Friday, October 30, 2015

Paschal Candles: Why Not Every Sunday?


As is so often the case, one of my seminary classmates has pushed me to think longer and harder about this topic (thank God for faithful colleagues).

She asks:
Ok, for the sake of argument, didn't Martin Luther say that every Sunday is a "little Easter"? So, why not light the Paschal Candle every Sunday? We celebrate Christ's passion and resurrection with each Holy Eucharist. Thoughts?
Bishop J. Neil Alexander (former Bishop of Atlanta, current dean of the School of Theology at Sewanee, and, like me, an alum of LTSS) discusses this in one of his books, Celebrating Liturgical Time. Essentially, his point is that while every Sunday is a "little Easter" and that the theology of the Resurrection permeates every Divine Service throughout the year regardless of seasonal and thematic overtones, that we still mark Easter proper with special distinction -- pre-Paschal fasting during Lent, the Triduum, the Vigil, extra acclamations, and the like. These distinctives set Easter apart as a sacred time among sacred times. Some of these markers (in this case, the Paschal candle) carries further into the rest of the year.

It's similar to the point Phil Pfatteicher makes about the "priesthood of all believers" -- that all Christians are baptized into the ministry of offering prayers and participation in sacramental worship, but the Holy Spirit and the Church call deacons, presbyters/priests, and bishops to ordained ministries of Word, Sacrament, Service, and Order (to be as broadly ecumenical as possible). The call to ordained ministry does not negate the ministry in which all Christians share, but rather furthers it. Just so, the year of "little Easters" culminates in the holiest time of holy times -- the Paschal Feast.

I suggest that it is good and proper to maintain certain distinctive elements, including the Paschal Candle, but not to such a degree as to make them "off-limits" throughout the rest of the year. The Paschal Candle, then, functions as something of a Resurrection exclamation point, making certain feasts stand out through the year.

By way of comparison, imagine if we took "Alleluia" to such an extreme -- that we used it all throughout Easter, but then excluded it from our Christmas liturgy, or if we did not abstain from it during Lent.

All of that being said, there is an argument to be made for using the Paschal Candle throughout the year, and frequent usage does not rob an item or action of its "specialness" or its meaning. We can probably count this one as adiaphora.

Light Your Paschal Candle This Sunday

All Saints' Day is this Sunday. Be sure to light your Paschal Candle.

It's a surprisingly controversial statement, to be sure. The official guidance from the US Conference of Catholic Biships is that the Paschal Candle is extinguished at Pentecost, and then removed (completely) from the Sanctuary unless for Holy Baptism or for a funeral.

In his seminal Manual on the Liturgy for the Lutheran Book of Worship, Philip Pfatteicher holds to the same position: that the Paschal Candle should not be used outside of the Great Fifty Days (with the exceptions of Baptisms and funerals), and it should never be used as the Christ Candle in the Advent wreath.

Guidelines from the Episcopal Church and the ELCA speak volumes by their silence: no other time outside of Easter, Holy Baptism, and funerals are addressed.

There is a certain logic to this: Easter is the marker of the Resurrection, and so the use of the Paschal Candle at funerals makes sense. And Baptism was, at one point, possibly, maybe kind of restricted to the Vigil. Using the Paschal Candle at "off-season" Baptisms makes sense as a way of emphasizing the continuity between the Sacrament as it is celebrated at the Great Vigil and throughout the rest of the year.

But it is exactly this connection to Resurrection that makes the Paschal Candle such an important symbol for use on All Saints' and All Souls' Days services. In her Altar Guild and Sacristy Handbook, S. Anita Stauffer points out that "the Paschal Candle is a resurrection symbol" (p. 19; ironically, she does this while discouraging its use during Evening Prayer).

The light marks our hope in the Resurrection of Christ. We cling to this hope on the first two days in November. We pray for the Faithful Departed specifically because we hope that Easter will lead to the Resurrection of the Body. We hope that the light which pierces the darkness of Holy Saturday will pierce the darkness of our sorrow. We hope that the promises made in Baptism will hold true through the grave. The light that pierced the darkness at the funeral is also the light in which we hope on All Saints' and All Souls'.

All Saints' and All Souls' are the Easter season erupting into the Ordinary Time of early November.

And maybe, just maybe, our liturgy is dynamic enough to accommodate our faith.

Friday, October 16, 2015

The Pope and the Clerk: On Rushing to Judgment

Let me put a few cards on the table:

1) I support full LGBT inclusion in the Church and in society. I rejoiced at the Obergefell decision.

