Clueless

Wow. I just read the "Explanation" of D025 at the GC Legislation site. Look at this language:

This resolution provides clarification in light of the Windsor Report (2004) and subsequent discussions in the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion.

The first resolve reaffirms resolution A159 adopted at the 75th General Convention General Convention, in 2006. While much attention has been focused on official statements and resolutions from the primates meetings, Lambeth Conference 2008, and Anglican Consultative Council meetings in 2005 and 2009, our participation in the Anglican Communion consists of a much richer tapestry of ministries and networks as well as personal relationships. Hence the second resolve encourages Episcopalians, individually and in dioceses and parishes, to build relationships with our sisters and brothers around the Anglican Communion by participation in these networks and ministries.

Another sign of the Episcopal Church's commitment to the Anglican Communion is financial. In 2007, The Episcopal Church budgeted $661,000 for the Inter-Anglican budget, which sustains the work of the Anglican Consultative Council and the Anglican Communion offices in London. The 2007 financial report of the Anglican Consultative Council (the latest available on the Anglican Communion website) reports a total income from Inter Anglican Budget contributions as £1,134,745 ($1,864,574.36, using 2009 currency rates). In other words, The Episcopal Church contributes a substantial portion of the Inter Anglican Budget. This resolution reaffirms our financial commitment.

Our relationships in the Anglican Communion have been tested by the question of the ordination to the episcopate of individuals living in a same-sex partnership. Resolution D-039 of the 73rd General Convention, in 2000, acknowledged that the membership of the Episcopal Church includes persons living in same-sex relationships; established an expectation that "such relationships will be characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God"; and further denounced "promiscuity, exploitation, and abusiveness in the relationships of any of our members." Three years later, the 74th General Convention reaffirmed this expectation. These standards thus provide guidance for access to the discernment process for ordination to the episcopate.

The acceptance of the ministry of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender persons is not settled in The Episcopal Church or in the Anglican Communion. While the church continues to discern God's will in these matters, it is important to remind ourselves that sacramental theology since the time of Augustine of Hippo has affirmed that the validity of sacraments does not depend on the character of the ordained person celebrating those sacraments.

See? Money and property get top billing and emphasis - and my God: can you believe the total cluelessness of that last sentence? "Generous pastoral response," anyone?

I read this Resolution over again because I found this at IGF: "Self-Made Schism."

I tried to explain "Anglican Fudge" to them in the comments, and at least one person seemed to understand. But it's also completely obvious that people outside the church just don't really get the whole thing. I am surprised, though, that the "overturning of B033" was reported as fact, without a more critical reading.

And then check out Christopher's latest post: Analyzing Rowan Williams’ Rhetoric About LGBT Persons. More about cluelessness over there.

Well, as I said at IGF: we have much more difficult work to do than we ever knew - certainly much more difficult than the feel-good band-aids we've been trying to use to close these raw and gaping wounds.

Good, really.

(Once again, though, I add: I am very appreciative of the language used in the already-on-the-books Resolutions from 2000 and 2003: "such relationships will be characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God." That is really major and important - although I suppose it seems old-hat by now. That is what is going to make deep change possible, not the ordination of gay men and women to the American Episcopate. Sheesh. Let's get over the silliness already and get to work....)

O Sacrum Convivium, Redux

Just found another gorgeous version of this hymn, at the St. Clement's Philadelphia audio library page.

It's Thomas Tallis' version, and here's the mp3.

About the song, including the words, again, from Wikipedia:

O Sacrum Convivium is a Latin prose text honoring the Blessed Sacrament. It was written by Saint Thomas Aquinas. It was included in the Latin Catholic liturgy as an antiphon on the feast of Corpus Christi. Its sentiments express the profound mystery of the Eucharistic miracle: "O sacred banquet at which Christ is consumed, the memory of his Passion is recalled, our souls are filled with grace, and the pledge of future glory is given to us."

Original Latin (punctuation from Liber Usualis):

O sacrum convivium!
in quo Christus sumitur:
recolitur memoria passionis ejus:
mens impletur gratia:
et futurae gloriae nobis pignus datur.
Alleluia.

Translation of original Latin:

O sacred banquet!
in which Christ is received,
the memory of his Passion is renewed,
the mind is filled with grace,
and a pledge of future glory to us is given.
Alleluia.

A New Testament Question: Ephesians 4:1-16

Next week's Epistle reading is this:

I therefore, the prisoner in the Lord, beg you to lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, making every effort to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all. But each of us was given grace according to the measure of Christ's gift. Therefore it is said,

"When he ascended on high he made captivity itself a captive;
he gave gifts to his people."

(When it says, "He ascended," what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower parts of the earth? He who descended is the same one who ascended far above all the heavens, so that he might fill all things.) The gifts he gave were that some would be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until all of us come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to maturity, to the measure of the full stature of Christ. We must no longer be children, tossed to and fro and blown about by every wind of doctrine, by people's trickery, by their craftiness in deceitful scheming. But speaking the truth in love, we must grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by every ligament with which it is equipped, as each part is working properly, promotes the body's growth in building itself up in love.

I mentioned to a priest of my acquaintance that I thought Paul really made some bad arguments at times - well, I think he does, although the priest pointed out that it could be the culture gap, and I acknowledge that that might be right - and cited this section above as an example:

(When it says, "He ascended," what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower parts of the earth? He who descended is the same one who ascended far above all the heavens, so that he might fill all things.)

My point was that this is, to me, a typical Pauline stretch; that "He ascended" does not necessarily imply that "He had also descended" - depending, of course, on who you are talking about. It also has nothing whatsoever to do with "the lower parts of the earth," that I can see - and where on earth does it say, or even imply, that "he ascended far above all the heavens," for goodness' sake? The passage being cited here is Psalm 68:18 - which, it seems to be generally thought, is a reference to Moses:

When you ascended on high,
you led captives in your train;
you received gifts from men,
even from the rebellious—
that you, O LORD God, might dwell there.

Another problem, of course, is the "giving" vs. the "receiving" of gifts. Which is it?

Paul is obviously talking about Christ above (although I'm still not sure what "the lower parts of the earth" have to do with it). I thought Paul was - once again - going way too far, but my priest friend said this: "That shouldn't even be in there! That passage is very difficult." (Or something like that - meaning, I gathered, that it would be better to leave the little aside out of the lectionary reading, because of inherent and/or intractable problems with the translation or something.)

And I've been reading a couple of commentaries on this section, and indeed there do seem to be some difficulties with it, even with the translations of words. Does anybody know what these happen to be, in case my Google Book commentaries suddenly cut out on me? Or don't include something important?

Thanks!

Verbum Supernum Prodiens

There are in existence two different versions of this hymn. About the original Verbum supernum prodiens (Celestial Word, to This Our Earth), TPL has this:

Verbum supernum prodiens dates to somewhere around the 6th or 7th century and can be found in monastic breviaries of the 10th century. The hymn is used for the Office of the Readings as an Advent Hymn.

