth and beauty that had drawn him to Christianity in the first place, when he writes:
Reason directs those who are truly pious and philosophical to honour and love only what is true, declining to follow traditional opinions, if these be worthless. For not only does sound reason direct us to refuse the guidance of those who did or taught anything wrong, but it is incumbent on the lover of truth, by all means, and if death be threatened, even before his own life, to choose to do and say what is right.
He then goes on to conclude his introduction with words that speak to his own eventual end at the hands of Rusticus:

For we have come, not to flatter you by this writing, nor please you by our address, but to beg that you pass judgment, after an accurate and searching investigation, not flattered by prejudice or by a desire of pleasing superstitious men, nor induced by irrational impulse or evil rumours which have long been prevalent, to give a decision which will prove to be against yourselves. For as for us, we reckon that no evil can be done us, unless we be convicted as evil-doers or be proved to be wicked men; and you, you can kill, but not hurt us.

From the very beginning of his apology, it is clear that St Justin truly believed in everything he wrote. He was not so blunt as St Jerome, but it was clear his heart was for God’s truth and he saw no need to compromise that truth in an effort to please the Roman leaders he was addressing.

Much of the rest of the apology focuses on addressing accusations and rumours being levelled against Christians. He begins by suggesting that Christians are being persecuted on the basis of their name, and not any facts:

But as we do not think it just to beg to be acquitted on account of the name, if we be convicted as evil-doers, so, on the other hand, if we be found to have committed no offence, either in the matter of thus naming ourselves, or of our conduct as citizens, it is your part very earnestly to guard against incurring just punishment, by unjustly punishing those who are not convicted. For from a name neither praise nor punishment could reasonably spring, unless something excellent or base in action be proved.

Here St Justin not only begins to make an argument about the need to follow standard jurisprudence and actually prove guilt before Roman citizens are punished for something, a theme he develops more fully later in his apology, he introduces something of a clever wordplay on the basis of the similarity between the Greek word for Christ and the Greek word for excellent and good.

The thrust of his argument is that accusations are being levelled without proof and that no punishment should be incurred without proof (and he indeed suggests that if anything like what Christians were accused of was actually being done by any Christians, the other Christians would justly support the punishment of those individuals), and he then proceeds to spend a significant amount of time discussing some of these rumours.

While today the Eucharist is administered only to those who have received the sacrament of Baptism, in the days of the early church, non-Baptised persons were not permitted to even participate in the liturgy surrounding the Eucharist. This seeming secrecy surrounding the sacraments helped contribute to some of the rumours being spread about Christians. Accusations of cannibalism were not uncommon due to rumours surrounding the Eucharist. St Justin addresses these issues head on by describing the liturgy that takes place when Christians gathered:

But we, after we have thus washed him who has been convinced and has assented to our teaching, bring him to the place where those who are called brethren are assembled, in order that we may offer hearty prayers in common for ourselves and for the baptised person, and for all others in every place, that we may be counted worthy, now that we have learned the truth, by our works also to be found good citizens and keepers of the commandments, so that we may be saved with an everlasting salvation. Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss. There is then brought to the president of the brethren bread and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at His hands. And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent by saying Amen. This word Amen answers in the Hebrew language to γένοιτο [so be it]. And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion.

This description of the liturgy itself should be extremely familiar to all Anglicans, but in that day would have been a revelation to pagans who would never have had an opportunity to read about it or witness it. He then goes on to conclude this section by discussing the Eucharist specifically with a passage that highlights a number of features of modern apologetics, including the use of Scripture to help explain Christian belief:

And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to them alone.

St Justin Martyr lived as someone who sought the truth, and when he found it in Christianity, he sought to share that truth with others, and to help explain it to them in a rational way that a reasoned mind could not reject. The great modern apologists—Chesterton and Lewis—owe much to St Justin, who proved his adherence to the truth he wrote when he professed Christ unto martyrdom.

On Holy Week

The Sunday Next Before Easter commonly called Palm Sunday

ALMIGHTY and everlasting God, who, of thy tender love towards mankind, hast sent thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ, to take upon him our flesh, and to suffer death upon the cross, that all mankind should follow the example of his great humility: Mercifully grant, that we may both follow the example of his patience, and also be made partakers of his resurrection; through the same Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Palm Sunday, also known as the Second Sunday in Passiontide or the Sixth Sunday in Lent, is the final Sunday before Easter Sunday and the first day of Holy Week, commemorating Christ's Passion. It is a period that takes Christians through Christ's triumphal entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday to the Last Supper and the washing of the disciple's feet on Maundy Thursday and his betrayal and crucifixion on Good Friday. It collects the totality of the anticipation and penitence of Lent and prepares us for the glorious triumph of Christ in the Easter Sunday resurrection. It is a complex pattern that contains several parts, each of which is described below.

The Great Fast of Lent lasts 40 days (excluding Sundays) in commemoration of Christ’s 40 days in the wilderness prior to his assumption of public ministry. It is a period today in which Christians prepare their whole lives as a holy offering unto God, and do so through prayer, repentance, fasting and almsgiving.

