'poem VI'

O saints, if I am even eligible for this prayer,
though less than worthy of this dear desire,
and if your prayers have influence in Heaven,
let my place there be lower than your own.
I know how you longed, here where you lived
as exiles, for the presence of the essential
Being and Maker and Knower of all things.
But because of my unruliness, or some erring
virtue in me never rightly schooled,
some error clear and dear, my life
has not taught me your desire for flight:
dismattered, pure, and free. I long
instead for the Heaven of creatures, of seasons,
of day and night. Heaven enough for me
would be this world as I know it, but redeemed
of our abuse of it and one another. It would be
the Heaven of knowing again. There is no marrying
in Heaven, and I submit; even so, I would like
to know my wife again, both of us young again,
and I remembering always how I loved her
when she was old. I would like to know
my children again, all my family, all my dear ones,
to see, to hear, to hold, more carefully
than before, to study them lingeringly as one
studies old verses, committing them to heart
forever. I would like again to know my friends,
my old companions, men and women, horses
and dogs, in all the ages of our lives, here
in this place that I have watched over all my life
in all its moods and seasons, never enough.
I will be leaving how many beauties overlooked?
A painful Heaven this would be, for I would know
by it how far I have fallen short. I have not
paid enough attention, I have not been grateful
enough. And yet this pain would be the measure
of my love. In eternity’s once and now, pain would
place me surely in the Heaven of my earthly love.

— Wendell Berry, from ‘Leavings’

(holy) saturday melancholia

Desolation… I think that’s the word for what I’m feeling. I expected this week to be spiritually intense, but I don’t think I realized it would be quite so… grueling. Liturgy, as “actions of the people,” takes on a deeper significance during Holy Week. I’m truly participating, and that’s very new for me. Sure, there was the idea that “we crucified Jesus” in the Christianity of my upbringing, but that was abstract and framed as part of the self-flagellation of the Passion narrative in the evangelical church.

Eucharistic Freelapse

My sponsor told me once (twice) ((three times)) about his first sip of alcohol after more than two decades of continuous sobriety. An accident? An ambush? Shirley Temple got deflowered somehow, at any rate… The Big Book doesn’t call it an allergy of the body for nothing. Spiritual anaphylaxis sets in before it even hits your tongue. Almost like your taste buds have stretched their ESP to the limit of its range, looking for the slightest hint of ethanol to scream about. I’m not blushing, I swear. I’m just allergic. I’m not manic, I swear. I’m just obsessed... “The Blood of Christ; the Cup of Salvation.” The watchword that somehow manages to defuse the bomb by tripping the wire. I drink a sip each week so that I never drink more than a sip. Your pharmakon ain’t got nothin’ on the Eucharist, Plato.

Love God completely • Love yourself rightly • Love others likewise

This is the refrain of the podcast Untangling Christianity that my friend Kyle recommended to me (great podcast, by the way). It is a threefold explication of the Greatest Commandment, according to Jesus. A popular Shi'a skaykh that I follow argues that Jesus was not a law-giving prophet, in contrast to Moses and Muhammad. This seems to disprove that. Jesus lay down a shari'a for his followers. It is spare in its rhetoric, but I'm realizing it's the shari'a I need at this point in my life. Following this shari'a is taking me out of Islam, a journey that I'm having trouble finding the words and courage to explain to my Muslim friends who so jubilantly celebrated my entrance into Islam. But I'm trying to give myself permission to love and ask to be loved regardless of the form my worship takes.

A Collect for a Psychic Towing Service

I had a doozey of a therapy session today. I didn’t want to go. My mind dug in its heels like a dog who doesn’t want to move on from a particularly salacious scent on a walk. I was miserable. And I wanted to stay miserable, goddammit. I was going to ride this rollercoaster of an emotional spiral to the very end if it killed me. But Benji asked me to go, if not for myself, then for him. Love or guilt or lover’s guilt—whatever—it roused me enough to go.

The Gospel According to St. [REDACTED]

“This is my part.” Even though he was sleepy and bleary-eyed without his glasses, Benji wanted to read the Lessons. We were praying the Morning Office earlier today. Or at least, we were trying to. We got to the Gospel lesson and started fumbling around, somewhat baffled. My copy of the Revised English Bible left off at John 7:52 and picked up again at 8:12, missing precisely the passage that the lectionary assigned for today. I had vague childhood memories of a disputed section somewhere in the Gospels, but I had written over any specifics long ago. We forewent the Gospel lesson and moved on with our prayers. But I wanted to go back and look at the passage more closely.

on louis weil's 'a theology of worship'

we should not misunderstand “lex orandi, lex credendi” as reflecting any causal or directional relationship. the very lack of a conjunction nods at the ubiquity of the via media. the phrase does not indicate a strict ritualism in which the orthoprax performance of the liturgy is identical with piety. but neither does it reflect a purely expressive mode of worship as we see epitomized in the charismatic evangelical traditions. the lex orandi does not create the lex credendi any more than the lex credendi precedes the lex orandi. the relationship, as i understand it, is one of embodiment. the orthopraxy of the liturgy and the orthodoxy of the creed stand together mutually constituting each other, the one manifesting the other in its complementary realm. this resonates with the catechismal definition of a sacrament: “an outward and physical sign [and would add ‘conduit’] of an inward and spiritual grace.” as such, while a common liturgy necessitates some interpretive work to make the liturgy intelligible to a given context, extreme care should be taken in altering the substance of the lex orandi, because it cannot be altered without also impacting its inward manifestation in the creeds.

lex orandi, lex credendi

“Fundamentalism is not taught in the [Anglican] liturgy. The function of the Church as the interpreter of Scripture is set forth, both in words in the ordination rites and in liturgical action in the way the Bible is used and preached in the Sunday liturgies. The statements of the catechism go further than the lex orandi, but they are consonant with it and form the basis for the Episcopal Church’s position outlined there. God did not dictate the Bible, but inspired its human authors without overruling their human limitations. The Bible is not self-explanatory; it is interpreted by the Church.” – p. 292

“But this volume is not a work of systematic theology. It is a reflection on theology prima, and it will leave many ambiguities. The ambiguities exist, not because the liturgy and its theology are confused—although a good case can be made that its theology of confirmation in confused at present and has been for centuries—but because the theology of the liturgy is not really a system and therefore cannot be systematized in different ways by different schools of academic theologians without being betrayed.” ­– p. 302


from the final chapter of the late Leonel L. Mitchell’s Praying Shapes Believing: A Theological Commentary on The Book of Common Prayer