TPL also has the later Thomas Aquinas version of Verbum supernum prodiens, listed in another place, about which it says:

Verbum Supernum was written by St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) in honor of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament at the specific request of Pope Urban IV (1261-1264) when the Pope established the Feast of Corpus Christi in 1264. It is used as a hymn at Lauds on Corpus Christi. The last two stanzas are used for the hymn O Salutaris Hostia (O Saving Victim).

Our good friend Derek the Ænglican has explained this in the comments: "This is another one of those where Aquinas has taken an early medieval hymn and tweaked it for different theological purposes. As a result there are two texts with the same incipit. It can be quite confusing and I wish Thomas would just stop it...". I disagree with Derek in this one instance, because I love "O Salutaris Hostia," and am happy that Thomas tweaked it - but I do see his point.

So, there are two hymns with the same name - but for the purposes of this post, I'm really interested in the words to the Aquinas hymn, and the last two verses specifically, which are:

O salutaris hostia,
Quæ cæli pandis ostium,
Bella premunt hostilia;
Da robur, fer auxilium.

Uni trinoque Domino
Sit sempiterna gloria:
Qui vitam sine termino
Nobis donet in patria.

The English words I'm familiar with are these:

O saving victim, opening wide
the gate of heaven to us below,
our foes press on from every side
thine aid supply, thy strength bestow.

All praise and thanks to thee ascend
for evermore, blest One in Three;
O grant us life that shall not end
in our true native land with thee.

The translation above is from Edward Caswall, 1849, and John Mason Neale, 1854, says Oremus Hymnal. And this is the famous hymn that's sung at Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament; at my local convent, it's sung every day immediately following Vespers, to one of eight different tunes.

Here's an mp3 of an Elgar version, a very beautiful motet that I've fallen absolutely in love with, sung by the St. Clement's choir. (I know a different version, which is also very beautiful, but alas cannot find it online.)

Here is the Durham Cathedral Choir singing yet another Elgar version at the Church of Sainte-Jeanne d'Arc de Versailles:



Here's another version:

The procession, exposition, incensing of the altar and singing of "Oh Salutaris Hostia" in preparation for the Litany of the Sacred Heart and the Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament. Filmed at Mother Angelica's Our Lady of the Angels Monastery in Hanceville, Alabama.

I'm not sure what this is, but I do really like it:



Here's Giovanni Vianini's Ambrosian Chant Hymn version of Verbum supernum prodiens:



Lastly, here's a beautiful version of the original Verbum supernum prodiens (the Mattins hymn), composed by Damijan Močnik and sung by the University of Utah Singers (unfortunately, the sound is not very strong):



Hymn melodies for the whole year from the Sarum service-books lists Verbum Supernum Prodiens as a Mattins hymn during Advent:

On the 1st Sunday in Advent, and daily (when the Service
is of the Season) until Christmas Day :-

Evensong: Conditor alme siderum ... ... ... 23
Mattins: Verbum supernum prodiens A Patre ... 24
Lauds: Vox clara ecce intonat ... ... ... 24

Below are the two sets of words, to the two different hymns - this one from from this source, and this is the Aquinas version:

Verbum supernum prodiens
Nec Patris linquens dexteram,
Ad opus suum exiens,
Venit ad vitæ vesperam.

In mortem a discipulo
Suis tradendus æmulis,
Prius in vitæ ferculo
Se tradidit discipulis.

Quibus sub bina specie
Carnem dedit et sanguinem;
Ut duplicis substantiæ
Totum cibaret hominem.

Se nascens dedit socium,
Convescens in edulium,
Se moriens in pretium,
Se regnans dat in præmium.

O salutaris hostia,
Quæ cæli pandis ostium,
Bella premunt hostilia;
Da robur, fer auxilium.

Uni trinoque Domino
Sit sempiterna gloria:
Qui vitam sine termino
Nobis donet in patria.

(s. Thomas Aquinas)

The Word descending from above,
without leaving the right hand of His Father,
and going forth to do His work,
reached the evening of His life.

When about to be given over
to his enemies by one of his
disciples, to suffer death, He
first gave Himself to His
disciples as the Bread of Life.

Under a twofold appearance
He gave them His Flesh and His Blood;
that He might thus wholly feed us
made up of a twofold substance.

By His birth He gave Himself as our companion;
at the Last Supper He gave Himself as our food;
dying on the Cross He gave Himself as our ransom;
reigning in heaven He gives Himself as our reward.

O saving victim, who throws open
the gate of heaven,
the attacks of bitter enemies oppress us;
give us strength, bring us aid.

Eternal glory be to God,
one in three Persons:
may He give us life forever
in our heavenly home. Amen.

LLPB gives Verbum supernum prodiens as High Word of God (mp3), which uses these words (which are the original early medieval set):

VERBUM supernum prodiens
a Patre lumen exiens,
qui natus orbi subvenis
cursu declivi temporis:

Illumina nunc pectora
tuoque amore concrema;
audita per praeconia
sint pulsa tandem lubrica.

Iudexque cum post aderis
rimari facta pectoris,
reddens vicem pro abditis
iustisque regnum pro bonis,

Non demum artemur malis
pro qualitate criminis,
sed cum beatis compotes
simus perennes caelites.

Sit, Christe, rex piissime,
tibi Patrique gloria
cum Sancto Spiritu Paraclito,
in sempiterna saecula. Amen.

High Word of God, who once didst come,
Leaving Thy Father and Thy home,
To succor by Thy birth our kind,
When, towards Thy advent, time declined,

Pour light upon us from above,
And fire our hearts with Thy strong love,
That, as we hear Thy Gospel read,
All fond desires may flee in dread;

That when Thou comest from the skies,
Great Judge, to open Thine assize,
To give each hidden sin its smart,
And crown as kings the pure in heart,

We be not set at Thy left hand,
Where sentence due would bid us stand,
But with the saints Thy face may see,
Forever wholly loving Thee.

Praise to the Father and the Son,
Through all the ages as they run;
And to the holy Paraclete
Be praise with Them and worship meet. Amen.

Here's the chant score that matches the mp3 above:

"From the Rector: New Prayer Book Lectionary"

From Stephen Gerth, Rector of St. Mary the Virgin:

At the 2006 General Convention, the Episcopal Church replaced the Sunday Lectionary that was adopted with the Prayer Book in 1979 with the “Revised Common Lectionary” – the “RCL.” The resolution authorizing this change provided that the 1979 lectionary could be used until Advent 2010. The just concluded 2009 General Convention took no action to alter this change. So, in Advent 2010 we will begin using this new lectionary. The new pew edition Prayer Books for sale in our gift shop already include it.

