Happy Easter!

Fresco of the Resurrection by Fra Angelico, San Marco, Florence

A Happy Easter to all! In the iconographic tradition of Western Christianity, we are accustomed to associate images of the resurrection of Jesus with this most solemn and joyous feast of the liturgical year. This fourteenth-century fresco by Fra Angelico, in San Marco, Florence, is a classic example. Our Lord is depicted rising from his tomb, surrounded by a glorious mandorla, holding a palm-fond of peace in one hand and a banner of victory in the other. The gathered women who were the first witnesses to the resurrected Christ gaze into the tomb or at the angel who admonishes them that he is not to be found there.

To eyes accustomed to such Easter imagery, the classical ikon associated with this feast among the Eastern Orthodox will seem surprising. The version seen here is from the historic monastery of Hosios Loukas in the mountains of Greece, and forms part of a uniquely exquisite and well-preserved set of tenth-century mosaics.

Mosaic of the Harrowing of Hell from the narthex of the monastery of Hosios Loukas, Greece

It does not depict the resurrection of Jesus, but his descent among the dead, sometimes referred to as the “harrowing of hell.” The movement here is downward, the upward fluttering of Jesus’ garments suggesting a rapid descent. Here in Hades or Sheol or the realm of the dead, Jesus takes Adam by the hand to lead him and Eve and all of us from that place into new life in him. For me, the most powerful element of this icon is the broken gates of death and the broken locks and chains that lie at the feet of the Lord. These might be described as representing everything that impairs our freedom to love as Jesus loves, our freedom to share fully in the life of the Holy Trinity, which is love: the fear of death, the habits of self-centeredness, the brokenness and burdens of the past from which we do not yet feel ourselves to be free. I pray that, as Spring blossoms around us, this season of joy and hope will find all of us willing in new ways to welcome Jesus as he descends to wherever we are, and to allow him to take each of us by the hand and to lead us away from whatever binds and burdens us into the newness of life and freedom to love that he both is and offers.

Fervorini non predicati: The First Sunday of Advent, Year B

Isaiah 16b-17, 19b; 64:2-7. Psalm 80:2-3, 15-16, 18-10. 1 Corinthians 1:3-9. Mark 13:33-37.

I doubt any of us sang “Auld Lang Syne” as the clock struck midnight, but, for the Church, this is New Year’s Day. With the Season of Advent, a new liturgical year begins in a spirit of quiet anticipation. We look toward the celebration of our vulnerable God’s birth into the world of creatureliness. We look further ahead to the consummation of the Universe in the life of the Holy Trinity at the end of time. But we also look toward our own future on this earth as persons, as the Church, and as members of the many other, sometimes overlapping, communities to which we belong.

The past liturgical year has not been easy. Though the coronavirus pandemic has officially been over for some time, the illness continues to take a toll, and has left us all, probably, with a newly-urgent sense of our mortality. Deadly conflict rages in Ukraine and the Holy Land, overshadowing in the headlines without diminishing the reality of ongoing strife elsewhere in the world. Here in the wealthiest nation on the globe, the scourge of homelessness continues to expand, while minority communities face increasingly blunt expressions of intolerance (even, sometimes, from one-another) and a renewed sense, among a surprising number of Americans, that intimidation and violence are appropriate expressions of their convictions, while discriminatory legislation advances in a number of states (as, indeed, elsewhere in the world, sometimes in life-threatening ways). Personally, this past year, I have lost to illness and advancing age an unprecedented number of people who were, or were once, close to me.

Today’s reading from the Book of Isaiah reminds us of the essential thing. We must not “harden our hearts,” and hardness of hearts can take many forms, from habitual wrong-doing that, once routinized (or once we become dependent on its results) blinds us to its wrongness; to allowing our spiritual and psychological fortifications (entirely appropriate in a world that can wound) to become such bastions as to close us off from love given or received; to, frankly, wanting to give up on making a difference in the world from a sheer sense of its overwhelming problems.

Just as, in the Incarnation we anticipate this season, God opened God’s own life to us by becoming one of us, so we must open ourselves to God and the invitation to love that he is always so urgently extending.

