On 30 April 2010 the major English-speaking countries were informed that Rome had granted the recognitio (approval) for the new Mass texts of the universal edition of the Roman Missal (Third Edition). The Conferences of Bishops in those countries have been awaiting delivery of these texts, so that they could in turn complete the process of seeking approval for their respective national editions of the Roman Missal.
On 20 August 2010 we received a digital copy of these universal texts, but still await approval for the local amendments to the Missal that will enable us to go ahead and publish the Roman Missal for use in New Zealand.
Originally we had hoped to launch our national edition of the Roman Missal on the First Sunday of Advent this year (28 November 2010). Rome’s unforeseen delay now makes this impossible. While, for the present, we are unable to publish the complete Roman Missal on the First Sunday of Advent as hoped, we nonetheless recognise the pastoral importance of implementing some of the new texts on that date.
Accordingly, the New Zealand Catholic Bishops’ Conference has decided to introduce the new translations of the following parts of the Mass:
‣ the greetings and responses at the beginning of Mass.
‣ the texts of the Penitential Act.
‣ the Gloria.
‣ the Creed.
‣ the prayers and responses during the Liturgy of the Word.
‣ all the dialogues between the Priest and the Assembly during the Liturgy of the Eucharist.
‣ the Holy,Holy.
‣ the Memorial Acclamations.
‣ the Doxology.
‣ all the prayers and responses of the Priest, Deacon and Assembly from the Communion Rite to the Concluding Rites.
‣ those gestures and postures required by the accompanying rubrics and/or the relevant sections of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal.
To assist in a smooth transition, the Conference will be making available, free of charge, an interim missalette containing those texts mentioned above. Also, a music resource will be available at the end of September 2010 offering two musical settings for the Mass: the setting of the Missal chants and a new composition by Douglas Mews.
The current Propers of the Mass, the Prefaces and the Eucharistic Prayers as provided for in the present Missal will still be in force until such time as the complete New Zealand edition of the Roman Missal can be published. In the meantime, we recommend that priests use either the present Missal or the current CPC “Prayers of the Mass”.
Put up your hand if you believe that children should not be fed until they can at least articulate the five food groups.
Put up your hand if you fully understand the Eucharist.
Put up your hand if you understand x% of all there is to be understood about the Eucharist, and at the current rate of learning you will know all there is to be known about the Eucharist in y years.
Cardinal Antonio Cañizares Llovera, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, has just called for the possibility of Roman Catholic children to receive communion prior to the age of seven. He was reflecting on the teachings of St Pius X. “With this decree … he taught the entire Church the meaning, the opportunity, the value and the centrality of Holy Communion for the life of all of the baptized, including children,” wrote the cardinal prefect of St. Pius X. First communion, as the beginning of our “walk together with Jesus” should not be put off.
Pius X pointed out that the ancient tradition of the Church was to give babies Communion immediately after their baptism. The practice died out in the West. Eastern Rite Catholics, of course, in full communion with Rome, receive communion from their baptism. Then the children are catechized from a very early age in what it is they have received.
“This practice of preventing the faithful from receiving, on the plea of safeguarding the august sacrament, has been the cause of many evils. It happened that children in their innocence were forced away from the embrace of Christ and deprived of the food of their interior life,” Pope Pius wrote.
New Zealand Roman Catholics, surprisingly, have an inconsistent variety of approaches. Most make their first communion aged 8 or 9. It normally requires first Confession, and Confirmation prior to receiving communion. But Christchurch Diocese and Palmerston North Diocese do not follow this practice, and have confirmation after first communion.
Canon lawyer Msgr Brendan Daly (in the newspaper NZ Catholic) explains that canon law requires children to be carefully prepared for first communion so that they understand what the mystery of Christ means and can receive with faith and devotion.
The issue, of course, with that approach is that what is sauce for the Eucharistic goose is sauce for Baptismal gander. If you demand “that they understand what the mystery of Christ means and can receive with faith and devotion”, then the Baptist position of requiring understanding and at least the “age of reason” to be baptized is a logical consequence, is it not?
Furthermore, why does the rationale not apply to Eastern Catholics whom the Vatican allows to receive from Baptism?
New Zealand Anglicans, and other provinces, have, in the renewal of liturgy, returned to the historic Christian practice of the Eucharist for all the baptised. Eucharist completes the sacrament of initiation, and is the repeatable part of the sacrament of initiation.
Archbishop Raymond Burke, the Roman Catholic Church’s top legal authority, has stated that reading at Mass or distributing communion is not a right of the baptized. “Assistance by “persons of the feminine sex” at the altar” is also not a right.
Pope John Paul II, of course, allowed “persons of the feminine sex” at the altar. The recent altar server pilgrimage to the Vatican drew thousands of boys and girls. “Archbishop Burke clarified, however, that the reality of the matter is that neither the presence of girls at the altar, nor the participation of lay faithful “belong to the fundamental rights of the baptized.””
