Evangelicals and the Environment

Here is an interesting piece on the rise of Evangelical environmentalism and the effects it could have on future presidential elections. 

Evangelical Christians have long been an important part of the Republican Party's electoral base, but the Republican Party has (it seems to me) generally been guilty of pitting the environment against the economny and choosing the economy every time, since that is seen as the real vote-getter.  What will happen if care for the environment and the dangers of climate change become more important issues for evangelical Christians? 

Whatever the effect of future elections, this issue has been notably absent in what passes for political discourse this year.  This year's presidential debates, for the first time since the Reagan era, included no questions about care for the environment or climate change.  That makes me wonder who gets the final say on what questions are included, as they obviously have a great deal of power over the shape of the campaign season's discourse.

Foster on the Eucharist

In the last few weeks I have been slowly and deliberatively reading Richard Foster's wonderful book, Prayer.  I believe Foster to be one of the wisest and most fully "catholic" teachers (because he draws from every stream of the Christian tradition) we have among us today.  I actually saw him speak in person for about 30 minutes at a conference once.

Chapter 10 of this excellent book, called "Sacramental Prayer," is one of the best explanations of the reasons for liturgical prayer and sacramental worship that I've ever read - and all in only 13 pages.  If you attend a Methodist, Anglican, Lutheran or Catholic church and wonder why we use so many "pre-written" prayers or why so many aspects of our service are the same from week to week, this chapter will surely offer you explanation and invite you to new insight.

In reflecting upon the classical ecumenically-received pattern of the "Service of the Table" or "Liturgy of the Altar" as it is found in The Book of Common Prayer and The United Methodist Book of Worship and worship books of numerous churches, this is what Foster writes about the total liturgical experience of the faithful who come for Holy Communion:

"At the heart of all Christian prayer is the celebration of the Eucharist or Holy Communion.  Nearly every aspect of prayer is caught up in the eucharistic feast: examination, repentance, petition, forgiveness, contemplation, thanksgiving, celebration, and more.  It most perfectly embodies the central core of prayer in that we are full participants in the action, but the grace that comes is all of God.  All of the senses are employed.  We see, we smell, we touch, we taste.  We hear the words of institution: "This is my body...This is my blood."  In short, the Eucharistic Prayer is the most complete prayer we ever make this side of eternity."

Vesting prayer for United Methodist clergy

In my experience most United Methodist clergy wear vestments when leading the divine service, in keeping with the traditions of the Wesleys and our Anglican heritage as well as those of the ancient undivided Church (and indeed, of the Biblical worship of the Old Covenant as well).  I thoroughly endorse this practice (even in services employing 'contemporary' music) as it adds another visual and 'iconic' element to the multi-sensory worship experience, it maintains our connections with the broader liturgical tradition, and it adds a deeper sense of reverence and gravitas to the service of worship.

Today’s United Methodist clergy (presbyters, deacons, and local pastors) likely wear a seasonal stole and possibly a pectoral cross over either a Geneva gown (an elaboration upon the black Cassock developed for the clergy of the medieval academy and used by many Churches with roots in the Reformation) or the still more ancient Alb with cincture.   Some United Methodist pastors, adhering more closely to the Anglican tradition and Wesley's own practice, wear a cassock with a surplice (a flowing white robe derived from the alb) over it, in addition to the stole and pectoral cross (pictured above are United Methodist clergy wearing cassock and surplice with a red stole at Cox Chapel in Dallas). 

In the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches the presbyters say a particular prayer with each additional garment that is put on while vesting (the actual vestments used as well as the prayers said are somewhat different in the Eastern and Latin Churches).  Some Anglo-Catholics use the same prayers as the Roman Catholic clergy.  I generally say an extempore prayer for myself and the people while vesting in my office before the worship service.  I have wanted to compose, or better yet discover in the tradition, a vesting prayer that would be appropriate for United Methodist clergy.  Now I’ve found one!

Students of liturgy likely know that our current United Methodist liturgy is derived from the Sunday Service Book of John Wesley, which itself is a revision of The Book of Common Prayer (1662).  The Anglican Common Prayer Book is, in large part, based upon the medieval Sarum Use of the Latin liturgy.  The Sarum Use was a version of the Latin Liturgy that developed in and around Salisbury Cathedral and became popular throughout England and is thus uniquely British.  I’ve recently discovered that according to the medieval Sarum liturgy, the priest did not say the same vesting prayers used by today’s Roman Catholic clergy, but rather was directed to recite the Veni Creator Spiritus, an ancient hymn beginning “Come, Holy Ghost.”  See the section headed “Preparation” on pages 8-9 of this essay about the Sarum liturgy.