Lent developed out of the needs of the Church. When Emperor Constantine ended the persecution of Christians and himself converted to Christianity, thousands of people converted to Christianity, be it those who had never heard the Gospel before because of the difficulty in preaching due to persecution as well as those who sought to profess Christian faith in order to gain advantage, either by marrying into a Christian family, with Christian relatives or with political officials who now supported Christianity.

With so many adults seeking to become Christian, an intensive process of catechesis developed. Catechumens were traditionally baptised at Easter, and so in preparation for that baptism, Lent was developed as a final period of intensive training in Christian faith. At the start of Lent, the catechumens would make vows affirming their desire to be baptised. Sometimes family members would be involved in this as well. For the period of Lent through to Easter they would be instructed in the faith, and then be baptised. They would receive some additional limited training in the sacraments after Baptism.

Over time, this practice would change. Family members would play a more active role, and sometimes begin in ways to participate in the training. Eventually, the whole community would participate, and Lent became a time of preparation for the renewal of baptismal vows and a time of prayer and repentance for the failure to in all ways keep those vows.

As Christianity became more established, there began to be fewer adults in need of baptism, as more and more children were being raised in Christian families, Baptism was being performed on the infant children, who were in no position to be catechised. Yet, for parents and other older Christians, Lent remained a time for them to remember their own baptismal vows and prepare for Easter. The emphasis changed from preparation for Baptism to the commemoration of Christ’s suffering, death and resurrection.

In Anglicanism, Lent begins on Ash Wednesday with a service of imposition of ashes, recalling the Old Testament practice of sprinkling ashes on one’s head as a sign of repentance and humility. Its liturgical colour is purple, like Advent, as it is a season both of repentance and penance as well as anticipation of Easter.

Passiontide is the period covering Passion Sunday, the fifth Sunday in Lent, and ending on Holy Saturday. In this period, particular emphasis begins to be placed on Christ’s Passion (suffering, from the Greek). Palm Sunday is the second Sunday in Passiontide, and begins the recounting of the Passion of Christ, commemorating his triumphal entry into Jerusalem, where the people laid palm leaves before him. It is the high point and most joyous of the Passiontide commemorations.

On Holy Wednesday, sometimes also called Spy Wednesday, we commemorate the decision of Judas Iscariot to betray Christ to the Sanhedrin. While this was clearly essential to Christ’s passion, it is also less frequently commemorated than other days during Holy Week.

After Holy Wednesday is Maundy Thursday. Maundy refers to the ceremonial washing of feet, and is in reference to how Christ washed the feet of his disciples after the last supper. Also known as Holy Thursday, the feast recalls not simply the washing of feet after supper, but also of Christ’s institution of the Eucharist. It initiates the Easter Triduum, the final commemoration of Christ’s suffering, death and resurrection. It is a solemn service, often celebrated in the style of a Tenebrae service, Latin for darkness, in which the candles and other sources of illumination are extinguished.

On Good Friday, commemorate Christ’s crucifixion with solemn and silent services of meditation. In many places, the cross is veiled, though if there is a crucifix it may be unveiled for at least part of the service. When the service has been completed, the congregation departs in silence, and a number of other activities happen, depending upon local particulars. Oftentimes the Stations of the Cross may be prayed. In other places, the end of the Good Friday service will start a prayer vigil lasting for the remainder of the Easter Triduum.

In this way, prayer takes precedence in the final hours of Christ’s death until Easter Sunday.

Taken as a whole, Lent is a great period of renewal and self-examination, and one in which we are invited, each year, to follow through the narrative of Christ’s passion. What better time to prepare yourself for renewal than prior to Easter? What better way to understand the scope of Christ’s human suffering than to walk through his passion with him?

There is power in the liturgy to help focus our thoughts on God, and perhaps nowhere is it more clear than Lent.

On Revision of the Prayer Book

The Sunday After Christmas Day

ALMIGHTY God, who hast given us thy only-begotten Son to take our nature upon him, and as at this time to be born of a pure Virgin: Grant that we being regenerate, and made thy children by adoption and grace, may daily be renewed by thy Holy Spirit; through the same our Lord Jesus Christ, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the same Spirit, ever one God, world without end. Amen.

In 2010, the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada mandated that the Faith, Worship and Ministry department create a Liturgy Task Force to further review and modify authorized liturgies for the Anglican Church of Canada. Recently, the Task Force released its first Trial Use liturgy for the Daily Offices, and it speaks to a very particular vision of liturgy and liturgical reform that is rooted in a  view that sees the language of, not simply the Prayer Book, but even the Book of Alternative Services as no longer being both ‘faithful and fair’. While the rationale for the proposed daily offices does not particularly define what is meant by faithful and fair, or how the Prayer Book or BAS are not faithful or fair, the notes on the revised Psalter written by the Rev Dr Richard Geoffrey Leggett provides in his words an explanation that the meaning is to provide language that is:

(i) faithful to the intent of the writers of the psalms as poems expressing the relationship between God and the people of Israel and (ii) fair to current users of the psalms who have found the predominately masculine language a barrier to the integration of the psalms into the life of prayer and worship.