The attitudes to women, particularly around menstruation, has a long history, going back into Biblical times. In 241 AD Dionysius, Archbishop of Alexandria, wrote: “menstruous women ought not to come to the Holy Table, or touch the Holy of Holies, nor to churches, but pray elsewhere.” Pope Gelasius I (494 AD) objected to women serving at the altar. The Decretum Gratiani (1140 AD), which became official Church law in 1234 AD, part of the Corpus Iuris Canonici has
Women may not distribute communion
Women may not teach in church
Women may not touch sacred objects
Women may not touch sacred vestments
The Corpus Iuris Canonici (1234 – 1916 AD) also has:
A woman may not touch the corporal
Women may not receive communion during their monthly periods
Women should receive communion in their hand on a ‘housel-towel’ or on the tongue
Women should be veiled when receiving communion
Women may not be singers in Church
From 1917
Women may not distribute holy communion
Girls or women may not be Mass servers at the altar
Women should have their heads veiled in church
Sacred linen must first be washed by men, before women touch them
Women may not read out Sacred Scripture in church
IMO, and with respect, I suggest the understanding of laity as there to pay, pray, and obey is not the understanding of Jesus. Renewal of liturgy has rediscovered liturgy is (as the origin of the word suggests) “the work of the people”. It is not a spectator sport. It is a team sport, where each has a particular role. I would suggest that the laity, in fact, are the ones appropriately reading lessons, leading the prayers of the faithful, bringing forward the bread and wine, taking up and presenting a collection and other gifts for the poor, etc. Clergy should not usurp these tasks. Laity have responses particular to them in the liturgy. Clergy should not usurp these responses. Many post-Vatican II church buildings do not have a “sanctuary” (this became a problem with a recent Vatican ruling that priests not “leave the sanctuary during the Sign of Peace”). In such a building, at which point is a “person of the feminine sex” deemed to be “assisting at the altar”? May she take up the collection, but not present it? In such a church building may no woman go beyond the front seats or pew? Or even sit in the front seats or pews if there is no physical barrier between her and the altar?
The 1989 Danish movie, Babette’s Feast, is full of deep theology. The story is set in an austere Christian sect in 19th century Jutland. There is much in the movie, even evident in the above clip, about meals and hospitality, Eucharist and community, reconciliation and joy, the generosity of God and the great banquets of which Jesus speaks…
Lord Jesus Christ,
you draw and welcome us,
emptied of pride and hungry for your grace,
to this your kingdom’s feast.
Nowhere can we find food for which our souls cry out,
but here, Lord, at your table.
Invigorate and nourish us, good Lord,
that in and through this bread and wine
your love may meet us
and your life complete us in the power and glory of your kingdom.
Amen.
An alternative to the Prayer of Humble Access; page 33.
From AN ORDER FOR THE HOLY EUCHARIST
The Church in Wales
Canterbury, 208pp, 1 85311 617 3
…When people tell me that they find Mass boring, I want to say to them: it’s supposed to be boring, or at least seriously underwhelming. It’s a long-term education in becoming un-excited, since only that will enable us to dwell in a quiet bliss which doesn’t abstract from our present or our surroundings or our neighbor, but which increases our attention, our presence, and our appreciation for what is around us…
Q. Is God’s activity limited to these rites?
A. God does not limit himself to these rites; they are patterns of countless ways by which God uses material things to reach out to us.
Is God’s activity limited to these rites – Is God’s activity limited to eucharist and baptism and so on? And the official answer of the church is, “no”. God does not limit himself to these; they are patterns of countless ways by which God uses material things to reach out to us.
God does not limit himself to eucharist and baptism and so on; eucharist and baptism and so on are patterns of countless ways by which God uses material things to reach out to us.
What we do in church is practising for the ordinary everyday lives we live outside of the church service.
In the sixth century Rule of St Benedict (Chapter 31) it says that we should treat everything “as if they were the sacred vessels of the altar”. We should have the same reverence for everything as we have reverence in church for the bread and wine, the chalice and altar. Everything in the world, in our lives, may look ordinary – but everything is shot through with the sacred, with meaning.
Fr. Paolo Padrini has developed an application that will let Roman Catholic priests preside at the Eucharist using an iPad instead of a missal book on the altar .
The application will be launched in July in English, French, Spanish, Italian and Latin, and will be free.
Two years ago, Fr Padrini produced the iBreviary, an application for iPods and iPhones. That initial version had some bugs. The current version is iBreviaryPro. The bugs are ironed out, but it only works when connected to the internet. It is a free application.
The iPad application will be similar but also contains the complete missal – all that is required for presiding at the Eucharist. There are plans for audio, commentaries, sermon suggestions and music ideas.
Fr Padrini was asked by the Vatican to oversee its youth outreach program in the new media, www.pope2you.net.
On Sunday all of us gather from far and near. We read from the scriptures and from the writings of the apostles for as long as possible. Then the one presiding at the service speaks to us, urging everyone to live up to what we have heard in the readings. Then we all stand up together and pray. At the conclusion of our prayers, we greet one another with a sign of peace. Then bread and wine mixed with some water are brought forward. The one presiding offers a long prayer giving thanks. Everyone loudly responding “Amen” concludes this. The eucharist is distributed, and everyone present receives communion. Then deacons take communion to those who are absent.
Those who can afford to contribute financially decide how much to give, and the money is used for orphans, widows, those in distress, the sick, those in prison, or away from home, and all those in need.
Pause a moment and ask yourself what is this a description of? When do you think the above piece originates from?
On the first of June Anglicans, Roman Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox celebrate the feast of Justin, a martyr at Rome. He was born at the start of the second century in what is now the Palestinian city of Nablus in the West Bank. The tradition is that he suffered martyrdom in Rome around the year 165. He was a philosopher who converted to Christianity – in Christianity he had found the true philosophy.
We still have a number of Justin’s writings, and the quote above is drawn from Justin’s “First Apology”, a work of Christian apologetics in which he is explaining Christianity. It dates from about 150. This is the oldest account of the Eucharist outside the New Testament period and Justin assures us he is describing the teaching of Christ and the earliest church. The Eucharist was clearly the principal, weekly Sunday worship of the church.
