This feature requires Macromedia Flash Download Here

Communications

From the Rector


— from the Rev'd William Munro Shand, III  —
The archive of the Rector's 2008 website columns is here

February 28, 2010
Too much snow has fallen since the diocesan convention in January, and thus our minds have been occupied by things other than the most important news to emerge from that gathering: Bishop Chane will retire in 2011, and thus is set in motion the Byzantine process of electing the IX Bishop of Washington. Herewith a few thoughts on what is, or might be, to come.
    Bishop Chane caught most of us by surprise. There was no inkling that he would announce this decision. As he made clear, his health is good and he retains much energy in exercising this ministry. If he were inclined to remind us in an “I told you so” manner, he could do that, for he had said at the time of his election in 2002 he hoped to serve eight years. When he came here, he kept his property in San Diego, and — given the weather in Washington this past month alone — who could blame him for wanting to return to one of the most beautiful locales in this land? In his announcement to the convention the Bishop said the time had come to elect a younger person to lead this diocese, noting that he will have spent over 38 years in ordained ministry when he steps down.
    To set this process in motion, the Bishop has to indicate his intentions to the Standing Committee of the diocese, an elected body of four priests and four lay persons. According to the canons of the Episcopal Church, it is the Standing Committee’s responsibility to accept the Bishop’s resignation, act as a liaison to the Presiding Bishop, and organize the election of the new bishop.
    The timetable Bishop Chane suggested would look something like this: This month the Standing Committee will appoint a search committee to conduct the nominating process. That committee likely will function the way such committees do when searching for a rector in a parish: They will draft a profile of the diocese and its vision for the new bishop. In considering potential nominees, they will interview dozens of priests, and perhaps a few incumbent bishops in other dioceses. In time they will release a slate of nominees, maybe five or six in number. There may be some provision for additional nominees by petition, but likely no provision for nominees “from the floor” at the electing convention. Background checks will be conducted. When the official slate is made known, there will likely be a series of “walkabouts” when the nominees visit the regions of the diocese to meet parishioners. All of this is fairly standard procedure these days. Bishop Chane suggested the election itself occur in the late spring of 2011. There will be a special convention, with election by orders – clergy in one count, laity in a separate count. In order to be elected, a nominee must receive majorities “in both orders” as is said. In effect that means there are two elections, or at least two discrete constituencies.    
    One more detail: When a person is elected bishop, consents must be received from other incumbent diocesan bishops and from standing committees of every diocese. What used to be more or less routine has become less so in these contentious times. Right now that process is being carried out in the wake of a controversial election in the Diocese of Los Angles. Keep your eyes on what happens in the Los Angeles process, and file it away for possible relevance when Washington elects a bishop. It is no exaggeration to say that many in the Anglican Communion will follow the Los Angeles process, with no small number objecting to the likely outcome. Just think what happened the last time New Hampshire elected a bishop.
    It is too early to speculate who might be among the nominees, much less who could be considered the likely front-runners. Suffice it to say, the process is a complicated one, often fraught with politics of the lowest order. Later on, we will consider the importance of electing bishops and how that evolved in this denomination. In any event, the coming months will be interesting ones in the Diocese of Washington.

February 15, 2010
No doubt survivors of the Blizzards of 2010 will speak of them for many years to come. When meteorologists compared these days to the records of 1889 they offered a ray of hope: Maybe it will be that long before we have such snows again. 
   Before writing another word, I want to pay tribute to Steve Wilson, our Junior Warden, and to Mr. Thai for their indefatigable work over the course of 10 days. It was not just the storm that required their attention, but also the consequences. Homeowners know these problems full well, and the “house of the Lord” was hardly immune from them. Steve and Thai bore burdens which go beyond “job descriptions”, and that is what separated their service from merely doing one’s job. The gratitude I express is profound, and, I am confident, widely shared.
   How does one begin to put such events into a theological context? One way is to call to mind, as we have done before in Sounds after earlier snowstorms, the words of the canticle Benedicite, omnia opera Domini, “A Song of Creation”. It is found on pages 47-49 of the Prayer Book. The pertinent passage reads as follows: “O we winter and summer, bless ye the Lord…O ye frost and cold, bless ye the Lord…O ye ice and snow, bless ye the Lord; praise him and magnify him for ever.”
   This canticle, or song of praise, dates to at least the end of the 4th century. Archbishop Cranmer included it in the 1549 Prayer Book, adding the refrain “Praise him and magnify him for ever” at various places. Although the original author of the text is known only in the heart of God, this hymn writer clearly knew Psalm 148, which is another theological reference appropriate to thoughts after a storm. 
   It is no stretch, especially in our parish, to consider the canticle Franciscan in essence. It surely evokes the “Canticle of the Sun” which is attributed to St Francis, and which appears as Hymn 406 in our present hymnal. It cannot be stressed too often in this confused and sentimental era that Francis was not a “nature lover”, but rather a passionate lover of the Creator. His reforming insight was to reclaim the Bible’s judgment expressed in Genesis 1:31: “And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.” It was that truth, a truth only dimly remembered in his day, that led Francis to preach to birds and wolves, and sing canticles to the sun and the stars. And it was that very truth which inspired the ancient hymn writer of the Benedicite to summon even ice and snow to praise and magnify the Lord God.
   In earlier winters, I have written in this space of the salutary effect of snowstorms on egos in our community. We are reminded, albeit not pleasantly perhaps, that we are not the masters of creation but constituent members of the created order. I still believe that to be a lesson we need to learn time and again. But now I add a more sympathetic note to that judgment, for having been without electricity for a few days, I cannot imagine what it would be like to face that prospect with no relief in sight. I do not mean the threat of no television or internet access, or those other inconveniences we all experienced. With, I hope, no sanctimonious note, we can offer our prayers and actions for those in need, those whom the current Prayer Book describes as “all poor and neglected persons whom it would be easy for us to forget” (p. 826). That means those in the cold streets of Washington or the broken streets of Port-au-Prince, and “all those who are in any ways afflicted or distressed in mind, body, or estate.” Snowfall can sharpen our understanding of those words, too.

February 1, 2010
Excerpt from the Rector’s Sermon on the Day of the Annual Parish Meeting
I Corinthians 13

One happy reality for the Shand household is that both Ben and Peter are gainfully employed. Both of them enjoy jobs which did not exist in the years in which they were born. Ben works in biotechnology; Peter works for Apple Computers. In the years of their respective births, their respective careers did not exist. 
   How many of you have had jobs which did not exist when you were born? I think it is probably safe to say that every year, the percentage of those who would answer that in the affirmative will increase. I am sure that Ben and Peter could continue to answer that in the affirmative in any future year the rest of their days, given the ways the world of employment changes and changes and changes.
   On the other hand, their father follows the vocation that their great-great-great grandfather did. His name was Peter. He was born in 1800, and ordained in 1833, a century and a half before I was ordained. Of course it is true that there are differences between how he followed his vocation and how I follow mine. For example, he never wrote a sermon on a computer or a typewriter, or even with a ballpoint pen, and that’s just a mundane comparison .I wonder if Dr. Shand knew that all he needed was love. John Lennon wasn’t even born until half a century after Dr Shand’s death. How could he have known love without the culture and the media and the world’s definitions, all those resources upon which it is so easy for us to rely? Imagine that.
On the day of an annual meeting, it is important to understand that if we would ever know the truth about Love, we will not learn it from the world. We will not learn the truth – the full, rich truth - from anyone or anything that has come into being in our own lifetime. Even though we are surely wise to look for new ways of doing things, just as we may look for new ways of earning a living, about some things we look not to the current or the modern, but to the eternal. 
   The first Peter Shand and I are priests in different churches, to be sure. He could not have imagined many of the things for which we give thanks today, nor could he have imagined some of the things which break my heart when I think about the Episcopal Church of our day. He could not have begun to understand what Ben and Peter do for a living. (In that he and I are more alike than not.)
   But, he knew the truth about Love, and that truth sustained him in the face of challenges you and I will never know, I pray. He learned that truth the same way we do: In the Sacraments of the Church, in the study of God’s word as revealed in Holy Scripture, in the beauty of holiness when two or three are gathered together, and in giving up ourselves to God’s service, to walk in those paths God has prepared for those who follow him.
That is how he learned the truth about Love, and that is how we shall, too. And that is why it is so important for us to hear these words again on the day we meet to take counsel for this parish family, where we do not have to ask or imagine what Love has to do with anything. 