For us at Saint Mary’s, it will require a great deal of editorial work to get these materials ready in a user-friendly fashion for use at the lectern. So far, Church Publishing has not printed a Book of Gospels for the RCL using the Revised Standard Version of the Bible. (No, we are not going to start using the New Revised Standard Version unless required to do so by the canons of the Church.) No translation or lectionary is perfect. The Bible was not written with what we call a lectionary in mind. Of course, there were a number of technical and editorial problems with the present lectionary. I think it is fair to say that there are even more with the new one.

The push for this new lectionary began with the 1997 General Convention. For better or for worse, the members and leaders of our Church are no longer shaped primarily by ongoing public Prayer Book worship. Very few congregations, parishes or cathedrals, actually have Daily Morning and Evening Prayer or a daily celebration of the Eucharist. In a way that few foresaw, the decline of public worship among us has only accelerated since the adoption of the present book in 1979. This has consequences for the way new decisions are made about the way we will worship in the future.

The RCL was promoted as being “a truly ecumenical lectionary shared by most Protestant denominations and widely used throughout the Anglican Communion” (web page for the “Revised Common Lectionary” on the web site of the Episcopal Church). But what does that mean? I know a fair number of clergy colleagues in other Protestant denominations who would call themselves “lectionary preachers.” For them, Baptists, Methodists and Presbyterians, that means most of the time, as preachers, they would select one or more verses from one of the lessons appointed on a given Sunday and use those verses as a basis for the sermon. This usually partial passage would be read in worship and the rest would not. On more than one occasion I have heard the psalm referred to as “one of the lessons.”

The normative experience of the Bible during worship in these denominations is fundamentally different from our own – or of the other liturgical churches, such as our brothers and sisters who are Lutherans or Roman Catholics. Moreover, if memory serves, our 1979 lectionary is closer to the Roman Church’s present lectionary than the RCL. More people are Roman Catholic than anything else.

Stay with me; there are even more complications. One example is the RCL decision to adopt the Roman Church’s lectionary for January 1. The Roman Church celebrates January 1 as the Solemnity of Mary, the Mother of God – and its first and second readings are chosen for that title. The celebration of Mary on January 1 is an ancient commemoration of Christians in Rome, but in the East and among Anglicans since the Reformation, January 1 has been kept as a commemoration of the circumcision of Christ – and our first and second readings reflect this. Now we have a title and collect for the Holy Name of Our Lord Jesus Christ along with lessons for the Roman Church’s celebration of Mary, the Mother of God. We love Our Lady at Saint Mary’s, but I think it’s fair to ask how many of our ecumenical partners in the RCL will be meeting to celebrate the Holy Name of Jesus or Mary, the Mother of God, on New Year’s Day.

Perhaps the greatest single problem with the RCL is the option it gives during the season after Pentecost for a congregation to choose to follow week by week a series of continuous readings from the Old Testament narrative. This is to enable preachers to preach on more of the Old Testament. In fact, this Sunday’s lesson from this series is one of the important lessons in the Old Testament narrative, David’s lust for Bathsheba and his decision to have her husband put in a place during a battle where he would die (2 Samuel 11:1-15). The problem is that we Christians don’t gather in the name of David, but in the name of Jesus Christ. Our focus is on Christ. This Sunday’s gospel is one that will no longer be read in the RCL, namely Mark 6:45-52, where Jesus walks on water, a reading that is paired with 2 Kings 2:1-15, where Elijah is taken up to heaven and the water is parted by Elisha as he takes up Elijah’s mantle. This lesson from 2 Kings will no longer be read unless one chooses the continuous option for Sunday readings in the summer.

Here’s another passage that’s no longer part of the appointed Sunday readings for what will be this year, Sunday, August 9, “All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me; and this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up at the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that every one who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day” (John 6:36-40). This is good news that I would like to hear. I think these words are far more important good news than whatever a preacher might make of the story of David, Bathsheba and Uriah. But the RCL is shaped by a Protestant, not a liturgical sensibility.

We take worship and evangelism through worship very seriously at Saint Mary’s. We put an enormous amount of our community’s resources into keeping our church building open and clean. The parish invests in clergy, sisters and staff so that there will be Daily Offices and Daily Masses seven days a week all through the year. More than any other factor, the way in which we worship is shaped by the Prayer Book. We will be loyal to the new edition of the Prayer Book just as we were loyal to the old. I will continue to hope for the widespread return of public worship according to the Prayer Book.

Loyalty to Prayer Book worship was at the heart of the Methodist revival in the eighteenth century – Methodists got their name because they were Anglicans who were “methodical” about the use of the Prayer Book. Prayer Book worship was also at the heart of the High Church tradition before and after the nineteenth-century Oxford Movement. However, we live in the first era of liturgical change since the Reformation when the public Prayer Book worship no longer shapes the common life of our Church. I think we Episcopalians have enormous opportunities to do new and good things, to bring out of our treasure what is old and what is new. Prayer Book worship has a way of calling people back to it. Once its joys and its call get into one’s soul, they don’t let go.

Anglican Fudge, a few days old

It just came to me tonight that actually nothing at all happened at General Convention. Every bit of the "gay Resolution" stuff - with one exception - is just obfuscation.

It's clear to me, for instance, after looking at it again, that D025 is 100% content-free. It says, basically, absolutely nothing - only that the "call" (by God, mind you) to ordained ministry is "mysterious." Here, take a look, especially at the section I bolded:

Resolved, the House of Bishops concurring, That the 76th General Convention reaffirm the continued participation of The Episcopal Church as a constituent member of the Anglican Communion; give thanks for the work of the bishops at the Lambeth Conference of 2008; reaffirm the abiding commitment of The Episcopal Church to the fellowship of churches that constitute the Anglican Communion and seek to live into the highest degree of communion possible; and be it further

Resolved, That the 76th General Convention encourage dioceses, congregations, and members of The Episcopal Church to participate to the fullest extent possible in the many instruments, networks and relationships of the Anglican Communion; and be it further

Resolved, That the 76th General Convention reaffirm its financial commitment to the Anglican Communion and pledge to participate fully in the Inter-Anglican Budget; and be it further

Resolved, That the 76th General Convention affirm the value of “listening to the experience of homosexual persons,” as called for by the Lambeth Conferences of 1978, 1988, and 1998, and acknowledge that through our own listening the General Convention has come to recognize that the baptized membership of The Episcopal Church includes same-sex couples living in lifelong committed relationships “characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God” (2000-D039); and be it further

Resolved, That the 76th General Convention recognize that gay and lesbian persons who are part of such relationships have responded to God’s call and have exercised various ministries in and on behalf of God’s One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and are currently doing so in our midst; and be it further

Resolved, That the 76th General Convention affirm that God has called and may call such individuals, to any ordained ministry in The Episcopal Church,; and that God’s call to the ordained ministry in The Episcopal Church is a mystery which the Church attempts to discern for all people through our discernment processes acting in accordance with the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church; and be it further

Resolved, That the 76th General Convention acknowledge that members of The Episcopal Church as of the Anglican Communion, based on careful study of the Holy Scriptures, and in light of tradition and reason, are not of one mind, and Christians of good conscience disagree about some of these matters.