In essence, the Liturgy Task Force is saying that language that refers to God as Father creates a barrier to praise of God, as does the use of language such as referring to humanity simply as ‘man’ as has been the case in many Bible translations, and is the case in the text of the Prayer Book, though generally not in the Book of Alternative Services.

While the rationale provides for two other practical reasons for this proposed revision—namely that in the current form you must flip back and forth between pages as you work through the liturgy rather than being able to simply read through it linearly and also that the lectionary and selection of canticles and prayers is limited—it seems that language is the driving force behind this revision, as these more practical concerns could be addressed without any actual change to the liturgy itself, simply through the publication of a revised lectionary for the daily offices or in the case of the former issue, through the use of technology similar to the Church of England’s Daily Prayer app which allows Apple and Android users to have an electronic prayer book which automatically inserts the daily readings into the Matins, Vespers and Compline services and allows the user to linearly read through the entire service.

The Liturgy Task Force has suggested that the language of the BAS, and by extension the Prayer Book, is deficient in either faithfulness or more likely fairness. If this is the primary revision of the text, then it suggests the Task Force views this as the primary hindrance to the use of currently authorized liturgical texts on the Daily Offices. It then seems the appropriate response is a comparison of how the revised proposed Daily Offices read as compared to, for instance, the Offices of the Prayer Book. While in the context of the Psalter faithfulness would be held up against the Psalms of the Bible, in the context of the Daily Offices, the Solemn Declaration states that our faithfulness is to be found in the Anglican Formularies: the Book of Common Prayer, the Ordinal and the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion. In this case, then, the Prayer Book should be the standard for faithfulness.

The Daily Offices begin with a penitential rite. In the Prayer Book, it reads as follows for Morning Prayer:

DEARLY beloved brethren, the Scripture moveth us in sundry places to acknowledge and confess our manifold sins and wickedness; and that we should not dissemble nor cloke them before the face of Almighty God our heavenly Father; but confess them with an humble, lowly, penitent, and obedient heart; to the end that we may obtain forgiveness of the same, by his infinite goodness and mercy.
And although we ought at all times humbly to acknowledge our sins before God; yet ought we most chiefly so to do, when we assemble and meet together to render thanks for the great benefits that we have received at his hands, to set forth his most worthy praise, to hear his most holy Word, and to ask those things which are requisite and necessary, as well for the body as the soul.
Wherefore I pray and beseech you, as many as are here present, to accompany me with a pure heart and humble voice unto the throne of the heavenly grace.

In order to be faithful and fair, the revised Daily Office proposes the following substitute: “Let us confess our sins against God and our neighbour.” This is the alternate invitation to confession in the BAS. Can it be said to be fully faithful to the Prayer Book? In the Prayer Book, the invitation to confession reminds us that Scripture commands us to confess in order to obtain forgiveness of those sins by virtue of God’s infinite mercy. The proposed new liturgy provides no rationale for confession. It fails to inform us of God’s infinite mercy and compassion for us. It fails to inform us of that Scriptural mandate to confess our sins.

Some similar problems arise in the confession as well. The confession of the Prayer Book:

ALMIGHTY and most merciful Father, We have erred and strayed from thy ways like lost sheep, We have followed too much the devices and desires of our own hearts, We have offended against thy holy laws, We have left undone those things which we ought to have one, And we have done those things which we ought not to have done; And there is no health in us. But thou, O Lord, have mercy upon us, miserable offenders. Spare thou them, O God, which confess their faults. Restore thou them that are penitent; According to thy promises declared unto mankind in Christ Jesu our Lord. And grant, O most merciful Father, for his sake, That we may hereafter live a godly, righteous, and sober life, To the glory of thy holy Name. Amen.

Contrast that with the proposed revised confession:

God of all mercy, we confess that we have sinned against you, opposing your will in our lives. We have denied your goodness in each other, in ourselves and in the world you have created. We repent of the evil that enslaves us, the evil we have done and the evil done on our behalf. Forgive, restore and strengthen us through our Saviour Jesus Christ, so that we may abide in your love and serve only your will. Amen.

The Prayer Book begins with poetic imagery: we are lost sheep who have strayed from the Father. It then lists ways in which we sin: following our own desires rather than God’s, offending against God’s laws, failing to do what we ought to and doing what ought not to be doing. In essence this can be further broken down into two parts. The first two list ways in which we offend against the Law which was made obvious in the confession for the BAS which very clearly referenced the summary of the Law: love God and love your neighbour as yourself. The same intent holds here, while the second two points show the ways we make these offences, either by failing to do something we ought to do (passive) or doing what we should not (active).