January 11, 2010
Word was received early this month of the death on December 30 of Lyttleton B. P. Gould, Jr, most recently living in Essex, New Jersey. With his death another chapter closes in the earliest history of St Francis, and in the educational communities of three fine independent schools in the mid-Atlantic.
   Lytt and his wife, Sis, were among the founders of this parish. In 1955, the first organizational meeting of Episcopalians interested in a church in the Potomac wilds of Montgomery County was held in their home. In time, Lytt was named first Junior Warden, serving simultaneously as first director of the Sunday school. Sis was the first chair of the altar guild. Together were genuine pioneers.
   At that time, Lytt was on the faculty of Landon School, which he joined in 1946. Beginning in 1948 he served as Middle School head for a decade. He left Landon and St Francis to become Head of School at the Far Hills Country Day School in Far Hills, New Jersey. During his tenure, that school enjoyed remarkable growth and development. When Lytt was named a Distinguished Alumni, he joined fellow Far Hills students Christie Todd Whitman, Steve Forbes, and Frederica van Stade, all of whom were students during his tenure. The citation described him as a “gentle, warm, empathetic man and a beloved educator. People like working with Lytt; he is a consummate teacher, and he always glows with respect for the individual. . . a visionary Head.”
   That vision led him to his next venture. In 1963, he left Far Hills to found the Purnell School in Bernardsville, New Jersey. His motivation came from the realization that a different kind of educational opportunity for what he called “salt of the earth girls” was needed, and he set out to build it. He and Sis welcomed the inaugural class of 18 girls in the fall of 1965. Today the Purnell School boasts 1,200 alumnae around the world. The story of the school, its philosophy and founding, makes for interesting reading. It can be found on the web at www.purnell.org.
   Thinking back to St Francis for a moment, it is worth remembering the visionary grace of those founders of this parish. The story bears repeating: In the 1952, Mike McConihe and a few others approached Bishop Angus Dun with an offer of the land whereon St Francis sits today. The Bishop declined their initial offer. His reason was that since the diocese had congregations in Poolesville and in Bethesda, there was no need for another church along River Road. In defense of the Bishop, no one could have foreseen the growth of Montgomery County in those days. What is ironic is that nationally, the Episcopal Church was at the apogee of congregational development when the offer was first made. It took Bishop Dun, and with him Bishop William Creighton, two years to have second thoughts, and to accept the offer of land. The rest, as they say, is history.
   Imagine the privileges that Lytt and Sis Gould enjoyed. They were instrumental in founding a church and in helping to provide for the two hallmarks of a faithful congregation: worship and Christian education. Lytt gave St Francis a handsome chalice and paten as memorials to his father; we will use that set on January 31, the Sunday of our annual meeting With Sis, Lytt Gould left legacies not only at St Francis, but at three superb schools in the mid-Atlantic region. There is no grander privilege than those, and no richer legacy ever. 

January 4
When St Paul catalogued the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22), he had one grand omission: A theological sense of humor is essential, if not for salvation itself, then at least for staying in the Church. One of the things which vexes my spirit is the smug self-righteousness that seems to pervade so many of our ecclesiastical affairs. It has not always been thus, but maybe these times are so discouraging that our ability to laugh at ourselves and human foibles has been diminished. If we can no longer smile, then we may rest assured Satan does in consequence of our stone faces.
   Here is a case of something that is not a laughing matter, but which had its comical dimensions. On a recent Sunday, I walked over to the shopping center across the street to pick up an item or two for home. Coming straight from church, I wore a clerical shirt (the black one with the round, white collar, just to be clear). As I walked past the entrance to the chicken restaurant, a woman abruptly charged out of the door, exclaiming an oath that included our Lord’s Name. Just as the words flew from her lips, her eyes saw me. I walked on by, but in a quick moment I heard her calling me, “Father. Can I speak to you a moment?” She apologized as though I were the one offended, and she seemed genuinely embarrassed. She compounded matters by saying, “I am Catholic…I mean, Roman.” She was clearly flustered.
   I assured her that any time she felt the need or desire to call upon the Name of the Lord, she was welcomed to do so in St Francis Church, that we had just done that very thing, albeit in a more appropriate sense and with better syntax, and I invited her to join us some day soon. She promised she would, and I hope she makes good on this peace offering. I could not resist adding the observation that she must have very poor luck indeed, to blurt out such a cry of frustration only to have a priest be her single hearer. Indeed, on this very morning I had slipped out of a grocery store in the other shopping center to avoid speaking to a couple who should have been in church but had not been (although they had time to buy snacks for the Redskins game!). I did not wish to embarrass them, but then I did encounter another soul who literally and spiritually had erred and strayed.
   The whole affair struck me as worth a good laugh. We have all said things we wish we could erase from memory. Some of them are even blasphemous, which means the reckoning of our sins committed has grown by yet another entry. Driving home from a diocesan convention once, I was “rear-ended” when a young man mildly struck the rear end of my car down at Macomb Street and Massachusetts Avenue. When I got out to check for damage, he exclaimed, “O God, I have hit a priest!” (The collar is a dead give-away.) I was so relieved that no damage had been done – either at the convention or to my car – that I was able to smile at his discomfort, and quickly offer a word of absolution. Having perpetrated two rear-end accidents in my teen years, I was more sympathetic than I might otherwise be. Yet the real reason for my equanimity in both cases was the humor of the moment, and the truth than no real harm was done. In both instances the offending parties knew their conduct could be improved, which is not a bad lesson for any of us to learn. And woe to the pompous soul who thinks no banner peel will ever find its way under our own feet.Archbishop

December 13, 2009
Archbishop Cranmer’s splendid collect for the first Sunday of Advent sets the theme of the entire season: “Cast away the works of darkness, and put [on] the armor of light, now in the time of this mortal life.” Inspired by Scripture, Cranmer calls us to a season of casting off and putting on. That is the true work of Advent: Not the buying of presents, not the decorating of houses, not the ceaseless rounds of hospitality, not the things which weary us and make us ambivalent about the “holidays”. Casting off and putting on are the reasons for this precious season.
  A myopic and sentimental view of the past holds that life was easier and less hurried in Cranmer’s day. I doubt those who lived those days would have found it so, given the extraordinary amount of routine work one had to do just to survive. Yet even if the pace of life had less pressure (contrived and real) than contemporary life presents, what does one make of Cranmer’s little adverb, “now”. All of that casting off and putting on was to be now, not when it is convenient, not when we get around to it, not after the other work of Advent is done. Now means now.
  Still, too many substitute “busy work” in place of the real work to which we are called. As we move through Advent, the pace seems to get more frantic. Is there another party to attend? Have I completed mailing my cards and greetings? Have I forgotten anything on the shopping list? Are our travel plans set? Add your own question to the list, and soon there is not enough time to get it all done, whatever “it” includes, and perhaps we just abandon hope, all we who enter here.
  One way to approach the season is to slow down rather than speed up. I want to suggest one way to do that. When you read the Prayer Book, pay attention to the punctuation. An almost forgotten principle is that the Prayer Book was meant to be read aloud, and with meaning. We have become inclined to rush through things as though the church building were ablaze and we cannot escape until we get to the last word. To the contrary, if we allow that punctuation (especially commas) to sharpen our sense of pace and meaning, we can begin to receive a richer blessing of the familiar treasures which often pass by our eyes and ears as though we were encountering a foreign tongue. Read the four Advent collects as part of your spiritual discipline. Read them aloud, with God as your audience. Pay attention to the punctuation, and let newer levels of meaning penetrate your heart.
  The punctuation in the Prayer Book is a broader subject than this column allows, and we shall have to consider it in greater detail another time. For now, however, let it serve as a routine discipline, but not an unimportant one. Advent’s summons to cast off and put on is something to be considered carefully. It involves repentance and it involves preparation. Advent thus can become a precious season indeed, if you let the commas — spiritual as well as a grammatical — slow you down, and put things in clearer perspective. To receive the richest blessings Advent can offer — and there are many — approach this season with Cranmer’s “now” in mind, cognizant of the important work he has set before us, and of the season in which he calls us to do it.

