The Ember Days are four sets of three days (roughly equidistant in the year) set aside for fasting by the Western Christian calendar. They were originally also the only days in which clergy could be ordained. They are the in weeks between the third and fourth Sundays of Advent, the first and second Sundays of Lent, the week between Pentecost and Trinity Sunday, and the week after Holy Cross Day. They are on the Wednesday, Friday and Saturday of their respective weeks.
Their origins are almost certainly pre-Christians (since the East has nothing like them); they happen to roughly correlate to the Celtic festivals of Imbolc, Beltane, Lughnasadh and Samhain. One Ember Week occurs in each of the four seasons; the word ember derives from the Anglo-Saxon ymbren, a circuit or revolution, and clearly relates here to the annual cycle of the year.
They were taken off the official church calendar with the reforms of Vatican II, their observance left to the discretion of individual bishops.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Daily Prayer: Tuesday Day
Our vocation is not simply to be, but to work together with God in the creation of our own life., our own identity, our own destiny. This means that we should not passively exist, but actively participate in His creative freedom, in our own lives, and in the lives of others, by choosing the truth.
To put it better, we are even called to share with God the work of creating the truth of our identity. We can evade this responsibility by playing with masks, and this pleases us because it can appear at times to be a free and creative way of living. It is quite easy, it seems, to please everyone. But in the long run the cost and the sorrow come very high.
To work out our own identity in God, which the Bible calls, "working out our salvation," is a labor that requires sacrifice and anguish, risk and many tears. It demands close attention to reality at every moment, and great fidelity to God as He reveals Himself, obscurely, in the mystery of each new situation.
We do not know clearly beforehand what the result of this work will be. The secret of my full identity is hidden in Him. He alone can make me who I am, or rather who I will be when at last I fully begin to be. But unless I desire this identity and work to find it in Him, the work will never be done.
The way of doing it is a secret I can learn from no one else but Him. There is no way of attaining to the secret without faith. But contemplation is the greater and more precious gift, for it enables me to see and understand the work that He wants done.
To put it better, we are even called to share with God the work of creating the truth of our identity. We can evade this responsibility by playing with masks, and this pleases us because it can appear at times to be a free and creative way of living. It is quite easy, it seems, to please everyone. But in the long run the cost and the sorrow come very high.
To work out our own identity in God, which the Bible calls, "working out our salvation," is a labor that requires sacrifice and anguish, risk and many tears. It demands close attention to reality at every moment, and great fidelity to God as He reveals Himself, obscurely, in the mystery of each new situation.
We do not know clearly beforehand what the result of this work will be. The secret of my full identity is hidden in Him. He alone can make me who I am, or rather who I will be when at last I fully begin to be. But unless I desire this identity and work to find it in Him, the work will never be done.
The way of doing it is a secret I can learn from no one else but Him. There is no way of attaining to the secret without faith. But contemplation is the greater and more precious gift, for it enables me to see and understand the work that He wants done.
Daily Prayer: Monday Dark
NIGHT HYMN
In my ending is my meaning
says the season.
No clock: only heart's blood
Only the word.
O lamp
weak friend
in the knowing night!
O tongue of flame
Under the heart
Speak softly:
For love is black
says the season.
Midnight!
Kissed with flame!
See! See!
My love is darkness!
Only in the Void
are all ways one:
Only in the night
are all the lost
found.
In my ending is my meaning.
NIGHT PSALM
Be still
Listen to the stones of the wall.
Be silent, they try
to speak your
name.
Listen
to the living walls.
Who are you?
Who
are you? Whose
silence are you?
Who (be quiet)
are you (as these stones
are quiet). Do not
think of what you are
still less of
what you may one day be.
Rather
be what you are (but who?) be
The unthinkable one
You do not know.
O be still, while
you are still alive,
and all things live around you
speaking (I do not hear)
To your own being,
Speaking by the unknown
That is in you and in themselves.