If you read the piece above quickly, you could be forgiven for thinking it was a description of the last Eucharist you attended. The Eucharist has been celebrated with essential similarities for about 100,000 Sundays. But sometimes we have cluttered up the essential, graceful simplicity. We have put the emPHASis on the wrong syLLAble. We have added just “another little prayer we love” and another little notice and commentary and explanation, losing the wood for the trees. Liturgical reform and renewal over the last few decades has been about returning to Justin’s graceful simplicity and allowing that to come alive in our own context.
So look at the text a second time and allow it to challenge us to bring more graceful simplicity to our services. This time notice what is not mentioned. Three examples:
There’s no confession and absolution. In the early church the whole of the Eucharist was seen to be reconciling. It renewed the sacrament of baptism which cleanses from sin, and it mediated Christ’s sacrifice “for the forgiveness of sins.” Penitential practices from private medieval piety, however, were embodied into the first Anglican Prayer Book in 1549. Modern liturgical renewal is rediscovering the earlier insight that “as we take part, as we break bread and share the cup, our forgiveness is renewed and we are cleansed” (A New Zealand Prayer Book- He Karakia Mihinare o Aotearoa, page 403).
There’s no creed. The early church regarded the Eucharistic Prayer as professing the church’s faith. That prayer abounds in credal affirmations. It does not seem coincidental that the people’s proclamation of the creed entered the liturgy when the Eucharistic Prayer ceased to be a vocal proclamation and began to be quietly said far removed from the congregation. The renewed Eucharistic Prayers are once again strong proclamations of the church’s belief.
There’s no blessing. Blessings developed during a period in church history when most in the congregation were not receiving communion during the Eucharist. Whatever our community practice, Justin challenges us to avoid any custom that gives the impression that Christ’s self-giving in communion needs to be supplemented.
The lack of a mention of hymns does not mean there was no music. Maybe the readings, the prayers, and the presider’s thanksgiving were chanted, as was taken for granted in the synagogue, and even in our own context of karakia in Te Reo.
Justin doesn’t have much lead-up to the lengthy readings does he? In the early church the service might have begun with a greeting to which the people responded, then they may have sung something – singing is always a wonderful way to form individuals into a group. Then the presider might have called them to deep silent prayer in which this community became conscious how together they were the body of Christ praying in the Spirit silently together to the Father. That time of silent prayer was collected by a brief “collect” proclaimed by the presider to which everyone gave their loud “Amen” which Justin explains is Hebrew for “so be it”.
Even such a brief preparation for the readings may be later than Justin. Allow that brevity to challenge our practices. I’m sure we’ve all been to services with such a lengthy introduction that by the time we get to the readings there is a decision made that, for the sake of time, of the three readings and the psalm set in the lectionary two or even three are omitted. The purpose of the introduction (“The Gathering of the Community”) is to prepare us to hear what the Spirit is saying to us as the church. Justin knew that in the Liturgy of the Word the emphasis was to be on the scriptures, not on the gathering rite preceding it. He understood the dynamics of letting Christ’s life in the scriptures come alive in us through the sacramental celebration. Let us allow Justin’s challenge to simplify the lines of our services so that the clear foci of Word, and Sacrament, and Service become as real in our own communities as they appear in his ideals.
A slightly shorter version of this article was recently published in the Winter print edition of Anglican Taonga
The prayer at the heart of the Liturgy of the Eucharist is the Great Thanksgiving/Eucharistic Prayer. The prayer at the heart of the Liturgy of the Word is the collect/opening prayer. Both of these prayers plunge us deeper into the life of God the Holy Trinity. They are led by the presider, addressed to God, the First Person of the Trinity, as we, together as Christ’s body, pray in the power of the Spirit.
The collect/opening prayer has a bidding (invitation to pray), the community prays together in deep silent prayer, then the collect is proclaimed, and the now-gathered community affirms/ratifies the prayer by a resounding “Amen.” (”So be it”).
The collect (like haiku or sonnet) has its own particular, recognisable structure. In the five-fold structure, three parts are always present (marked *):
*You– Address
Who – Amplification (& motive)
*Do – Petition
To – Purpose (& motive)
*Through Jesus Christ…
Collects, like Eucharistic Prayers, are to be general. Inclusive. We should all be able to find ourselves in them. We should all be able to assent with the “Amen”. We live in a RCL/3YearLectionary, post-tight-little-themed-Sunday-services church. Where pebbles are cast and we hope the ripples somehow touch all – or nearly all. Collects, hence, are mostly general prayers, not too tightly setting a them.
Prayers for an Inclusive Church is mostly a collection of collects – about a hundred and fifty of them across the three years of the RCL. Unfortunately the collects are not supplied with a particular bidding. They are mostly linked to the gospel reading. Other than that, they essentially fulfil the requirements of my criteria above [each has the shorter ending, eg. "through Jesus Christ the Way, the Truth, and the Life." rather than the normal Trinitarian ending, which in any case the presider could continue with, "...with you... and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever."]. About half a dozen of them are addressed to the Second or Third Person of the Trinity, creating that oddity of praying to the Second Person of the Trinity “through Jesus Christ”. But Steven Shakespeare is clearly aware of these issues and his Introduction sets out an understanding of inclusiveness and the place of prayer which articulates insightfully the contribution of René Girard. For those who think inclusiveness is “a shapeless tolerance for anything and everything”, Steven Shakespeare highlights from his previous book that “the inclusiveness of the church is precisely what makes it a demanding, counter-cultural presence in the world.”