The imagery of encounter from today’s reading from Isaiah, in which the Prophet invites God to “meet us in doing good,” is echoed in the collect from today’s Mass, asking God for “the resolve to run forth to meet your Christ with righteous deeds at his coming.” This imagery, like the Gospel, is hopeful and optimistic about what, with God, each of us can do in love. We can change our lives for the better; we can be of service to the needs of our neighbor. What we do with an in God may seem small, but, joined with the work of many others of good will, and with that of all the angels and saints, the good is cumulative. As Advent takes us into winter, let us sprint through these cold days and nights toward the warm embrace of the Lord, who runs toward an encounter with us, too.

Fervorini non predicati: Twenty-Sixth Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A

Ezekiel 18:25-28; Psalm 25:4-5, 6-7, 8-9; Philippians 2:1-11; Matthew 21:28-32

Today’s second reading contains one of the great pieces of early Christian verse. Often called the Christ Hymn, it (or most of it) is probably older than the Letter to the Philippians, something whith which the readers and hearers of that letter would have been familiar. A homily – still less an unpreached homilette – usually isn’t the place to go into the literary structure of a Scriptural passage, but here it’s quite important. They hymn is chiastic: that is, it resembles the Greek letter chi, which is shaped like an X. This is a technique one encounters in ancient documents in which the high cost of writing materials available at the time inspired the use of structural elements that highlighted what was important in a way that didn’t use many words. The parts of the text corresponding to the wide upper and lower parts of the X share similar themes, as do the parts corresponding to the narrowing portions of the X moving toward the center. And, at the center, is the heart of the text’s message.

Here, the beginning and end of the hymn (“…though he was in the form of God,” and “Jesus Christ is Lord…”) are both about the glory of Jesus as Son of God. At the heart of the chaism is the cycle of death-on-a-cross followed by or bound up with exaltation.

The Christ hymn is about the cycle of Jesus’ life on earth, and its cosmic implications, as well as, and most importantly for us, the way in which our own lives and persons baptized into Christ will share, and already do share, in that cycle, all of which is sometimes called the Paschal Mystery. Jesus chose to share a human life, undertaking both its joys and is sufferings and, ultimately, death, so that we can see the pattern by which God draws the universe toward its consummation in himself. This does not make anyone’s suffering any less real, but it immerses it, along with all our joys, into the life of Christ, and carries us forward on the current of that life into the reality of resurrection. Sometimes we experience this here and now, as painful things give rise to unexpectedly good things; mostly we we must await the fulfillment of all things in Christ to see this dimension of the Paschal Mystery in action. But this rhythm should draw forth from us both compassionate service to those most in need, and deep hope for us all.

Fervorini non predicati: Twenty-Fifth Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A

Isaiah 55:6-9; Psalm 145:2-3, 8-9, 17-18; Philippians 1:20c-24, 27a; Matthew 20:1-16a

Painting of the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard
The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard, Jacob Willemszoon de Wet, 17th century, Museum of Fine Arts, Budapest, public domain

If the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard were about the wages and hours of laborers, it would be shocking in its apparent endorsement of injustice. But it isn’t. The idea of a parable is to arrest our attention with something surprising or outrageous in order to make a point about something else. The point here has to do with our relationship with God. What God has to offer us is not money (though some would have it so), but God; or, put another way, grace. In this world we tend to value things on the basis of their scarcity, and money can be hard to come by and difficult to get enough of, even for those who are willing to work for it; so our Lord seems to use it here in order to get us thinking about what is of value. Relationship with God is greatly to be valued, but it isn’t scarce. God offers himself abundantly to everyone, not as payment for doing good things but as a gift, as is always the case with love. To share in God’s own life is a gift into the mysteries of which we will be delving for all eternity, without ever exhausting its riches, and that is so whether it is a gift we find ourselves willing to receive early in life or late. But to say this is not to deny the value of our work. What we do with and in God has great value precisely in so far as it is an expression of the divine life we have been, in Christ, invited to share, the divine love we have been called to express in all we do.