2) I support freedom of religious expression and those who have conscientious objections.

3) I disagree with Kim Davis' decision to stop issuing marriage licenses. If her job requires her to act in contradiction to her religious beliefs, she should follow the example of early Christians and leave her job. The ancient liturgical document The Apostolic Tradition of Pseudo-Hippolytus lists professions that were forbidden to Christians. The expectation was that there are certain jobs that conflicted with the teaching of the Church: ancient Christians did not serve as as charioteers. It's not that they were charioteers who refused to race; they simply left the profession. Davis should follow the example of the third century Chrisitans and resign her position if she believes if conflicts with her faith.

4) Moreover, I think Davis' legal counsel is using her. They have their own agenda in mind, not her best interest. Frankly, I am surprised that her representatives have not been disbarred.

5) I like this Pope. I disagree with him on a few issues, but I firmly believe that he is making steps towards full reconciliation within the Church.

6) I like NPR. They tend to get stories right on the first go and tend to be the most unbiased news source in this country. I'm going to call them out on some stuff in this post precisely because they usually do a good job. Fox News or MSNBC dropping the ball on a story? Nothing out of the ordinary. NPR is capable of better, and so they're my media-stand-in.

With all of that being said, when Pope Francis met Kim Davis, the American media lost its mind.

The trip went incredibly well. The Bishop of Rome delivered a stirring address to Congress, ate with the poor, met with survivors of clerical sex abuse, and projected himself as a bishop of the people -- in keeping with his desire that the Church be poor and for the poor.

But just consider how the few days after his departure played out.

The first few days after his return to Rome, NPR lauded the visit, saying he "Moves Believers and Skeptics Alike" and "Strikes A Chord" with both Catholics and non-Catholics.

And then something happened. Lawyers at the Liberty Counsel started tweeting about Kim Davis' papal audience. And the tone of the conversation changed. NPR picked up the story and reported what Davis told ABC News:
Just knowing the pope is on track with what we're doing, and agreeing, you know, kind of validates everything.
That same day, NPR ran a story: "Pope's Commitment to Religious Freedom Highlighted on US Trip." Interviewee Emma Green, a reporter at The Atlantic, details all of the ways that Il Papa discussed religious freedom: he mentioned it at Independence Hall, he met with a group of nuns in a legal struggle against the contraceptive mandate, and he mentioned it before Congress. As Green puts it: "hints." But meeting with Davis? That's highlighting, because we all know how intimately the Bishop of Rome is concerned in the goings-on of a Pentecostal county clerk in Kentucky.

It's important to remember that at this point, there had been little news on the event. The story broke on 30 September, the date of the article above. The Vatican commented on it the same day, acknowledging that the Pope and Davis had been in the same place at the same time.

By the next day, NPR was touting that the visit "Puts a New Twist" on the papal visit. Credit where credit is due, one of the Vatican correspondents discussed the Pope's mid-air press conference this way:
We don't know exactly how this meeting occurred and what the pope knew about her. Of course, just later on a press conference on the way back to Rome after leaving Philadelphia, he was asked about the rights of conscientious objection for people, and then he gave a very milk-toast, bland answer about generic rights of conscientious objection for people without mentioning Kim Davis, without mentioning same-sex marriage. So it makes me think that maybe he didn't even know who this person was or what was going on in that meeting.
But this clarification came only in response to the anchor's question:
It would seem that everything on a papal trip is there to make a point. What might have been the point for Pope Francis in this meeting with Kim Davis?
Later, NPR ran a follow-up about the response of LGBT Catholics "disappointed" in the papal "meeting."

It's important to remember how little had come out at this point in the story. The only source of information on the meeting was from Davis and her lawyers. The Vatican had done little more than to begrudgingly admit that the meeting had occurred. And yet the entire week-long visit was recast by this single event.

Then, after two days and no fewer than four articles of confused "this changes everything" reporting, the hurricane stopped. The Vatican issued a statement. Turns out, the meeting didn't change everything. The Pope met Davis briefly in a receiving line. It wasn't a formal audience. He offered no express opinion on her situation. Because, as it turns out, the Liberty Counsel was blowing the event way out of proportion.

And the news media -- even our best news agencies -- swallowed the Liberty Counsel's version, hook, line, and sinker.

