On the Articles: Article XII

Saint Philip and Saint James the Apostles

ALMIGHTY God, whom truly to know is everlasting life: Grant us perfectly to know thy Son Jesus Christ to be the way, the truth, and the life; that, following the steps of thy holy Apostles, Saint Philip and Saint James, we may stedfastly walk in the way that leadeth to eternal life; through the same thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Saint James the Brother of the Lord, Martyr

O HEAVENLY Father, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning: We bless thy holy Name for the witness of James and Jude, the kinsmen of the Lord, and pray that we may be made true members of thy heavenly family; through him who willed to be the firstborn among many brethren, even the same Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Fifth Sunday after Easter commonly called Rogation Sunday

O LORD, from whom all good things do come: Grant to us thy humble servants, that by thy holy inspiration we may think those things that be good, and by thy merciful guiding may perform the same; through our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

XII. Of Good Works
Albeit that Good Works, which are the fruits of Faith, and follow after justification, cannot put away our sins, and endure the severity of God’s ludzement; yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ, and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively Faith; insomuch that by them a lively Faith may be as evidently known as a tree discerned by the fruit.

If there is one topic sure to set a protestant on edge it is a discussion of works. The Epistle of St James famously discusses the importance of works, for which the greater reformer Martin Luther termed it the Epistle of Straw, and even went so far as to seek to remove it from the Canon of the New Testament. Article XII on good works relates to Article XI dealing with Justification, two key concepts during the time of the continental reformation and which required clarification in England when the Articles began to be compiled and promulgated.

In pre-reformation Medieval western theology, a good work was something used to earn merit, the favour of God. While this included morally good acts, significantly, others were merely acts of piety laid upon sinners by priests in order to confirm penitence. Saying the rosary, fasting and other such acts of contrition were considered good works. This practice was rejected by the continental reformers, and leading to that overall perception of anything relating to works as needing rejection. It seems as though in some places, particularly with uneducated laity and poorly educated clergy, misconceptions of the role of these acts of penitence could have been normative, and so the Anglican response in the Articles needed to clarify this matter, despite rejecting much of the broader premise of Martin Luther and other protestants.

The opening line of the Article makes clear that good works cannot earn one merit or put away sins. This is a line of argument acceptable to the protestants, however it is notable also in that it fits in line perfectly with the Roman Catholic doctrines, just not practice. The Article goes on, however, to say that good works are a necessary procession of a “true and lively Faith” which might otherwise be termed a saving faith. This distinction draws reference to the Epistle of James, which itself is often contrasted with Paul’s Epistles where he seems to suggest the opposite. It also distinguishes it far more from the Protestant position of the reformers.

Much like some of the disconnect between the Roman Catholics at Trent in the counter-reformation and Martin Luther and the reformers before them, terms were being used in a different sense, and each party did not entirely recognize that as they objected to eachother’s statements on the matter. To quote Fr Kenneth Ross:

It was a similar variation in the use of key words which made St. James and St. Paul appear to contradict one another in the New Testament. Each appealed to the story of Abraham, St. James to show that faith without works did not justify, and St. Paul to show that it did. It is clear, however, that St. James was using faith in the sense of intellectual assent: in his use of the word the devils had faith (S. Jas 2. 19), but they were certainly not justified. St. Paul, however, by faith means personal commitment to the Saviour. And by works St. Paul was thinking more particularly of works undertaken in order to win God’s favouir and rewards, whereas St. James meant the works which are the necessary consequence of a life surrendered to Christ.

It was this negative view of works among the continental reformers that lead many protestants to reject the sacraments, beginning to view them as works of man. This view is wholly rejected by the Articles, by which the Sacraments are wholly accepted as works of God, who transmits grace through them. This was a rejection of a position held by the Father’s of the Church and universally recognized. St Ambrose of Milan writes in his On the Myteries that, “Believe, then, that the presence of the Godhead is [in the waters of Baptism]. Do you believe the working, and not believe the presence? Whence should the working proceed unless the presence went before?” This position was integral to his entire explanation of all the Sacraments, and was not a novel or innovative position. It was purely an overreaction to the concerns over

In this way the Article agrees with both Biblical authors as it states both that we cannot by our own works earn our salvation forgiveness of sins, but at the same time they are the necessary fruits of saving faith. The final clause of the article states that as a tree can be known by its fruit, so can faith be known by its works. This emphasizes the Scriptural foundation of Anglican understanding of the faith, and also reinforces the English reformer’s rejection of many of the more extreme views of the continental reformers.