The confession used in the revised rite follows something of a similar pattern, but again in the quest for ‘fair language’ it has lost its faithfulness. We sin by opposing God’s will in our lives, denying God’s goodness in each other, ourselves and the created world. While the Law, the ten commandments, previously served in the Prayer Book as the ultimate definition of sin, and Christ’s summary of the Law in the BAS, this proposed rite goes further by making its own summary which is just to say opposing God’s will. The problem with such a definition, is that while the Law and Christ’s Summary of the Law are defined in Scripture, God’s will can mean many things. The Law is a part of God’s will, and part of his will which applies to all mankind. Yet at the same time, God’s will is also individual in that he has purposes and designs for every single person. The discernment of God’s will in our lives is a personal responsibility, and by framing sin in terms of God’s will, the Liturgy Task Force has framed sin in terms that are thus discerned individually as well. This is neither faithful—in the sense that it again loses the fullness of the Prayer Book—and neither is it fair in that it lacks clarity. Doubtless the Liturgy Task Force did not include this confession, which is actually from a TEC resource called Enriching our Worship I published in 1998, with the intended desire that these should be the results, but ultimately that is the first concern that must be raised. A similar problem exists with the confession’s definition of how we sin. While the Prayer Book says it involves acts and omissions, the revised rite suggests sin is caused when we deny God’s goodness in each other, ourselves and the world. We can turn to Scripture to define the Law; we cannot turn to Scripture to define God’s goodness in a single place; it is in the fullness of Scripture that God’s goodness is found.

Interestingly enough, this confession lacks the criteria identified by the Liturgy Task Force in terms of language which they sought to change, namely gendered language. This holds true in the confession of the BAS (p. 46). So the question then is why is it even being changed? Whenever a liturgical text is opened up for specific purposes, it can be very tempting to make additional changes, whether they be for reasons of literary preference, theological preference or otherwise.

The Prayer Book remains the standard of our faith and will continue to. The fullness of Anglicanism is found within it, and the ultimate expression of Anglican Doctrine as well. As it says in the Solemn Declaration:

And we are determined by the help of God to hold and maintain the Doctrine, Sacraments, and Discipline of Christ as the Lord hath commanded in his Holy Word, and as the Church of England hath received and set forth the same in ‘The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, according to the use of the Church of England; together with the Psalter or Psalms of David, pointed as they are to be sung or said in Churches; and the Form and Manner of Making, Ordaining, and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons’; and in the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion; and to transmit the same unimpaired to our posterity.

On Remembrance

The Twenty-first Sunday after Trinity

GRANT, we beseech thee, merciful Lord, to thy faithful people pardon and peace; that they may be cleansed from all their sins, and serve thee with a quiet mind; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Remembrance Sunday

ALMIGHTY Lord and everlasting Father, who wouldest have the kingdoms of the world become the kingdom of thy Son Jesus Christ: Bestow thy blessing, we beseech thee, upon all who labour for peace and righteousness among the nations, that the day may be hastened when war shall be no more, and thou shalt take the nations for thine inheritance; through the same Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

For those who serve in the Queen's Forces

O LORD of hosts, stretch forth, we pray thee, thine almighty arm to strengthen and protect the Queen’s forces in every peril of sea, and land, and air; shelter them in the day of battle, and ever keep them safe from all evil; endue them with loyalty and courage; and grant that in all things they may serve as seeing thee who art invisible; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Today is Remembrance Sunday. A day coming shortly after All Souls day in which we seek to commemorate those who died specifically in the service of their country. Remembrance Sunday is an Anglican practice which emerged following the First World War in which the world was exposed to the horrors of modern total war with millions of young men dying on the muddy battlefields of Europe. It has since taken on special significance as a more general memorial to all those soldiers who have died in the service to their country in all wars and peace operations.

Since the beginning of the Canadian participation in the war in Afghanistan, Remembrance Sunday has taken on special significance as, for the first time in a generation, the true risks of combat operations were brought home and Remembrance Sunday was no longer simply a time to honour the dwindling numbers of the Great Generation who fought in the Second World War, but rather a time to mourn losses being incurred on those sandy battlefields and to pray for the safety of those still fighting there.

While combat operations have since ceased in Afghanistan, the Canadian military remains active abroad, confronting the threat of Russian incursions in Ukraine and the threat of the Islamic State in Iraq. We live in a dangerous world, and the reality is that Canada, as one of the best-trained modern militaries in the world, will often be looked to for support in conflict zones around the globe.

In the wake of the murders of WO Patrice Vincent of Cpl Nathan Cirillo, this year’s Remembrance Day campaigns have taken on an even greater significance for many for whom it is also a cathartic expression of their grief and incomprehension at the violence during the shooting at Parliament Hill.

As we gather before the Lord for Remembrance Sunday, the words of the Act of Remembrance are given new meaning that is not found when it is used in a secular context. “Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.” In particular, we are reminded of St Paul’s words to the Corinthians:

I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:
“Death is swallowed up in victory.”
“O death, where is your victory?
    O death, where is your sting?”
The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
Therefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labour is not in vain. (1 Cor 15. 50-58)

Through the Act of Remembrance, we bring the sacrifices of soldiers to God, much in the same way the Collect for the Sovereign is meant to bring the power structures of the civil authority before God during the Eucharist. It reminds us that, though they have fallen, their death is merely the death of the flesh, and their victory over death has been assured in Christ Jesus.