The Veni Creator Spiritus (perhaps followed or preceded by a brief extempore prayer asking God’s mercy and aid for the pastor and congregation) is an especially appropriate vesting prayer for United Methodist clergy for several reasons:

As we've seen, this prayer (already nearly a thousand years old in John Wesley's day) is a part of the ancient British liturgical tradition (in the Sarum liturgy), and as such it was carried forward into the liturgy of The Book of Common Prayer, where it is used in the ordination services.  Furthermore John Wesley retained it in the ordination rite when he revised the BCP into the Sunday Service Book.  So it is part of the medieval catholic, the Anglican, and the Wesleyan liturgical heritage.  More than that, in keeping with Wesley’s Sunday Service Book, the Veni Creator Spiritus is still called for in our contemporary ordination rites (see for example The United Methodist Book of Worship page 690, the first rubric) and it is found at 651 in The United Methodist Hymnal so that our clergy can have it near at hand while vesting.  So we too have in our own Methodist liturgical tradition a wonderful vesting prayer for our clergy to use, that recalls the charge and gifts we received at our own ordination.

In case you don't have your Hymnal handy, the words are to be found here (search for hymn 651). 

And can it be...?

Here is a modern setting of Charles Wesley's great (and difficult to sing) hymn "And Can it be" (United Methodist Hymnal, 363).  While John Wesley wrote most of our formal theology, Charles' hymns also form a foundation of Methodist theological tradition. 

Bringing the Old Language into the New Rite

Like a great many United Methodist clergy, I regularly lead in celebrating Holy Communion using the rite in The United Methodist Hymnal (p. 12-15) called Word and Table II (or Rite II, presented in part below).  This rite gives a "standard" format for celebrating the Lord's Supper, while also allowing for variation at four points that marked by an asterisk ( * - you will see these in the presentation of Rite II below).  Thus we Methodists stay true to our Anglican liturgical heritage (Rite II reflects the 1979 Book of Common Prayer liturgy) while also staying true to our evangelical heritage of flexibility and openess to the Holy Spirit.

Word and Table Rite I and Rite III are variations of the same rite; Rite III is a more "bare bones" rite requiring the celebrant to "fill in" several parts of the prayer with pre-selected or sponteneous words (Rite III requires additonal words beyond simply what is written), allowing for even more flexibility and adaptation, while Rite I is the same rite completely 'fleshed out' and is to be prayed exactly as written.  Churches that use the Great Thanksgiving Prayers for the various liturgical seasons and holy-days of the Christian year in our Book of Worship (p. 54-79) will generally have the congregation follow Rite II.

While Word and Table I-III are basically longer and shorter versions of the same Rite, our Hymnal and our Book of Worship also contain a very different rite for celebrating the sacrament called Word and Table IV (Rite IV) which gives us the older "King James English" of John Wesley's Sunday Service Book and of the classic 1662 Book of Common Prayer of the Anglican tradtion.
In the Book(s) of Common Prayer of the Anglican tradition, just before the Sanctus there is a "Proper Preface," a part of the prayer that changes seasonally, recalling an aspect of who God is and what he has done that evokes our praise and thanksgiving.  The "old English" rite in the Methodist liturgy (Rite IV) also contains these seasonal prefaces (see The United Methodist Book of Worship p.46-48).   

In the classic Anglican rite the portion of the prayer immediately following the Sanctus ("Holy Holy Holy..."), which recalls the Father sending the Son as redeemer, is always the same going back to Archbishop Thomas Cranmer's original Book of Common Prayer of the mid-1500s.  This part of the prayer is also maintained almost without change in the "old language" rite (Rite IV) in the Methodist worship books.  Many of us who value our Anglican liturgical heritage may find ourselves wanting to use Rite IV more often precisely because the precise wording does more perfectly reflect the Book of Common Prayer liturgy of the last 500 years; however this desire runs somewhat counter to our desire to celebrate the sacrament in a language understood by contemporary people. 