In dealing with Salvation, Articles XI and XII introduce justification and works, while Articles XII and XIII continue to expound on the role and limits of works for Christians, laying out clear boundaries on the purpose, limits and Christian understanding of works.

Wisdom of Saints: St Hilary of Poitiers

The Feast of Hilary of Poitiers, Doctor, Bishop of Poitiers, France, 368

O GOD, who by thy Holy Spirit hast given unto one man a word of wisdom, and to another a word of knowledge, and to another the gift of tongues: We praise thy Name for the gifts of grace manifested in thy servant N., and we pray that thy Church may never be destitute of the same; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Octave Day of the The Epiphany of our Lord

O GOD, who by the leading of a star didst manifest thy only-begotten Son to the Gentiles: Mercifully grant, that we, who know thee now by faith, may be led onward through this earthly life, until we see the vision of thy heavenly glory; through the same thy Son Jesus Christ, who with thee and the Holy Ghost liveth and reigneth, one God, world without end. Amen.

St Hilary of Poitiers was an influential Christian and bishop of the 4th century who was among many prominent Christians of the age who opposed the Arian heresy which swept throughout the Christian world. While St Athanasius the Great is considered the foremost opponent of Arianism and defender of Nicene Christian orthodoxy, St Hilary is widely viewed as the most prominent defender of orthodoxy in the Christian West.

He was born at the start of the 4th century in the city of Poitiers in France, then a Roman province. His parents were noble and while his exact date of birth is unknown, it is likely he was born prior to the 313 Edict of Milan which legalized Christianity throughout the Empire, and was thus raised a pagan. Due to his family’s prominence, he was able to receive a strong education. Over the course his early life he ultimately chose to study the Holy Scriptures. St Hilary had been searching throughout his studies

He was convinced of their truth and abandoned his pagan upbringing, was Baptised and ultimately admitted to Holy Orders in the late 340s. By 353 he was elected Bishop of Poitiers with unanimous support.

St Hilary became bishop at a difficult time for the Church in France, however. Arianism had taken firm root there, and the Emperor, Constantius II, was himself Arian. St Hilary immediately took to defending orthodoxy, both in writing on orthodox belief and challenging the power of Arian bishops in Gaul. The key to St Hilary’s downfall, at least in the minds of his Arian opponents, came when he refused to sign a condemnation of Athanasius the Great in 356. He himself was ordered into exile by the Emperor, and sent to Phrygia in modern day Turkey.

He participated in the Council of Seleucia in 359 which had been called between disputing Arian factions, the Semi-Arians, who favoured reconciliation with Nicene Christians, and the Anomeans, who, with the support of the Emperor, sought to persecute and repress Nicene Christianity completely. St Hilary found limited support among the semi-Arians who thought he might perhaps be a bridge between them and Nicene Christianity, however St Hilary stood firm in his orthodoxy, even leaving Phrygia for Constantinople and the heart of Arianism in the East. Tiring of his constant challenging of their doctrine, the more extreme Arians petitioned the Emperor to have St Hilary restored to his diocese in the West, if for no other reason than to remove him and his ideas from their presence in the East.

St Hilary, the, “sower of discord and disturber of the Orient,” as Sulpicius Severus records it, was ordered home and he made the best of his journey preaching against Arianism in Greece and Italy before finally returning in triumph to Poitiers in 361. In that same year, the Emperor died, ending the persecution of Nicene Christians.

St Hilary remained in Poitiers for the remainder of his life, but continued to fight against Arianism and made a number of other lasting contributions to Christianity. Also in 361, with the encouragement of St Hilary, St Martin of Tours founded Liguge Abbey within the diocese of Poitiers. One notable exception to his remanining in Potiers was in 364  when he travelled to Milan where he attacked the Arian bishop Auxentius, predecessor to St Ambrose of Milan. Auxentius was defended by Emperor Valentinian, however, who ordered St Hilary to leave Milan and return to Poitiers, where he eventually died in 368.