See? Nothing. Blathering on and on for paragraph after paragraph - yet saying nothing at all. Now that's genius.

And C056 does one thing: it actually backs the conversation up to where it should have begun years ago, with allowance that Bishops may "provide generous pastoral response" to gay couples. Nothing more. Look:

Resolved, the House of Deputies concurring, that the 76th General Convention acknowledge the changing circumstances in the United States and in other nations, as legislation authorizing or forbidding marriage, civil unions or domestic partnerships for gay and lesbian persons is passed in various civil jurisdictions that call for a renewed pastoral response from this Church and for an open procession for the consideration of theological resources and liturgies for the blessing of same gender relationships; and be it further

Resolved, That the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, in consultation with the House of Bishops, collect and develop theological resources and design liturgies, and report to the 77th General Convention for further action; and be it further

Resolved, That the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, in consultation with the House of Bishops, devise an open process for the conduct of its work inviting participation from provinces, dioceses, congregations, and individuals whoa re engaged in such theological work, and inviting theological reflection from throughout the Anglican Communion; and be it further

Resolved that bishops, particularly those in dioceses within civil jurisdictions where same-gender marriage, civil unions or domestic partnerships are legal, may provide generous pastoral response to meet the needs of members of this Church, and be it further

Resolved that this convention continue to honor the theological diversity of this Church in regard to matters of human sexuality and be it further

Resolved that member of this church be encourage to engage in this effort.

Nothing happened, except that a couple of stalling tactics were put in place - and actually quite masterful ones, too.

I am very happy, though, about C056 - because a "generous pastoral response" is a hell of a lot more than the church has ever offered before. And, as I say, that's what should have happened years ago, instead of the consecration of gay bishops and all the nonsense that has followed. I'm glad, too, that people are being encouraged to participate in discussions.

All people did was buy time via Anglican Fudge - and these two are the best batches I've seen yet, in fact. Wow.

"Is Peak Oil Real? A List of Countries Past Peak"

From the Oil Drum:

Country	Peak Prod.	2008 Prod.	% Off Peak	Peak Year
United States	11297	7337	-35%	1970
Venezuela	3754	2566	-32%	1970
Libya	3357	1846	-45%	1970
Other Middle East	79	33	-58%	1970
Kuwait	3339	2784	-17%	1972
Iran	6060	4325	-29%	1974
Indonesia	1685	1004	-41%	1977
Romania	313	99	-68%	1977
Trinidad & Tobago	230	149	-35%	1978
Iraq	3489	2423	-31%	1979
Brunei	261	175	-33%	1979
Tunisia	118	89	-25%	1980
Peru	196	120	-39%	1982
Cameroon	181	84	-54%	1985
Other Europe & Eurasia	762	427	-44%	1986
Russian Federation	11484	9886	-14%	1987*
Egypt	941	722	-23%	1993
Other Asia Pacific	276	237	-14%	1993
India	774	766	-1%	1995*
Syria	596	398	-33%	1995
Gabon	365	235	-36%	1996
Argentina	890	682	-23%	1998
Colombia	838	618	-26%	1999
United Kingdom	2909	1544	-47%	1999
Rep. of Congo (Brazzaville)	266	249	-6%	1999*
Uzbekistan	191	111	-42%	1999
Australia	809	556	-31%	2000
Norway	3418	2455	-28%	2001
Oman	961	728	-24%	2001
Yemen	457	305	-33%	2002
Other S. & Cent. America	153	138	-10%	2003*
Mexico	3824	3157	-17%	2004
Malaysia	793	754	-5%	2004*
Vietnam	427	317	-26%	2004
Denmark	390	287	-26%	2004
Other Africa	75	54	-28%	2004*
Nigeria	2580	2170	-16%	2005*
Chad	173	127	-27%	2005*
Italy	127	108	-15%	2005*
Ecuador	545	514	-6%	2006*
Saudi Arabia	11114	10846	-2%	2005 / Growing
Canada	3320	3238	-2%	2007 / Growing
Algeria	2016	1993	-1%	2007 / Growing
Equatorial Guinea	368	361	-2%	2007 / Growing
China	3795	3795	-	Growing
United Arab Emirates	2980	2980	-	Growing
Brazil	1899	1899	-	Growing
Angola	1875	1875	-	Growing
Kazakhstan	1554	1554	-	Growing
Qatar	1378	1378	-	Growing
Azerbaijan	914	914	-	Growing
Sudan	480	480	-	Growing
Thailand	325	325	-	Growing
Turkmenistan	205	205	-	Growing
Peaked / Flat Countries Total	-	49597	-	60.6% of world oil production
Growing Countries Total	-	32223	-	39.4% of world oil production

Only 14 out of 54 oil producing countries and regions in the world continue to increase production, while 30 are definitely past their production peak, and the remaining 10 appear to have flat or declining production [1]. Put another way, peak oil is real in 61% of the oil producing world when weighted by production. Since 2008 capped a record run for oil prices, most countries and oil companies were trying all-out to increase production. While a handful of producers (think Iraq) might be limited by above-ground factors, the majority of producers simply couldn't do any better in 2008 [2].

The evidence of the demise of the cheap oil era has become insurmountable. In the face of the highest oil prices on record, the great majority of the world's oil producers were incapable of taking advantage and producing more oil. Many nations including the US saw their oil production peak decades ago - there simply is no turning the clock back. This list shows that we are relying on a small number of countries to keep providing cheap oil. We need to move faster to alternatives and greater energy efficiency, before the last fourteen peak as well.

"Majority of US Gays Still Interested in God"

And here's a good example of what I'm talking about....

I recently stumbled upon an article on USA Today’s website reporting the release of research comparing faith across the Gay/Straight divide. I think it says something most in the church, and many outside of it, should probably take note of: that even though numbers are lower, there is still a huge interest in the Christianity, let alone spirituality, amongst those the church has most often sought to demonise.

"People who portray gay adults as godless, hedonistic, Christian bashers are not working with the facts," said George Barna, founder of the Barna Group, a Ventura, Calif.-based research company. "A substantial majority of gays cite their faith as a central facet of their life, consider themselves to be Christian, and claim to have some type of meaningful personal commitment to Jesus Christ active in their life today."

The Straight/Gay splits were quite consistently noticeable, but still remarkably small compared to what many want to portray. Is faith important in their lives – 72%/60%, identifying as Christians – 85%/70%, “personal commitment" to Jesus Christ” 75%/58%. I don’t know what other people think about this, but my immediate reaction is to thank God the church hasn’t done as much damage as many believe.

Experience tells me this probably isn’t very far from reality in Britain either; whilst the loudest voices proclaim the hurt they’ve felt from the church, most are actually not far behind their straight counterparts. In fact, its interesting to see just how much demand there is for serious discussion on faith and sexuality from LGBT groups on campuses around the UK.

