Coming Clean

I bought a CD of gregorian chant a while back. This hymn has always been my favorite on the CD. So, I decided to find what the lyrics were (Latin runs together to my untrained ear) and mean. Given the nature of my conversion, the fruit of my search gave me much encouragement and reassurance.

Pange, lingua, gloriosi         Sing, my tongue, the Savior's glory,
Corporis mysterium,             of His flesh the mystery sing;
Sanguinisque pretiosi,          of the Blood, all price exceeding,
quem in mundi pretium           shed by our immortal King,
fructus ventris generosi        destined, for the world's redemption,
Rex effudit Gentium.            from a noble womb to spring. 

Nobis datus, nobis natus        Of a pure and spotless Virgin
ex intacta Virgine,             born for us on earth below,
et in mundo conversatus,        He, as Man, with man conversing,
sparso verbi semine,            stayed, the seeds of truth to sow;
sui moras incolatus             then He closed in solemn order
miro clausit ordine.            wondrously His life of woe.

In supremae nocte coenae        On the night of that Last Supper,
recumbens cum fratribus         seated with His chosen band,
observata lege plene            He the Pascal victim eating,
cibis in legalibus,             first fulfills the Law's command;
cibum turbae duodenae           then as Food to His Apostles
se dat suis manibus.            gives Himself with His own hand.

Verbum caro, panem verum        Word-made-Flesh, the bread of nature
verbo carnem efficit:           by His word to Flesh He turns;
fitque sanguis Christi merum,   wine into His Blood He changes;
et si sensus deficit,           what though sense no change discerns?
ad firmandum cor sincerum       Only be the heart in earnest,
sola fides sufficit.            faith her lesson quickly learns.

Tantum ergo Sacramentum         Down in adoration falling,
veneremur cernui:               Lo! the sacred Host we hail;
et antiquum documentum          Lo! o'er ancient forms departing,
novo cedat ritui:               newer rites of grace prevail;
praestet fides supplementum     faith for all defects supplying,
sensuum defectui.               where the feeble senses fail.

Genitori, Genitoque             To the everlasting Father,
laus et jubilatio,              and the Son who reigns on high,
salus, honor, virtus quoque     with the Holy Ghost proceeding
sit et benedictio:              forth from Each eternally,
procedenti ab utroque           be salvation, honor, blessing,
compar sit laudatio.            might and endless majesty.

Amen. Alleluja.                 Amen. Alleluia.

In highschool I played in the marching and symphonic bands. I had a pretty good time, I learned a lot, and I thought after moving on into college that it would just fade into a memory. What I didn’t expect was the recurring dreams.

I’m always in my seat. I’m always watching my director. And it’s just … perfect. I’m happy; everyone is trying to pull together; and what we do is beautiful and powerful.

The dream isn’t always exactly the same … but that since of perfection, overcoming odds (we played always a bit beyond our reach, and generally did it well), and happiness is always there.

And I’ve never had anything that has captured that same … community … since. And that is why I think I have had the recurring dreams since that time. And I think it is a large part of why I’m so damn depressed.

What we did there was perfect ourselves against odds for each other and the beauty of it all … a small image of what we should be doing in our spiritual lives.

I’ve just not had anything so well defined and so … intent in common, good purpose since then. And I think I would. In fact, I think that’s what is missing … or maybe it’s what I need to get over. It’d be sad though if the latter were true.

They seem to have left (or been forced out of) our cultural consciousness altogether.

… and, no, charismatics do not qualify as mystics. I’m thinking more along the lines of the monastic.

A comment I left over at Matt’s blog.

I’ve not read a lot of Chesterton, but the stuff I have read … well, it leaves me invigorated. Much the same with Lewis and Tolkien.

It’s not that these men knew how to draw out what is wrong with this world … they knew how to draw out what was right …

Sometimes I think we romanticize so much of the wrong of the world (even for seemingly right reasons) because that is what we know, can identify, and can relate to.

But these guys never romanticized the wrong. They certainly knew how to draw out and paint the depths of suffering, vice, and evil in the world … but what was romanticized and formed the contrast of their prose was the good, the ideal … a glimpse of a hobbit-esque world of self indulgent selflessness in between the larger resistance to gluttonous selfishness.

Every now and then, He shows up in my babies as they embrace the faith. Faith, hope, and charity - pretty amazing stuff when it manifests itself in little ones.

‘course, when they decide to turn off the narrow way … yeah … life is hard.

And life is hard. But for kids we think it so simple. Yet the awful confusion of it all even in that simplicity really should set our expectations for everything else to come when life becomes so much more complicated

Josh’s money quote (from about six months ago): “I want to be good, but I don’t want to be good.” We related this story later that day to the archbishop who laughed and said, “I think St. Paul said something like that.”

… I’d like to do over time.

1. Categorizing the statements of Jesus.
- What are the parables?
- What are the exhorations?
- What are the theological statements/proclomations/dogmas?
- etc

2. Developing Christian theology with Paul “second”
- Take the Gospels and the non-Pauline epistles and see how far you get.

This second one is kinda interesting to me ’cause I was looking at wikipedia today on Sola Fide and it listed the passages used in support of Sola Fide
(17 passages in all: John 3:16 John 6:28-29 (explaining Matthew 7:21) Acts 16:31 Acts 26:18 Romans 1:17-18 Romans 3:28 Romans 4:5 Romans 5:1 Romans 10:9 Romans 11:6 Romans 14:23 Ephesians 2:8-10 Philippians 3:9 Galatians 2:16 Galatians 2:21 Galatians 3:1-3 … 9-14 … 21-25 … Galatians 5:4,5)

vs those against

(20 passages in all: Matthew 5:48 (part of the Expounding of the Law) Matthew 7:21 (part of the Sermon on the Mount) Matthew 12:36-37 Matthew 16:27 Matthew 19:17 Matthew 24:10-20 (part of the Olivet discourse) Matthew 25:31-46 Matthew 28:19-20a (part of the Great Commission) Luke 8:21 Luke 10:25-28 John 5:29 Romans 2:6,7; 13 2 Corinthians 5:10 James 1:22 James Chapter Two (Excerpts) Phillipians 2:12-13 Revelation 20:13 Revelation 22:12 1 Peter 1:17 1 John 2:3-7)

Now, I’ve always known that sola fide was Paul heavy … but only two passages outside of Paul are used to support sola fide? Granted, this is just wikipedia … so I need to dust off some old studies … but still, there is something seemingly not right about it. Furthermore, the classical position of faith and works has the support of 3 of 4 gospels and all of the apostolic writers.

If you were to treat Paul “second” to everyone else, it would seem that you would have to arrive at the Catholic position. Maybe that’s why I always had the feeling that the rest of the NT was treated second to Paul in my Protestant days?

I can’t be the first to have observed/thought this, so if anyone has any links to pass along, feel free.