Feast of St Agnes

From the readings at Matins, by St Ambrose:

"Today is the birthday of a Virgin; let us imitate her virginal innocence. It is the birthday of a Martyr; let us also bring sacrifice. It is the birthday of St. Agnes; let men look up in admiration and children not be disheartened. You married, be filled with wonder; you unmarried, follow in her footsteps. But where shall we find words of adequate praise, since her very name bespeaks her glory and renown? In her we see a devotion that far surpasses her age; a virtue that exceeds all Power of nature. Hence, it seems to me that she had not merely a human name, but, prophetically, she was given the name of a Martyr to indicate beforehand what she was to be. The name of our Virgin to a guarantee of her purity. If I call her Martyr, already I have praised enough. For, that is great praise indeed, which one does not need to seek but is freely given by others. No one can be more praised than one who is praised by all. As many men, so many encomiums. They have only to mention her name to praise her as a Martyr. According to tradition, it was in her thirteenth year that she suffered martyrdom. How despicable the cruelty that spared not even this tender age! But how great the power of faith that found even that age its witness."

Octaves and Epiphany revisited...

If you've been reading my annual rants on the subject of Octaves and assorted stray feasts that have been inserted into (or out of) the calendar over the last few weeks, you hopefully also have caught up with the nice write up of assorted blogs take on the issue over at New Liturgical Movement.

But alas, both myself (being behind on my reading in general) and the NLM post somehow managed to miss what is surely the definitive ecumenical take on this subject over at The Low Churchman's Guide to the Solemn High Mass.  Here is an extract to give you the flavour of it:

"The problem with Ritualists is not merely that they wear unusual clothing, mutter strange incantations and attempt to secure the aid of departed spirits using mystical runes. Rather, it is that they refuse to observe the most basic standards of chronological syncronization. Ordinary churchmen know, for example, that January 1st is New Year’s Day, and toast the new year with glasses of diet ginger ale and spoonfuls of tomato aspic. For Ritualists, the same date is referred to as the Octave Day of Christmas, or the Circumcision of Christ with the Feast of the Holy Name, the Solemnity of Mary the Mother of God, Triumph of the Revolution and a Commemoration of the Transferral of the Relics of St Fulgentius of Ruspe."

Do go and read the rest for a good giggle.

Second Sunday after Epiphany

Though we are now technically no longer in the Christmas Season, the liturgy time after Epiphany still reflects his historical association with that feast and season.

The feast of the Epiphany feast itself, you will recall from the Benedictus antiphon of the feast, celebrates three separate events:

"Today the Church hath joined to her heavenly Spouse, for Christ hath washed away her sins in the Jordan; the Magi hasten with gifts to the royal nuptials, and the guests are gladdened with wine made from water, alleluia."

This Sunday's Gospel, from St John 2:1-11, the subject of the Benedictus and Magnificat antiphons for the Sunday, centres on the last of these three, the marriage at Cana and the miracle of water transformed into wine.

The Benedictine Office this week in summary

Sunday 19 January – Second Sunday after the Epiphany; Marius, Martha, Audifax and Abachum, memorial
Monday 20 January - SS Fabian and Sebastian, Class III
Tuesday 21 January - St Agnes, Class III (Class II for monasteries of nuns) [**in some places, St Meinrad, Class I]
Wednesday 22 January – Class IV; St Vincent, memorial [EF: and St Anastasius;**in some places, St Meinrad]
Thursday 23 January – Class IV; St Emerentiana, memorial [EF: St Raymond Pennafort]
Friday 24 January – Class IV; St Timothy, memorial [EF: Class III]
Saturday 25 January – Conversion of St Paul, Class III

St Benedict's psalter and the election of the gentiles

There is a very interesting series over at the always excellent Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment blog, which I strongly recommend reading, on what is known as 'two covenants theory', the idea that Judaism is not superseded by the New Covenant.