If there really is this much interest in God amongst the Gay community, it probably explains why the Metropolitan Community Church is growing so dramatically. It maybe ought to cause churches to question whether there aren’t quite a lot of closet gays in their pews. And it certainly makes me wonder how many Evangelical Gays are finding themselves forced onto Liberal churches to avoid leaving the church altogether.

I was told sometime back, and I do wonder where this data came from, that American trends showed “Gays are getting married and Evangelicals are getting divorced”. Again, rather startling given the prejudices still held by many in the church that Gay people don’t form monogamous, committed relationships like Straight people do (its a very long time since I dismissed that impression myself, just in case anyone is wondering).

Looking at the data I just don’t see a Godless, de-churched-closed bunch (posh term meaning people who’ve left the church and are not open to returning). Specific difficulties, yes. An area which requires a huge amount of work and trust building (perhaps from both sides)? Yes. But I definitely get the impression many in the church have dug themselves a moat of presumption, believing they aren’t of interest to those on the outside.

There is also this assumption that if Gay people aren’t happy, its because they’re Gay (and the same for almost any other negative attribute, to be honest). I think much of this just reflects a kind of cultural determination to see Gay people troubled by their sexuality, when in reality, its the Christians who tend to be troubled (believe me, I get to talk to them about it far too often).

For the church, I think means a bit of a reality check is in order. How many of the churches beliefs about the Gay community are actually about justifying the application of specific, and debateable, bible verses to a group of people. And how far has that simply not worked? And how many closet gays are there in the pews? And what does this say about the Grace of God? Thank God the Church never quite manages to totally screw things up!

HT Dan.

Ironically....

....I seem to be choosing this moment, when the General Convention of the Episcopal Church has finally decided to do what it should have done 30 years ago - namely focus on pastoral care for its gay membership, instead of consecrating gay bishops, about which I could frankly not give a flying you-know-what - to make the decision to leave the church for good.

I just cannot abide its noxious habits any longer, and I can't afford to live with the rage I feel all the time for the church and for its clergy. A friend at my parish sent me a link to a talk given by "Bishop Steven Charleston" yesterday; she was very enthusiastic about it, and eager to have me watch the video. But I can't; I hate him, sight unseen, and I think what he's going to say is not worth hearing, even though I haven't heard it yet.

That's how full of anger I am, and why I know there's no longer much point in just going through the motions. Meantime, people are still arguing about "losing our catholicity" and - not only is there no resolution condemning the anti-gay actions and rhetoric of our "Communion partners" - but there is open mourning about how terrible it is we won't be "in Communion" with the fascists in Nigeria any longer.

Honestly, the church is very sick, in so many ways - and honestly I don't think I can afford to be around it any longer. I haven't had really much of a spiritual life for years now, anyway; I've been so furious about everything that I've been unable to maintain much conscious contact with God at all. I've tried, too: I've tried Centering Prayer, which worked for awhile, I guess; I've tried the Daily Office; I've tried simply trying to let go of everything and hope for the best.

But what kind of way is that to live? My spiritual life was better before I got to the church, in most ways. It doesn't mean I will give up faith; I will just be abandoning "Holy Church the Less." I do desire to remain part of "Holy Church the Great" - and to maintain a connection with all people who love God.

Anyway, I've really already left; what remains is to formalize it. But I'm really very glad about C056, so perhaps this is exactly the right time to go.

I've just finished posting the Requiem Mass files, too; another irony, perhaps....

Missa pro Defunctis: Communio

The Communion song from the Requiem Mass, sung by Giovanni Vianini:

Lux æterna luceat eis, Domine,
cum sanctis tuis in æternum,
quia pius es.
Requiem æternam dona eis, Domine;
et lux perpetua luceat eis ;
cum Sanctis tuis in aeternum,
quia pius es.

May everlasting light shine upon them, O Lord,
with your saints forever,
for you are merciful.
Grant them eternal rest, O Lord,
and may everlasting light shine upon them.
with your saints forever,
for you are merciful.

Here's the chant score:




Again you can clearly hear this Gregorian melody in the Duruflé version of the song:



But actually, I really like John Rutter's version of the Lux Aeterna:

So, OK, there's C056

Well, that's something, at least. Fairly straightforward, and at last something to do with the membership and with pastoral care of real human beings.

Resolved, the House of Deputies concurring, that the 76th General Convention acknowledge the changing circumstances in the United States and in other nations, as legislation authorizing or forbidding marriage, civil unions or domestic partnerships for gay and lesbian persons is passed in various civil jurisdictions that call for a renewed pastoral response from this Church and for an open procession for the consideration of theological resources and liturgies for the blessing of same gender relationships; and be it further

Resolved, That the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, in consultation with the House of Bishops, collect and develop theological resources and design liturgies, and report to the 77th General Convention for further action; and be it further

Resolved, That the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, in consultation with the House of Bishops, devise an open process for the conduct of its work inviting participation from provinces, dioceses, congregations, and individuals whoa re engaged in such theological work, and inviting theological reflection from throughout the Anglican Communion; and be it further

Resolved that bishops, particularly those in dioceses within civil jurisdictions where same-gender marriage, civil unions or domestic partnerships are legal, may provide generous pastoral response to meet the needs of members of this Church, and be it further

Resolved that this convention continue to honor the theological diversity of this Church in regard to matters of human sexuality and be it further

Resolved that member of this church be encourage to engage in this effort.

So, I take back bullet point 3 in my last post, and am therefore a little less bitter. I'm still enraged at a low level, though, I must admit....

D025, B033, and etc.

Honestly, I'm not following any of this; I don't care anymore. In my view, the Episcopal Church has proven itself to be too utterly consumed with its own existence and its pet political issues, and too effectively uninterested in the welfare and well-being of its membership, for me to give much of a damn at this point. I've seen this in action this over and over and over again in the past 5 years or so, and I've completely lost interest in any of it.