St Hilary had many notable writings, but one of the most important is his treatise on the Trinity, which, much like St Athanasius in the East, was an anti-Arian defence of Nicene, trinitarian Christianity. Written shortly before his return to Poitiers in 361, On the Trinity contains many notable passages.

St Hilary expounded greatly on the majesty and infiniteness of God, saying:

We are well aware that neither the speech of men nor the analogy of human nature can give us a full insight into the things of God. The ineffable cannot submit to the bounds and limits of definition; that which is spiritual is distinct from every class or instance of bodily things. Yet, since our subject is that of heavenly natures, we must employ ordinary natures and ordinary speech as our means of expressing what our mind apprehends; a means no doubt unworthy of the majesty of God, but forced upon us by feebleness of our intellect, which can use only our own circumstances and our own words to convey to others our perceptions and our conclusions. [4:2]

For all that, St Hilary had already referenced his own spiritual development, and how sublime he found the description of God in Exodus, something which drew him towards Christianity when he first stumbled upon it, and he writes, “For such an indication of God’s infinity the words ‘I Am that I Am’ were clearly adequate.” [1:6]

For St Hilary, Holy Scripture was the root of all Christian belief. Indeed, some of his desire to reconcile Arians to true faith was due to his firm belief that their error was not of faith or piety, but of interpretation, and if they could be convinced of the error of their understanding of the Scriptures they could be restored to orthodox belief. In his first book, he explains,

“My prime object is by the clear assertions of prophets and evangelists to refute the insanity and ignorance of men who use the unity of God (in itself a pious and profitable confession) as a cloak for their denial either that in Christ God was born, or else that He is very God.” [1:17]

It is his supreme dedication to the Word of God, his unfailing commitment to orthodoxy, even in the face of exile, that make St Hilary a Saint of the Church worthy of commemoration, just as the orthodoxy of his own writings make him worthy of study to this day.

On Tables

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. Amen. 

Imagine a party held by a community association meant to bring the people together. All are welcome and signs outside invite everyone in, even non-members. At the door, unfamiliar faces are warmly greeted and told where to go. Yet halfway into the evening, the master of ceremony announces that food is to be served, but only members of the community association will be allowed to sit at the table and eat.

Would anyone feel welcomed in such a situation? That is the argument presented against the practice of closed communion, or versions of it, which deny the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper to any guests, in contrast to open communion in which it is offered to all, even non-Christians, who desire to receive.

Even within the Anglican Church of Canada, there are those who argue that the sacraments ought not to be denied to anyone. This argument has been advanced in relation to the recent discussion over the amendment of the marriage canon to allow same-sex persons to receive the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, saying that the Anglican Church of Canada will never be truly welcoming and accepting until sacraments are open to all.

The perspective of the community association makes complete sense in the secular sense. It is downright rude and nonsensical to invite others in and, without warning them until the food is presented, tell them that they must be a member before they will be invited to eat. And yet, with the Eucharist, it is not at all the same. The Church is not offering physical or carnal nourishment, but the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ which nourishes us spiritually by God’s grace.

To understand the difference, first look to Scripture and this famous exhortation from St Paul:

Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgement on himself. (I Cor 11. 27-29)

Here, St Paul calls on those who are about the receive to do two things. First, to repent and approach in purity as opposed to approaching in an unworthy manner. Second, to discern the body. This passage has been taken by many to refer to the need to understand the sacramental nature of the body and blood before receiving. To understand the Real Presence which is presented in the sacrament. The Fathers speak to this as well.

St Ambrose of Milan, in his On the Mysteries, speaks to the sacramental nature of the Eucharist when he says:

The Lord Jesus Himself proclaims: “This is My Body.” Before the blessing of the heavenly words another nature is spoken of, after the consecration the Body is signified. He Himself speaks of His Blood. Before the consecration it has another name, after it is called Blood. And you say, Amen, that is, It is true. Let the heart within confess what the mouth utters, let the soul feel what the voice speaks… Christ, then, feeds His Church with these sacraments, by means of which the substance of the soul is strengthened, and seeing the continual progress of her grace… He signifies that the mystery ought to remain sealed up with you, that it be not violated by the deeds of an evil life, and pollution of chastity, that it be not made known to thou, for whom it is not fitting, nor by garrulous talkativeness it be spread abroad amongst unbelievers.

