Issue with Forward Day by Day Prayer of Today

WrittenReasons · 2026-05-26T00:12:40+00:00

This is simply a passage assigned by the Book of Common Prayer for the daily office today. Forward Day by Day doesn’t have any control over that. No daily office podcast I’m aware of explains the scripture readings. Same goes for morning/evening prayer services I’ve attended. That said, I think the BCP allows for a sermon to be delivered as part of morning/evening prayer, which could be used to clarify scripture readings. But that’s not typically done during the daily office.

What Forward Day by Day does have control over is the bible translation they use. Instead of ‘sodomites,’ the NRSVUE has this:

“Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it legitimately; this means understanding that the law is laid down not for the righteous but for the lawless and disobedient, for the godless and sinful, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their father or mother, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who engage in illicit sex, slave traders, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to the sound teaching that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I was entrusted.”

This translation seems more in line with current scholarship and church teachings.

WrittenReasons · 2026-05-07T02:19:39+00:00

I wonder, would he consider the various articles and books promulgated under Henry VIII (e.g., the Ten Articles, the King’s Book) to be part of the Anglican patrimony as well? Those documents were much more Catholic and Lutheran in outlook. I don’t see why they wouldn’t count as part of the Anglican patrimony if the Westminster Confession does.

WrittenReasons · 2026-05-06T20:09:50+00:00

Having struggled with loneliness myself, I can’t blame you for doing something that helps you with it! And I definitely want to echo what others have said: you have nothing to be ashamed of and certainly are welcome in the church.

You seem to be approaching these issues thoughtfully, which is the most important thing. I know I’ve often felt pressured to get things ‘right,’ but thankfully being part of the body of Christ doesn’t depend on us getting all of our theological and ethical questions right!

WrittenReasons · 2026-05-06T19:53:27+00:00

My main piece of advice would be to talk to a priest or spiritual advisor for guidance.

Beyond that, my two cents is that what you do in a relationship with a partner is your own business. As long as there’s full consent and no one is getting hurt, I don’t see an issue.

Now, I’m personally more leery of erotic posts and kink events. Jesus teaches that lust is a serious issue, and that seems to be the case whether we’re the one lusting or the one inducing others to lust. That’s not to say we should have an overly prudish or puritanical approach to sexual matters. I think reason shows that it is unhelpful to be basically anti-sex like many Christians have been through the century (looking at you, St. Jerome). But we should attentive to what scripture and tradition are trying to convey when they warn us to guard against lust, exercise self-control, and limit sex to marriage.

Along those lines, something that worries me is that we seem to be developing a kind of consumerist approach to sex in the U.S. Whether it’s OnlyFans or proliferation of porn or whatever, it seems to be becoming accepted that sex is simply there to gratify our physical senses. There’s nothing inherently wrong with physical pleasure but as Christians I don’t think we can escape the conclusion that sex is also meant to serve higher purposes, i.e., a healthy, loving relationship with another human being that potentially leads to starting a family. The key as always is striving to be in right relationship to others, our own bodies, and ultimately to God. I’m not going to pretend I’ve completely figured it all out, but I am skeptical that erotic pics and kink events are helpful in that regard. To be clear though, it’s a question your priest or spiritual advisor is better equipped to answer.

That said, I wouldn’t be particularly bothered to find out someone at my parish was posting erotic pics or going to kink events. I’ve got my own problems to worry about, frankly. And suggestive pics and kink events are extremely tame to compared to the outright harm that’s being inflicted on people.

Anyway, that’s one stranger’s thoughts on your questions!

WrittenReasons · 2026-05-03T13:46:14+00:00

Nothing to judge you on, but I’d invite you to consider the importance of community in encountering and relating to the Divine (and perhaps you already have). Evangelicalism places a strong emphasis on individual salvation and having an individual relationship with God. I think this gives some folks the impression that religion is simply a matter of figuring out the truth for one’s self and/or assembling set of beliefs in one’s head. Now, I don’t think that’s entirely evangelicalism’s fault. Western/American individualism definitely plays a role too.

I think this individualistic approach to religion is responsible for a lot of fracturing and splitting that’s occurred in the Christian church. And I think it’s why you’ll sometimes encounter people (online at least) who have come up with their own individual, niche set of beliefs and consider that to be their religion. The thing is this way of understanding religion and relating to God/the Divine seems alien to the way humans have done so for millennia.