December 6, 2009
Advent Message by the Rt. Rev. Mark J. Lawrence, Bishop of South Carolina. Reprinted by the permission of Bishop Lawrence.
It’s a lot like bringing the boxes of Christmas decorations out of the attic or wherever you have them stored. Like pulling the Christmas sweaters from the wardrobe closet—that to my mind is the way the Church, each Advent, drags him out of the liturgical mothballs. His given name is John bar Zechariah. You know him as John the Baptist. He is completely out of step with what I have dubbed the Shopmas season. That is a word I coined some years ago to describe the season that begins the day after Thanksgiving and lasts until December 31. It is celebrated with lights, glitter, cards, parties, presents, and most of all shopping accompanied by holiday music. It is enchanting how puissant such songs as “Winter Wonderland” or “White Christmas” can be for the shopkeeper’s business. Some preachers complain about this festive celebration. I kind of like it.
  My problem is with the lectionary. Just when I’m in the mood for the nostalgia of Shopmas the Church drags John the Baptizer out of the pages of the Bible and plops him smack dab in the middle of my life and I have to deal with him again. And not just for one Sunday but for two! I can see him there in the barren desert that borders the Jordan River near where it flows into the Dead Sea. The lowest place on earth and the last place most of us want to be during Shopmas. He’s out there preaching. He’s dressed austerely in skins and camel’s hair; living on a sparse diet of locust and wild honey. His voice raging like a furnace; his message burning like a wild fire in the chaparral, uncontained and uncontainable—“Repent,” he cries, “repent.” 
  There are those people, few and far between, who come into our lives with an austerity, even a harshness that the causes us to grow. They are tough on us, and yet for some reason do not offend us. Or if they do, we get over it and go on. Maybe it’s a teacher, a coach, or even a boss who gets the best out of us. They push us to become more than we thought we were able to be. John the Baptist is like that. This is one of the reasons the Church drags him out each Advent. He can cry, “Repent—change your life, you’re out of control and making a mess of things in your life and in the lives of others," and instead of getting all in a huff, as if your husband, wife or best friend had just told you about some irritating quirk in your personality, you say, “Yeah, I’ve been thinking about that, too.
  John the Baptist’s message each Advent, right in the middle of the Shopmas season, is “Reconsider your lifestyle.” He prompts us to ask really important questions: Is the way you’re living truly satisfying? Does it have meaning and purpose? And most importantly, is it pleasing to God? If not, it is time to reconsider—to repent, to turn in a Godward direction.  Then we are enabled to recognize the One to whom John points—Jesus, the Lamb of God. He takes away the sin of the world; He brings forgiveness for the past and power to change our lives today for a more grace—filled tomorrow. John’s ministry helps us get ready: to prepare a way for the Lord: to make straight in the desert of life’s barrenness a highway for God. You can do this now, wherever you are reading this. You can quiet your heart and talk to Christ. Tell him you are willing to turn from whatever it is that keeps you from experiencing the fullness of his life and presence. The words of Werefried van Straaten are still true, “Jesus comes back into the world when we offer him a dwelling place in our hearts.” Shopmas (which begins this Friday, right after Thanksgiving) may be for festivities, but Advent is, among other things, for preparing for that feast of God’s love, which is Christmas, when the Prince of Peace opens the doors of many hearts. May one of them be yours, even if it is more like a stable than a palace and needs more than a little straightening up. 

November 29, 2009
With the permission of Bishop Chane, four members of the parish have been commissioned as Lay Eucharistic Visitors. Bill Dinsmore, Don Harrison, Sue Tull, and Norma Young have now accepted this responsibility. Several months ago, I wrote about their work and this new (to St Francis) labor of love. It seemed a good idea to reiterate the nature and scope of this ministry.
Lay Eucharistic Visitors, as they are designated in this diocese, share in the privilege of carrying the Eucharist to those who are prevented from regular attendance at Sunday worship. The key distinction between what we have done for years and what is new among us the word “lay”, for this is ministry is exercise by laity. 
  The basic contour follows these lines: At a Sunday morning celebration, bread and wine are set apart for those who have requested a visit. When possible, the recipients of this communion will be remembered by name in the prayers that day. One or two Visitors commissioned for this work will then take the elements (the technical word for bread and wine) to the parishioner. Prayers will be offered and communion received. All of this is under the supervision of a priest on the parish staff, and the service is duly recorded in the service register.
   A few distinctions are important to remember. This is not a ministry of convenience, offered to those who simply let their Sunday bounden duty slip by the unmet. It is a way the parish community seeks to be in communion with those who are prevented from being where we all should be regularly, namely at worship in church. A second point to note is that this is not a discrete celebration of the Holy Eucharist; that is the work of priests and bishops, and is done together with the congregation. This form of communion is an extension of the Sunday celebration, but at a different hour and day. It is not a substitute or “second seating.” One of the important links between the gathered congregation and the recipient of the lay Eucharistic visit is the moment of prayer and commissioning when the gathered community sends out the Eucharistic visitors. The bread and wine become outward and visible signs of the sacramental fellowship which, while somewhat compromised by absence, is not defeated by it. 
  A final point is a note of clarification. People often confuse a home or hospital communion with “last rites”. There is no connection between the two. Indeed, the Prayer Book option for anointing, which is not part of this ministry, is not confined to moments in extremis any more than receiving Holy Communion in this form is intended only for the mortally ill or in a crisis. These visitations are not appropriate at such times.
  I am grateful to Bill, Don, Sue, and Norma for their willingness to undertake this work, and we all trust in time this ministry will enrich the pastoral life of this parish.

November 22, 2009
The work schedule some of us on the church staff follow sends us home in the first hours of darkness. Several nights each week, the Glenolden house shines with bright warmth across the playing field. That light is a sign that one of the youth groups is in session. The ostensible purpose of the session is a Bible study, but those evenings also include food, video games, and fellowship. To borrow the phrase from Acts, week by week the Lord is adding to their numbers (Acts 2:46—47).
  The warm glow of that lighted house is profoundly reassuring. At the risk of descending into the sentimental, the thought often arises that at that particular hour, engaged in those particular activities, the young people present are, as James Montgomery wrote (Hymn 480), “safe from the world’s alluring harms.” To be sure, the purpose of the work going on in that house and in that ministry is not really self—defense, but edification. When all is said and done, edification – through worship, teaching, preaching, and education – might well be what this parish does best. It is an old fashioned word, but it is also a biblical one, and it points to a biblical goal. That shining house symbolizes the important work.
  To step aside from the image of the youth house, the theme of edification still obtains. In St Paul’s letter to the Ephesians, that theme is eloquently expressed. Read and consider his words in Ephesians 4:11—32. The Apostle is not lecturing the Church about any of the “hot button issues” of his day or ours. To the contrary, he is speaking of the purpose of the Church’s ministry, ministry which is intended ultimately to bring the believer to maturity in Christ, to protect the believer from “every wind of doctrine”, and to promote the growth of the body of believers not just in numbers but in the love of Christ. That is edification.  
  From various quarters have come appeals for the financial support we need to operate and to pursue the purposes of our parish’s ministry. There is a cause and effect relationship between having specific opportunities in mission and ministry and the parish’s ability to meet its vocation. Regardless of the economic climate, that cause and effect relationship is always affected more by our willingness to respond than by our ability to do so. This year is no exception. Please keep that candid observation in mind.
  A fine book of recent years is Peter Ackroyd’s excellent work London: The Biography. Ackroyd is a brilliant writer whose skills run from the traditional biography to creative novels. This work is a collection of short essays on the long, storied history of that wonderful city. One of the most descriptive passages recounts medieval London in the time of Henry III (1216—1272), an unsettled epoch. In consideration of the city during an unsettled time, Ackroyd writes that “the most striking scene is perhaps that of the dark and silent city, barricaded [at night] against the outer world.”
  Is it a stretch to say the glow of the Glenolden house reminds me of that description? Edification, among youth programs or any other parish endeavor, is not a barricade. It is, however, the work of the Church as it seeks to be built up into the maturity Christ intended for those who love and follow him. It is our only reliable defense against the “world’s alluring harms.”