In these ways, Remembrance Sunday is a unique moment for Anglicans to reflect upon those in civil authority who act on our behalf. Yet, at the same time, it is nothing new.

Each week in the Prayers of the People, biddings and intercessions are offered. There are five categories of biddings: the universal church, those in civil authority, the faithfulness of clergy and people, for those in adversity or suffering and for the dearly departed.

In praying for the universal church, we primarily concern ourselves with unity and right-doctrine; that all Christians would fulfil Christ’s prayer for peace and unity, particularly among Christians.

In praying for those in positions of civil authority, we recall the fact the fact that the government has a significant impact on our lives; it decides both where and when soldiers are to be deployed; how laws will be administrated; conditions in prisons and penitentiaries and importantly numerous laws of a moral dimension.

Clergy receive prayers for the faithful administration of their duties as teachers of the faith and administrants of the sacraments. They hold the all important charism of teaching authority, and so we pray for their faithful interpretation of God’s word and their teaching of it.

As the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews reminds us, “Remember those who are in prison, as though in prison with them, and those who are mistreated, since you also are in the body.” (Heb 13. 3) In some translations, mistreated is translated simply as adversity. Recall those suffering persecution, sickness, and all other forms of adversity.

Lastly we pray for the faithful departed and those who grieve. We pray both for those who continue to live, for their comfort, and also for the departed, praying for their glory in faith.

It is clear how many of these hold a slightly more limited, but still familiar, context on Remembrance Sunday. We pray for the Government and all governments, that there would be peace among the nations and an end to the need for military forces to be deployed abroad. We pray that in zones of active conflict there would be resolution. We pray for those forces that combat injustice and persecution in the world. We in particular recall those who served and who returned home with wounds, visible and invisible, and pray for their healing and well-being. Finally, we recall St Paul’s words on the victory of Christ in death as a we remember those who have fallen in wars, and we

This year, Remembrance Day has taken on a visceral and personal meaning for many. It was already highlighted in the minds of many, being the centenary of the start of the First World War, and the attacks on Canadian Armed Forces personnel here in Canada, the shooting in Ottawa in particular being an event that captured the attention of the nation as the attack was reported over the course of several hours. We have been reminded of the dangerous responsibilities soldiers take upon themselves, on our behalf, when they take up their uniforms. Remembrance Sunday reminds us that we are not merely to remember them, but to pray for them as well, fulfilling  St Paul’s instructions to the Philippians to, “in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God.” (Phil 4. 6)

Simply put: it is not enough simply that we will remember them; we will remember and pray for them.

On Organs

The Sixteenth Sunday after Trinity

O LORD, we beseech thee, let thy continual pity cleanse and defend thy Church; and, because it cannot continue in safety without thy succour, preserve it evermore by thy help and goodness; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Last Sunday identified two primary problems that have a tendency to arise when using contemporary Christian music in a worship service, for which the use of the Book of Common Praise was presented as a potential solution. The two problems were first and foremost that the prayers offered through some of that music are shallow, while the second was that there may be a tendency to shift God as the object of worship through the tool or medium of music, to worship of either self or the music itself.

What is the Book of Common Praise and how does it potentially resolve these issues? The Book of Common Praise is the officially authorized hymn book of the Anglican Church of Canada, though it is not a mandatory book nor does it hold the canonical status of the Book of Common Prayer. There have been four authorized versions in the 20th century, the 1908 Book of Common Praise, the 1938 Book of Common Praise, the 1971 ecumenical Book of Common Praise developed in conjunction with the United Church of Canada and finally Common Praise which was authorized in 1998. The 1938 Book of Common Praise, which was reprinted most recently in 1963, is by far the preferred hymnal for traditional Anglicans in Canada, given the significant theological changes and problematic doctrinal innovations introduced in Common Praise.

St Justin Martyr in his Apology in Defence of Christians wrote that, “no one can give a name to God, who is too great for words; if anyone dares to say it is possible to do so, he must be suffering from an incurable madness.” Had he lived to see the publication of Common Praise, he might have made a similar comment on the revisionist slant of the committee that created it, which decided to re-write some hymns in order to, for example, affirm God as Mother in the revised text of Hymn to Joy. This type of revisionist agenda reminds us that the importance of hymnody is not simply in ancient tunes, traditional instruments such as a pipe organ or choirs, but rather in the orthodoxy of the words being sung. St Augustine of Hippo spoke to the nature of hymns saying this:

It is a song with praise of God. If thou praisest God and singest not, thou utterest no hymn: if thou singest and praisest not God, thou utterest no hymn: if thou praisest aught else, which pertaineth not to the praise of God, although thou singest and praisest, thou utterest no hymn. An hymn then containeth these three things, song, and praise, and that of God. Praise then of God in song is called an hymn.