"I will try, like them
To be my own silence:
and this is difficult. The whole
World is secretly on fire. The stones
burn, even the stones
they burn me. How can a man be still or
listen to all things burning? How can he dare
to sit with them when
all their silence
is on fire?"
In my ending is my meaning
says the season.
No clock: only heart's blood
Only the word.
O lamp
weak friend
in the knowing night!
O tongue of flame
Under the heart
Speak softly:
For love is black
says the season.
Midnight!
Kissed with flame!
See! See!
My love is darkness!
Only in the Void
are all ways one:
Only in the night
are all the lost
found.
In my ending is my meaning.
NIGHT PSALM
Be still
Listen to the stones of the wall.
Be silent, they try
to speak your
name.
Listen
to the living walls.
Who are you?
Who
are you? Whose
silence are you?
Who (be quiet)
are you (as these stones
are quiet). Do not
think of what you are
still less of
what you may one day be.
Rather
be what you are (but who?) be
The unthinkable one
You do not know.
O be still, while
you are still alive,
and all things live around you
speaking (I do not hear)
To your own being,
Speaking by the unknown
That is in you and in themselves.
"I will try, like them
To be my own silence:
and this is difficult. The whole
World is secretly on fire. The stones
burn, even the stones
they burn me. How can a man be still or
listen to all things burning? How can he dare
to sit with them when
all their silence
is on fire?"
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Cliff Notes: The First Urban Christians
Hilariously, the final chapter of this outstandingly dry and recitative book begins with the disclaimer that "the description that follows avoids strong theoretical assumptions."
It is, I believe, I little late for that advance knowledge.
At any rate, the question of the formation of early Christianity is the question of unity, among believers as well as their beliefs; one body believes in one Christ, one God. Christian monotheism is Judaic monotheism. This provided a ready contrast to the social diversity, complexity, and plurality of the broader Roman Empire.
Yet the point was not just that Christianity was internally united around a set of social symbols; it was unified over and against the outside world, bound with bonds of affection that would express precisely the honor of the one God. So that while Paul makes such abundant reference to the Jews, there is no mention of, or any evidence of, contact between the early churches and the Diaspora synagogues.
Of course, this was only a provisional separation; Pauline Christianity sought to bring absolutely everyone into the inner circle, hence their zeal for far-flung evangelism. And hence the need to refrain from some kinds of contact with the broader world, but never to fear contamination from it.
This over-and-against was only temporary because of the eschatological nature of early Christianity- Jesus' resurrection was not, for them, a timeless act for personal redemption, but the first act in the end of days which would judge everyone. The early Christians looked forward to a series of events in the immediate future that would transform every social relationship.
The early Christians were by their nature socially dissatisfied, and looked forward to the difference. They perceived their status in the eyes of the others to be less than it would ultimately be. They were the best living embodiments of cognitive dissonance.
So early Christianity invariably combined the traditional with the radically new. By so doing, it was able to move a fairly traditional culture- the broader Roman Empire- toward a radical world view and ethos without sacrificing continuity with the Empire's longer history.
Their eschatological vision both explained present circumstance and recommended a specific outlook and set of dispositions. It was given to them by Paul through a revelation of Jesus Christ. It defended the radically new in terms drawn from the old. The radically new was already attested to in ancient Scripture.
There is nothing new under the urban sun, even these radical claims about the end of days, even this assertion that He would also raise us, even our exaltation and enthronement. As Christ was first weak, then powerful, so too will weak and afflicted Christians be vindicated and glorious.
Thus early Christianity presented a picture of sons of light against suns of darkness, of spiritual powers at war with one another and with God- but pacified and reconciled by Christ's ascension through the astral spheres. Personal struggles of immorality, weakness, bondage, fear and suffering and even the tension between Jews and Gentiles accrue cosmic importance.