I guess this is the text of the latest, D025:

Resolved, the House of Bishops concurring, That the 76th General Convention reaffirm the continued participation of The Episcopal Church as a constituent member of the Anglican Communion; give thanks for the work of the bishops at the Lambeth Conference of 2008; reaffirm the abiding commitment of The Episcopal Church to the fellowship of churches that constitute the Anglican Communion and seek to live into the highest degree of communion possible; and be it further

Resolved, That the 76th General Convention encourage dioceses, congregations, and members of The Episcopal Church to participate to the fullest extent possible in the many instruments, networks and relationships of the Anglican Communion; and be it further

Resolved, That the 76th General Convention reaffirm its financial commitment to the Anglican Communion and pledge to participate fully in the Inter-Anglican Budget; and be it further

Resolved, That the 76th General Convention affirm the value of “listening to the experience of homosexual persons,” as called for by the Lambeth Conferences of 1978, 1988, and 1998, and acknowledge that through our own listening the General Convention has come to recognize that the baptized membership of The Episcopal Church includes same-sex couples living in lifelong committed relationships “characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God” (2000-D039); and be it further

Resolved, That the 76th General Convention recognize that gay and lesbian persons who are part of such relationships have responded to God’s call and have exercised various ministries in and on behalf of God’s One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and are currently doing so in our midst; and be it further

Resolved, That the 76th General Convention affirm that God has called and may call such individuals, to any ordained ministry in The Episcopal Church,; and that God’s call to the ordained ministry in The Episcopal Church is a mystery which the Church attempts to discern for all people through our discernment processes acting in accordance with the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church; and be it further

Resolved, That the 76th General Convention acknowledge that members of The Episcopal Church as of the Anglican Communion, based on careful study of the Holy Scriptures, and in light of tradition and reason, are not of one mind, and Christians of good conscience disagree about some of these matters.

So here it is again. I'm reading posts by those I can stand reading these days, and nothing from the tedious national church - and (to quote one random example of such a post), this comes from Fr. Jared (and please understand I'm not criticising him in this post; I'm just quoting him because, as I said, I can stand reading him - sorry, Fr. Jared):

Re: Resolution B033
TEC exercise restraint in not consenting to the election of bishops whose manner of life presents a challenge to the broader communion.

This resolution was never a “ban on gay bishops.” Rather, it was our General Conventions attempt to meet the requests of the Windsor Process and various Communion bodies in a way that was marked by integrity. Some believe it succeeded, most believed it did not. It asked that, at the final stage of the discernment process, the church look carefully at the implications of the election of any bishop, particularly as that election would affect relations in the Anglican Communion. The Communion authorities affirmed that it was not the explicit moratorium requested, but that it was the best our General Convention could do and represented a good faith effort to heed the requests of our brothers and sisters across the Communion. In the end though, it was the 2006 General Convention’s own advice on how discernment with regard to calls to the episcopacy should be handled.

Re: D025
This is the new resolution, quoted in its current form above.

This resolution reaffirms TEC’s desire to be a part of the Anglican Communion in all ways possible. It makes the important point that TEC has engaged in the thirty-year of listening requested by Lambeth Conferences since 1978 and that, for us, the result of that process has been a recognition of the godliness of same-sex couples and the gifts their ministry has brought to our church. It concludes by noting that neither members of TEC nor the Communion are of one mind with regard to all of this. The key clause in this resolution for many is the sixth,

God has called and may call such individuals, to any ordained ministry in The Episcopal Church, and God’s call to the ordained ministry in The Episcopal Church is a mystery which the Church attempts to discern for all people through our discernment processes acting in accordance with the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church.

This resolution clarifies that all people have access to the discernment process. B033 spoke to the final stage of the discernment process. It should be pointed out that all people have already had access to the discernment process. Indeed, there have been partnered clergy who have been possible candidates for bishop. They just never got to the point of needing the consents that B033 addressed. The question of access has not changed, it has only been clarified.

The only change here is that now, in 2009, General Convention is saying that the Constitution and Canons, along with the Spirit’s guidance in discernment, are the appropriate limitations on call to ordained ministry. This is so very essential: B033 imposed an extra requirement and did so in a way that was out of keeping with our own Constitution and Canons and discernment process. This General Convention is now saying that the discernment process (where God’s call is tested) in the context of our Constitution and Canons is sufficient. If a priest who is in a same-sex relationship is elected, the question will not be “will this election break B033?” Rather, the question will be “is God calling this person to this office?” I would hope that we can agree that the latter question is far more important than the former.

Re: Communion Implications of D025
Particularly given the Archbishop of Canterbury’s comment that he regrets this resolution

There were three moratoria that were a part of the Windsor Process: (1) no same-sex blessing liturgies, (2) no gay bishops, and (3) no more cross-border interventions. On one and two the appropriate Communion bodies have recognized time and again that TEC fulfilled the moratoria as best as it could. With regard to the third, there has been absolutely no change. For three years our church has lived in a place of pain, contrary to our own beliefs and at the cost of our own members, while those conservative bishops have, if anything, escalated their interference in our Province.

I believe that it has become crystal clear that no matter what TEC does, the conservatives will not turn from their plans to create their own schismatic denomination and that small group in the Global South will do everything to encourage it. We tried to do this moratoria thing as best as we could for three years, while those on the other side blatantly ignored the one moratorium that applied to them.

I guess I agree with Fr. Jared - as far as it goes. But may I point out a couple of things?

• Again, this resolution is utterly focused on the clergy only, and on the office of Bishop in particular - as if this were a crucially and centrally important issue. Reminder: The Windsor Report never said anything about the ordination of priests; it pointedly avoided the question, because (I'm sure) it was certain to cause a multitude of problems, since there are so many gay priests already. So this Resolution responds to a question that was never asked, and to a "problem" that never existed. Again: what we're dealing with here is about 100 people out of 6 billion in the world - essentially we are consumed here with the concept of promotions for American Episcopal priests.


• A "call" is presumed, as always, to involve ordination. Well, no - sorry; that's just one kind of "call"; there are numerous others - but you'd never know it in this fekakteh organization.


• Nothing, of course, is said about same-sex blessings. The one question that should have been answered is tossed aside as if it didn't exist: the question of gay (lay)people and the value and meaning of our lives in the church and in the world.


• Nothing, of course, is said about the issue of our "Communion partners": Primates and National Churches who are attempting to destroy gay people - and, I'm sure, quite often succeeding in their efforts - in their own nations.

I'm being very, very bitter about the church, I realize. I suppose some of these other issues may be discussed in some sort of half-hearted way at some point in the next few days - but believe me: I'm not putting any money on it.

I saw a document produced by my own diocese - Newark - a few weeks ago; it's yet another "Covenant" produced to manipulate the laity. This time, I gather the issue is failing churches, and how we can close them (although I may be reading the tea leaves wrongly; it's so hard to figure out what any Episcopal Church documents are actually meant to do). If you look on page 2 of this PDF file of the "Covenant" document, you'll notice there's an entire section labeled "Adherence to the Canons," and why it's important.

I laughed out loud, reading that. Of course, this particular demanded "adherence" is completely centered on money and property. There's lots in this document, too, about clergy compensation, and pension plans, and etc. So these are the important issues to the Episcopal Church, apparently: clergy comforts and job opportunities, money, and property.

Listen, I once worked at a tennis club that was attached to some luxury apartments - and it was quite clear that in reality it was basically a club for the employees. The employees booked time whenever it suited them, never mind what might have been best for the people who actually lived there; courts were maintained with more energy when employees were about to play on them. Nobody really cared about anything except what was convenient for the people who worked there, and what benefitted them. (This same process has, of course, been at work in my own parish recently, as people who've been reading along with me for the past couple of years know.) So am I surprised that the Episcopal Church's employees do exactly the same thing? Not at all, really.