The situation of modern Jews when it comes to the Church is sensitive territory these days, for many in the Church, swayed by the desire to promote inter-religious unity, advocate ideas that are at odds with both Scripture and tradition.  Fr Hunwicke does a fairly comprehensive demolition on these erroneous theories in the light of the tradition, what Vatican II's Nostra Aetate actually says, and other evidence.

Fr Hunwicke's posts (as on some many other issues) have been rather helpful for my own understanding of this touchy subject, so I thought it might be timely to share some of my speculations on St Benedict's ordering of his psalm cursus that may reflect his understanding of this topic by way of a minor footnote.

The traditional understanding of the Old and New covenants

Fr Hunwicke provides a very carefully nuanced articulation of the tradition on this topic; let me provide the un-nuanced version for the sake of debate.

I would suggest that the hardline version of the traditionalist position is that modern-day Jews are no longer the chosen people: for God's promise to Abraham is fulfilled in the Church, which was founded by the faithful remnant of the Jewish people that he preserved, consisting of the apostles and disciples and their subsequent converts.  Catholics, in other words, are the new Jews.

In this view, instead of the whole Jewish people being granted a privileged place in ongoing salvation history (or at least are still the inheritors of an eschatological promise of reconciliation), they have been dispossessed just as the Canaanites were in their time, and their inheritance given to the new Israel, the Church, which is open to gentiles and Jews alike; Rabbinic Judaism, in other words, is not the Judaism of Our Lord's time.

Fr Hunwicke demolishes some of the obviously erroneous liberal views on this subject, but many traditionalists still struggle with the suggestion made by modern theologians, including Pope Benedict XVI, to the effect that while the Mosaic Covenant has been closed, modern Jews still have a privileged place in salvation history by virtue of the covenant with Abraham.

Fr Hunwicke suggests that Pope Benedict's rewrite of the (EF) Good Friday prayer, which reflects St Paul's words on the subject, arguably reflects an eschatological explanation for this view of the continuing covenant, while leaving the traditional view, that Jewish worship and practices have no salvific value, intact.

I want to draw your attention to five insights on this issue that can, I think, be gained from St Benedict's version of the Divine Office, which I think helps support the eschatological promise approach advocated by Pope Benedict and others.

1.  The old sacrifices have been superseded: Psalm 91 (92) on Friday

In the traditional version of the Roman Office, Psalm 91 (Bonum est confiteri Domino) is said on Saturday, not least because the title given to in Scripture is 'For (or 'on the day of' in the Vulgate) the Sabbath'.

St Benedict, however, moved it to Friday at Lauds.  It is a change that contemporary liturgical scholar Paul Bradshaw, for one, finds puzzling (Daily Prayer in the Early Church, p147).

Ex-Trappist turned Orthodox scholar Patrick Reardon, in his book Christ in the Psalms, though offers a very elegant and plausible rationale for this change, for he notes that as well as the Sabbath, Jewish commentaries state that it was sung daily as an accompaniment to the morning sacrifice of a lamb.  Reardon, accordingly, sees the shift of the psalm to Friday Lauds as a testimony to the idea that Friday is "our true the true Pascha and Atonement Day, on which the Lamb of God took away the sins of the world."(p181)

Reardon sees Psalm 91 as a reminder that the Old Covenant, which merely foreshadowed what was to come, has ended, and the New has replaced it:

"Prayed on Friday mornings, as the ancient Western monastic rule prescribed, this psalm reminds the Church why it is no longer necessary to make the daily offering of lambs in the temple, for those sacrifices had only "a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things" (Heb. 10:1). With respect to those quotidian lambs offered of old, we are told that "every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins" (10:11). But, with respect to the Lamb in the midst of the Throne, we are told that "this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God . . . For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified" (10:12-14). This is the true Lamb to whom we chant: "You are worthy to take the scroll, / And to open its seals; / For You were slain, / And have redeemed us to God by Your blood" (Rev. 5:9)." (p181)

2.  Psalm 118: the new testament is superior to the old

In the Roman Office, Psalm 118 is sung over the course of Sunday from Prime to None (and in the older form of the Office, daily at these hours).  St Benedict, by contrast, splits the longest psalm in the psalter between Sunday (Prime to None) and Monday (Terce to None).   And he organises the split so as to end Sunday None with a stanza where the psalmist claims to have outshone his teachers and those of old in his understanding:

"Through your commandment, you have made me wiser than my enemies: for it is ever with me. I have understood more than all my teachers: because your testimonies are my meditation. I have had understanding above ancients: because I have sought your commandment." (verses 98-100)

It could of course just be how things fell out.  But St Benedict's contemporary Cassiodorus (author of easily the most popular commentary on the psalms of medieval monks) certainly understood these verses as affirming the new covenant over the Old:

Certainly the new people had better understanding than the older Jewish people, for they happily accepted the Lord Christ who the Jews with mortal damage to themselves believed was to be despised.”

Cassiodorus actually sees the reference in another verse of the stanza, verse 103, which refers to the law being sweeter than honey, as another allusion to this same idea:

“Honey has particular reference to the Old Testament, the comb to the New; for though both are sweet, the taste of the comb is sweeter because it is enhanced by the greater attraction of its newness. Additionally, honey can be understood as the explicit teaching of wisdom, whereas the comb can represent that known to be stored in the depth, so to say, of the cells. Undoubtedly both are found in the divine Scriptures.”

3.  The canticle of Hannah and younger sons

Over at Fr Hunwicke's blog, commenters have noted that the recent tendency to refer to Jews as our 'older brother' is something of a mixed message given the fate of so many older brothers in the Bible!   Indeed, St Paul uses just this typology in one of his discussions on the status of the Jews, in Galatians 4:

"21 Tell me, you who are so eager to have the law for your master, have you never read the law? 22 You will find it written there, that Abraham had two sons; one had a slave for his mother, and one a free woman. 23 The child of the slave was born in the course of nature; the free woman’s, by the power of God’s promise. 24 All that is an allegory; the two women stand for the two dispensations. Agar stands for the old dispensation, which brings up its children to bondage, the dispensation which comes to us from mount Sinai.25 Mount Sinai, in Arabia, has the same meaning in the allegory as Jerusalem, the Jerusalem which exists here and now; an enslaved city, whose children are slaves. 26 Whereas our mother is the heavenly Jerusalem, a city of freedom. 27 So it is that we read, Rejoice, thou barren woman that hast never borne child, break out into song and cry aloud, thou that hast never known travail; the deserted one has more children than she whose husband is with her. 28 It is we, brethren, that are children of the promise, as Isaac was. 29 Now, as then, the son who was born in the course of nature persecutes the son whose birth is a spiritual birth. 30 But what does our passage in scripture say? Rid thyself of the slave and her son; it cannot be that the son of a slave should divide the inheritance with the son of a free woman."

Wednesday, in the Christian week, is traditionally associated with the betrayal of Judas.  That's the reason that Wednesday was a fast day in the early Church as it is in the Benedictine Rule, and in the Office, this is reflected, inter alia, in the choice of Psalm 63 at Lauds.  The variable (ferial) canticle of the day, though, is the Canticle of Hannah (I Kings [1 Sam] 2:1-10), a song of rejoicing at her pregnancy (with the prophet Samuel) that put paid to the taunts of her husband's fecund other wife.  We today tend to interpret this canticle as foreshadowing the Magnificat, which it certainly does.  But one of the earliest Benedictine monastic commentaries on the Office Canticles, by Rabanus Maurus (780-856), also interprets that typology in the light of St Paul's Galatians typology, saying by way of summary:

"But on Wednesday the Canticle of Anna the prophetess is sung, in which the expulsion of the perfidious Jews is set out, and the election of the Church of the gentiles is demonstrated."

And indeed St Benedict's psalm selections for this day come back to the theme of God's choice of peoples several times, most notably in Psalms 134 and 135.