This eschatological background was disseminated by highly mobile leaders whose constant concern was unity. The local groups they formed were intimate and exclusive, with strong boundaries, commitment, and interpersonal engagement. They believed in a shift in the order of the world. A truly heterogeneous mix of people, they were weak in one or more terms of social power and status, but exhilarated by experiences of power in their meetings.
Early Christianity, then, and the central symbol of a crucified savior, did not so much prescribe individual expectations so much as it described what was happening to these ambiguously-statused people. The low were being, as it were, raised up.
That concludes this Cliff Notes series. Now get ready for the Qur'an.
It is, I believe, I little late for that advance knowledge.
At any rate, the question of the formation of early Christianity is the question of unity, among believers as well as their beliefs; one body believes in one Christ, one God. Christian monotheism is Judaic monotheism. This provided a ready contrast to the social diversity, complexity, and plurality of the broader Roman Empire.
Yet the point was not just that Christianity was internally united around a set of social symbols; it was unified over and against the outside world, bound with bonds of affection that would express precisely the honor of the one God. So that while Paul makes such abundant reference to the Jews, there is no mention of, or any evidence of, contact between the early churches and the Diaspora synagogues.
Of course, this was only a provisional separation; Pauline Christianity sought to bring absolutely everyone into the inner circle, hence their zeal for far-flung evangelism. And hence the need to refrain from some kinds of contact with the broader world, but never to fear contamination from it.
This over-and-against was only temporary because of the eschatological nature of early Christianity- Jesus' resurrection was not, for them, a timeless act for personal redemption, but the first act in the end of days which would judge everyone. The early Christians looked forward to a series of events in the immediate future that would transform every social relationship.
The early Christians were by their nature socially dissatisfied, and looked forward to the difference. They perceived their status in the eyes of the others to be less than it would ultimately be. They were the best living embodiments of cognitive dissonance.
So early Christianity invariably combined the traditional with the radically new. By so doing, it was able to move a fairly traditional culture- the broader Roman Empire- toward a radical world view and ethos without sacrificing continuity with the Empire's longer history.
Their eschatological vision both explained present circumstance and recommended a specific outlook and set of dispositions. It was given to them by Paul through a revelation of Jesus Christ. It defended the radically new in terms drawn from the old. The radically new was already attested to in ancient Scripture.
There is nothing new under the urban sun, even these radical claims about the end of days, even this assertion that He would also raise us, even our exaltation and enthronement. As Christ was first weak, then powerful, so too will weak and afflicted Christians be vindicated and glorious.
Thus early Christianity presented a picture of sons of light against suns of darkness, of spiritual powers at war with one another and with God- but pacified and reconciled by Christ's ascension through the astral spheres. Personal struggles of immorality, weakness, bondage, fear and suffering and even the tension between Jews and Gentiles accrue cosmic importance.
This eschatological background was disseminated by highly mobile leaders whose constant concern was unity. The local groups they formed were intimate and exclusive, with strong boundaries, commitment, and interpersonal engagement. They believed in a shift in the order of the world. A truly heterogeneous mix of people, they were weak in one or more terms of social power and status, but exhilarated by experiences of power in their meetings.
Early Christianity, then, and the central symbol of a crucified savior, did not so much prescribe individual expectations so much as it described what was happening to these ambiguously-statused people. The low were being, as it were, raised up.
That concludes this Cliff Notes series. Now get ready for the Qur'an.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Cliff Notes: The First Urban Christians
Early Christianity was only tenuously a religion- rather, one much more like talkative, passionate, and quarrelsome social circles. They lacked shrines, temples, statues, sacrifices, public festivals, dances, music, pilgrimages, and even inscriptions.
Yet they did have rituals, symbolic action representing what the society deems important- and without which, indeed, a society may not be possible, as social relationships require symbolic acts.
The two rituals which Christianity obviously had were, of course, baptism and the Lord's supper. But they also met regularly, which itself becomes a ritual- weekly and on Sundays, as it happens.