St Ambrose’s views of the efficacy of the sacraments are mirrored in the works of many others of the Fathers. Perhaps the most notable work of which are the catechetical lectures of St Cyril of Jerusalem. St Cyril’s teaching itself begins by referring specifically to St Paul’s teachings previously cited (as opposed to St Ambrose’s emphasis on Christ’s institution in the gospels and the broader Biblical narrative of God’s grace), and then to begin a discussion of the Real Presence asks if a Christian accepts the transformation of water into wine at Cana, why not wine into Blood in the Eucharist? He goes on to explore Christ’s words in St John’s gospel where he says, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you,” (St Jn 6. 53).

These interpretations leave little to the imagination. The Fathers believed in the Real Presence, and so to in Anglicanism are we reminded in Article XXV of the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion that the:

Sacraments ordained of Christ be not only badges or tokens of Christian men’s profession, but rather they be certain sure witnesses, and effectual signs of grace, and God’s good will towards us, by the which he doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our Faith in him.

And again in Article XXVIII, where it says, “insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith, receive the same, the Bread which we break is a partaking of the Body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ.” The emphasis here again shows that there is true grace transmitted through the Body and Blood and that it must be rightly, worthily and with faith received.

The Anglican Communion as a whole actually practices a form of open communion, in that you are not required to be a member of the Anglican tradition, but rather just that you be baptised. Most protestant denominations practice some form of open communion, generally without requirement of baptism because communion is viewed as being merely symbolic.

We must never forget that in being welcoming we must be mindful of showing both love and truth, and the truth is that it is not loving to invite someone to their condemnation if they ignore St Paul’s warnings about receiving the Eucharist.

While the limitation of reception only by baptised Christians is good, it sometimes seems insufficient. St Paul’s first warning was against receiving while impure. This is why the confession is said prior to reception of the Eucharist. However for someone who does not believe, they do not approach the confession in faith. They cannot truly confess their sins for they do not believe that they are sins, nor do they believe that by the blood of Christ their sins may be forgiven.

The second point, however, that they must discern the body, is more problematic. Many Christians do not discern the body, contrary to the teachings of the Fathers. Indeed, many Anglicans do not either. By the practice of closed communion, the Roman Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox Church ensure that those who receive do not receive to their condemnation. While it is possible that someone outside their tradition could receive, it is for the protection of all that they not receive.

A happy compromise might be to make clear as a policy of the Church that when others are invited to receive, those Baptised Christians who have examined their conscience and who believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist be invited to come forward and receive, and for others to be limited to a blessing.

Wisdom of Saints: St Ambrose of Milan

The Feast of Ambrose, Doctor and Bishop of Milan, 397

O GOD, who by thy Holy Spirit hast given unto one man a word of wisdom, and to another a word of knowledge, and to another the gift of tongues: We praise thy Name for the gifts of grace manifested in thy servant Ambrose, and we pray that thy Church may never be destitute of the same; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Feria in Eastertide

ALMIGHTY Father, who hast given thine only a Son to die for our sins, and to rise again for our justification: Grant us so to put away the leaven of malice and wickedness, that we may alway serve thee in pureness of living and truth; through the merits of the same thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

St Ambrose of Milan is one of my favourite saints, not necessarily for his teachings, but rather for the story of his life, how he became a Christian, and how he chose to be a defender of Christian orthodoxy.

St Ambrose, born Aurelius Ambrosius, was born in around 340 AD, either at Trier, Arles or Lyons. He was raised in Trier where his family, an ancient and noble Roman family, had converted to Christianity. His father, sharing his name of Aurelius Ambrosius, was the praetorian prefect of Gaul, placing him in charge of modern Britain, France, Spain and parts of North Africa. His mother was a pious Christian. He was the youngest of three siblings, with an elder sister named Marcellina who ultimately became a nun, and an elder brother named Satyrus who followed Ambrose’s path into Government, before ultimately retiring to come and live with his brother after he was raised to the episcopacy.