Fervorini non predicati: Twenty-Fourth Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A

A fervorino, in the context of liturgy, is a short homily; the sort of thing one might expect to hear in the course of a weekday Mass. Given the nature of both my “secular” work and my apostolate, I seldom preach. But I thought I might try to offer here a brief reflection on the readings for Mass on Sundays and Solemnities: a fervorino non predicato or unpreached homilette, if you will (not to be confused with the delicious French egg dish that some of you probably plan to enjoy at brunch today!). I apologize in advance if I am not entirely consistent about this; there will undoubtedly be weeks when my other responsibilities preclude writing something here.

Sirach 27:30-28:7; Psalm 103:1-4, 9-12; Romans 14:7-9; Matthew 18:21-35

Today’s reading from Sirach begins with an arresting image: “Wrath and anger are hateful things, yet the sinner hugs them tight.” One imagines a person who has nothing left but anger, no one left to embrace but the destructive phantom of their own rage. A hellish thought. Yet anger is a complex thing. One often hears that anger can be good: that it can motivate to action in the interests of justice, compassion, or love, and this is true to some extent. If we were all emotionally neutral in the face of harm there would be no progress toward its undoing. But even justified anger can sometimes be reminiscent of misguided attempts to introduce invasive species into ecosystems in order to correct some problem, resulting, as with kudzu in the American South or cane toads in Australia, in new and much bigger ones. Anger can be consuming and engulfing; even when it begins with good reason and is aimed at achieving good things, it can blaze out of control, harming even the one whose anger it is, constricting interior freedom.

The emotional turmoil of anger can cloud our judgement as to whether or not we are really in the right in a given situation. And here we arrive at the pith of today’s Gospel: hypocrisy. Jesus himself is sometimes, albeit rarely, portrayed in the Gospels as angry, and nothing seems to provoke that response from him more reliably than when people insist that others uphold standards that they themselves, in practice, despise. The servant in the Gospel today is forgiven an enormous debt, only to resort to violence in seeking to extract a petty payment from another. One of the great dangers of anger is that we can find ourselves exacting from others standards of which we ourselves fall short, either because our hearts have become so hard as to be oblivious to our own reality and obsessed with the shortcomings of others, or because, in some way, we are seeking to use the other as a scapegoat for our own guilt (a role Our Lord has insisted he is happy to play, if played it must be, and one that he alone can).

St John Cassian
St John Cassian, anonymous, public domain

St John Cassian, the great monastic mystic, is uncompromising on this subject: “the deadly poison of anger… must be totally uprooted from the depths of our soul. For as long as it resides in our hearts and blinds our mind’s eye with its harmful darkness, we shall be able neither to acquire the judgment of a proper discretion nor to possess a good contemplative vision or a mature counsel, and we shall not be sharers in life…” (Institutes, VIII.i). Importantly, uprooting anger is not the same thing as suppressing it. If we tamp it down into the recesses of our hearts, it will, reliably, one day explode. Uprooting it is more like frankly confronting its causes, pondering what, if anything, we might do to address them, taking such action as we can in love, and entrusting the situation to God. Often, I realize, easier said than done. But, on the other hand, St John Cassian and the other Desert Fathers and Mothers are remarkably optimistic about what we human beings can achieve with and in God.

It is not for me to say when and how you should embrace anger. Each of us must make that discernment, prayerfully, for ourselves. But, if and when we do allow anger in, we must handle it with great care if we wish to be “sharers in life” and the freedom that is ours in Christ.

Robert Farrar Capon: Exit 36

Robert Farrar CaponIn recent weeks I have found myself thinking about the late Episcopal priest and bon vivant Father Robert Farrar Capon, whose earthly pilgrimage came to an end a decade ago this month. As a callow undergraduate I was introduced to his writings by a Lutheran pastor I knew. Those books – and the remarkable man who produced them – captured my imagination on levels theological, liturgical, musical, gastronomic, and otherwise. I sought out and savored all that I could find. I was a young man of Roman Catholic background studying philosophy at a famously conservative Presbyterian college in rural Pennsylvania and spending vacations back home in Southern California, on the cusp (though I didn’t yet know it) of profound struggles with faith and embodiment and the relationship between the two – struggles to which Our Lord’s Incarnation would eventually provide the sacramental key. My approach to Christianity at the time was abstract, rule-bound, and rather morbidly focused on my own shortcomings; unwittingly Jansenist, one might say. Capon was my introduction to the joys and freedoms of grace as encountered sacramentally in an irreducibly material world saturated by divine love, however troubling that world may sometimes be and however much we may ourselves fall short of what that love calls us to. Not all of Fr Robert’s writings are of equal quality, and he readily admitted that aspects of some of the earlier ones had not aged well. But wise and entertaining they remain, approached on their own terms and with this in mind.

