Lorica of St. Patrick, Part 1

To begin my series of meditations on the insights from the saints who have gone before, or historic Christianity if you want to be more academic, I thought I would start with the "Lorica of St. Patrick" or "St. Patrick's Breastplate" as it is more commonly known today. Two reasons for doing this. One, this is where my curiosity about historical Christianity was first piqued, so it seems a fitting starting point for deeper investigation. Two, starting with someone like Augustine, who has whole library departments devoted to studying him, was terrifying. And he probably deserves his own series if I am going to touch on him at all. This prayer/hymn is rather long as these things go, so I'm going to divide my study of it into two or three parts, depending on how the spirit leads, so to speak. 

This prayer most likely not written by St. Patrick himself, as the first evidence for it is several centuries after he died. However, it does emphasize certain points for which St. Patrick was known  and are attested to in his two surviving letters. For example, it begins and ends with emphasis on the triune nature of God, focuses on God's power to protect his faithful and his abiding presence with believers. It was written in an ancient Irish dialect, in the form of a lorica. A lorica  was a type of incantation or spell used by druids to ward off evil, and means "breastplate" or armor. It begins with an invocation of the deity, followed by what you are invoking them for, ended with a reiteration of who you are talking to and with what authority. This prayer could be seen as a reclamation of the lorica from pagan hands for use as spiritual armor, such as Paul talks about. 

Most people, if they are familiar with this prayer, are familiar with Cecil Frances Alexander's metricized and edited version known in hymn books as "I Bind Unto Myself Today" (incidentally, one of the few if not the only hymn set to two tunes in one setting). Alexander's version puts the prayer into iambic tetrameter, and eliminates verses 6 and 7. Both poems are rather long, so I will reproduce them as necessary, rather than in full. Both can be found in full on the The Order of St. Patrick's website. 

The first thing you notice when reading through the texts is that it is a combination of catechism and prayer for protection and guidance . The first two verses in particular, while invoking God's power, lays out the foundation beliefs of Christianity: the Trinity, God as creator of all, Christ's birth, baptism, death, burial, resurrection, ascension and promised return for Judgement are all there in the first two verses. Its a good place to start. Alexander's version fleshes it out with more details ("His baptism in the Jordan River/ His death on the Cross for my salvation/ His bursting from the spiced tomb" vs "... his baptism,/ to the virtue of his crucifixion with his burial,/ to the virtue of his resurrection..."). If you were writing under the name of the man who helped convert Ireland, you'd probably want to start out with an emphasis on the Trinity and a catechism. 

Catechisms and confessions of faith are kind of funny things these days. I've been to quite a number of churches that don't have any sort of confession of faith as part of their normal services. I've known upstanding members of congregations who could not recite the Apostles' Creed or explain why each phrase in there was important. Now, last post I wrote about relying more on the wisdom of God and less on the wisdom of man, but I can't help but think this falls under the category of wisdom of God. Christ knew his time was short. I seriously doubt he wasted  his time. Shouldn't we be holding to our catechisms, which encapsulate the most fundamental of our beliefs and the entire story of salvation, like a life preserver? Not letting them fall by the wayside while we get distracted with petty side issues that do nothing to further the work we were set out to do. 

The next verse concerns itself with aligning the speaker with both the heavenly host and that great cloud of witnesses. 

   I bind myself today to the virtue of ranks of Cherubim,
          in obedience of Angels,
          [in service of Archangels]
          in hope of resurrection for reward,
          in prayers of Patriarchs,
          in preaching of Apostles,
          in faiths of Confessors,
          in innocence of Holy Virgins,
          in deeds of righteous men.

or, as Alexander phrases it

I bind unto myself the power
of the great love of cherubim;
the sweet "Well done" in judgment hour;
the service of the seraphim;
confessors' faith, apostles' word,
the patriarchs' prayers, the prophets' scrolls;
all good deeds done unto the Lord,
and purity of virgin souls.

This verse is left out of many hymnal versions, either because the hymnal editors only allow five verses and this one is deemed less important, the weird scan of the second line or some other reason (I have heard one person object to the idea of virgin souls being purer). With the possible exception of hemming and hawing over the Holy Virgins, there's not much of a problem with the last five lines of the original verse. We might not emphasize the saints who have gone before, but its not like we don't talk about Moses or Peter or the martyrs or praise good deeds done. Why wouldn't we want to say "I stand with these people and by their good deeds"? Its the other verses I would like to focus on for the moment.

The writer seems to be a lot more comfortable talking about cherubim and angels than most Christians I know, including myself. Cherubim have gotten labeled as those stupid winged baby heads and angels have become synonymous with 'guardian angel' or sappy religious Hallmark cards. "Don't drive faster than your guardian angel can fly" and that pouty pastel child you see on baptism cards. Those things couldn't strike fear into the heart of the Cowardly Lion, pre Oz. This prayer isn't talking about these mythical things, more fairy than servant of the Most High. It's talking about an Angel of the LORD. The being that has to preface every human interaction with "Be not afraid". The creatures who hover at the throne of God and cover their faces. God's messengers and generals. Putti I wouldn't want to be caught dead with. The cherubim that Isaiah saw or the angels who lead the charge against the dragon in Revelation? Them I would be proud to bind myself to. 

"Hope of Resurrection for Reward". "The sweet 'Well done' in judgment hour". Judgement Day. Dooms Day. The End of Days. Talking about the apocalypse is in right now, but its always the zombie apocalypse, the Mayan apocalypse, or some random dude with a calculator and selective reading ability's apocalypse. For the most part, Christians don't seem to like to talk about it these days. Too many wackadoodles. Too many awkward conversations. Apocalyptic literature reads, honestly, like a really weird acid trip. Eschatology is a field with a lot of good minds in it, but not one you're average Joe is going to dive into as a hobby.

Nevermind that for believers, its supposed to be a good thing. We will be raised in new, incorruptible bodies. We will see God, and we don't have to be afraid. We're washed in the blood of the Lamb, our transgressions have been blotted out. Judgement Day is when we get to hear "Good job." And afterwards comes the new heaven and new earth and that is going to be the most wonderful thing ever.