November 15, 2009
At the 11:15 service this week, we shall celebrate the marriage of Cherry Diaries and John Anthony Smith. Lest there be any confusion, let me put it more plainly: A wedding will be part of the 11:15 liturgy this week. In the course of the usual counseling we expect for those who are married here, I suggested this possibility and the couple agreed. Thus we are offered an opportunity to think about marriage, as opposed to the question just of weddings. The two are not one in the same.
  There is nothing exclusively Christian about marriage. To the contrary, there is no known society that does not have some form of marriage, although in many cases marriage has more to do with property, the raising of children, and other social customs. Even in our time, so—called “arranged marriages” are not unknown in various parts of the world. In such cases, as Tina Turner famously asked, “What’s love got to do with it?” The answer is, not much.
  The idea of marriage becomes more familiar to us in the heritage first of Israel. At the heart of this view is the covenant between God and the people. Nowhere is this more poignantly developed than in the writing of the 8th century BC prophet Hosea, who understands God’s faithfulness even in the wake of the trial of his own marriage to an unfaithful wife. It is from the covenant God offered that Israel learned two of the hallmarks of marriage: The monogamous nature of the relationship (Israel was to have only one God), and the faithfulness God displayed, which was in contradistinction to the unfaithfulness with which Israel often responded. Adultery is not only about sex. It is simply not clear to what extent polygamy – more than one wife – was practiced. It was apparently accepted among higher classes, but never encouraged. As one of my former professors told us, the Bible often describes situations it does not condone. So, many Biblical characters had more than one wife, but such is never held out as the ideal, and it is never, ever applied to the worship of the God of the covenant.
  The New Testament does not go on at great length about marriage. Jesus’ first miracle was in celebration of a marriage (Do you know which miracle it was?). St Paul believed marriage to be the best defense against sexual immorality, but his thought was also in the context of his expectation of the imminent return of the Lord. 
  In time, the Church came to hold the righteous view that marriage exists as part of the created order, seen from the beginning, and that weddings are the public ratification of the natural contract between a man and a woman. The Church stipulated certain provisions of this “honourable estate”: The relationship mirrors that of Christ and his Church, that it is lifelong, that it is marked by love, comfort, honor, and mutual joy, perhaps to include the blessing and responsibility of children.
  Space does not permit a long account of the evolution of marriage from purely a social contract to the “honourable estate” it represents today. This must suffice for now: For many centuries, having a marriage blessed (and that is what a wedding is) as part of the Sunday liturgy was the norm, not the exception. Some other time we will consider this liturgical history at greater length. For now, we shall look forward to this celebration as part of our normal Sunday 11:15 liturgy. The notion of being a guest still prevails, for we are all guests at that feast given by the Lamb. In other words, if 11:15 is your normal service, there is no reason not to be present this week. Those who know Cherry and John, as well as those who may not, might consider what it means to be present to witness their vows and to promise to uphold them in their marriage. That is why anyone is present at a wedding, and it is an important role indeed.

September 13, 2009
Some time ago I offered in this space some thoughts with respect to the grand Christian virtue of encouragement, and it is to that theme I wish to return now. My reason for so doing is that I am increasingly aware of the need we all have to receive encouragement, and of the central role that encouragement plays in Christian discipleship. 
   What brought this into focus for me was the recent death of a friend of my mother’s, a remarkable lady my mother came to know when she moved into the Episcopal retirement community in Columbia. Although my mother had looked forward to this move, it still represented a significant change in her life. Almost as soon as she entered that community, the lady of whom I am writing took my mother under her wing. In ways both subtle and more overt, she helped orient my mother to her new surroundings, playing no small role in making that residence a home in ways it might not otherwise have been. 
   My mother’s friend showed her the ropes, made her aware of the rhythms of life there, helped clue her in on the peculiar, individual mores of life in that defined community. My mother was always a positive, optimistic person, but her friend helped those traits to blossom in this new setting. It is no overstatement to say that her friend’s encouragement made a world of difference in this last move my mother had to accomplish, and my gratitude for that encouragement was part of what I laid on the altar when I attended the funeral for my mother’s friend, who had become my own friend as well over these years. 
   It is commonly held that the earliest extant writing of St Paul is I Thessalonians, which makes that epistle likely the oldest work in the New Testament. It is a simple, direct word from the Apostle, and the theme of encouragement pervades it. There is a clearly unsettled undertone to I Thessalonians, written, as it was, in the expectation of the imminent return of the Lord. St Paul had not settled down for the longer haul at this point, and the mature writing one finds in Romans, for instance, is absent in this letter. What is not absent, however, is the fresh awareness that the Christian life might not be easy, that it could put the faithful at odds with the ways of the world and some of the powers that be. It is for this reason that St Paul writes with directness: “Therefore, encourage one another and build up each other, as indeed you are doing.” (5:11) 
   Those who are attentive to the themes of my recent sermons have heard, I hope, this very note sounded more than once. I wrote before of the letter I received from a wise friend and theological mentor who made me aware of the need we all have for encouragement, and it was his inspiration that has been reflected in my recurrent attention to this theme. High on the list of reasons for a Christian community is the encouragement we receive. If St Francis does not offer that encouragement, then something is amiss. 
   To the contrary, we need not despair on that point. We can rely on worship, exploration of the riches of Christ in Word and sacrament, and fellowship—all distinctive elements of our corporate life here—as founts of encouragement. Moving into the fullness of parish life with its crowded, enticing calendar of opportunities, taking encouragement where it is offered is one of the blessings we can receive, even as encouragement is one of the blessings we can pass on whenever we get the opportunity and privilege. 

September 6, 2009
Autumn is a splendid time of the year. Even after a reasonably tolerable summer such as this year offered, the hint of morning crispness restores the spirit. Enthusiasm is easier to come by in the fall. Churches “shake off dull sloth”, as one of our hymns puts it. Parents are relieved to see schools open their doors again, and more than a few students, if they will admit it, share the anticipation of a new academic year. Autumn flowers remind us that spring has no monopoly on beauty, and the coming riot of color in the trees of this region is a blessing not to be taken for granted. Autumn is more than a time of mellow ripeness.
   This fall follows on a discordant summer. In the public sector various political meetings seem inevitably to disintegrate into shouting matches. Much debate continues about the way to deal with the economic challenges of the nation or issues of health care, and international dilemmas seem to admit of no easy solutions. And on a smaller but not unimportant stage, the drama of The Episcopal Church continues to play out.
   History does allow some things to be repeated, and here is one instance: Once again, the best thing that can be said about any General Convention is that it stands adjourned. By no reasonable reckoning was Anaheim 2009 an edifying experience for this denomination. We are left to wonder what if anything it means to be part of something larger than just one province. Does the Anglican Communion, that family of which we are a constituent member, matter or not? Is the leadership of this denomination so determined to stand outside not only communion but — more to the point — the long stream of Christian teaching and belief that we are left not only alone, but also with a new thing in many ways not recognizable as Christian? Those are serious questions, and even if reasonable people can arrive at differing conclusions, they are questions which demand consideration. Let the record be clear: It has not been every General Convention which called such things into question, but this year’s convention did. Such was the summer of 2009.
   As much as we might prefer to stand apart from all this and try to go on our merry way, it is no longer faithful to adopt such a stand. From time to time someone will ask what things are so disturbing to this writer. Many who read this could produce their own indictments. To do so can descend into petulance, and that is not a productive course. At the same time, productivity must yield to faithfulness, faithfulness defined by the heritage and teaching of the Church, and tempered with the Christian virtue of magnanimity.
   St Francis will return to its normal vibrant state. There are classes to teach, hymns to sing, houses to tour, guests to welcome, sheep to feed. As we come to this fall, those things which are so discouraging in the Episcopal Church cannot be denied, but neither can they blind us to the opportunities and responsibilities we have. We will be careful to mark out where we stand under the authority of Scripture, Tradition, and human reason as informed by those two. We will look the many, many sources of encouragement and identity as Anglicans which go far beyond the results of any convention, and we will not be dissuaded from seeking renewal in those rich places. That is some of what lies ahead as we welcome the fall of 2009.

July 5, 2009
Question: Which President of the United States said this? “I should like to assure you, my Islamic friends, that under the American Constitution, under American tradition, and in American hearts, this center of worship is just as welcome as could be a similar edifice of any other religion.” If you were quick to answer President Obama, your chronology would be off by half a century. These words were President Eisenhower’s, spoken at the dedication of the Islamic Center on Massachusetts Avenue in 1957.
   It is hardly necessary to remind anyone that the world presents a more complicated picture than then was seen in the climate which prompted President Eisenhower’s warm words. Still, he was thoroughly cordial and constitutional in his remarks, and he had the weight of America’s rich history of religion as an essential part of this nation’s story. Ike spoke with such confidence because our history allowed him to do so. The other day thoughtful parishioners asked me about a disturbing mischaracterization of the religious climate which prevailed during the era of the Founders. They had encountered the inaccurate view which contends, simply, that none of the Founders had any genuine religious faith at all. Such a view is rubbish, but it is rubbish one finds pedaled widely in various outlets. Why such deliberate distortions find currency is another matter; however, it is beyond doubt that the secular media simply cannot do a very good job in reporting on matters pertaining to religion. If that observation holds with respect to reporting on contemporary events, it is written in spades when the topic is historical.   
   A simple analysis illustrates the point. Suppose the general topic is George Washington’s religious views. We first need to know as much as we can about the general climate of Anglican Christianity in 18th century Virginia. That is the society in which Washington grew to maturity, where he preferred to live, and where he died. That was the context in which any such exploration must begin. Put upon that context the general overlay of life in Virginia, how not just Anglicans but others also found the religious climate. Only then can one begin to approach what specific views General Washington might have held. Since he wrote very little about that, or anything so personal for that matter, we are left only with educated speculation. What we hope is that our speculation will indeed be educated and not just idle thought. Worse still is the tendency to force upon historical figures various preconceived notions or canards, or ones which are tailored to suit contemporary purposes. Such thinking is not only ahistoric; it is dishonest.
   Here is a helpful antidote. Put on your summer reading any one of these volumes: American Gospel (John Meacham); Washington’s God (Michael Novak and Jana Novak); Founding Faith (Steven Waldman); Pilgrims in Their Own Land (Martin Marty); America’s God (Mark Noll). Let me go one more step to say anything by Noll or Marty is worth your time. Perhaps this list will set you on the right path. There is ample reason to thank God on the Glorious Fourth, and I hope you will do just that.