But this is a church - or, well, maybe not, I guess. And that's why I'm bitter, in fact, because it sure doesn't seem to act like one.

Well: this, too, shall pass. Everything goes - the wonderful and the awful alike. And that's the only way I can maintain any sort of relationship with this church, knowing that. I'm just a fringe member now, and don't really care much about anything it does or says; I don't care - and I don't believe anything it says anyway. I just go on putting up posts about the Church Year and its feasts on this blog, and that's how I keep my sanity. The faith will survive, even as the church tears itself apart in its petty, stupid, inane, manipulative causes - and probably that "tearing apart" is going to be the best thing that ever happened to it, anyway. (And many thanks to the so-called "orthodox," who are helping this process of "creative destruction" along with their own stupid, petty, inane, manipulative acts and actions.)

First and last word on this topic from me, I very much hope and expect....

Missa pro Defunctis: Sanctus and Agnus Dei

From Giovanni Vianini:



The Sanctus and the Agnus Dei in the Requiem Mass use the same texts as in all ordinaries of the mass - except that in the Agnus Dei, the petition miserere nobis (Have mercy upon us) is changed to dona eis requiem (Grant them rest), and dona nobis pacem (Grant us peace) to dona eis requiem sempiternam (Grant them everlasting rest):

Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus,
Dominus Deus Sabaoth;
pleni sunt coeli et terra gloria tua.
Hosanna in excelsis.
Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini.
Hosanna in excelsis. (reprise)

Holy, Holy, Holy,
Lord God of Hosts;
Heaven and earth are full of your glory.
Hosanna in the highest.
Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.



Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, dona eis requiem,
Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, dona eis requiem,
Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, dona eis requiem sempiternam.

Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world, grant them rest,
Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world, grant them rest,
Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world, grant them rest, eternal.

Here are the chant scores:





As you can hear, Maurice Duruflé uses these Gregorian melodies almost without alteration in his own Requiem, although with some lovely embellishment:

The Sanctus (sung by "Coro: I Ragazzi Cantori di S. Giovanni (San Giovanni in Persiceto, BO)" - a boychoir):



Agnus Dei:

O Sacrum Convivium

From Wikipedia:

O Sacrum Convivium is a Latin prose text honoring the Blessed Sacrament. It was written by Saint Thomas Aquinas. It was included in the Latin Catholic liturgy as an antiphon on the feast of Corpus Christi. Its sentiments express the profound mystery of the Eucharistic miracle: "O sacred banquet at which Christ is consumed, the memory of his Passion is recalled, our souls are filled with grace, and the pledge of future glory is given to us."

Original Latin (punctuation from Liber Usualis):

O sacrum convivium!
in quo Christus sumitur:
recolitur memoria passionis ejus:
mens impletur gratia:
et futurae gloriae nobis pignus datur.
Alleluia.

Translation of original Latin:

O sacred banquet!
in which Christ is received,
the memory of his Passion is renewed,
the mind is filled with grace,
and a pledge of future glory to us is given.
Alleluia.

We sang Ralph Vaughan Williams' "Love Bade Me Welcome" as an anthem today. It's a baritone solo based on George Herbert's original poem, "Love":

LOVE bade me welcome; yet my soul drew back,
Guilty of dust and sin.
But quick-eyed Love, observing me grow slack
From my first entrance in,
Drew nearer to me, sweetly questioning
If I lack'd anything.

'A guest,' I answer'd, 'worthy to be here:'
Love said, 'You shall be he.'
'I, the unkind, ungrateful? Ah, my dear,
I cannot look on Thee.'
Love took my hand and smiling did reply,
'Who made the eyes but I?'

'Truth, Lord; but I have marr'd them: let my shame
Go where it doth deserve.'
'And know you not,' says Love, 'Who bore the blame?'
'My dear, then I will serve.'
'You must sit down,' says Love, 'and taste my meat.'
So I did sit and eat.

Here's a video of this piece; as you'll hear, the choir remains silent until the last verse. At that point, all voices sing the Gregorian O Sacrum Convivium in unison, as background while the baritone continues singing his song:



From YouTube, here's the original Gregorian antiphon on which this choral section is based:



Something from that page:

The antiphon O sacrum convivium, from a sixteenth century Turnhout processionale (Flanders, ca. 1550). Chant group Psallentes♀, directed by Hendrik Vanden Abeele. Singers are Sarah Abrams, Helen Cassano, Lieselot De Wilde, Rozelien Nys, Rein Van Bree, Kerlijne Van Nevel and Veerle Van Roosbroeck.

Live recording of de Begijntjesprocessie [the procession of the Beguines], 19th of October 2008 in the Predikherenkerk, Leuven, Belgium (www.30cc.be). Thanks to Rein Van Bree for the minidisc-recording. More information on the musical patrimony of Flemish Beguinages in the book edited by Pieter Mannaerts: Beghinae in cantu instructae, Brepols publishers, 2008.

www.psallentes.be
info@psallentes.be

Psallentes is a Belgium based professional chant group with a focus on late medieval chant.

From Giovanni Vianini, singing an Ambrosian hymn version:



And here's the beautiful (composed) Gabrielli version:



Here's a very interesting portrait of Thomas Aquinas, by Francisco de Herrera,(Sevilla, 1627 - Madrid, 1685):

Stringfellow on Money

From Episcopal Cafe's "Speaking to the Soul" today:

Freedom from the idolatry of money, for a Christian, means that money becomes useful only as a sacrament—as a sign of the restoration of life wrought in this world by Christ. The sacramental use of money has little to do with supporting the church after the manner of contributing to conventional charities and even less with the self-styled stewardship that solicits funds mainly for the maintenance of ecclesiastical salaries and the housekeeping of church properties. . . . The offertory is integral to the sacramental existence of the church, a way of representing the oblation of the totality of life to God. No more fitting symbol of the involvement of Christians in the everyday life of the world could be imagined, in American society at least, than money, for nearly every relationship in personal and public life is characterized by the obtaining or spending or exchange of money. If then, in worship, human beings offer themselves and all of their decisions, actions, and words to God, it is well that they use money as the witness to that offering. Money is, thus, used sacramentally within the church and not contributed as to some charity or given because the church, as such, has any need of money.

The sacramental use of money in the formal and gathered worship of the church is authenticated—as are all other churchly sacramental practices—in the sacramental use of money in the common life of the world. . . . The charity of Christians in the use of money sacramentally—in both the liturgy and in the world—has no serious similarity to conventional charity but is always a specific dramatization of the members of the Body of Christ losing their life in order that the world be given life. For members of the church, therefore, it always implies a particular confession that their money is not their own because their lives are not their own but, by the example of God’s own love, belong to the world.