Hymns are prayers, sung in praise of God. The traditional hymnody of the Anglican Church of Canada reflects St Augustine’s three-fold requirements. More than that, the hymns were written long-enough ago that they all reflect a traditional theology and avoid a shallower approach.

Like good prayer, a good Christian song ought to thank God for something He has done or something He is. In doing so, it ought to speak to what He has done, or who He is. Poor Christian music fails to expound on God’s nature, and instead simply uses ‘Christianese’ and Biblical sounding words to create a catchy lyric, something which often times will shift the focus away from God and back towards either the music itself or the person who is singing it. In other words, for good Christian music the message is God, while for bad Christian music the message is the medium.

While not at all seasonal, Easter provides an interesting comparison of a traditional hymn versus popular contemporary Christian praise music. Perhaps one of the most commonly sung hymns on Easter Sunday is, appropriately enough, Easter Hymn, known more commonly by its first line, "Jesus Christ is risen today, Alleluia!" The second is called This is Amazing Grace by Bethel Music, and was the most popular Easter praise song in the United States in 2014.

Jesus Christ is risen today, Alleluia! our triumphant holy day, Alleluia! who did once upon the cross, Alleluia! suffer to redeem our loss. Alleluia! Hymns of praise then let us sing, Alleluia! unto Christ, our heavenly King, Alleluia! who endured the cross and grave, Alleluia! sinners to redeem and save. Alleluia! But the pains which he endured, Alleluia! our salvation have procured, Alleluia! now above the sky he's King, Alleluia! where the angels ever sing. Alleluia!

Who breaks the power of sin and darkness Whose love is mighty and so much stronger The King of Glory, the King above all kings Who shakes the whole earth with holy thunder And leaves us breathless in awe and wonder The King of Glory, the King above all kings Chorus: This is amazing grace This is unfailing love That You would take my place That You would bear my cross You lay down Your life That I would be set free Oh, Jesus, I sing for All that You've done for me Who brings our chaos back into order Who makes the orphan a son and daughter The King of Glory, the King of Glory Who rules the nations with truth and justice Shines like the sun in all of its brilliance The King of Glory, the King above all kings [Chorus] [Bridge:] Worthy is the Lamb who was slain Worthy is the King who conquered the grave Worthy is the Lamb who was slain Worthy is the King who conquered the grave Worthy is the Lamb who was slain Worthy is the King who conquered the grave Worthy is the Lamb who was slain Worthy, worthy, worthy Oh

While both songs do speak to truths about God, Easter Hymn more clearly speaks to God in each and every line and more clearly each and every line’s purpose is to praise God for who He is and what He has done. In This is Amazing Grace, by contrast, the first six lines speaks only to one implied truth that God has broken the power of sin. If St Augustine were to evaluate the song, it seems doubtful he would find it fits his criteria of a hymn.

As JB Philips warns in his book Your God is Too Small:

It is natural and right, of course, that the worship we offer to God in public should be of the highest possible quality. But that must not lead us to conceive of a musically "Third-Programme" god who prefers the exquisite rendering of a cynical professional choir to the ragged bawling of sincere but untutored hearts.

Regardless of the medium, it is possible to warp the purpose and to substitute our own preferences towards the music. The intention of using music as a tool of worship must always be to praise God, and our concern must be for the words being said and their intended audience, not the degree of musical excellence.

The use of a hymnal encourages that focus, providing other benefits beyond simply assurance of orthodox theology in the words being sung. With limited musical accompaniment, it is the voice of the people which is the primary tool of worship, while the organ merely maintains the meter of singing. A hymnal containing the tune to a song can also allow a parishioner unfamiliar with a given tune the opportunity to sing.

This is not to say that there is no merit to listening to more contemporary Christian music, regardless of what St Augustine would have made of it as a tool for worship. The question is the degree to which it is appropriate as a tool of worship for the mass. A Christian song which may not be appropriate for the mass due to its lack of theological depth or even its ability to truly praise God may still be appropriate to listen to outside of the mass as a wholesome form of musical entertainment. A song which lacks any form of thanks to God for who He is and what He has done can still at the least encourage us to think about God.

Worship is not about musical preferences or traditional versus contemporary. We must always recall the importance not of the music or the form or instruments, but rather of the intent: does this music honour God?

On Liturgy

The Thirteenth Sunday after Trinity

ALMIGHTY and merciful God, of whose only gift it cometh that thy faithful people do unto thee true and laudable service: Grant, we beseech thee, that we may so faithfully serve thee in this life, that we fail not finally to attain thy heavenly promises; through the merits of Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

For someone who is new to Anglicanism, the celebration of the Lord’s Supper on Sunday is probably their primary form of worship. From an outsider’s perspective, there might be one other piece of information they know of what to expect when they come to an Anglican church on a Sunday: liturgy. A formal prescribed order of service prescribed in some dusty tome that tells parishioners what to say, when to say it, when to sit, when to kneel, when to stand and when to sing.