When Ambrose was still young, his father died. His mother moved their family to Rome, where she assisted in the religious training of her three children. Marcellina, who was about ten years older than Ambrose, took a vow of virginity, living a consecrated life in her mother’s house. Her vows greatly influenced St Ambrose, who is remembered in part for his own love of virginity.

In Rome, he studied literature, law and rhetoric. His education included learning Greek, the language of the Septuagint, and his Greek learning helps distinguish him from some of his great contemporaries, such as St Augustine of Hippo, who did not have the benefit of an education in Greek language and literature.

When he completed his education, he applied himself to the practice of law. So eloquent were his arguments that he obtained a patron, Praetor Anicus Probus, who took Ambrose into his Council. In 372, Anicus petitioned Emperor Valentinian on Ambrose’s behalf and obtained for him the office of consular governor of Liguria and Æmilia, with a residence in the second most important city in Rome, Milan.

Over the next two years, Ambrose would earn the love and esteem of the people of Milan for his judicious leadership over them. He was eloquent, fair and just, able to build concensus and compromise between factions to bridge political divides. There were many in this time, as Milan was a city in relative chaos when Ambrose arrived.

In 355 the Nicene bishop of Milan, Dionysius, had been dragged into exile and replaced by an Arian bishop, Auxentius, from Cappadocia. This outsider bishop created a significant strain on Milanese Christians, particularly those orthodox Christians who subscribed to the Nicene Creed and opposed the Arian Heresy. After becoming Governor, Ambrose was sometimes forced to weigh into these controversies and debates in order to prevent further disruption. Known to be orthodox in his personal beliefs, he was none the less respected by Arians for his artful compromises.

In 374, Auxentius died. At the time, bishops in Milan were chosen by election of the people. So concerned over the possibility of violence or other tumult stemming from such a popular vote, the provincial bishops petitioned the Emperor to simply appoint a successor, however Valentinian refused. As the governor, it fell to Ambrose to maintain order. Using his well-known oratory, he began to speak to the assembled people and clergy, attempting to calm them, speaking of peace and moderation. As he was speaking, however, a voice interrupted him, shouting out, “Ambrose, bishop!” The chant was joined by others, and to Ambrose’s complete shock he was unanimously elected bishop.

Ambrose had initially no wish to serve. He hadn’t even been baptised and was still only a catechumen, though this lay largely due to a misguided and common practice of the day to delay baptism until near death due to reverence for the sacrament. The people wrote to the Emperor asking him to confirm their elected choice, and he did, ordering Ambrose to be imprisoned until he accepted.

Ambrose accepted, was baptised and in December 374 was consecrated as Bishop of Milan. His first act as bishop was to give his worldly possessions to the poor and his land to the church, after making provision for the care of his sister. Given his lack of theological training, he then devoted himself to the study of the Church Fathers and the Holy Scriptures. Soon he began placing his significant oratorical skill and keen mind to work in the pulpit, where he would soon enough famously convert St Augustine to Christianity by the power of his homilies.

He surprised the Arians by strongly refusing to acquiesce to them in the way he had as governor. He refused to give them a building to meet in and wrote against them. Ultimately he would help to define the meaning of Christian orthodoxy in that age, and bringing an end to Arianism.

While Ambrose was a fierce opponent of heresy and paganism, his zeal for Christian orthodoxy and religious persecution of heretics did not extend to how they were treated civily. Arians and pagans were still citizens, and still had rights. As human beings, they were still God’s creates whom he loved and wanted saved. Ambrose showed respect to them, even as he opposed them theologically. His position was quite innovative at its time, and earned him a significant amount of respect from all people.