Mostly the prayers here are pretty-much usable as given. Occasionally I would alter a word here or there. I am possibly not as comfortable as the author to use an image in prayer for the purpose of what I might call “shock tactics”. Here are prayers that allow us to see scriptural passages afresh. There are also confessions, introductions to the Peace, and Eucharistic Prayers which would need their own review. Because of this book I have already ordered his book The Inclusive God: Reclaiming Theology for an Inclusive Church. Out of five stars, this collection gets four and a half from me.
Collect for this coming Sunday:
Holy Trinity,
you are neither monarch nor monologue
but an eternal harmony
of gift and response:
through the Uncreated Word
and the Spirit of Truth
include us and all creation
in your extravagant love;
through the Wisdom of God,
who raises her voice
to call us to life.
Amen.
I have been developing a theology and practice here of ordained priesthood/presbyterate where presiding-preaching-pastoring are three intimately intertwined, irreducible dimensions.
This post might be regarded as a fourth (in a trilogy) reflecting on:
In a two (or more) priest community, there are some who have developed a tradition where one priest presides at the Eucharist and the other priest preaches. They roster week about. In other words the presider never preaches, and the preacher never presides.
It is always fascinating to pore over church service advertisements. Especially the way a community perceives itself, what it thinks it is important, and how it expresses itself to visitors and seekers:
a devotional service
Family service
Festival Eucharist with Easter Hymns
Traditional Holy Communion (BCP) with hymns
Informal lively service with communion
But the prize in Holy week’s advertising goes to:
“Sung Festival Eucharist with incense”
A council spokeswoman said: “The investigation carried out by our team concluded that there is insufficient evidence to show that the occasional burning of incense, within St Paul’s Church, represents any significant hazard to health.” The church was large and airy; so the smoke would be “significantly dispersed”, it was well ventilated, and the blown-air heating system would “dilute” any smoke.
An interesting doctoral thesis (please credit me): correlating incense health issues and theological/liturgical perspectives. Remembering incense has been shown to cause antidepressive behaviour in mice. It also activates the poorly understood ion channels in the brain alleviating anxiety and depression.
When asked: what is incense for? The answer is: for the nose.
Remember in the afterlife the Bible speaks of there being two alternative smells: one is incense, the other… which do you prefer getting used to?
The Exsultet (Exultet) can be a good source of reflection during the Easter Season. The Exsultet originates from some time between the fifth and seventh centuries and is the traditional Western Rite hymn of praise intoned by the deacon during the Easter Vigil after the procession with the Paschal Candle.
Rejoice, heavenly powers! Sing, choirs of angels!
Exult, all creation around God’s throne!
Jesus Christ, our King, is risen!
Sound the trumpet of salvation!
Rejoice, O earth, in shining splendor,
radiant in the brightness of your King!
Christ has conquered! Glory fills you!
Darkness vanishes for ever!
Rejoice, O Mother Church! Exult in glory!
The risen Savior shines upon you!
Let this place resound with joy,
echoing the mighty song of all God’s people!
My dearest friends,
standing with me in this holy light,
join me in asking God for mercy,
that he may give his unworthy minister
grace to sing his Easter praises.
Deacon: The Lord be with you.
People: And also with you.
Deacon: Lift up your hearts.
People: We lift them up to the Lord.
Deacon: Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.
People: It is right to give him thanks and praise.
It is truly right
that with full hearts and minds and voices
we should praise the unseen God, the all-powerful Father,
and his only Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.
For Christ has ransomed us with his blood,
and paid for us the price of Adam’s sin to our eternal Father!
This is our passover feast,
when Christ, the true Lamb, is slain,
whose blood consecrates the homes of all believers.
This is the night
when first you saved our fathers:
you freed the people of Israel from their slavery
and led them dry-shod through the sea.
This is the night
when the pillar of fire destroyed the darkness of sin!
This is the night
when Christians everywhere,
washed clean of sin and freed from all defilement,
are restored to grace and grow together in holiness.
This is the night
when Jesus Christ broke the chains of death
and rose triumphant from the grave.
What good would life have been to us,
had Christ not come as our Redeemer?
Father, how wonderful your care for us!
How boundless your merciful love!
To ransom a slave you gave away your Son.
O happy fault,
O necessary sin of Adam,
which gained for us so great a Redeemer!
Most blessed of all nights,
chosen by God to see Christ rising from the dead!
Of this night scripture says:
“The night will be as clear as day:
it will become my light, my joy.”
The power of this holy night dispels all evil,
washes guilt away, restores lost innocence,
brings mourners joy;
it casts out hatred, brings us peace,
and humbles earthly pride.
Night truly blessed when heaven is wedded to earth
and man is reconciled with God!
Therefore, heavenly Father,
in the joy of this night,
receive our evening sacrifice of praise,
your Church’s solemn offering.
Accept this Easter candle,
a flame divided but undimmed,
a pillar of fire that glows to the honor of God.
(For it is fed by the melting wax,
which the mother bee brought forth
to make this precious candle.)
Let it mingle with the lights of heaven
and continue bravely burning
to dispel the darkness of this night!
May the Morning Star which never sets
find this flame still burning:
Christ, that Morning Star,
who came back from the dead,
and shed his peaceful light on all mankind,
your Son, who lives and reigns for ever and ever.
Amen.