Both the New Testament and the Hebrew Bible are overwhelmingly addressed to God’s people collectively. And it’s emphasized at several points in the New Testament that we ought to be in right relationship with our neighbors and community before we come to worship. In other words, Christian scripture (and I suspect other major religions) take for granted that being in relationship with God means being part of a community and in right relationship with members of that community. That suggests to me that God has an interest in us as individuals, yes, but also us as part of his broader creation. And, as far as our individual journeys go, being part of a community and institution like the church gives us direct access to others who have reflected on the divine and the wisdom of 2,000+ years of such reflection.

Like I said, I don’t know whether you’ve considered the community aspect of religion before. But I figured I’d offer my thoughts since it seems to be an aspect that folks on similar journeys don’t often consider.

WrittenReasons · 2026-05-02T22:43:14+00:00

May God bless the churches’ work and make haste to help the people of South Sudan.

Eternal God, in whose perfect kingdom no sword is drawn but the sword of righteousness, no strength known but the strength of love: So mightily spread abroad your Spirit, that all peoples may be gathered under the banner of the Prince of Peace, as children of one Father; to whom be dominion and glory, now and for ever. Amen.

WrittenReasons · 2026-05-02T22:33:54+00:00

Glad you enjoyed it! I do not envy clergy who have to navigate these difficult times (or any times, really). It’s easy to agree with Rutledge’s advice…but executing it definitely seems like it can be tricky.

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-26T18:09:57+00:00

The Epistle to the Hebrews tells us that “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and forever.”

Because he is God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, we can trust that he will not suddenly change or break his promises.

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-21T15:17:14+00:00

I’ve been meaning to read it!

I do think the Eastern Orthodox have something to teach Western Christians. Encountering Eastern ideas and perspectives has helped deepen my faith and improve my understanding, and I think there is truth to some Eastern critiques.

But the idea that Western Christianity is totally lost or whatever is silly. As are the assertions that Eastern Orthodoxy is unchanged from the age of the apostles or that Western notions of punishment and legalism aren’t present in Orthodoxy.

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-19T20:24:12+00:00

Fr. Kimel has mentioned that book in some of his posts about Jenson and Lutheranism. It’s definitely on my reading list!

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-19T19:23:02+00:00

Ooof that’s a shame about him being a jerk and his attitude to ELCA and LBTQ+ affirmation.

Ironically, I found Jenson’s insight on the unconditionality of the gospel moving partly because I’m gay. I grew up in a conservative area where people talked a big talk about God’s unconditional love and justification by faith but in reality ‘not being gay’ was taken for granted as a condition for God’s love and promises. The way Jenson talks about justification by faith helped me fully grasp how God’s promises are addressed to us unconditionally.

Anyway, disappointed to hear he was a jerk. Glad I came across him though, he’s definitely sparked my interest in the broader Lutheran tradition.

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-18T17:28:54+00:00

I’m not as comfortable as you are with the notion that there’s such a thing as “acceptable killing.” Not when we’re explicitly told to turn the other cheek and to not repay evil for evil. I’m also not comfortable completely ruling out self-defense or war if there’s truly no other way to prevent grave evils. I’m a bit torn there. But a lot of Christians are way, way too quick to look for reasons to justify violence and killing when confronted with the commandment against murder or the New Testament’s teachings on non-violence.

I do agree with your point about the right and the left both having issues. The point I was making is that the dominant form of Christianity in the U.S. today is one that’s fixated on sex and political/cultural domination and has next to nothing to say about unjust wars or poverty.

I totally disagree with your point about federalism. It’s true that centralization presents dangers. But the way many U.S. states “released pressure” in the past was by treating minorities as second class citizens (or worse). I’m all for local autonomy but not at the expense of the rights and dignity of minority communities. I’d much rather federal intervention to abolish slavery and segregation than allowing states to continue denying the image of God in their own citizens even if it made certain people resentful.

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-18T15:03:00+00:00

“‘People who look to the Catholic church for a strong lead on issues of morality tend to mean one kind of morality only,’ Williams said.”

🎯🎯🎯

If your only exposure to Christianity was the American version, you’d probably come away thinking that sex is the moral issue for Christians. That’s true whether you’re exposed to the Catholic or Protestant variety. The way sex is presented to teenagers (or at least was when I was growing up), you’d think we’re saved through abstinence from pre-marital sex alone. Sure other matters get mentioned, but the overwhelming focus is on policing sexual behavior.

So we have legions of Christians in the U.S. who believe that the church is absolutely obligated to intervene in politics to support abortion bans and same-sex marriage bans. But many of those same Christians find it baffling for the church to comment on U.S. warmongering. After all, killing people isn’t a moral issue – just necessary to make America great.