So taken was I with Fr Robert’s work that I wrote to him, asking (rather boldly, in retrospect) to visit. And he replied with an invitation to spend time with him and Valerie, his wife, at their home on Shelter Island during one of my college vacations. My sense of this visit is that it lasted a few days, but when I piece together in memory the events that transpired, I realize it can’t have been more than an over-night stay. It began with Mass celebrated by Fr Robert at Holy Trinity Episcopal Church, Greenport. He suggested that if I arrived early, I should ask for him, and I did that. I found him in the sacristy, albed, but not yet having put on the stole and chasuble. He was seated in an arm-chair, his feet on a table, morning sunlight filtering through the pipe-smoke rising from his briar – striking a classically Caponian attitude. The liturgy was celebrated simply and with dignity. His homily was exactly what one would expect, insightful and bonkers. All I remember of it is the image of Our Lord going out on a date with the Church and arriving in a hearse to pick her up. Still, to have remembered anything from an ordinary Sunday homily after more than twenty years is remarkable.

Robert Farrar CaponThe Capons’ hospitality was generous and gracious. He and I spent a memorable afternoon in chintz armchairs in their conservatory-like dining room eating liverwurst on crackers, drinking cheap white wine, and talking about the one subject with which Catholic theology is concerned: everything. He took me into the basement to see the harpsichord he had been building for years and to talk about Baroque music. That evening, Valerie drove me to the beach and we had a rambling conversation seated on the hood of her car, gazing out over a darkling Shelter Island Sound. After one of Robert’s favorite aperitifs (Cinzano on the rocks with a twist – cf. his Between Noon and Three), the three of us enjoyed a lively and delectable dinner, although I was so excited to be in their eccentric kitchen, watching Robert at work over the old commercial range familiar to his readers, that I remember nothing of what we ate. Then we smoked cigars and – somewhat to my surprise – watched tennis on television before retiring. Capon habitually rose very early for Morning Prayer, celebrated partly in his car and partly while running, with the readings in Hebrew or Greek, as appropriate. I had an early flight to catch. So, the next morning I bade him farewell in the dark outside their house, a kitchen towel over his shoulder, then drove off in my rented car to catch the ferry to Long Island.

I visited the Capons one other time during my undergraduate years, just for an afternoon. He made a splendid pasta puttanesca accompanied (he was ever the advocate of vin ordinaire) by red wine out of a jug. Valerie and I kept in touch afterwards for a while, occasionally, by e-mail and telephone. Gradually, though, we lost contact. I was thunderstruck by news of Robert’s death in 2013. I had always told myself the three of us would rekindle our acquaintance.

One day in 2018, I received a telephone call from Valerie out of the blue. By then we hadn’t spoken or written in years. It was lovely to hear her voice. We had a long chat. And she told me she was involved in having Robert’s writings re-published by Mockingbird Press. She was asking one of their friends to write a preface to each of the books, and she wanted me to do so for one of his earliest and most unusual, Exit 36. She gave me a deadline, and told me to call her when I had finished and dictate the piece to her over the phone. I was deeply touched by this request but it came at a difficult time. Illness in the family, unhappiness at work, a dip into melancholy – the sort of pile-up of wearying circumstances most of us experience now and again – made it a challenging task to complete. I finished in time and, since I had Valerie’s e-mail address, decided to send her the finished product that way, rather than ringing her up. Strange to say, at the time I just didn’t feel up to a telephone conversation, dear as she was to me. I suppose I feared that she wouldn’t like what I had written, and the prospect of having failed her in a task I felt so honored to perform was daunting; it must have seemed easier to me at the time to receive such news, if received it must be, by in writing. She never wrote back. I suspect she just didn’t use that e-mail address any longer and never received what I had sent. The book was published with a thoughtful preface by someone else. And I have felt ever since that I let Valerie, and Robert’s memory, down.