Exsúltet iam angélica turba cælórum:
exsúltent divína mystéria:
et pro tanti Regis victória tuba ínsonet salutáris.
Gáudeat et tellus, tantis irradiáta fulgóribus:
et ætérni Regis splendóre illustráta,
tótius orbis se séntiat amisísse calíginem.
Lætétur et mater Ecclésia,
tanti lúminis adornáta fulgóribus:
et magnis populórum vócibus hæc aula resúltet.
[Quaprópter astántes vos, fratres caríssimi,
ad tam miram huius sancti lúminis claritátem,
una mecum, quæso,
Dei omnipoténtis misericórdiam invocáte.
Ut, qui me non meis méritis
intra Levitárum númerum dignátus est aggregáre,
lúminis sui claritátem infúndens,
cérei huius laudem implére perfíciat.]
[Vers. Dóminus vobíscum.
Resp. Et cum spíritu tuo.]
Vers. Sursum corda.
Resp. Habémus ad Dóminum.
Vers. Grátias agámus Dómino Deo nostro.
Resp. Dignum et iustum est.
Vere dignum et iustum est,
invisíbilem Deum Patrem omnipoténtem
Filiúmque eius unigénitum,
Dóminum nostrum Iesum Christum,
toto cordis ac mentis afféctu et vocis ministério personáre.
Qui pro nobis ætérno Patri Adæ débitum solvit,
et véteris piáculi cautiónem pio cruóre detérsit.
Hæc sunt enim festa paschália,
in quibus verus ille Agnus occíditur,
cuius sánguine postes fidélium consecrántur.
Hæc nox est,
in qua primum patres nostros, fílios Israel
edúctos de Ægypto,
Mare Rubrum sicco vestígio transíre fecísti.
Hæc ígitur nox est,
quæ peccatórum ténebras colúmnæ illuminatióne purgávit.
Hæc nox est,
quæ hódie per univérsum mundum in Christo credéntes,
a vítiis sæculi et calígine peccatórum segregátos,
reddit grátiæ, sóciat sanctitáti.
Hæc nox est,
in qua, destrúctis vínculis mortis,
Christus ab ínferis victor ascéndit.
Nihil enim nobis nasci prófuit,
nisi rédimi profuísset.
O mira circa nos tuæ pietátis dignátio!
O inæstimábilis diléctio caritátis:
ut servum redímeres, Fílium tradidísti!
O certe necessárium Adæ peccátum,
quod Christi morte delétum est!
O felix culpa,
quæ talem ac tantum méruit habére Redemptórem!
O vere beáta nox,
quæ sola méruit scire tempus et horam,
in qua Christus ab ínferis resurréxit!
Hæc nox est, de qua scriptum est:
Et nox sicut dies illuminábitur:
et nox illuminátio mea in delíciis meis.
Huius ígitur sanctificátio noctis fugat scélera, culpas lavat:
et reddit innocéntiam lapsis
et mæstis lætítiam.
Fugat ódia, concórdiam parat
et curvat impéria.
O vere beáta nox,
in qua terrénis cæléstia, humánis divína iungúntur!¹
In huius ígitur noctis grátia, súscipe, sancte Pater,
laudis huius sacrifícium vespertínum,
quod tibi in hac cérei oblatióne solémni,
per ministrórum manus
de opéribus apum, sacrosáncta reddit Ecclésia.
Sed iam colúmnæ huius præcónia nóvimus,
quam in honórem Dei rútilans ignis accéndit.
Qui, lícet sit divísus in partes,
mutuáti tamen lúminis detrimenta non novit.
Alitur enim liquántibus ceris,
quas in substántiam pretiósæ huius lámpadis
apis mater edúxit.²
Orámus ergo te, Dómine,
ut céreus iste in honórem tui nóminis consecrátus,
ad noctis huius calíginem destruéndam,
indefíciens persevéret.
Et in odórem suavitátis accéptus,
supérnis lumináribus misceátur.
Flammas eius lúcifer matutínus invéniat:
ille, inquam, Lúcifer, qui nescit occásum.
Christus Fílius tuus,
qui, regréssus ab ínferis, humáno géneri serénus illúxit,
et vivit et regnat in sæcula sæculórum.
Amen.
Easter Vigil Exultet (cathedral of Nice in France, 2008)
Rejoice, all creation!
Let the heavenly chorus sing!
Jesus Christ, our light, is risen! Sound the trumpet of salvation!
Rejoice, O earth, in shining splendour, the light of Christ will warm our autumn night. Christ has conquered!
Glory fills you! Darkness will vanish for ever!
Rejoice, O church of God! Exult in glory! The risen Saviour shines upon you!
Let this place resound with joy. Echoing the mighty song of all God’s people!
The Lord is here. God’s Spirit is with us.
Lift up your hearts. We lift them to the Lord.
Let us give thanks to God. It is right to offer thanks and praise.
It is truly right that with full hearts and minds and voices we should praise you the eternal God, and your First-born, our Saviour Jesus Christ.
For Christ is the true passover lamb who at this feast has set your faithful people free.
This is the night when you saved the people of Israel from their slavery in Egypt and led them through the Red Sea on dry land.
This is the night, when the pillar of fire brought light to your wandering people.
This is the night when all who believe in Christ are delivered from gloom, and are restored to grace, and grow together in fullness of life.
This is the night when Jesus Christ broke the chains of death and rose triumphant from the grave.
Night truly blessed when heaven is wedded to earth and we are reconciled with God!