There is a famous quotation by CS Lewis from his Letters to Malcolm, Chiefly on Prayer where he says:

Every service is a structure of words and acts through which we receive a sacrament, or repent, or supplicate, or adore. And it enables us to do these things best--if you like, it “works” best--when through long familiarity, we don’t have to think about it. As long as you notice, and have to count, the steps, you are not dancing but only learning to dance. A good shoe is a shoe you don’t notice. Good reading becomes possible when you need not consciously think about eyes, or light, or print, or spelling. The perfect church service would be one we were almost unaware of; our attention would have been on God.

In this, he describes the faithful utility of a liturgy when coming to worship in that it allows worshippers to focus on God rather than being concerned with an order of service. Lewis here expresses the practical reason for St Paul’s reminder to the Corinthians that, “God is not a God of confusion but of peace.” (1 Cor 14. 33) This is a useful understanding of why there is a written and ordered liturgy, but to take this understanding (and it should be noted Lewis was talking here on the subject of worship, not liturgy specifically) is only a minor part of the full meaning of liturgy, the expression of liturgy that we see only when we gather together to worship, just as worship of God occurs both corporately and privately, but it is chiefly expressed for many Christians on Sunday when they gather to celebrate the Lord’s Supper.

The liturgy goes well beyond that, however. It is an ancient institution with roots in the early church where the liturgies sprung up out of Christ’s words of institution recorded throughout the Scriptures. As it is rendered in the Book of Common Prayer:

[Christ], in the same night that he was betrayed, took Bread; and, when he had given thanks, he brake it; and gave it to his disciples, saying, Take, eat; this is my Body which is given for you: Do this in remembrance of me. Likewise after supper he took the Cup; and, when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all, of this; for this is my Blood of the new Covenant, which is shed for you and for many for the remission of sins: Do this, as oft as ye shall drink it, in remembrance of me.

Following Christ’s commandment to do this in remembrance of Him, a number of different liturgies with almost entirely common features, but generally different orders, appeared.

The modern Anglican liturgy stems from two of these ancient liturgies. The earliest English Church liturgies were rooted in the liturgies of St John and St Paul associated with the Church at Ephesus. During the 6th century, St Augustine of Canterbury introduced some revisions using the Sacramentary of St Gregory the Great, which itself found its roots in the Liturgy of St Peter, associated with Rome.

The first thing to remember about the liturgy is thus that it is rooted in both Scripture, Christ’s commandment to us, and in the traditions of the Apostles and the Church Fathers.

It should further be noted, even from just this brief introduction, that there is more to liturgy than simply a formal and prescribed method of worshipping when Christians gather. The etymology of the word liturgy may reveal even more. The term stems from the ancient Greek leitourgia, which might be rendered as ‘work of the people’ or ‘public works’ and referred to the civic works undertaken by wealthy citizens on behalf of all the people. In that sense, the liturgy for Christians referred to the works they were instructed, by Christ, to undertake on behalf of all people. The term in its Christian origins can be traced to the Septuagint (the Greek language translation of the Hebrew Scriptures used by Jews during the time of the early Church) in which the word leitourgia was used to refer to public religious service at the Jewish Temple.

Christ’s instructions to Christians were not limited simply to the use of the sacraments. Early Christian understanding of liturgy involved their actions at all times, of which only part was frequent participation in the Lord’s Supper for spiritual nourishment.

It is why when the communion is finished, the Prayer Book ends the service with a final blessing based on St Paul’s words to the Philippians:

THE peace of God, which passeth all understanding, keep your hearts and minds in the knowledge and love of God, and of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord: And the blessing of God Almighty, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, be amongst you and remain with you always. Amen. (Phil 4. 7)

In this blessing, we are commissioned to go forth to continue to do the liturgy throughout the week by keeping the knowledge and love of God in our hearts and minds at all times. We pray to God to bless us in this way, to keep that knowledge, in order that we as Christians may perform our own ‘work of the people’ throughout the week by practicing the love of God as Christ further instructed us.

In both the practical sense of an order of service, and the broader reminder that Christians are called to love all people, the liturgy stands as a necessary tool for Christian life, and an essential practice of the ancient Church.

On Worship

The Twelfth Sunday after Trinity

ALMIGHTY and everlasting God, who art always more ready to hear than we to pray, and art wont to give more than either we desire or deserve: Pour down upon us the abundance of thy mercy; forgiving us those things whereof our conscience is afraid, and giving us those good things which we are not worthy to ask, but through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ, thy Son, our Lord. Amen. 

Worship has been described as the principle duty of a Christian, but how is that duty fulfilled? As touched upon previously, worship means ascribing worth to something or someone. It is therefore something we do to God; it is not something we can come to passively experience. JI Packer goes so far as to suggest that, “[w]e are constructed so that no activity ever brings us such deep joy as does the worship of God, once we are enabled (through new birth in Christ and through the liberating power of the Holy Spirit) to plunge into it.”

This makes generally clear the concept of worship. It is something done by us that shows how we ascribe worth to God, and at the same time gives us joy owing to how God created us. But how do we worship? What constitutes worship?