Aside from his conversion of St Augustine to Christianity, St Ambrose is mostly known for his impact on Church-State relations, particularly due to his friendship with Emperor Theodosius. In 390, a popular charioteer in Thessalonica was imprisoned for attempting to rape a male cup bearer. The people demanded his release because he was a popular and successful charioteer, and when the government officials refused, a general revolt occurred in which the military commander and a number of other Roman officials were killed. When Emperor Theodosius heard of this, he was outraged and dispatched the army to capture the city, as if it were hostile. They massacred thousands of civilians. Shortly after he dispatched the army units, he changed his mind and sent a messenger to cancel the orders, but the messenger never caught up with the army units who proceeded to slaughter the inhabitants of Thessalonica, some 7,000 killed according to some accounts.

St Ambrose was stunned when he heard of what happened and immediately wrote a letter to the Emperor demanding that he repent of his act in ordering the massacre. Theodosius refused. Ambrose was simply a clergyman in far off Milan, while he was the Emperor of the entire Roman Empire, sitting on his throne in Constantinople. However, shortly after receiving the letter from Ambrose, imperial business took him to Milan. As a Christian, Theodosius went to church when he was in Milan, but Ambrose refused to offer Theodosius communion unless the Emperor publicly repented of his acts.

Ultimately, the Emperor relented. Divesting himself of his imperial vestments, clothed in a sackcloth and with ash streaked on his face in a sign of penance, Theodosius repented for the massacre.

In standing up to the Emperor, St Ambrose placed his own life on the line for his calling and for God’s truth. He showed great courage for his office in upholding both Christian orthodoxy in the theology being preached in his diocese and also in rebuking those who failed to measure up to Christian virtues with egregious public sins while still acting as if they had committed no wrong.

While later bishops would use St Ambrose’s example as a means to manipulate civil leaders by withholding the sacraments, St Ambrose’s purpose was never to force the submission of the state to the Church, but rather to show that no person, regardless of civil or religious status, was exempt from God’s laws.

NB. The Feast of Ambrose is commemorated on 4 April, but as that fell on Holy Saturday, the feast is transferred to a ferial day.

On Lectio Divina

The Twenty-Second Sunday after Trinity

LORD, we beseech thee to keep thy household the Church in continual godliness; that through thy protection it may be free from all adversities, and devoutly given to serve thee in good works, to the glory of thy Name; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

This post is an excerpt of a talk given on lectio divina at a Parish Retreat held the weekend of the 14th and 15th of November 2014.

We began today with an historic request. Christ’s disciples, as recorded in the gospel of St Luke, ask Him, “Lord, teach us to pray.” We engaged in a meditation on the nature of Christ’s response to their request, and since then we have explored teachings and witnesses on private and corporate prayer life. Prayer has been described as a gemstone with many facets. In becoming familiar with them all, we can help to prevent our prayer life from losing depth or becoming a boring monotone. More simply, our goal has always been to show how we can each, simply, enhance our prayer lives and relationships with God through an active and spirited life of prayer which St Teresa of Avila once said was, “nothing else… than being on terms of friendship with God.”

For most of us, our prayer life likely began through the recitation of memorized prayers like the Lord’s Prayer. Over time, we begin introducing more personal elements to our prayers, moving off script. This is the beginning of the transformation of our relationship from one that is impersonal and is about sending messages to God to a more personal relationship with God in which our prayers are conversations between good friends.

Conversation requires not just speaking, but listening as well.  The same holds true in prayerful conversation with God: there must be time for God to speak, and we need to listen when He does. It isn’t wrong to simply bring our petitions to God, in fact we are instructed to do so (Phil 4. 6). It is a start. But to develop a true and deep relationship with God, we need to leave times of silence for God to speak, and train ourselves to listen. In his book The Screwtape Letters, CS Lewis presents an imagined demon giving instruction to a pupil on ways to corrupt the souls of a human. In one of his letters, the demon Screwtape notes that the world is, “occupied by Noise...the grand dynamism, the audible expression of all that is exultant, ruthless, and virile…We will make the whole universe a noise in the end…The melodies and silences of Heaven will be shouted down in the end.”

In the early church, listening to God was considered to be an extremely important and natural part of our spiritual lives. Our spiritual activity in relation to God was a rhythm, a gentle oscillation, between activity towards God and receptivity from God. The activity was pray to God, while receptivity was prayer through listening to God.