From “Money” by William Stringfellow, in Simpler Living, Compassionate Life: A Christian Perspective, edited and compiled by Michael Schut. Copyright © 1999. Used by permission of Living the Good News, a division of Church Publishing Incorporated, New York, NY. www.churchpublishing.org

Missa pro Defunctis: Domine Jesu Christe (Offertorium)

From Giovanni Vianini, the Offertory of the Requiem Mass:



And the words:

Domine, Jesu Christe, Rex gloriæ,
libera animas omnium fidelium defunctorum
de pœnis inferni et de profundo lacu.
Libera eas de ore leonis,
ne absorbeat eas tartarus,
ne cadant in obscurum;
sed signifer sanctus Michæl
repræsentet eas in lucem sanctam,
quam olim Abrahæ promisisti et semini ejus.


Hostias et preces tibi, Domine,
laudis offerimus;
tu suscipe pro animabus illis,
quarum hodie memoriam facimus.
Fac eas, Domine, de morte transire ad vitam.
Quam olim Abrahæ promisisti et semini ejus.

Lord Jesus Christ, King of glory,
free the souls of all the faithful departed
from infernal punishment and the deep pit.
Free them from the mouth of the lion;
do not let Tartarus swallow them,
nor let them fall into darkness;
but may the sign-bearer, Saint Michael,
lead them into the holy light
which you promised to Abraham and his seed.

O Lord, we offer you
sacrifices and prayers in praise;
accept them on behalf of the souls
whom we remember today.
Make them pass over from death to life,
as you promised to Abraham and his seed.

Here's the chant score, again from SGM:





I love the Durufle version best, myself:

My thoughts about General Convention 2009

You couldn't possibly, ever, in a million years, pay me enough to go.

Thank you.

Soul Mates

I'm getting old and cynical, for sure. Or maybe just old - or maybe just cynical. Or maybe I just identify strongly with The Tragic these days? Let's see.

By way of introduction: I now have exactly three broadcast channels left, after the switch to DTV: New York 7 (ABC), 11 (WPIX), and 13 (which is PBS, so that's good). I also have several Korean stations I never had before, a Mandarin one, and a couple of Spanish ones. That Chinese-language channel could help me at last to learn that language, which I've been half-heartedly trying to do for the past 8 years or so. I think really three channels is all anybody really needs, too: one for news and events (7), one for junk (11), and one for good stuff (13). So, it's really kind of like 1920 around my house now; this is a (virtually) air-conditioning- and TV-free zone these days. I'm kind of liking it, to be honest. (I do have this computer thing going, I realize, so maybe that kills the whole notion. But maybe not, because for me computers are mainly about writing and creating visuals - both kind of hands-on, low-tech activities. I'm on Twitter but have never used it - and I have only 4 Facebook friends.)

Anyway, I do turn on the TV about once a week, and the point of this post is really to be amazed in public about having seen the South Carolina Governor Sanford story, and to examine my own cynicism (or tragic sense) about it.

Here we have a man who years ago spent his political capital while a U.S. Representative to condemn Bill Clinton's philandering, calling him a "rascal," and gunning for his Impeachment. But then, the Governor himself is caught jetting to Argentina to meet his own paramour in an illicit tryst.

That would all be quite drama enough - but it's the latest twist that really gives this story its zing. The Governor apparently gives an hours-long TV interview, spilling his guts about the whole thing - weeping, too - and, while he's at it, dropping cluster bombs all over his own life, blowing it to bits before our eyes. He wants us all to know that this wasn't just a "meaningless fling"; no, the woman he's involved with - María Belén Chapur - is his "soul mate." (At this point, cut away to his wife dialing her lawyer.)

Naturally, I think, when I hear this, Well, we all know exactly what has happened - and what's going to happen next: Mark Sanford - middle-aged dork - has fallen in love with some beautiful 23-year-old bimbo, and then told the entire world that she's his "soul mate." To follow, in quick succession: wife leaves Sanford, with kids, sues for divorce and gets a fat settlement; bimbo falls for 22-year-old Brazilian hunk (a movie star, or a singer? I couldn't decide) and runs away with him to Rio de Janeiro; Sanford is left with mounting alimony bills and not much else, eats beans out of the can in his 4th-floor-walkup apartment, and eventually gets a job as a night-watchman in a downtown Charleston Investment firm.

See? That is how my mind works these days; I think that every story in the world has already been told, over and over again, and the outcome never changes. I think: all is futile - all is vanity, and a chasing after wind. Human beings are so, so stupid - and so, so predictable. But apparently his Soul Mate is in reality a 41-year-old divorced mother of 2 teenagers, so there goes that whole theory.

So is that just getting old, or just getting cynical? That's the question before us today.

But actually, this other plotline also has possibilities for cynical analysis and prediction of tragic consequences, now that I think of it. Let me see what tragedy I can wrest from it, and I'll get back to you.....

What's really wrong with the RCL

I guess probably Derek said this about 2 years ago - can't find that particular post at the moment (as I can't seem to find much of anything these days in my confusion and disorientation) - but I finally understand the heart of the problem with the RCL. (Fr. Bryan writes about another thing that he takes issue with, but that's not my concern.)

Here's the problem: our choirmaster is using, for the Gospel Alleluia, some sort of modern Catholic resource. The sentence used in this Alleluia matches up with the one used at JoguesChant.org, and is based on a three-year lectionary (which means we are in the post-Vatican II era).

And the signal problem here is that in many or most instances, the sentence has no relationship at all with most or any of the Scripture readings on the day. So that, for instance, last week, the readings were from 2 Samuel, Psalm 130, 2 Corinthians, and Mark - but the Gospel Alleluia was Omnes gentes! That's "O clap your hands, all ye people" - a total irrelevancy and in fact a jarring opposition to the rest.

This week, it so happens that the Gospel Alleluia is based on Magnus Dominus (that's a PDF file), and that is the Psalm (#48) that will be read on Sunday. But that's just a stroke of fortunate luck, that's all.

The RCL is dissolving the relationship between the Readings and the Chant Propers, until at some point, no such relationship will remain. It's forcing us to go Protestant, in this way and others. The RCL doesn't use the Apocrypha (except for a few token inclusions), for another good example, and as I've complained before, this results in the loss of one of my favorite readings of the entire year - one that so impressed me when I first heard it 5 years ago that I wrote about it then, amazed and stunned at how utterly splendid worship could be, and convinced that I was making a good decision to come back to the church.

I adore singing the Chant Propers, in whatever way it's possible - but not when it's this crazy meaningless mishmash. But of course, it's really the "anti-medieval" movement in the Episcopal Church that's at work here, trying to sweep away an influence they find distasteful - and in doing so, they are creating a bizarre mess of a FrankenMass (and not in a good way).

In future, I expect this will all be swept away as well, as the next generation is more sensible. Meantime, I have to grit my teeth - and continue my pilgrimages to St. Mary's (who I think must have special permission to keep using the BCP readings, because it would totally mess up their liturgy otherwise).