Therefore, Holy God, in the joy of this night, accept our evening sacrifice of praise, your church’s solemn offering.
Accept this Easter candle, a flame divided but undimmed, a pillar of fire that glows to your honour, O God.
Let it mingle with the lights of heaven and continue burning to lighten the darkness of this night!
May the Morning Star find this flame still burning among us. Christ is that Morning Star, who rises to shed your peaceful light on all creation.
Christ is now alive and glorified with you for ever and ever. Amen.
Rejoice, heavenly powers! Sing, choirs of angels!
O Universe, dance around God’s throne!
Jesus Christ, our King, is risen!
Sound the victorious trumpet of salvation!
Rejoice, O earth, in glory, revealing the splendour of your creation,
radiant in the brightness of your triumphant King!
Christ has conquered! Now his life and glory fill you!
Darkness vanishes for ever!
Rejoice,O Mother Church! Exult in glory!
The risen Saviour, our Lord of life, shines upon you!
Let all God’s people sing and shout for joy.
Or Alternatively, the Introduction could be sung by the whole congregation to a tune of the metre 10.10.10.10 using the following form. Note: not all tunes of 10.10.10.10 metre are suitable.
All Sing, choirs of heaven! Let saints and angels sing!
Around God’s throne exult in harmony!
Now Jesus Christ is risen from the grave!
Salute your King in glorious symphony!
Sing, choirs of earth! Behold, your light has come!
The glory of the Lord shines radiantly!
Lift up your hearts, for Christ has conquered death!
The night is past, the day of life is here!
Sing, Church of God! Exult with joy outpoured!
The gospel trumpets tell of victory won!
Your Saviour lives; he’s with you evermore!
Let all God’s people sound the long Amen!
The minister continues
The Lord be with you All and also with you.
Lift up your hearts. All We lift them to the Lord.
Let us give thanks to the Lord our God. All It is right to give thanks and praise.
It is right and good that with hearts and minds and voices
we should praise you, Father almighty, the unseen God,
through your only Son, Jesus Christ our Lord,
who has saved us by his death,
paid the price of Adam’s sin,
and reconciled us once again to you. All [Glory to you for ever.]
For this is the Passover feast,
when Christ, the true Lamb of God, is slain
whose blood consecrates the homes of all the faithful. All [Glory to you for ever.]
This is the night when you first saved our ancestors,
freeing Israel from her slavery
and leading her safely through the sea. All [Glory to you for ever.]
This is the night when Jesus Christ vanquished hell,
broke the chains of death
and rose triumphant from the grave. All [Glory to you for ever.]
This is the night when all who believe in him are freed from sin,
restored to grace and holiness,
and share the victory of Christ. All [Glory to you for ever.]
This is the night that gave us back what we had lost;
beyond our deepest dreams
you made even our sin a happy fault. All [Glory to you for ever.]
Most blessed of all nights!
Evil and hatred are put to flight and sin is washed away,
lost innocence regained, and mourning turned to joy. All [Glory to you for ever.]
Night truly blessed, when hatred is cast out,
peace and justice find a home, and heaven is joined to earth
and all creation reconciled to you. All [Glory to you for ever.]
Therefore, heavenly Father, in this our Easter joy
accept our sacrifice of praise, your Church’s solemn offering.
Grant that this Easter Candle may make our darkness light.
For Christ the morning star has risen in glory;
Christ is risen from the dead and his flame of love still burns within us!
Christ sheds his peaceful light on all the world!
Christ lives and reigns for ever and ever! All Amen.
The four marks of the church’s mission were formulated and presented as part of the report of a meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council which took place in Nigeria in 1984.
Two meetings later, in Wales in 1990, they wrote in a report called Mission, Culture and Human Development “There has been a consistent view of mission … in recent years, which defines mission in a four-fold way . . . We now feel that our understanding of the ecological crisis, and indeed of the threats to the unity of all creation, mean that we have to add a fifth affirmation: to strive to safeguard the integrity of creation and sustain and renew the life of the earth.”
Lent is about being honest with ourselves. And Lent is about saying sorry – and doing something about it. It took Christians until 1990 to articulate responsibility for nature, for the environment, for the life of this planet. Why did it take so long? Why in 1984, when the church was working out its mission statement did it just stop at four? Why did it take six more years and two more meetings before the church realized we are responsible to strive to safeguard the integrity of creation and sustain and renew the life of the earth?
Part of it comes from a mentality that believes Jesus is coming again soon. If Jesus is coming again soon, then we don’t need to worry about the environment – in fact, we can help history along and encourage Jesus to return soon by just getting those wars going that we think the Bible is talking about.
And there’s a second, maybe even deeper problem. We see it in Psalm 8:
You, God, have made us human beings a little lower than God, and crowned us with glory and honor.
You, O God, have given us dominion over the works of your hands; you have put all things under our feet,
all sheep and oxen, and also the beasts of the field,
the birds of the air, and the fish of the sea, whatever passes along the paths of the seas.
We read this idea in Genesis 1:26
26 Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.”
27 So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”
The idea that has been drawn from Genesis 1 and from Psalm 8 is that the rest of creation was made for us humans. We are the top of the pile and it’s all specifically made by God for us. And we can do with creation absolutely whatever we like. God gives it to us so that we have dominion over it and subdue it. God puts it under our feet.
Recently we’ve been growing to realise that we humans may be sitting on the top of the pile but if we destroy what we are sitting on – then… there’s actually nothing else to sit on. We are totally dependent on the creation Genesis 1 and Psalm 8 appear to be giving to us to have dominion over and to subdue. We have begun to realise that we are fouling, we are soiling, we are messing up our own nests.