However, I don’t intend this to be a gloomy post! With the sense of impending transition into Autumn in the air, but Summer warmth still bathing the desert I call home, and in a Caponesque mood, I thought I would publish here, for what it’s worth, the little preface that I wrote back in 2018:

SOME THOUGHTS ON EXIT THIRTY-SIX

Father Robert approached words much as he approached food: as a necessity of human life that happened to be an outlet for his effervescent creativity and a source of great and contagious delight. But just as, when it came to food, he advocated both feast and fast, so also he understood the necessity of silence before the limits of the utterable. This book is about those limits. When confronted by an event as much on the threshold of human experience as death is, especially death by one’s own hand, or when aware that one is standing in the presence of God, the only really adequate act of speaking is to remain silent. But both before and after silence there is a human need to say something, to speak a few words into the void or toward the Mystery and see what kind of echo they might return. When we talk about the deepest levels of human experience, and especially when we talk about God, this is the best we can do. And if this be the case with even the most scholarly works of theology, then why not attempt to write theologically in a way that is obviously and even light-heartedly a preliminary sketch, an act of tinkering, an improvisation? Such writing was to become one of Fr Robert’s principal preoccupations and a vital if eccentric expression of his priesthood, and Exit Thirty-Six was one of his earliest experiments with it.

Feast of St Athanasius of Alexandria

St Athanasius icon
St Athanasius

St Athanasius, whose feast we celebrate today, is well-known as a champion of the divinity of  Christ. He is less well-known as an example of how agreement can sometimes be an unexpected source of division. Few Christians remember today (though Fr Andrew Louth brilliantly reminds us in his The Origins of the Christian Mystical Tradition) that in the early Church, the doctrine of creation was hotly debated. During that period, neoplatonic philosophy provided an invaluable framework in which to think Christian ideas through and, in typical neoplatonic fashion, many Christians then believed in the preexistence of souls and even of some kind of primordial matter. In their view, God did not create the universe out of nothing, but formed it from materials that had always been there and populated it with souls who shared God’s eternity. The idea of creation ex nihilo – out of nothing – was a novelty. Interestingly enough, this novel view was shared by St Athanasius and by his sparring partner (eventually denounced as a heretic), Arius. They both agreed that God had created the world out of nothing. Arius held that the divine Logos was also created out of nothing and adopted into divinity; Athanasius insisted that that the Logos existed eternally as a person of the Godhead. The debate between these two was fierce, sometimes, in historical hindsight, to an unedifying degree. But it began from a place of agreement. The debate between Athanasius and Arius, and its eventual resolution at the Council of Nicaea, proved to be of definitive importance in the development of the Church’s understanding of Jesus. But one wonders if it might have been less acrimoniously resolved if those involved had realized more palpably that their disagreement arose from prior concord – and from concord in a rather novel concept, at that. When we face disputes, it might help to trace them back to what led up to them; this pattern is less unusual than one might imagine, and discovering latent or presupposed shared views might actually help in resolving disagreement.

Memorial of St Ambrose, Bishop and Doctor of the Church

St Ambrose of Milan

St Ambrose of Milan was renown even in his own lifetime as a brilliant theologian, a kind and indefatigable pastor, and an accomplished statesman. But one of the things for which he was regarded as remarkable will seem puzzling, even comical, today: his ability to read silently! Silent reading is now the norm rather than the exception; we would think it odd to find someone reading aloud to themselves. But in late antiquity – and on into the Medieval era – reading aloud was so much the norm that the ability to read silently seems to have ranked as a remarkable accomplishment.

We learn of St Ambrose’s ability to do so in the Confessions of his contemporary, St Augustine: “When he read his eyes would travel across the pages and his mind would explore the sense, but his voice and tongue were silent” (VI,3[3], in as translated by Sr Maria Boulding, OSB).