However, with only a little bit of planning ahead, the classic language of the Anglican liturgy contained in Wesley's Sunday Service Book and in Rite IV can be integrated into the newer rites in a way that does not run afoul of the 'rubrics' (the instructions printed in red italics).  What follows is Rite II in regular font with wording based on Rite IV (the old liturgy) inserted in italics as the "appropriate words" that the pastor may add.  This approach not only preserves the old language, but also marries the strong theology of the cross emphasized in Rite IV with that of Christ's presence in the Supper which is more emphasized in Rite II (note: the responses of the congregation are in bold).
_____________________
The Lord be with you.
And also with you.
Lift up your hearts.
We lift them up to the Lord.
Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.
It is right to give our thanks and praise.

It is right, and a good and joyful thing, always and everywhere to give thanks to you, Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth.*

And so, with your people on earth and all the company of heaven we praise your name and join their unending hymn:

Holy, Holy, Holy Lord, God of power and might, heaven and earth are full of your glory.  Hosanna in the highest.  Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.  Hosanna in the Highest.

Holy are you, and blessed is your Son Jesus Christ.*

Almighty Father, in your tender mercy you did give him, your only Son,
to suffer death upon the cross for our redemption:
He made there, by the one offering of himself,
a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice for the sins of the whole world;
He did institute, and in his holy gospel command us to continue,
a perpetual memory of his precious death until his coming again.

By the baptism of his suffering, death, and resurrection you gave birth to your church, delivered us from slavery to sin and death, and made with us a new covenant by water and the Spirit.*

On the night in which he gave himself up for us he took bread, gave thanks to you, broke the bread, gave it to his disciples and said: "Take, eat; this is my body which is given for you.  Do this in remembrance of me."
When the Supper was over, he took the cup, gave thanks to you, gave it to his disciples, and said: "Drink from this, all of you; this is my blood of the new covenant, poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.  Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me."

And so, in remembrance of these your mighty acts in Jesus Christ, we offer ourselves in praise and thanksgiving as a holy and living sacrifice, in union with christ's offering for us, as we proclaim the mystery of faith.

Christ has died; Christ is risen; Christ will come again.

Pour out your Holy Spirit on us gathered here, and on these gifts of bread and wine.  Make them be for us the body and blood of Christ, that we may be for the world the body of Christ, redeemed by his blood.*

By your Spirit make us one with Christ, one with each other, and one in ministry to all the world, until Christ comes in final victory, and we feast at his heavenly banquet.
Through your Son Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit in your holy church, all honor and glory is yours Almighty Father, now and for ever.  Amen.
____________________

The resulting rite would be shorter than Word and Table I (the congregation could follow Rite II in the Hymnal) and would also contain more of the classic language and theology that we Methodists inherit from the larger Anglican tradition, without using an English idiom that (while quite beautiful) will strike some hearers as archaic or difficult to understand. 

Redefining "Science"?

When I saw this editorial in the USAToday this past weekend I thought I was in for more bad news and/or complaining about Young-Earth Creationists hijacking public school science education and curriculum. 

The actual topic was far more interesting, speaking of growing pressure to accept or include the Social Sciences as "hard sciences" in the same sense as, say Physics or Chemistry.  For me, the political aspects of this story are quite interesting (and disturbing) as well.  I invite you to ponder the following excerpt:

"Not all studies within the hard sciences measure up. The majority of studies do, though. However, while there are notable exceptions, a substantial proportion of studies in the social sciences are not considered scientifically rigorous because the human experience is highly subjective and changeable across culture and time.

Second, the politics. It's not a secret that academia, particularly the humanities, skews heavily left.
A recent survey by economics professor Daniel Klein revealed that Democrats outnumbered Republicans by a whopping 30-to-1 ratio in anthropology; 28-to-1 in sociology; nearly 10-to-1 in history; and nearly 7-to-1 in political science. In economics, which is widely considered "conservative" by other social fields, Republicans are merely outnumbered 3-to-1.

As psychology professor Jonathan Haidt, the liberal-turned-centrist would say, "This is a statistically impossible lack of diversity." Yet, some progressives in academia and the news media justify it by referring to Democrats as "pro-science" and the Republicans as "anti-science," rather than addressing the obvious lack of political tolerance in the modern world of universities. That partisanship has brought with it a willingness to discard science that refutes pet ideological causes appealing to the left..."

Given the lack of diversity of political out-looks, I wonder if perhaps the Universities might consider formal or informal "diversity quotas" requiring that certain percentages of their faculty should be not only female, non-white, or gay, but also politically conservative?  Just a thought.