Before moving on, let us acknowledge that Christians have been terrible at caring for creation and that we need to seek forgiveness for that and repent of our attitude and to start implementing the fifth mark of mission: to strive to safeguard the integrity of creation and sustain and renew the life of the earth.
We are becoming more careful in reading the Bible. The post-modern world in which we live takes much greater care about context including the context of the person who wrote this text. Post-modernism pays more attention to power – we ask the question: who is benefiting from this? Who is losing through this? Post-modernism also says: where you stand determines what you see – step out of your own way of reading the text, try and read it from a different perspective, if you’ve been reading the text to bolster your position, what might be another reading that challenges your position?
“Dominion,” is a translation from the Hebrew verb radah. This grants humans the right and responsibility to rule, to govern the rest of creation. That is the way radah is used in the Bible. Kavash “subdue” is even stronger than radah. There is no question that subdue and have dominion is what is meant.
Now look at the context. In Genesis 1, God brings all life into existence, declares it is all good, and puts it in a harmonious ecosystem. Humans are God’s representatives, made in God’s image, and are called to act the same way. [I don’t know if you noticed in the next couple of verses in Genesis humans are not given the right to kill and eat animals!]
In Genesis 1 we humans are God’s deputy, God’s stewards.
Read further into the Bible and one finds that the dominion that God seeks is regularly one that protects the defenseless and gives justice to the oppressed. Dominion over creation implies the vocation to protect it.
Now think of the context of the writer and early readers: they live in a land where most are subsistence farmers, eking out a living on land with rocky soil, and often little rainfall. They are subduing an often seemingly hostile environment. If you are examining power relationships, it is nature that they experienced as having power. That power-dynamic has been very much reversed. We have technology and nuclear capability that completely turns the power dynamics upside down. Take care then when we read “subdue it; and have dominion over it” – that means something quite different in our technological, post-industrial context than in an iron age context.
Don’t stop at reading in Genesis 1, however. Remember Genesis 2 isn’t simply a continuation of the Genesis 1 story. Genesis 2 is a quite different creation story. In Genesis 2 humans aren’t made in God’s image, aren’t made to subdue and have dominion. In Genesis 2 humans are made like the plants and animals, humans, plants, and animals are all made out of adamah – the arable topsoil of the hillcountry. And when Genesis 2 says the human is to avad it that is translated as “till it” – but better translate it as “serve” it.
Thankfully Christians are becoming more aware of our responsibility to be God’s deputy, God’s steward, and to serve creation. In the last 25 years Christians have started praying:
Awaken in us a sense of wonder for the earth and all that is in it.
Teach us to care creatively for its resources (NZPB p413)
We remember with gratititude your many gifts to us in creation and the rich heritage of these islands.
Help us and people everywhere to share with justice and peace the resources of the earth. (NZPB p416)
We thank you for your gifts in creation – for our world, the heavens tell of your glory; for our land, its beauty and its resources, for the rich heritage we enjoy. We pray for those who make decisions about the resources of the earth, that we may use your gifts responsibly; for those who work on the land and sea, in city and in industry, that all may enjoy the fruits of their labours and marvel at your creation; for artists, scientists and visionaries, that through their work we may see creation afresh. (NZPB p463)
[Such prayers are absent from New Zealand's 1966 and 1970 revisions, and only begin to appear in the 1984 revision. Even the 1989 Prayer Book Eucharistic Liturgy Thanksgiving for Creation and Redemption was not built on that perspective "from the ground up", but had creation words patched onto previous revisions]
Christians conscious of our responsibility to strive to safeguard the integrity of creation and sustain and renew the life of the earth may wish to explore A Rocha: “A Rocha is a Christian nature conservation organisation, our name coming from the Portuguese for “the Rock,” as the first initiative was a field study centre in Portugal. A Rocha projects are frequently cross-cultural in character, and share a community emphasis, with a focus on science and research, practical conservation and environmental education.”
I see, from time to time, discussions about “lay presidency” of the Eucharist. In favour of this, regularly the eucharistic rite is dismembered and the discussion quickly degenerates to, “why can a lay person do this bit and not that bit?” This functionalism and legalism is often emotionally undergirded with an anti-catholic attitude {Sydney Anglicans are forbidden from such “popish” practices as wearing a chasuble (as St Paul did), adding water to the wine (as Jesus would have),… if they could get rid of the connection between priesthood and eucharist they would have removed most of the catholic hardware on which Anglicanism runs}.
Any reflection on eucharistic presidency can begin with the concept and practice of presidency generally. A teacher presides over a classroom, a judge presides over a courtroom. This does not mean the teacher does everything – quite the opposite. Good educational theory will have the teacher enabling, facilitating the learning of all in the room. The teacher involves individuals and the whole class in the learning process. Similarly, the judge does not do everything in the courtroom, others have specific tasks and the judge oversees and coordinates the smooth running of all that happens in the room.
The priest oversees all that happens in the Eucharist. The priest doesn’t do everything – quite the opposite. Others have specific tasks and the priest coordinates the smooth running of all that happens at the Eucharist, enabling, facilitating the worship of all present. There are certain things that the presider needs to do in order to be clearly and appropriately presiding.
In New Zealand Anglicanism certain things have happened that have obscured the place of the priest at the Eucharist.