4.  The redemption triptych (Psalms 113, 129 and 134/5) - redemption comes only through Christ

In the Benedictine Office, Psalm 113 (In exitu Israel) is said at Vespers on Monday rather than Sunday as it is in the Roman Office.  In part I think that is because it provides a type of baptism, in the parting of the Red Sea and the Jordan (especially in verse 3: Mare vidit, et fugit: Jordánis convérsus est retrórsum), one of the themes Maurus identifies in the Monday Lauds canticle (along with the Incarnation).  But it also, I think, sets up a nice triptych of opening psalms at Vespers on the first three days of the week around our redemption through Christ.

The two outer panels are provided by Psalms 113 on Monday and 134 and 135 (known as the Great Hallel in Jewish liturgy) on Wednesday.  These three psalms share both common themes and several verses between them, and take us through God's power compared to empty idols, manifested through the creation of the universe, and intervention in history to lead his people out of Egypt, and into the Promised Land.

If he were being consistent, St Benedict would have placed Psalm 128 as the first Psalm at Vespers on Tuesday, for on that day all of the other Gradual psalms are said from Terce through Vespers.  But St Benedict actually places Psalm 128 (where it arguably fits well for other reasons) on Monday, and instead, in the middle of the triptych sits Psalm 129 (De Profundis), with its promise of Christ's redeeming action ('For with the Lord there is mercy, and with him is plenteous redemption: he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquity').  Dom Gueranger, in his Liturgical Year, notes that this psalm above all, was often interpreted by medieval commentators, as a prophecy of that final reconciliation of the Jews.

5. The Hallel psalms reversed: The first shall be last?

St Benedict’s arrangement of the Sunday Office at both Lauds and Vespers is significantly different to the old Roman he started from.  Two key changes he makes are to start the variable psalmody  at Lauds with Psalm 117 (it was in Prime in the old Roman Office), and to end it with Psalm 112, at Vespers (moving Psalm 113 to Monday in order to do so).  These are, of course, the last and first respectively of the ‘Hallel’ psalms, the psalms sung at the three major Jewish festivals each year.

The more prominent position St Benedict accords to Psalm 117 is easily explained: it is one of the most quoted psalms in the New Testament, important in particular for the verses directly prophesying the Resurrection, and pointing to Christ as the stone the builders rejected.

Is it possible, though, that the ending of Vespers on Psalm 112 was also meant to provide a subtle reference to the idea that the first shall come last in relation to St Paul's prophesy in Romans that  'all Israel shall come in'?  St Benedict (485-547) may very well have been familiar with the Bishop of Ravenna, St Peter Chrysologus' (380-450) teaching to just this effect (now used in the readings of the Liturgy of Hours as Fr Hunwicke notes).  And it is certainly nicely consistent with Pope Benedict's rewrite of the Good Friday prayer:

"Let us also pray for the Jews: That our God and Lord may illuminate their hearts, that they acknowledge Jesus Christ is the Savior of all men. (Let us pray. Kneel. Rise.) Almighty and eternal God, who want that all men be saved and come to the recognition of the truth, propitiously grant that even as the fullness of the peoples enters Thy Church, all Israel be saved. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen"

So, is this all too much of a stretch?  Do let me know what you think.

On the what of lectio divina **

A few weeks ago I suggested some options on what to read for lectio divina, that included looking at the psalms; taking the texts of the Sunday liturgical cycle; reading the Gospels systematically; and reading (the rest of) the Bible.  And I noted that I am posting aids to lectio divina in the form of notes on the psalms in the context of the Benedictine Office, and notes aimed at reading St Matthew's Gospel systematically over the quarter on my other blogs.

I've just come across a rather curious post by Father Mark over at Vultus Christi who, in a letter to Oblates of his monastery, argues that a systematic program of Bible reading , or reading the books of Scripture right through is downright uncatholic.

I'm not actually sure whether his post was meant as a direct response to my post (or queries from his Oblates generated by it); probably not, I'm far from the only one to suggest such systematic approaches.
But I have to say I find his a rather extreme position, so herewith a discussion of his arguments. Alas, wordpress won't, for some reason, allow me to post a comment on his blog, so I'm posting it over here instead.

Reading the Bible in order is Protestant?