While there were many different ways early Christians would make themselves receptive to God, one that received something of a revival and remains extremely commonplace today is lectio divina. It was strongly encouraged in the medieval monastic traditions, and particularly in the Rule of St Benedict from the early 6th century, where the very first sentence of the prologue instructs the reader to, “incline the ear of thy heart,” in order to hear, “thy loving Father.” Michael Casey, a Cistercian monk who has written extensively on the subject, describes it as, “more than the pious perusal of ‘spiritual books.’ Lectio divina is a technique of prayer and a guide to living. It is a means of descending to the level of the heart and finding God.”

Lectio divina is Latin for ‘divine reading’ but it might more easily be understood, at least initially, as ‘divine listening’ because it is a practice which helps us to hear God. Lectio divina is a personal prayer, though it can also be practiced corporately, in which we read Scripture not to see what God has revealed to Christians through the ages, but to listen to His will for us personally in the moment.

While there can be infinite variations in the practice of lectio divina, there are almost always a few common features that unite those practices.

Before beginning, a verse of Scripture is selected as the focus of the lectio divina. The verse itself shouldn’t be too long, as it is easier to contemplate a briefer verse without having to constantly re-read the passage from your Bible. The actual meaning of the passage is not entirely relevant. Remember, lectio divina is not about coming to a deeper understanding of the meaning of a passage, but rather allowing God to speak to you through it. Having selected a passage, there are four main steps to be followed.

Lectio is the first step, reading. The selected passage must be read slowly, attentively and reverently, and through the reading we begin to listen for the, “still small voice,” (1 Kgs 19. 12) of God as he may highlight a particular word or passage within the verses being read. When reading, pause after each clause. In some practices, during certain stages of the reading you may even re-read a particular part of a passage multiple times, or even pause after every single word.

Meditatio is the second step, meditation. Following the annunciation of Christ to St Mary, St Luke records that she pondered what had been revealed to her in her heart (Lk 2. 19). Once we have heard the word or phrase God is speaking to us, we must do the same. Allow it to sit in our head and interact with our thoughts, our worries and the longings of our hearts.

Oratio is the third step, prayer. As St Ambrose of Milan put it, “And let them remember that prayer should accompany the reading of Sacred Scripture, so that God and man may talk together; for “we speak to Him when we pray; we hear Him when we read the divine saying.” While lectio divina as a whole is a form of prayer, this is a stage of particular prayer within the process. In the meditatio we personalize God’s word for us. In the oratio we pray a prayer of consecration, offering back what we have meditated upon to God with a grateful heart. This can be done wholly through intent, or if it is easier it can be done through words, spoken or unspoken. God knows the desires of our hearts, but it can be easier as a method of focusing to use words.

Contemplatio, or contemplation, is the final step in lectio divina. It is the point in which, in silence of thought and mind, we can contemplate the loving presence of God. It is a receptive stage in the rhythm of prayer that follows through the receptivity in lectio and activity in the oratio. Through lectio divina, God has invited us into His transforming embrace, revealing to us His will for us. Having had that confirmation of God’s love for us, contemplatio allows us to rest in that love. In this act we achieve closeness with God that cannot be matched purely by conversation. An example might be how at certain points in very close relationships, words are not necessary and two people can simply enjoy and communicate through their presence together. As St Pio of Pietrelcina puts it, prayer, “is the key to God’s heart. You must speak to Jesus not only with your lips, but with your heart. In fact on certain occasions you should only speak to Him with your heart.”

There are many different practical ways to engage in lectio divina, but each of these four stages will be present in some manner. It should be noted, however, that they themselves do not represent a linear progression through lectio divina as there will often be repetition of the reading, meditating and prayer stages throughout the process, and in particular when engaged in a group setting, the contemplation stage may be very brief, or may be engaged in privately at a separate time as a conclusion to the lectio divina. What is critical, however, is that each stage is incorporated into the structure of the prayer. Through them, the rhythm of prayer life in the early church is restored. This rhythm of the early church is also best supported through regular practice. Abbot John Chapman of Downside once said, “The only way to pray is to pray; and the only way to pray well is to pray much. If one has no time for this then they must at least pray regularly.” So it is with lectio divina.