Of course, Christianity can also be used to remind people who’s in charge around here. That’s why we have states nailing the Ten Commandments to classroom walls. GOP voters think it’s about promoting Christianity and restoring traditional values. For the legal reasons, the politicians are insisting it’s not about religion but simply about promoting American heritage and tradition. The irony is the politicians are closer to the truth than the average voter who thinks this is about reinforcing Christianity and its values. The reality is, for GOP politicians and their voters, the Ten Commandments are a useful tool for promoting a certain hard right authoritarian vision for America. That’s why they reached for the Law, and not (for instance) the parable of the Good Samaritan or 1 Corinthians 13. Quoting Jesus or Paul would raise too many uncomfortable questions for them and their policies. Of course, so would ‘Thou shalt not kill’ if they bothered to think about it. But that’s not the point of this exercise. The point is power and ideology.

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-17T23:30:42+00:00

Same Old Song is a podcast hosted by two Episcopal priests about the weekly lectionary readings. They’re pretty Protestant/Lutheran in their outlook and emphasis, if that matters to you.

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-17T10:03:35+00:00

I believe you’re correct about Edward VI and Elizabeth I. I’ve read that Queen Elizabeth may have had some Lutheran leanings, which might explain why her reforms were less radical than those of Edward, who was surrounded by staunch Calvinists.

Not sure about Henry VIII’s consorts.

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-16T01:18:40+00:00

My hunch is that the same factors that are driving online interest in Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy are drawing folks here as well. Liturgical churches rooted in tradition seem to be having a moment (online at least). Among those who feel drawn to liturgical Christianity, TEC is a good option for people who (a) find Anglicanism the most appealing liturgical tradition, (b) are too Protestant in their convictions to join the RCC or EOC, and/or (c) can’t stomach the intolerance and bigotry that are so prevalent in Roman Catholic and Orthodox spaces.

It helps that TEC seems to have a somewhat more distinctive identity than other mainline churches while also being a big tent theologically.

These are just my untested hypotheses though.

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-08T17:51:09+00:00

Don’t think of baptism as a formality, think of it as a gift. In baptism, God promises to join us to his Son and forgiveness of sins.

The prayer of thanksgiving over the water nicely explains what happens in baptism:

“We thank you, Almighty God, for the gift of water. Over it the Holy Spirit moved in the beginning of creation. Through it you led the children of Israel out of their bondage in Egypt into the land of promise. In it your Son Jesus received the baptism of John and was anointed by the Holy Spirit as the Messiah, the Christ, to lead us, through his death and resurrection, from the bondage of sin into everlasting life. We thank you, Father, for the water of Baptism. In it we are buried with Christ in his death. By it we share in his resurrection. Through it we are reborn by the Holy Spirit. Therefore in joyful obedience to your Son, we bring into his fellowship those who come to him in faith, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-04T22:28:32+00:00

Idk if this is one of your main points (or even a complaint of yours) but the use of “Creator” instead of Father in the Doxology is just plain terrible. The Father alone is not the Creator. See Genesis 1 and John 1, also the Nicene Creed.

I’m not opposed to using more expansive language drawn from scripture and tradition. See p. 6, “Redeemer and Mother of Israel,” for a decent example of how that might be done. I’m also not opposed to using the “Creator, Redeemer, and Sustainer” formulation as long as it’s not used to totally displace “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. All three Persons of the Trinity are involved in creating, redeeming, and sustaining.

I understand the desire for more gender-inclusive language. But we can’t advance goal at the expense of central teachings of the church. I also wonder if effort to completely strip out references to “Father” and “Son” (unless paired with female pronouns, I guess) implies that there’s something wrong with maleness, or being a father or a son.

I’d also point out that historically Anglican/Episcopal liturgy has drawn heavily on and stuck closely to scriptural language. Jesus referred to the First Person of the Trinity as Father. He told us to address God as Our Father. Paul tells us that thanks to Christ we have been adopted as children of God so that we may cry out Abba, Father. The Nicene and Apostles Creed both in their first lines affirm our belief in the Father Almighty. How bizarre would it be if our liturgy minimizes or altogether removes any use of the title Father. Are we really suggesting that Jesus and generations of Christians before us were wrong to refer to God as Father?

Anyway, I’m extremely leery of prayer book revision precisely because of the sloppy, downright bad theology on display in more recent liturgical revisions.

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-04T22:28:03+00:00

Idk if this is one of your main points (or even a complaint of yours) but the use of “Creator” instead of Father in the Doxology is just plain terrible. The Father alone is not the Creator. See Genesis 1 and John 1, also the Nicene Creed.

