I think it pisses God off if you walk by the color purple in
a field somewhere and don’t notice it.
Alice
Walker
When I am an old woman I will wear purple, with a red hat
That doesn’t suit me . . .
But maybe I ought to practice a little now
So people who know me are not too shocked and surprised
When suddenly I am old, and start to wear purple.
Jenny
Joseph
We Episcopalians find
many details to fret over. I wonder if the fretting is a self-protecting device
to distract us from a big picture that might be too wonderful for us to bear.
One thing we are
particularly prone to fretting over is colors. For example, there is the color
purple. Episcopal bishops wear purple clergy shirts. Some wear a darker shade
called blue-purple; others wear a lighter version called rose-purple. Some say
the two shades distinguish the high church from the low church. Others say they
label the liberals and the conservatives. I could never find a consensus, so I
wear both, alternately, mostly to assure that people will know I do in fact
change my shirt daily.
Recently I have come
across a sartorial scruple that strikes me as unhelpful. I have encountered both
clergy and laity who feel that they cannot wear purple or that they cannot wear
purple in my presence. They are under the impression purple scarves, blouses,
skirts, socks, etc. are liturgically verboten.
I want to go on
record, just for here in Nevada, that this Bishop does not see how God’s
Kingdom Mission is advanced by such fussiness over purple. Purple clerical
shirts help color code our clergy so we can tell the bishops from the priests
and deacons, but with regard to any other item of clothing, the episcopacy
cannot claim a monopoly on a band of the color spectrum. So, Nevada brothers
and sisters, please, in the spirit of Alice Walker and Jenny Joseph, wear
purple to your heart’s content.
While we are on the
subject of purple, let us speak of Advent. It used to be normative to use
purple appointments in churches during the Advent season. In recent years, some
churches have replaced the purple with blue. Strong opinions have arisen
dividing the Purple Party from the Blue Party over this difference. I wish to
say emphatically and with the deepest of convictions, it doesn’t matter. True,
there is no real precedent for this use of blue. Blue, I am told, was the color
used by the Medieval English Church EXCEPT during Advent and Lent. Saying that blue is somehow less penitential
than purple is as subjective as the interpretations of different shades of
bishop clergy shirts. The argument has been persuasively advanced that this use
of blue is a ploy by liturgical suppliers, “whose names must not be spoken,” to
sell more frontals. But, so what?
For a little
perspective, the practice of using liturgical colors to help set the spiritual
tone of the season – like the different opening acclamations, collects, proper
prefaces, and dismissals actually prescribed by the Prayer Book – goes all the
way back to the 4th Century. But different churches have used
different colors in different times. See, http://fullhomelydivinity.org/articles/colors%20full%20page.htm
The liturgical color
scheme is written in water colors, not stone. Moreover, it is a matter of
custom and practice, not a rule guiding our liturgy.
Blue is not “less
penitential.” Royal blue is associated with royalty so in Advent it suggests
the coming of the King. Bright blue is associated with the sky or Heaven where
the Angels proclaim the incarnation. It is also associated with Mary, the “Queen
of Heaven,” and so the Church waits with Mary for the birth. But the Purple
Party has a perspective too. Purple also represents royalty and the coming of
the King as well as penitence. So, there is truly no right or wrong about the choice
of color for Advent.
Another confusion arises
over the liturgical colors on the bishops visit or at baptism. The answer is
that the regular color of the day is appropriate. Galley, The Ceremonies of the Eucharist, p. 174.
But here’s my one
actual concern: Episcopalians would be shocked to hear themselves called “fanatics,”
but I once heard fanaticism defined as becoming so obsessed with the means that
one forgets the ends. I might use the word “idolatry,” worshiping the creature
instead of the Creator. We sometimes fret
too much over details – “getting it right” – without thinking of the meaning
the colors and other liturgical symbols are intended to express. The soul is
not expanded by fussiness over details but rather by immersion in the spirit of
the liturgy. True, in ignorance of the spirit of the liturgy, we are apt to get
the details wrong. But then the problem is not transgression of a rule of
etiquette to which the more scrupulous say “tsk tsk” but rather a deafness to
God’s call.
I hope our people
will learn the liturgy, not so they can be perfectionist and “get it right”
more often than others – but so they can soak it in and let the ancient symbols
of the faith grow their spirits and embolden their hearts for God’s mission in
our suffering world.
No comments:
Post a Comment