There is an intriguing if oblique reference in the Rule of St Benedict to the fact that reading aloud, even to oneself, was the norm in his time. In arranging the outline of the monks’ day, Chapter 48 prescribes that “after Sext [or midday prayer] and their meal, they may rest on their beds in complete silence; should a brother wish to read privately, let him do so, but without disturbing the others” (as translated by monks of Collegeville).  “Reading privately” in the dormitory would not disturb others unless it were done aloud; the Rule expects it to be in a low voice during the siesta so as to allow others to sleep.

I mention all of this in order to draw attention to the fact that, historically, people engaged with texts in a way that involved more of the body than does the silent reading to which we are now accustomed, and texts were written in the expectation that they would be experienced in this way. You may find this helpful in your own encounters with Sacred Scripture, liturgical texts (when you pray alone), the writings of the Fathers and Mothers of the church, and “secular” writings, too. If you are struggling to encounter a text in a way that resonates with you, whether in lectio divina or in some other situation, try reading it aloud to yourself; try proclaiming it if it is something proclaimable. You may find that it comes alive in a new way.

Feast of St Andrew the Apostle

simonestandrew
St Andrew, Simone Martini, ca. 1326, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

Today’s feast might be an appropriate occasion for the inaugural post on this new website. The Abbey in which I spent truly formative years as a monk is under the patronage of this Saint and, while I am no longer affiliated with it in any way, it remains one of those places-of-the-heart for me. St Andrew is the patron of Scotland, the country from which a few of my ancestors hail, including (at least according to Hazlet lore) Robert the Bruce – and of whose national dress, the kilt, I am a great fan. More somberly, today’s saint is the patron of Ukraine, a country embroiled in terrible conflict at this time.

Most relevant, though, to the purpose of this website is that St Andrew is regarded as the first of Jesus’ disciples, the “Protoclete” or “first called,” and discipleship of the Lord will be an underlying theme here.

Today’s Gospel, Matthew 4:18-22, contains that puzzling summons of Jesus, “Come after me, and I will make you fishers of men.” “Fishers of persons” might give a better sense of what is intended here. Jesus is evidently presenting this fishing for human beings as a good thing, yet when fish are pulled from the sea, they die and are eaten. We could have a long discussion about how or whether this might be justifiable in terms of human stewardship of Creation, but as an analogy for what the disciples of Jesus do it is certainly puzzling.

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI is a controversial figure. His ministry contained many tensions: having been a rather progressive theologian and peritus or adviser to the Second Vatican Council, he became known for his conservatism as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. His papacy was characterized by encyclicals, homilies, and audiences of often quite striking theological and pastoral – even mystical – insight, an over-the-top approach to liturgical splendor and pontifical haberdashery that verged on camp, and, alas, some decisions and policies that can only be called regressive and and that were in some instances genuinely harmful. Then, in a highly ambiguous and much-discussed gesture, he resigned, becoming the first Pope to have done so in nearly six hundred years.

In any case, his homily on the occasion of the inauguration of his papacy contains what I find to be a very helpful insight into this reading from the Gospel of St Matthew – an insight, he says, that is of Patristic origin. (One doesn’t cite sources in a homily, but I do wish he had done so in this case – I’ve been unable to track down the source in question! Perhaps one of you, dear readers, might help me here.)

The saline environment of the sea is splendid for the fish who live there, but aside from the occasional swim (or free-dive, or snorkel, or scuba excursion), it is most inhospitable for human beings. Immersed in it, we die. It becomes a place of alienation from which we need rescuing. So, to go fishing for human beings is not to entangle them in a deadly net, but to seek to draw them from alienation and death into community and life. In the person of Jesus, and, through him, in the embrace of the Holy Trinity, we have found both.

Our vocation as disciples, and, together, as the Church, is thus not to try to persuade people of an idea, but to live in relationship with one another, with Jesus, and with the world in the way Jesus both proclaimed and enacted. If sin has scattered and alienated us from one another and from God (even, indeed, from our own true selves), Jesus, simply in virtue of who he is, draws us back toward the Center which is himself, and the closer we are to him, the closer we are to one-another and to every being made by God.