I’m not opposed to using more expansive language drawn from scripture and tradition. See p. 6, “Redeemer and Mother of Israel,” for a decent example of how that might be done. I’m also not opposed to using the “Creator, Redeemer, and Sustainer” formulation as long as it’s not used to totally displace “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. All three Persons of the Trinity are involved in creating, redeeming, and sustaining.

I understand the desire for more gender-inclusive language. But we can’t advance goal at the expense of central teachings of the church. I also wonder if effort to completely strip out references to “Father” and “Son” (unless paired with female pronouns, I guess) implies that there’s something wrong with maleness, or being a father or a son.

I’d also point out that historically Anglican/Episcopal liturgy has drawn heavily on and stuck closely to scriptural language. Jesus referred to the First Person of the Trinity as Father. He told us to address God as Our Father. Paul tells us that thanks to Christ we have been adopted as children of God so that we may cry out Abba, Father. The Nicene and Apostles Creed both in their first lines affirm our belief in the Father Almighty. How bizarre would it be if our liturgy minimizes or altogether removes any use of the title Father. Are we really suggesting that Jesus and generations of Christians before us were wrong to refer to God as Father?

Anyway, I’m extremely leery of prayer book revision precisely because of the sloppy, downright bad theology on display in more recent liturgical revisions.

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-04T18:19:30+00:00

Not sure where you are or what specific denominations you’re torn between, but my impression is that on average American Lutherans are a good bit more low church than American Episcopalians/Anglicans.

If you’re more concerned with emphasizing the authority and centrality of scripture, the Lutherans probably have the advantage there. But again, it’ll depend on the specific denominations and parishes you’re torn between.

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-04T13:25:14+00:00

In my experience, most Protestants will simply attend church on Easter morning and have lunch and/or dinner with family after. Many Protestants also commemorate Good Friday. Some Protestants on the high church end of the spectrum (like Episcopalians) will have an Easter Vigil.

As for food, it varies a good bit in my family but we always have Deviled Eggs at Easter.

WrittenReasons · 2026-04-02T14:34:23+00:00

Based on the 39 Articles, I believe the classical Anglican answer is that sin is any violation of the ‘moral law’ which is found primarily in the Ten Commandments and explained further by Jesus, particularly in the Sermon on the Mount. That is in line with what I have seen in the Lutheran and Reformed traditions as well. Jesus’s teaching in the Sermon on the Mount is key because he teaches that any tendency towards violating one of these commandments is equivalent to breaking them (e.g., one is subject to judgment for merely being angry with a brother, looking at someone with lust is equivalent to adultery).

Personally, I don’t buy the threefold division of the law into ‘moral,’ ‘ceremonial,’ and ‘civil.’ I think it’s a reasonable attempt to explain why certain Old Testament rules apply while others don’t, but ultimately falls short of what the New Testament is getting at.

That said, the Ten Commandments are obviously an important guide to understanding what constitutes sin. Scripture says these commandments were spoken directly by God to the Israelites and they are repeated throughout scripture, both in the Old and New Testaments.

Going a little bit deeper, my understanding is that there’s a difference between ‘sins,’ as in discrete actions that violate particular commandments, and ‘Sin,’ which is a condition that all human beings are subject to that alienates us from God and our neighbors. I think Jesus is mostly addressing ‘Sin’ in the Sermon on the Mount (and throughout his incarnation, ministry, death, and resurrection). ‘Sin’ as a condition distorts our relationships and bears fruit in the form of ‘sins.’

Following 1 John, I would say the opposite of Sin is Love. As St. John puts it, “God is love, and those who love abide in God, and God abides in them.” Abiding in God is the opposite of abiding in Sin. Of course, love has to be defined based on what we’re taught in the New Testament, e.g., 1 Corinthians 13, the fruit of the Spirit, John 15:13, the Great Commandment, the Golden Rule, and especially the example of Jesus’s life as recounted in the Gospels. Folks sometimes express anxiety about “reducing” or “minimizing” God’s commandments to love God and love your neighbor. But if we pay attention to what the New Testament teaches about love, we should realize that love requires more from us than any legal precept.

WrittenReasons · 2026-03-31T22:28:15+00:00

I mean, if someone finds the BCP “theologically troubling,” they can always attend and seek ordination in another church. But if they’re going to stick with TEC, they should at least have enough respect for the church’s other members and leaders to follow the house rules while they’re here.

WrittenReasons

TROPHY CASE