In the revision of the BCP that began in 1964, the commission designed the Liturgy of the Word in such a way that it could stand alone in the form of an Office, replacing, for example, Matins or Evensong. This meant that this could be led by a lay person. The commission wrote:
For occasions when it is not desired or possible to celebrate the Holy Communion, the first part of the Liturgy to the end of the Intercession provides an order of worship complete in itself. This service does not require the presence of a priest. (Introduction to 1966 Liturgy)
Furthermore, during theological study at St John’s College in Auckland, ordinands “practised” liturgical leadership by leading parts of the Eucharist that did not require ordination. In so dividing up the leadership of a service this gave a poor model of good liturgical leadership and presidency . Rather than reflecting on appropriate presiding models, these ordinands, once ordained, cloned their St John’s experience in their parish. What could arguably have had a certain appropriateness in a seminary context, was now replicated in a context in which it was not.
Poor liturgical study, training, and formation combined with rubrical fundamentalism with a Prayer Book that continued the 1964 distinctions between “first” and “second” part of the Eucharist and its leadership, and little reflection on the nature of presidency generally, as well as (appropriate) reaction against the tradition in which “the priest did it all” increased the trend to having a lay person “lead the first part” and a priest “lead the second part”. This development naturally leads to the question: why can a lay person not “lead the second part?”
In rural, multi-centre parishes (often in the past the first experience of a priest being a vicar after curacy) the priest was moving from centre to centre on Sunday morning, and might not arrive at the start of the service. A lay person would then start the service off.
“Locally Shared Ministry/Total Ministry” has severed the link between pastoring, preaching, and presiding for priesthood, dividing up the tasks that need to be held together to prevent a priest’s presiding from appearing like magic. In many ways, that last part of the sentence should be in the forefront of many people’s reflection. What is left in many communities who would articulate a “low” view of ordained priesthood is in fact a rubrical fundamentalism that gives the appearance of the priest being a sort of magician who is brought out to do those bits of a service a lay person cannot lead: the absolution, the consecration, the blessing. What is lost in this is both an appropriate understanding of lay ministry which has been clericalised, as well as an appropriate understanding of priesthood which has been reduced to a magician.
Those who advocate for “lay presidency of the Eucharist” do so by stating that these presiders will be authorised to preside by the bishop. One presumes that such authorisation would be done prayerfully – in which case we have such authorisation by the bishop already. For two millennia it has been called “ordination”.
Priesthood is normally understood as church-facing/Christian-community-facing leadership. Priests gather and lead the Christian community gathering (breathing in).
Priests in the Church are called to build up Christ’s congregation,
to strengthen the baptised…
to be pastors…
to declare forgiveness through Jesus Christ,
to baptise,
to preside at the Eucharist,
to administer Christ’s holy sacraments. NZ Anglican ordinal, Prayer Book pg 901
Deacons, on the other hand, are ordained to world-facing, sacrificial leadership. They lead the Christian community dispersed in service in the world (breathing out).
Deacons in the Church of God serve in the name of Christ,
and so remind the whole Church
that serving others is essential to all ministry. NZ Anglican ordinal, Prayer Book pg 891
Currently, to be ordained a priest (church-facing leadership) you have to be ordained a deacon first (world-facing leadership). This is termed “sequential ordination”. If God is calling you to church-facing leadership rather than world-facing leadership – tough! So most people perceive deacons as apprentice priests. And those God calls to the diaconate (and not to priesthood) are regularly seen as people who haven’t made the grade and are stuck in their apprenticeship.
In the Latin Rite of Roman Catholicism (the majority of Roman Catholics), “permanent deacons” can marry (prior to ordination) and then regularly do priest-like ministry (church-facing, rather than world-facing) because of a shortage of celibate priests. [Other Roman Catholic rites allow for married priests and have a stronger tradition of a clearly differentiated diaconate]
(Unfortunately) I have regularly seen people who once said strongly they were called to the diaconate, after a period decide they were called to priesthood after all. I can only quickly think of one person, I know personally, called to the diaconate who has stayed a deacon.
[I am not in this post going to bring bishops into the discussion. There is an ongoing dispute about the nature of bishops:
Are bishops priests to whom we have delegated the authority to ordain (the position of St Jerome)?
Or are priests delegates of the bishop in the local congregation (so that when the bishop is present the priest ought not to function in that ministry - the position of Theodore of Mopsuestia)?]
As I wrote above, currently to become a priest one must be a deacon first. A different approach, “direct ordination” or “per saltum ordination” (literally “by a leap”) is the understanding that you be ordained directly to the order to which God calls you. If you are to be a deacon, you are ordained a deacon (the current practice); if you are to be a priest, you would be ordained a priest (not a deacon first). Some scholars argue that in the early church all ordinations were per saltum (see Hallenbeck ed. Orders of Ministry). St Ambrose’s direct ordination to the episcopate is probably the most celebrated story.
There seems a surprising amount of emotional energy invested in maintaining the status quo. We have probably all met bishops proudly (sic!) proclaiming “I am still a deacon!” Episcopal Cafe has presented two interesting posts about the emotional dimension against per saltum ordination (part 1; part 2).There is also a discussion about this in the discussion area of Sarah Dylan Breuer’s facebook page. Some theologians hold that per saltum ordinations would be invalid. What is your position? And in the comments area – why?
There will be a sequel to this post in the near future.
Book review of 
. Out of five stars, this collection gets four and a half from me.
I have been developing a theology and practice here of ordained priesthood/presbyterate where presiding-preaching-pastoring are three intimately intertwined, irreducible dimensions.
Recent Comments