What happened at these meetings? Chanting and singing, as evidenced by Paul's periodic hymns and psalms. It is also likely, though not certain, that assemblies read from Scripture; we also know that some preached by making proclamations, and others taught. We might also assume that exhortations of the sort found in the Epistles were also common in conversation there.
The only thing special about these rituals was their blend of the familiar and the novel- an outsider would have recognized all of these things, but also would have thought their combination and application altogether strange.
But these numinous rituals accomplished three key things: they increased feelings of solidarity, upped the prestige of individuals, and marked the occasion as solemn.
Baptism, of course, was a more solemn ritual than most, miming Christ's death and resurrection. These were most likely full immersions in water, with the baptized performing the rite naked- likely in a river, or, failing that opportunity, with a tub and a bowl. The baptized took off and put on clothing to signify the "old man" and the "new human". They might also have shouted out Abba to signify their new intimacy with God as heavenly father.
The Eucharist was a rather more subtly symbolic affair. It likely alluded to the festival meals common in all voluntary associations- especially with those of the burial clubs that commemorated the deaths and interment of their members. They included the saying of Christ, "this is my body" and "this is my blood" as ritual pronouncements.
And just as in those burial clubs, the wealthy members likely hosted these meals for everyone, as patrons- this eventually led to disputes. But this could not be, precisely because of the nature of the ritual: all the members were one body, the body of Christ. They were sharing a holy meal within a sacred world of symbols; this dissolved the boundary between rich and poor as much as it dismantled the boundary between Gentile and Jew.
And no, no one still knows what the baptism for the dead was all about. Sorry.
Yet they did have rituals, symbolic action representing what the society deems important- and without which, indeed, a society may not be possible, as social relationships require symbolic acts.
The two rituals which Christianity obviously had were, of course, baptism and the Lord's supper. But they also met regularly, which itself becomes a ritual- weekly and on Sundays, as it happens.
What happened at these meetings? Chanting and singing, as evidenced by Paul's periodic hymns and psalms. It is also likely, though not certain, that assemblies read from Scripture; we also know that some preached by making proclamations, and others taught. We might also assume that exhortations of the sort found in the Epistles were also common in conversation there.
The only thing special about these rituals was their blend of the familiar and the novel- an outsider would have recognized all of these things, but also would have thought their combination and application altogether strange.
But these numinous rituals accomplished three key things: they increased feelings of solidarity, upped the prestige of individuals, and marked the occasion as solemn.
Baptism, of course, was a more solemn ritual than most, miming Christ's death and resurrection. These were most likely full immersions in water, with the baptized performing the rite naked- likely in a river, or, failing that opportunity, with a tub and a bowl. The baptized took off and put on clothing to signify the "old man" and the "new human". They might also have shouted out Abba to signify their new intimacy with God as heavenly father.
The Eucharist was a rather more subtly symbolic affair. It likely alluded to the festival meals common in all voluntary associations- especially with those of the burial clubs that commemorated the deaths and interment of their members. They included the saying of Christ, "this is my body" and "this is my blood" as ritual pronouncements.
And just as in those burial clubs, the wealthy members likely hosted these meals for everyone, as patrons- this eventually led to disputes. But this could not be, precisely because of the nature of the ritual: all the members were one body, the body of Christ. They were sharing a holy meal within a sacred world of symbols; this dissolved the boundary between rich and poor as much as it dismantled the boundary between Gentile and Jew.
And no, no one still knows what the baptism for the dead was all about. Sorry.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Notice: Wikicreedia Update
Because the project really began here, I hope to update everyone here as it goes along.
I'm pleased to announce that the first Wikicreedia Forum was a success. Attendance and interest were gratifying, and I was as clear and publicly confident as I can ever remember being- all of which bodes well for the project. At the Forum, I retold the story of Wikicreedia's origin as a confluence of a class on the Nicene Creed and an NPR report on emerging uses of wikis as democratic technology.