There are many different ideas on what constitutes worship. JI Packer concluded his thought by suggesting that, “worshipping on earth is training and rehearsal for heaven.” This reflects the concept of worship as a mirror of heaven, a practice for our eventual joining of the Church Triumphant in heaven, ceaselessly praising God with all the other saints and angels in heaven. Others view worship as more of a form of service to God. It is show of devotion to God for who He is and what He has done. Among many evangelical circles, including some Evangelical Anglicans, it is viewed merely as an affirmation for believers, an opportunity for peace and refreshment amidst the turmoil of the world. Still others view it as a form of communion with God and other Christians. Worship becomes an opportunity to share our relationship with God with other believers in community. Still to others, worship is more of an external act, a proclamation of the Gospel; an opportunity to make a profession of belief to non-believers about the God we worship. Among charismatics, there is also a notion of worship as being an arena of transcendence, a way of meeting with God beyond ourselves.

Examining any local parish, it would be possible to see multiple ideas of worship in action, regardless of whether or not that parish identified itself as being evangelical or charismatic or anything else. Most parishes will not be alike, emphasizing one idea over another, and excluding a third completely. For instance, a parish rooted in Low Churchmanship might largely ignore the concept of worship as a mirror of heaven, and instead focus more thoroughly on ideas of service to God and affirmation for believers. A parish of a more High Churchmanship might conversely have greater focus on worship as a mirror of heaven and communion with God and other Christians.

What is important is that whatever lens or idea is used to frame worship, it ultimately be done in the original context of ascribing worth to God. Worship must always focus on God, glorifying and affirming him, and should never shift that focus away from God towards the individual. Worship is not about making ourselves feel better. As JI Packer says, we receive joy from worshipping God. We don’t need to make it about us in order to receive joy from worship!

Coming to Holy Communion on a Sunday morning is thus in and of itself an act of worship; in doing so we proclaim God’s worth of our time each week. But beyond that, how do we worship?

Holy Scripture commands us to, “love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength,” (Mk 12. 30). How does that apply in the context of worship?

Properly, worship focuses on God. The best worship, however, focuses on God with all our five senses, in order that we display our love as Christ commanded. In doing so, we are actively engaging all that we are in worship. Worshipping God with some senses may seem more readily apparent than others. It is simply to think of how we worship God with hearing, listening to the Gospel or singing beautiful hymns, but what of our senses of smell or touch?

As mentioned there are two simple ways in which we engage our hearing in worship. First, there is the receptive way. When we listen to the Gospel and other lessons being read from Scripture, we ascribe worth to God. We similarly engage our hearing when we listen to the homily expounding on the nature of God. Alternatively we can be active towards God and engage hearing through our own words and songs. When we pray, in and of itself it is an act of worship, but when we pray together, it becomes a second act of worship, seeking to make our prayers beautiful to the ears. The same can be said of when we use our voices to sing, joining the Angels in their unending hymn to God. In both of these cases, our hearing is engaged in filling our hearts and minds with the love and praise of God, and the revelations of His nature.

Sight is another obvious way to engage our senses in the worship of God. From a prepared altar to stained glass windows or other decorations around the church, our eyes can be constantly engaged. Banners in liturgical colours remind us of historic events or seasons and of God’s nature and relationship with us. Clerical garments and altar decorations similarly have specific meanings. Just as our hearing is engaged receptively, our sight can be similarly engaged as we watch the cross processed to the sanctuary or other actions carried out during the service.

The most common way to engage our smell is through the use of incense, a practice dating back to the early Church. The use of incense throughout the service carries with it different meanings. When the Gospel is processed amidst the people to be read and is censed, it is meant to bring to mind the devotion and prayers of missionaries of the Church in bringing the Gospel to the world. During the offertory, the censing represents God’s grace being imparted. During the consecration and preparation of the gifts the incense is offered as adoration for God.Even when incense is not used, there are other smells which can be engaged in worship. The altar will be adorned with candles, and while unscented still produce a smell from the burning of the wick, particularly once they have been extinguished at the end of the service.

The sense of taste is engaged when we receive God’s grace through the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. “Oh, taste and see that the Lord is good! Blessed is the man who takes refuge in him!” (Ps 34. 8) The mouth is the gateway to our body, and when we engage our tongue in the consumption of the body and blood of our Lord, the taste reminds us of the gift we have received, the constant refilling of God’s grace and our duty of thanks towards Him.

Finally, our sense of touch is somewhat surprisingly one of the more versatile of our senses in the context of worship. There is something about the physicality of touch that lends tangibility to the intangible aspects of worship. We touch others to pass the peace in preparation for giving of offerings to God. We touch ourselves when we cross ourselves at the invocation of the trinity and other points during the service. We touch the baptismal font and cross ourselves to renew our baptismal vows. Taken more broadly, touch can involve all aspects of our physical activity. When we kneel to pray or stand to sing.

Worship is best when it engages our whole minds and bodies, and when every aspect of our being is engaged in ascribing worth to God. Holy Communion provides a feast of worship for each of our five senses, but in order to translate a candle or a stole into worship, we must engage our senses with the intention of worship.