Cue the correction and clarification: NPR ran two consecutive stories after the Vatican announced the "meeting" was almost a non-event. Hindsight, it turns out, is much clearer. You can't draw a total conclusion about a person's policy from a single event, especially if that event is being framed entirely by somebody else's agenda. Francis met briefly with Davis in an impersonal, highly formalized setting -- but we only listened to how Davis and her lawyers framed the narrative. Because, as it turns out, Francis did have an official one-on-one audience, much like the one Davis described. But he met with a former student, a gay man, and that man's husband. They were welcomed via personal invitation, whereas Davis was contacted independently by the nuncio (Vatican ambassador) to the US.

Way back on the first day of the news cycle, Fr. James Martin, SJ, wrote a quick seven-point response to the unfolding story. Throughout, he urges caution in interpreting the events. He reminds us that the Vatican, not Davis, is the authority on the Pope's actions and intentions. That meetings take place but do not indicate specific endorsement of the individual. As Fr. Martin puts it:
Most of all, despite what Ms. Davis said, a meeting with the pope does not “kind of validate everything.” Again, the pope meets with many people, some of whom he may know well, others of whom may be introduced to him as a reward for long service, and perhaps others who will use a meeting to make a political point. Meeting with the pope is a great honor, but it does not betoken a blanket blessing on “everything” one does. Not to put too fine a point on it, but Pope Francis also met Mark Wahlberg, and that does not mean that he liked “Ted.”
So the next time there's a "this changes everything" moment with the Pope, whether it's along the lines of "Who am I to judge?" or a meeting with a partisan figure, let's all wait. See how things unfold. Remember that every event has to be understood in the full context of the who the Pope is, both as the Bishop of Rome and as a man named Jorge. No single event defines a papacy or a visit.

So, NPR and every other news organization out there, wait a moment next time. Put the events in full context. And please, for the love of God, don't let the Liberty Counsel control the narrative. 

Thursday, October 15, 2015

"I'll Recite the Creed'

Pope Francis has made waves with his emphasis on social justice, peace, and proper stewardship. He's also received a lot of pushback -- from politicians, which is to be expected, but also from theologians.

As my colleague Fr. Lee pointed out, the Church's mission for social justice is rooted in our theology.

So when Il Papa was questioned about his perceived leftism, his response was spot on:
“Maybe I have given an impression of being a little bit to the left,” the pope said. “And it if [sic] necessary, I’ll recite the creed. I am available to do that, eh.” 

Tuesday, October 13, 2015

A Just Liturgy

One of my classmates from Candler, Father Lee, is one of the single most impressive priests I know: well-versed in Latin and Greek, an Anglo-Catholic who also sports thick glasses, a beard and tattoos, rides a motorcycle, and celebrates the Mass in Spanish when asked. He is the future of the Church, and the Episcopal Church is lucky to have him.

As a colleague, I am blessed by his insights into contemporary culture and theology. Recently, the Most Reverend Justin Welby, current Archbishop of Canterbury, proposed a major shake-up within the Anglican Communion. This news broke from Lambeth right around the time that Senator Bernie Sanders addressed students at Liberty University's weekly convocation. A few highlights from my colleague's reflections:
Bernie knows something we can’t seem to grasp: When, not if, but when Evangelicals wake up to issues of Economic Justice, it will be a cataclysmic shift in the American political landscape. One which the Republican party, as it stands today, will not survive.
I’m not sure the Mainline will survive it either. We’ve made justice issues our sine qua non, at the expense of a comprehensive theological vision to back it up. When Evangelicals start to get on board they will do it better than we do, and no amount of liturgical Millenials will be enough to make us compelling.
And later:
I’m starting to get my hackles up anytime I hear “It doesn’t matter how you believe, only how we pray.”
No. The Creed is a claim, not just of our belief, but of the truth of the reality of the Triune God, and the Church that serves that God. The central claim that we make is that God crossed the infinite gap between Godself and us, and became like us in order to save us.
 The Church is called to strive for justice, and unfortunately, we've allowed powers and principalities to distract us from that task. The predominantly liberal side has failed to engage with that call in any sort of meaningful theological sense, instead deferring to secular ethics. And the conservative side has failed to engage with the same call period. As Fr. Lee points out, we are called to be like the God who sides with the oppressed. This identity is rooted in a distinctly theological claim.

And I look at the dismissal which concludes every Divine Service: "Go in peace. Serve the Lord." This isn't just a means of telling people that the Mass is over but rather of sending them forward as a people hoping in and proclaiming the Resurrection in thought, word, and deed. We are sent out to strive for justice. We are an apostolic Church; yes, this means we share the faith of the Apostles, but also that we participate in their sending. The very word "apostle" means "one who is sent out." We, as the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church are sent into the world to proclaim the news of a Risen Savior and to live into the new reality.