Fr Mark points rightly to the privileged place Scripture has in the liturgy, and of Scripture as, in a certain sense, a product of the liturgy rather than something that should be viewed as entirely independent of it.  And he points out that Scripture is not a personal book, but something that can only be understood in the midst of the Church.  Thus far I agree.

But he then takes that view a step further than I think can really be sustained, arguing that as a general principle, as Catholics, we should only read the Bible in the context of the readings set at Mass and in the Office:

"Unlike Protestants who may open the Bible at random, or follow a personal reading plan, or use it to prepare a teaching or sermon, Catholic and Orthodox Christians submit to the Church’s use of the Bible in the liturgy...What should one read in lectio divina? In my long personal experience, it is best to focus on the very texts that will be chanted or read, and heard on a given day, in Holy Mass and in the Divine Office..."

He consigns the reading of Scripture in order to rare special occasions:

"There are also moments in life, notably during a retreat or on the occasion of a special anniversary, when one may want to read a particular book of the Bible continuously from start to finish..." 

St Benedict and the tradition on lectio divina

Now I'm all in favour of one option for lectio divina being to base it around the readings in the liturgy.
But to claim this is the only option we should ever adopt seems to me a step too far!

Here is why.

First, St Benedict himself in his Rule sets the precedent in favour of reading books in order, requiring his monks to read least one book a year consecutively (and this would normally have been a book of Scripture) during the season of Lent (RB 48).

Secondly the Fathers (including Benedictine monks like St Bede) and later theologians did not simply stick to the Sunday (or Sanctoral) readings, but produced many commentaries on complete books of Scripture, long viewed as essentially products of lectio divina.  Using them in anthology form obviously has value, but so too, surely, does treating them as complete works in their own right.

Thirdly, many of the Fathers adopt a 'canonical' reading of Scripture, an approach that is regaining popularity today, that interprets sections of Scripture by reference to its placement in the particular book of the Bible.  In the case of the psalms, for example, the particular number of certain psalms is regarded as significant in and of itself.  And canonical interpretation becomes supremely important in the case of obviously carefully crafted orderings of the material such as occur in St John's Gospel in particular, which is structured around 'signs' and 'days'. If we only ever read the snippets of Scripture prescribed for a particular day in the Mass we will surely miss this rich layer of meaning that comes from context.

Fourthly, others have suggested that in fact the monastic tradition is to read the books of the Bible through over a year: in fact, as Dom Christopher Lazowski, in an inspiring post from a few years back on New Liturgical Movement states that:

"There is a monastic adage that states that a monk should pray the Psalter in a week, and should read the Bible in a year...The rest of the Bible is read in a systematic way at the night Office...But the reading of Sacred Scripture is not limited to the liturgy. It is the chief matter of lectio divina, the meditative and prayerful reading, sliding in and out of prayer, that is a vital element of monastic life."

Dom Christopher notes that novices in his own monastery are given a plan for reading the Bible in a year 'which is inspired by the way the different books are read at the Office, with the addition of the books that the Office omits, but without the psalms and the Gospels'.

Finally, there are practical reasons for reading the books straight through as well, not the least of which is that if we only read what occurs in the liturgy we will remain ignorant of large chunks of Scripture (yes even the Novus Ordo lectionary omits whole psalms, chapters and verses of the Bible from its cycle).  Yet the Church has always insisted that all of Scripture is provided for our instruction.

St Matthew continues!

There is certainly a good case for taking the texts of the Mass and/or Office as the basis for our lectio for at least once cycle.  But equally, I think, there is a case for appreciating that God inspired the Sacred authors to write complete books that should be treated as such.  So, assuming you are not an Oblate of Silverstream (since obedience to one's abbot is a key virtue regardless of whether you think he has it right or not!), please do feel free to join me over at my Lectio Divina notes blog for a chapter by chapter read of St Matthew this quarter!

**Just to note that Fr Mark has written a subsequent post rather modifying his position, and suggesting that reading through the Gospels systematically would be acceptable as a source of lectio.