June 28, 2009
We are one year into the agreement with St Andrew’s Episcopal School, and it seemed an appropriate time for a brief update. The thesis offered here is simple: This merger has been a blessing to both institutions. 
   That observation suggests yet one more word of thanks to those who worked to bring about the original agreement. And the person at the center of this story is the capable and dedicated Head of School at St Andrew’s, Robert Kosasky. It was Robert who first saw the possibility to make this a reality. Timing is always an essential element in almost all human endeavors, and Robert was not discouraged by the treacherous climate of recent months. Many will be aware that independent schools had been thinking in terms of what was sustainable and viable long before the stock market’s decline. I think Robert understood something I have tried to remember in church leadership, namely that to program only to maintain the status quo is ultimately to land in obsolescence. That won’t do for churches or schools any more than it will do in other business ventures. So, it was Robert who began to raise this possibility, and the leadership of both this parish and St Andrew’s began to take a hard, critical look at his idea. It took months to sort out, but in the end a merger eventuated. 
   Prentiss Feagles, in office then as Senior Warden, drew the familiar distinction between the major things and what he called “the weeds”. The truth is, life is lived just there, in the weeds, when the lawyers, wardens, board chairs, and financial gurus have gone on their way. That means in our case the people, especially the professional staffs, of both institutions. Like any marriage, it has taken some adjustment. The spirit of cooperation has prevailed, and the common resolve to make this work has provided the energy. 
   From the school’s part, this should be said: The recently completed academic year was a good one. More and more this institution is being seen as what it is: The Lower School of St Andrew’s, not the former Day School of this parish. I have insisted on that understanding and look forward to the complete shift in thinking that will come in time. In saying that, it is fair to remember that the best of the older principles and customs established here over the Day School’s years are intact and serve as a healthy foundation. The future, however, is more exciting than any nostalgia for the past. The continuity provided by Pat Talbert Smith and many of the faculty have ensured that smooth and promising transition. As enrollment continues to expand, there is reason for optimism. 
   From the perspective of the parish, this agreement has been a blessing. It has helped stabilize financial operations for which the Vestry is responsible. St Andrew’s careful attention to enhancing the building has refurbished the classroom space in ways we could not have done otherwise at this time. The playground has been restored if not to pristine beauty, then at least to an attractive area no longer resembling a trailer park. Visitors have joined us in worship who are part of the school community. In a time when the Episcopal Church does not always get the best publicity there is a bright witness to it in Potomac. That is where things stand after a year. One thinks of the motto of many schools, “Excelsior.” It’s not a bad word for this venture. 

June 21, 2009
  The beautiful countryside due south of Annapolis is the heart of Southern Maryland. The “S” is properly capitalized in that descriptive name and refers to traits not simply geographical, but cultural and social as well. The peninsula between the Patuxent River to the west and the Chesapeake Bay on the east is a genuine “land of pleasant living.” Please remember, this is not the Eastern Shore, but the rolling hills of Anne Arundel and Calvert Counties.
   A friend of mine serves as rector of a parish established in 1692. He has served this cure for more than 35 years and knows the region well. He is also a wise and good priest and pastor. When I moved to Southern Maryland he helped me understand the mores of what was then a more distinctive region than perhaps it is now with the rapid (and lamentable) suburban sprawl that has pushed out from Washington and even Baltimore.
   Once we were discussing another parish in the Diocese of Maryland and he told me about their origins. This parish (not served by either of us) had begun as a refuge for dissidents from another long-established parish. Some church issue, now lost in the mists of memory, had caused a group to start “their own” church. My friend said that lo, these many years later, the people of that church were still angry, but no one was quite sure what the issue was. From this he concluded that if a congregation begins in anger it may never outgrow it.
   Such unfortunate memory is not confined to Southern Maryland, then or now. It is surely true in many ethnic and political feuds. Ancient enemies renew their dislike of one another without remembering what set them at enmity in the first place. Like the feud between the Hatfield clan and the McCoy clan, the original animosity was lost, but the hatred wore on.   
   These thoughts came to mind the other day when I read a short essay by the distinguished theologian Alister McGrath. Speaking of theological feuds, often less interesting than Hatfield-McCoy matters but sometimes no less bloody, Professor McGrath wrote that “Purely oppositional movements tend to find themselves in difficulties once their point of reference is removed.” He went on to point to the earliest Christians. They did not “affirm the Resurrection of Christ against anyone” (emphasis mine); rather, “belief in the Resurrection was seen as a positive option, ‘good news’ for all humanity.” Indeed.
   Professor McGrath’s thoughts seem timely as yet another General Convention slouches its way toward not Bethlehem but Anaheim. It is easy to define who the Church is and ought to be over and against the misbegotten pronouncements of the Presiding Bishop and many of her cohorts in power, but that will not serve to edify over the long haul. Far more promising is faithful attention to sound theology, defined by Tradition and articulated with grace, power, and no small amount of magnanimity. This will prove to be a more faithful response not only to the vexations of the present hour, but also to the vocation of the Church to welcome others into the household of the faithful. We have more good news to proclaim than we have time to waste in complaint and despair, even though there is reason enough for both of those commodities. Be of good cheer even when things tend to get us down.

 June 13, 2009
The season of aestivation is upon us, and so a few timely words and random thoughts as we move into the warm months.
   For the balance of the summer, the 10:00 service will be Holy Eucharist, Rite II. This change from our usual pattern will allow us to utilize some of the musical settings we cannot otherwise use in Rite I. It also refreshes our appreciation of Anglican liturgies. I intend to be on the lookout for some other variations simply to provide a little diversity and contrast. Such variations are hardly revolutionary, and in due time we will return to our customary patterns of worship. The Sunday 8:00 and Wednesday 10:00 services will continue unaltered. As it was in the beginning, is now, and will be forever. (If you attend those services, you already know that.)
   Sundays at 9:00 we will offer an adult education short course. This year’s focus will be an Anglican view of the sacraments. The series will begin June 14 and continue through July 26. The classes are held in the Kincaid Library between the 8:00 and 10:00 services, and offered as “stand alone” classes for those whose travel prevents attendance at every session.
   One of the benefits of the summertime is the opportunity to worship in other settings. I am not hesitant to remind you that our bounden duty and service remains to worship God every week in the Church, not just on the Sundays when it suits us or we happen to be in town. Especially in a congregation like this one, with an active Sunday school program, there is a temptation to equate church attendance with school year attendance. Simply put, that is not faithful discipleship, period. It is
worth remembering that younger children  

  
  will never learn “church manners” if they don’t have the opportunity to practice them, so don’t keep the children out of church.

I always encourage parishioners to worship in local churches when they are away on vacation. Doing so brings us into contact with other church practices, some of which might be healthfully incorporated into our parish life. If you travel abroad, such worship serves as a reminder of the breadth of the Anglican Communion in its local constituent members. Vacation worship can also renew your appreciation of the good things going on here, deepening one’s appreciation of St Francis. That is not a reason to boast, but it is a reason to give thanks. For years I have appreciated the practice of having bulletins from other churches brought back, and I pass them on to the staff when there is something I think they should see or might enjoy. Please keep that custom alive this year.
   It is also timely to remind one and all of the need to keep pledges current. The parish has to pay its bills just as any financial operation does. I have not to date expressed my gratitude, and that of the Vestry, for the very faithful response of parishioners even in the recent economic climate. A prudent budget has been carefully watched, and while there are not blue birds chirping outside the Treasurer’s office, neither are the vultures roosting there. Most churches have to remind parishioners to keep their pledges up to date, and we are no exception. The best way to do that is to be here to return your own pledge in person, but, failing that, the mail generally works. We appreciate your thoughtfulness on this very much.
  
 June 6, 2009

Here is a story worth considering. Once upon a time, there was a bright, erudite star of promise in the English literary firmament. His name is A. N. Wilson, and he was the darling of the London literary crowd. Educated at Rugby and New College, Oxford, he rose in the writing establishment by dint of his skills as a critic and author.    