I emphasized the following aspects of Wikis:
* A wiki invites all users to edit any page with any vanilla Web browser.
* A wiki promotes meaningful associations by making link creation intuitively easy.
* A wiki involves the visitor in an ongoing process of creation that constantly changes the site.
*A wiki enables collaborative documents.
And I emphasized what might be aspects of a Wiki creed:
Narrative. It could describe moments when Christian faith was formed or tested or changed. It could help Christians think about their experience, and tell the things about belief that the rest of the world might not know.
Brevity. Conciseness could help Christians name specific tenets of ordinary faith today- and the most essential ones at that.
Positive and confessional. It could avoid preaching and editorializing. We could tell each other what we do believe, rather than quibbling over things that others might or might not.
Ordinary, modern English. A creed is only as relevant so far as its believers might understand it, and the Wiki creed could be one that believers take with them out into the world.
I then introduced the Wikicreedia advertising and roll-out timeline (though it's always open to everyone):
Avent 08->Easter 09: wiki for Gethsemane with early ideas and first content
Easter 09->Advent 09: wiki for downtown and regional churches
Advent 09->Easter 10: wiki for national, Catholic and Orthodox churches.
Easter 10->Easter 11: wiki for all Christians worldwide
Easter 11->Easter 12: final versions of the Wikicreed
Finally, I announced the group that will meet to produce first-page content, which is @Gethsemane on Sat, Dec 6 @10:00 AM- with a few further meetings likely to follow.
As I said, I enjoyed this all immensely, and hope to be a good steward of Wikicreedia going forward.
Comments? Questions? Let me know.
I'm pleased to announce that the first Wikicreedia Forum was a success. Attendance and interest were gratifying, and I was as clear and publicly confident as I can ever remember being- all of which bodes well for the project. At the Forum, I retold the story of Wikicreedia's origin as a confluence of a class on the Nicene Creed and an NPR report on emerging uses of wikis as democratic technology.
I emphasized the following aspects of Wikis:
* A wiki invites all users to edit any page with any vanilla Web browser.
* A wiki promotes meaningful associations by making link creation intuitively easy.
* A wiki involves the visitor in an ongoing process of creation that constantly changes the site.
*A wiki enables collaborative documents.
And I emphasized what might be aspects of a Wiki creed:
Narrative. It could describe moments when Christian faith was formed or tested or changed. It could help Christians think about their experience, and tell the things about belief that the rest of the world might not know.
Brevity. Conciseness could help Christians name specific tenets of ordinary faith today- and the most essential ones at that.
Positive and confessional. It could avoid preaching and editorializing. We could tell each other what we do believe, rather than quibbling over things that others might or might not.
Ordinary, modern English. A creed is only as relevant so far as its believers might understand it, and the Wiki creed could be one that believers take with them out into the world.
I then introduced the Wikicreedia advertising and roll-out timeline (though it's always open to everyone):
Avent 08->Easter 09: wiki for Gethsemane with early ideas and first content
Easter 09->Advent 09: wiki for downtown and regional churches
Advent 09->Easter 10: wiki for national, Catholic and Orthodox churches.
Easter 10->Easter 11: wiki for all Christians worldwide
Easter 11->Easter 12: final versions of the Wikicreed
Finally, I announced the group that will meet to produce first-page content, which is @Gethsemane on Sat, Dec 6 @10:00 AM- with a few further meetings likely to follow.
As I said, I enjoyed this all immensely, and hope to be a good steward of Wikicreedia going forward.
Comments? Questions? Let me know.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Notice: The Next Cliff Notes Series
I'm pleased to announce that, whenever I finished summarizing all there is to summarize about The First Urban Christians, I'll be moving on to embrace...The Meaning of the Qur'an. I can't summarize the Qur'an, it seems, because no one has ever translated it. You can't. In Islamic circles, part of the Qur'an is the Arabic language. The most you can do is translate the meaning.
So there. Now you've learned something.
So there. Now you've learned something.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)