Feast of the Commemoration of the Baptism of Our Lord

Today's (not the) Octave Day of the Epiphany feast, of the Baptism of Our Lord, marks the formal end of the Christmas season in the 1962 calendar.  The greater Christmas season continues, however, for as the Baronius Missal comments on the season after Epiphany:

"This period, which begins the day after the Octave of Epiphany, is an extension of Christmastide..."

The Office readings for today includes this sermon by St Gregory Nazianus (Second Nocturn):

(Reading 5): I am not able to restrain the outbursts of my happiness. I feel changed and elated. I forget my own meanness while I undertake and try to discharge the office of the great John. It is true that I am not the Forerunner, but at least I come from the desert. Christ is enlightened, or rather, He enlighteneth us with His own light. Christ is baptized; let us go down with Him into the water, that we may come up with Him.

(Reading 6):John is baptizing. Jesus cometh. He cometh that He may make holy him who baptizeth Him; He cometh to bury the old Adam in the waters; He cometh to hallow the blessed flood of Jordan. He Who is Flesh and Spirit cometh to open for all that should ever be baptized that power of generation whereby new peoples are constantly begotten of water and the Holy Ghost. The Baptist will not receive Him. Jesus striveth with him. I, saith John, have need to be baptized of thee. Thus speaketh the candle to the Sun, the voice to the Word.

(Reading 7): Jesus came up out of the water, having, in a manner, washed the whole world, and brought it up with Him. And He saw the heavens opened not divided, even those heavens which Adam had once shut upon himself and us his descendants, when the cherub's fiery sword barred the gates of Paradise.

(Reading 8): And the Holy Spirit bare witness, witness unto Him Who is of One Substance with Himself. And witness was given from Heaven, unto Him that came down from heaven.

Not the sixth day of the Epiphany Octave

Octaves traditionally served a number of purposes: they signalled the importance of a particular feast; and through the repetition of the texts for that feast, helped the laity to truly learn certain key texts of Scripture.

These days we tend to prefer to constantly seek novelty, and disdain the idea of learning things by heart.  Yet constantly repeated texts help shape our mindset, forming us spiritually in a particular way of thinking.

And these traditional octaves also provide an opportunity, through the readings set set at Matins for the feast, to penetrate the mystery of the feast more deeply.

Accordingly, here are the readings that were previously set for the sixth day of the feast in the Benedictine office, courtesy of the excellent Divinum Officium website:

Homily by St Ambrose, Bishop of Milan.
Book ii. on Luke ii.
What are the gifts of the faithful and true? Gold to our King, frankincense to our God, and myrrh to Him Who died for us. The first is that whereof are made the royal honours of kings, the second is that mystic offering which is used in the worship of the Divine Power, and the third is that wherewith we pay respect to the dead, whose bodies it keepeth from corruption. My brethren, let us who hear and read these things, make offering out of what treasures we have albeit we have it in earthen vessels. 2 Cor. iv. 7. If we confess that all that we have, we have, not from ourselves, but from Christ, how much more should we confess that whatever we have is not our own, but Christ's?

The wise men out of their treasures presented unto Him gifts. Wilt thou know how pleasing to Him they were? The star appeared to them, but disappeared when it came near Herod. Then it appeareth to them again, leading them on the way that led to Christ. This star then was the way, and we know that Christ calleth Himself the Way. John xiv. 6. And truly also in the mystery of His Incarnation He is called a Star; as it is written There shall come forth a Star out of Jacob, and a Man shall rise out of Israel. Where Christ is, there is a Star; yea, He is Himself the bright and morning Star. Apoc. xxii. 16. And the light that leadeth to Jesus is His own.

Remark another point. The wise men came by one way and departed by another. They that had seen Christ, knew Christ, and they departed better than they came. There are two ways, the one which leadeth to destruction, the other which leadeth to the kingdom; the one is the way of sin, which leadeth to Herod; the other is Christ, the true Way, Who leadeth us home to the fatherland, from that journeying here, whereof it is said My soul hath long dwelt as an exile.