   Among his achievements were a score of novels, numerous essays and volumes of literary criticism, and biographies of John Milton, Leo Tolstoy, C. S. Lewis, and Jesus. Over the course of his career, controversy had not been unknown to him, but none more pertinent to consideration here than those which arose in theological disputes. 

   At one point in his life, he prepared for Holy Orders in a theological house of studies in Oxford. In those days he was on the “High Church” Anglo-Catholic end of the spectrum. Then something happened, and his faith began to erode. In a recent essay in London’s Daily Mail, he described that transformation: “Like most educated people in Britain and Northern Europe (I was born in 1950) I have grown up in a culture that is overwhelmingly secular and anti-religious. The universities, broadcasters, and media are not merely non-religious, they are positively anti.” He goes on. “For ten or 15 of my middle years, I, too, was one of the mockers…” Developments in his personal and professional life seemed to contribute to that erosion of faith. 

   It was during the phase when he was “one of the mockers” that he published his biography of C. S. Lewis. The extent to which his spiritual disposition colored his judgments of Lewis remains a source of speculation. The work on Lewis was surely flawed, less than it could have been in the hands of one with the talents Wilson has shown. 

   When he turned his hostile skepticism on Jesus (as a subject), he met his match. A 

  scholar who is an exact contemporary of Wilson’s, who also had Oxford in his background, stepped to the fore: N. T. Wright, then Chaplain and Tutor at Worcester College, Oxford but now Bishop of Durham, and without question the leading Anglican scholar in the episcopal order, began to engage in a series of public debates in writing. Their debate produced, among other things, the short but rich study from Bishop Wright’s pen, Who was Jesus?, a work which holds up well these years hence.

But to return to A. N. Wilson, now he is in a different place. In that essay he wrote for the Daily Mail (April 11, 2009), Wilson took issue with the those whom he called “the chattering class”. “As time passed, I found myself going back to church, although at first only as a fellow traveler with the believers, not as one who shared the faith… My [eventual return to faith] has come about in large measure because of the lives and examples of people I have known – not the famous, not the saints, but friends and relations who have lived, and faced death, in the light of the Resurrection story, or in the quiet acceptance that they have a future after they die.” There is surely more to A. N. Wilson’s story than just the brief account of it in the newspaper, and perhaps he will favor (favour?) us with his reflections in some future time. I hope so, even as I hope he will revise his Lewis biography in light of what he knows now that he could not see in 1992. But for us, here is the point: We are not among the famous or the saints, but those friends and relations who have lived in the light of the Resurrection story. It was not the logic even of Bishop Wright that invited Wilson back into the fold, but that is nothing new: Read I Corinthians 1:18-25 to discover that this story had been published long before A. N. Wilson put pen to paper.
  

 May 27, 2009
As the current school year comes to a close, please allow me to take this opportunity to express sincere thanks to those who have taught in our Christian education ministry this year. They will be recognized in this newsletter and in the service bulletin Sunday, but this space belongs to me, and there is nothing I wish to do more than express gratitude for the dedication of our teachers.
I learned the hard way that it is foolish to run a “cast of characters” in trying to thank people, inevitable will be the omissions. The only more dangerous practice is to single out individuals, for someone is sure to ask why others were not included. That notwithstanding, I want to do just that by calling attention to the faithful work of three individuals: Each week, Sue Tendall, John Fraser, and Carol Thedford lead the worship service for the pre-school children. It is held in the chapel while other classes are going on elsewhere. I am very grateful to the three of them for this ministry, and I am hereby paying them tribute.
This service is a profoundly important moment for these children, for it is in this part of their day that they will begin to grasp some crucial principles. They begin to understand that worship is at the heart of everything we do. Even in a world of crayons and snacks, we gather first to pray and praise God. That is the reason we come here. It is in this experience that they begin to understand what the Psalmist wrote long ago, “Be joyful in the Lord…come before his presence with a song… the Lord is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his faithfulness endures from age to age.” I began to learn those truths when I was the age of the

  children in this service, and I have every confidence this latest vintage is learning those very things.

They will also learn that worship is not something done only when a priest is present. From personal experience I know how important this is, too. Not only did I begin to learn about worship in a service like the one we have here, but it, too, was always led by lay people. We always had three or four priests on the staff of the parish where I grew up, and those who led this service were not substitutes, and we never thought of them as such. It was simply meet and right that these men and women conducted worship. It was the most natural thing we could imagine. The lesson here is the love and commitment of other members of the family to lead the most important thing we do.
Last week, one of my former Sunday school teachers died. She was 99, taught Sunday school for forty years (among other services to her parish), and lived a quiet life, most of it in one city. She never married. One who serves the Lord as she did, as those mentioned in this column do, have the precious privilege to help shape the spiritual health of a generation. My former teacher can know the joy of one whose “children rise up and call her blessed.” (Proverbs 31:28) She had children over the course literally of a generation — forty years. And just to be clear, the gratitude I have expressed in this column for these teachers and for my own is sufficiently capacious to include all those whose names are written in the bulletin, in the newsletter, and in the Lamb’s book of life.  
 May 17, 2009
Wedding rehearsals are seldom moments for pastoral work. By that time, the counseling the couple and their priest have been working on is complete. The license has been procured, any other necessary forms have been submitted, and what remains is to run through the choreography of the service to make sure everyone has a vague notion of where to stand and how to get there. One last moment, however, does present itself, and with a degree of importance I have come to appreciate more and more. It is found in that question the officiant will ask the congregation: “Will all of you witnessing these promises do all in your power to uphold these two persons in their marriage?” The answer is, “We will.” During the rehearsal, all those participating in the coming service are instructed that they are expected to respond to that question in a forceful way, and then they are expected to make good on the promise they are making before God. They lead the congregation in so doing.
   Consider the placement of this question, coming as it does in that phase of the wedding which mixes church and state responsibilities. The state claims authority to approve all marriage contracts, hence the need for a license. Episcopal weddings begin with a series of questions in which is ascertained the legal standing of the couple to enter upon the contract they are about to make. They are reminded one more time of the some of the purposes of Christian marriage. Each declares his or her consent to have the other as husband or wife in a covenant marked by certain distinctive characteristics. Thus some of the terms of the marriage covenant are stated, and the couple’s understanding of those terms is put before the entire assembly.
   It bears noting that there is nothing exclusively Christian about marriage. Marriage is an institution which both predates the Church, and is found in acceptable forms in secular contexts as
well. Moreover, one does not have to 
  
  believe in the Church’s teachings to have a good marriage; atheists, to take one category, can do as much. But if a couple wishes the blessing of the Church on their relationship, there are certain definitions and terms they are expected to embrace. Apart from that, the Church cannot bless their union. All of that has to be tended to before moving on to the marriage itself.
The couple has so far promised only to attempt to establish the relationship described in the opening address. When asked if they will work on this, the answer is, “I will,” not “I do.”

   The couple offers themselves each to the other, and both to God, that the two may become one. And here is where that question becomes so important. Everyone else in the room is there primarily as a witness to the proceedings. Put aside the frippery of being a bridesmaid or groomsman; the important role is as witness. Even the guests are there to witness the exchange of vows. From a legal standpoint, witnesses are essential to the contractual aspect of the service. But theologically, witnesses promise to do all in their power to uphold this couple as they continue to seek to establish and maintain the relationship they are have promised to follow. This response is, among other things, a public vow, made to God. It is also a promise made to and about the couple.
   I have never heard this more movingly and accurately expressed than in the words offered by a bride’s father at a reception I attended not long ago. He toasted all of the guests as “friends who could safely be assigned the responsibility to support” the newly married couple. I wondered if all of us realized how right the father was, and how important was our responsibility. “We will” was not a vacuous comment, but a sacred promise and vow. It included supporting, encouraging, guiding. That promise is the most important gift we can give any couple as they begin their married life.
 May 10, 2009
In many important ways, the Christian faith relies more on hearing than on any other sense. The Bible is replete with instances of the power of speech and hearing, and at the heart of our discipleship lies our hearing. In an age when the visual dominates, we may find this a difficult notion to follow, so perhaps a brief study will prove beneficial.
   The classic theological reference work, A Theological Word Book of the Bible, puts it this way: “The Hebrews regarded hearing as a serious matter involving the whole self…We must regard hearing as a complex operation, exercising the whole attention and response, and yet as a single process which runs on from hearing to approval or disapproval, and then on to obedience or disobedience or any other response that may be involved." 
   Read that again, and when you have caught your breath, consider this illustration. When a parent asks an adolescent son or daughter, “Did you hear me?” the parent is not checking out the auditory capacity of the offspring. Generally that question is posed because there has been either no response at all, or a response of rebellious disobedience. We have all been on both sides of that conversation. In fact, it is not an unknown dialogue between married couples. “Did you hear me?” conveys a wealth of meaning.
   In the Bible, hearing is given precedence over other senses. Light came out of darkness at the word of the Lord. “God said, ‘Let there be light’, and there was light.” The poetic truth expressed in Genesis is that even chaos and darkness were obedient to God’s word.
   “Thou, whose almighty word, chaos and darkness heard, and took their flight…” is the opening line of Hymn 371. At the same time, we cannot intrude into the mystery of how the Prophets heard the voice of God, but we believe that as a result of hearing, 
  
  when they spoke, their words were not just their own, but conveyed the same creative, revealing power of God. Prophetic authority did not rest on the approbation of the people but on the belief that what they said was of God, the same God who had spoken light into being.
   The work of Jesus was often related to hearing. It was not to impress the skeptical that he restored hearing to the deaf. Rather, by his healing work those who had been deaf were now able to hear and thus (here is the point) to follow, to respond, and to obey. There is no health in us, and thus apart from his saving grace, the deaf could not possible follow and obey. It is likewise the same with us, any pretensions to the contrary notwithstanding. “He speaks; and, listening to his voice, new life the dead receive” wrote Charles Wesley. Where else are we to find new life?
   Consider the pastoral image of the Good Shepherd. Did shepherds speak to the sheep just to be heard? No, they were not bellowing politicians who are enchanted by the sounds of their own voices. (Spend a day with C-SPAN if you doubt that.) Shepherds spoke to guide the flock in and out safety, to lead them to quiet waters and green pastures. This is why Jesus said one of the attributes of the Good Shepherd (as opposed to false ones) is that the sheep will hear his voice, and will not follow the voice of a stranger (John 10).
   The supreme expression of this Biblical truth is Archbishop Cranmer’s great collect on Scripture. Note the verbs and their sequence: “Grant that we may in such wise hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them…” That is the fullness of our relationship to the word of God, and it begins by hearing. The process continues eternally, for in hearing, light continues to shine out of darkness for the disciple, just as it did in the beginning. He speaks, and we receive new life.

    
 May 3, 2009
Grammatical precision can convey important principles. For example, it is accurate and revealing to speak of the Church in England to describe the history of Christianity in, say, the year 1000. It would not be correct to speak of the Church of England when considering that same time period. That little preposition makes the difference between historical accuracy and anachronism.
   A similar distinction is very instructive in thinking about the church season which we presently celebrate. Note the titles of the Sundays in current succession: They are Sundays of, not after Easter. The prepositions make an important point, for while it is clearly true that Easter Day has passed, the season of Easter is, in fact, seven weeks long. Neither accurate nor welcome was the comment a parishioner in my former parish made to me many years ago on a bright Easter Day, “Well, that takes care of the Resurrection for another year."
   In prior prayer books, both in this country and in England, this distinction was not drawn, and Sundays were reckoned as Sundays after Easter. The only noteworthy distinction was the fifth Sunday after Easter, commonly called Rogation Sunday. That is a topic for another time, including a note of lament that we no longer are specific about that designation. Rather, the point for now is the longer observance and celebration of the Easter season, or to use the lovely designation, Eastertide."
   Those who are faithful in worship will 
   
  note the opening acclamation in the Holy Eucharist is the ancient Easter greeting “Alleluia, Christ is risen. The Lord is risen
indeed. Alleluia." Provision is also made for the use of the Paschal Candle "at all services from Easter Day through the Day of Pentecost." These are outward signs of the season, and reminders of the joy that extends for a full fifty days, not just one bright Sunday morning.
   When this revision of the Eastertide prepositions was first suggested, some objected to the inclusion of the time between Ascension Day and Pentecost, or Whitsunday. A strong case can be made for that objection. Lost is the notion of the time between the withdrawal of our Lord's earthly presence, albeit his risen presence, and his own first gift of the Holy Spirit. Anglo-Catholic parishes often remove the Paschal Candle from its stand as art of the Ascension Day service, a dramatic liturgical act, but not a sad one like the stripping of the altars on Maundy Thursday.
   Whether one wishes to measure the Easter season as forty or fifty days, this point is the same: We are meant to celebrate, to be sure. But we are also meant to contemplate this great mystery. We are told that, having been joined to him in a death like his, we will be risen with Christ; read Romans 6: 1 – 11.
   Just what does that mean, and what are the implications of that affirmation? The contemplation of those themes will surely last longer than one season of the Church's year.

March 15, 2009
March 25th is observed in the Church as the Feast of the Annunciation, and locally observed as Maryland Day. While the vagarious way in which the mail is delivered makes it unlikely Sounds will arrive at coincidental time for this double holiday, it is still meet and right to think about the 25th and what it suggests.
   The Annunciation records the visit of the Archangel Gabriel to the Virgin Mary. Gabriel had astonishing news for the young woman, and her response to the angelic message changed the course of history for all time. For many centuries, March 25th was the start of the new year, not January 1. It is precisely nine months before Christmas and as such is the first date in the cycle by which the Church observes our Lord’s earthly life. The Year of our Lord – Anno Domini – was measured from the time of his conception, and until the mid-18th century, all years were likewise reckoned to begin on this date. Thus the Annunciation was a feast with secular as well as religious significance.
   In the year 1634 the first English settlers arrived in what is now Maryland. The story of those tiny ships the Ark and the Dove is remarkable. In St Mary’s City, the small recreation of the original colonial capital, a replica of one of the vessels floats in the harbor. It does not look like a vessel sturdy enough to withstand a Chesapeake storm on a cruise to Smith Island in the Bay, much less a winter’s passage (they left England in November) across the north Atlantic. But come they did, and the rest is, as is said, history. This year marks the 375th anniversary of the founding of the colony.
   Maryland was not named for the Blessed Mother, despite the Calvert family’s Roman Catholic loyalties. It was named for Henrietta Maria, wife of Charles I of England, and daughter of the charming Henry IV of France. (“Paris is worth a mass” said he when he converted to Catholicism from his Protestant Huguenot upbringing.) The marriage of Charles and Henrietta Maria was not a happy one, complicated in many unfortunate ways. Naming the colony for her is possibly the nicest thing the king ever did for his wife. She was never popular in England or her native country, but her name lives on in the legacy of this state.
   Who is the real queen? Henrietta Maria had all the regal trappings. She was the daughter of a king, her lineage included both the Bourbons and Medici houses, her husband was a king, and two of her sons would become kings, Charles II and James II. But royal families as stubborn as the Stuarts and Bourbons knew power, and they sought to exercise it absolutely. That is what got them in trouble more than once.
   Then there is that Mary to whom the Gospels bear witness. We know next to nothing about her background, and only a few glimpses of her character emerge. Yet when we meet her in St Luke’s account of the Gospel, she is allowed to speak the definitive word for Christian discipleship: “Behold, the handmaid of the Lord; be it upon to me according to thy word.” Even Gabriel must have marveled at her obedience. Who indeed is the real queen? 

March 2, 2009
At the heart of my presentation to the adult class on February 22 was the analysis of the Book of Deuteronomy by Professor Brevard S. Childs. So rich are his insights that his summary bears repetition here where those who were not at the class can see it, and those who were there can have it to consider at greater length.
   First, a word about Professor Childs. One of the 20th century’s most influential Old Testament scholars and teachers, Brevard Childs was a member of the faculty of Yale Divinity School from 1958 until 1999. Among his students in New Haven were Christopher Seitz, former seminarian here and a distinguished scholar in his own right, and our own Phillip Ellsworth. Professor Childs and I were cousins; I have a letter in which he recounts visiting my great-grandmother at her summer residence in Saluda, NC. Bard Childs was native of Columbia, SC but he held two degrees from the University of Michigan. It was inevitable that Phil should come under his sway.
   Over his distinguished career as a scholar and teacher, Professor Childs wrote numerous books and articles, but he influenced countless students as only a superb teacher can. Yale named him a Sterling Professor, a felicitously descriptive title of honor among Yale faculty. He died in 2007 full of honors and held in warm esteem.
   In the class here I cited his summary of Deuteronomy from his comprehensive Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (1979). It is one of those books to which I refer any time I am studying the Hebrew scriptures, but it is not just a dry, academic tome: While the scholarship is of the highest order, it is written by one who saw the hand of God in Israel’s story, and the word of God brought to life and light in him who is the Word, our Lord Jesus Christ.
   The three key points Professor Childs made in summarizing Deuteronomy are these:
First, God’s covenant is not tied to past history [only], but is held in continuity as every age partakes of the blessings of that Covenant. (This is at the very heart of what we believe happens every time the Holy Communion is celebrated – every time.) 
   Second, the promise of God to his people still lies in the future. We put that truth in this familiar language: “We most heartily thank thee for that thou dost feed us, in these holy mysteries…and dost assure us thereby of thy favor and goodness towards us…and [that we] are also heirs, through hope, of thy heavenly kingdom.” Or, as Bishop William Frey of Colorado said, “We have more future with God than past.”
   Third, Deuteronomy teaches that the law demands a response of commitment. Here is one place to see that thinking: Jesus said, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment.” He is quoting Deuteronomy (6:5). As Professor Childs put it, “The purpose of God remains a dynamic imperative which evokes an active choice in order to share in the living tradition of God’s people.” Lord, incline our hearts to keep thy law.
   It was from this short section that I quoted in both the class and in this article. Better still is to get these books for yourself, or those of Christopher Seitz who is perhaps the one over whom the Childs mantle was cast and a double portion given (cf., II Kings 2:1-12, the Old Testament lesson on the day this class was taught). This little article is simply an hors d’oeuvre to a feast one can enjoy even in the otherwise abstemious days of Lent I the legacy of a faithful and wonderful teacher, scholar, and disciple. 

February 9, 2009
In the judgment of many, Abraham Lincoln is America’s greatest President. On the occasion of the bicentenary of his birth, that proposition is sure to engender appropriate historical debate and even partisan claims, lo these many years after his death. Yet if his place as a political leader is subject to a variety of opinions, it is safe to say only the most foolish would deny the place of honor he holds in the hearts of most Americans. Among our Presidents, Lincoln is clearly the one beloved of more people. No one comes close.

   It is hard to gainsay the reasons for this. The story of his life is replete with appealing vignettes. Born in lowest poverty, his rise to the White House is the stereotypical “rags to riches” story Americans hold dear. It is, of course, the antithesis of the story of Jesus. Read St Paul’s take on that in Philippians 2:5-11, the famous “Carmen Christi.” That is hardly to imply any criticism of Mr Lincoln; that observation serves, rather, as a reminder of the progression of the Lord from the place of highest honor to one of lowest estate, wherein true glory was to be found. Our Lord “did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant…”

   Still, there is so much to admire in Mr Lincoln’s story. At the St Andrew’s lower school celebration of his 200th birthday, the “plot” of their play focused on virtues our children (and adults) would do well to emulate: His dedicated pursuit of education, his demonstrable courage, and his characteristic honesty. I might add that among the graces he displayed was a superb sense of humor, no small asset in a leader, and a remarkable contrast to most (all?) politicians who then as now swan about in the public eye, taking themselves far too seriously.

   Yet when all is said and done, it is probably his compassion that draws most admirers to Mr Lincoln. The tragedies he suffered seem beyond reckoning. The reports of his haunting the War Department for news from the war front, his bouts with melancholia, if not outright depression, his string of losses in his personal life – these all contribute to his legend. They draw him to our hearts, and help us understand why newly freed slaves in Richmond bowed before him, much to his embarrassment.

   To get to his heart (in more ways than one), there is one book above others to read: Lincoln’s Greatest Speech, by Ronald C. White, Jr. Dr White is professor of American Intellectual and Religious History at San Francisco Theological Seminary. This book is his study of the second Lincoln inaugural address, the finest presidential speech of any president, at any time. Dr White provides a rhetorical analysis in a theological context. The address, only 701 words long, was delivered on March 4, 1865 to a crowd of fifty thousand or so rain-soaked onlookers, among whom stood John Wilkes Booth. Its most memorable phrase was “with malice toward none; with charity for all”. Those words signaled the direction Mr Lincoln intended to follow in his second term. Not all believe he could have been successful in such an approach, and perhaps he would not have been. But from somewhere deep within, the President summoned the “better angels of our nature” (another Lincoln phrase), and in so doing, he wrote his own legacy. Christians and Americans in general would serve a higher purpose by considering again his speech, and taking its eternal point to heart. 

January 26, 2009

Excerpt from the Rector’s Sermon to the Annual Meeting of Potomac Parish
 
This year, as our parish—as many businesses, many governments, and many households must do—watches carefully what we spend and where, I want to say a word about money and its impact on the parish life. I am not whining but stating a simple fact: There will be some things we are unable to do because we do not have the money. If you want a list of those, ask me some other time; however, I am confident few if any people hearing me say that will find it a surprising, and perhaps not even a disappointing, statement. That is simply the way things are on many levels in our society these days.
   Yet if there are things we are unable to do, there is nothing we are unable to be, by the grace of God. God did not call us to be successful, but God did call us to be faithful. When Simon and Andrew, James and John, heard the call of Jesus, it wasn’t a call to plan a balanced budget. It wasn’t a call to devise some new program. It most surely wasn’t a call to adopt a set of resolutions in a diocesan convention or a gathering of bishops. The call was clear: “Follow me”.
   That is what he asks: “Follow me.” When we speak of ways to strengthen this church of whom we are members, will this be our first priority as well? In our ideas and innovations about all manner of things we “do” around the church, are we as concerned about what we are? I say again, God does not call us to be successful; God calls us to be faithful.
   We are living in a day when success is not easy to come by, at least as the world – especially Washington and Potomac – would define success. Bottom lines are not what we will be asked about on the day of judgment. A more important and indeed salient question would be, “Did you accept and act upon my invitation to follow me?” “Did you welcome others in my Name to the fellowship you enjoyed?” “Were you faithful, or just successful?”
   I do not know all that the Lord will ask us in that day of judgment. I have said before, and I still believe, that no matter what he asks, our only possible response will be, “Lord, have mercy.” But I hope we can carry with us a heart full of gratitude that when it was our turn to follow him, we measured our response not simply by the criteria of success, but rather by hearts inclined to faithfulness. That is what he asks. That is what his invitation means when he says, “Follow me.”
 

January 19, 2009
The 54th Annual Meeting of Potomac Parish will follow the 9:00 service this Sunday, January 25. In the cycle of parish life, this time is less captivating than a beautiful evensong or youth group Bible study, but it is an important time in the life of this or any parish. I encourage your attendance. The Christian Education program for children continues until the conclusion of the meeting, and there is no 11:15 service on this day.
   The lineage of such meetings dates to the time of the Reformation. Prior to the late 16th century, “vestries” were meetings of parishioners called to make provision for the physical maintenance of the church property. The name “vestry” came from the room in which such meetings were conducted, small chambers where the clergy and others could vest for worship. Maintenance of the physical property of the parish remains a key function for vestries today.
   In 1598, Parliament added to the vestries’ responsibilities. They were charged under civil law to care for the poor of the parish, a ministry formerly exercised by monastic communities. When Henry VIII dissolved the monasteries, this function devolved upon the local congregations. It is helpful to think of a parish as a geographical unit, much like a county. (That terminology is used still in Louisiana.) Thus a congregation had responsibilities which included initially the local church property, and then the welfare of individuals within the parish’s bounds. In time, those responsibilities began to resemble the precursor role of a county council, wherein maintenance of roads and even some minor judicial matters were assigned to vestries. In colonies such as Maryland the organization of vestries was a matter of civil law as well as a spiritual concern, and even now, the vestry of this parish is constituted by the Maryland Vestry Act, a bit of state legislation dating to the 19th century, most recently revised in 1976.
   As vestries’ responsibilities evolved, common wisdom prevailed: Meetings are seldom efficient ways to accomplish broad tasks. Thus “vestries” shrank from being general congregational meetings to smaller bodies chosen and deputed to do the work of the larger body. In America, this evolution continued further as vestries were eventually elected by the parish membership, not appointed by the local lord of the manor. That is where we stand today: Vestries are elected by parishioners entitled to vote, deputed to oversee the work of the greater body of the full congregation, and charged to work with the Rector on a wide variety of matters.
   Our Annual Meeting is not a contentious time, but that lack of controversy should not be taken to suggest the agenda does not include important matters. This is the prime opportunity to participate in the representative form of church government that we follow in the Episcopal Church. Our meeting’s agenda will include election of the wardens and the Vestry, a financial report – perhaps a matter of greater interest than usual in these parlous economic times – and some other business I hope to conduct with dispatch. Once a year we ask our parish membership to gather for this purpose, and I hope you will demonstrate your commitment to the mission and work of St Francis by your presence this week.