tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37649987869033177042023-11-16T04:45:46.527-08:00Father, give me a worda disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.comBlogger62125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-61631769222877808142022-05-26T12:20:00.002-07:002022-05-26T12:20:53.997-07:00Changes ahead <p>"Everything changes and nothing stands still." A saying of Heraclitus of Ephesus who also, incidentally, has given us the philosophical grounding of "logos" so integral to the theology of the Johannine Gospel and Epistles. </p><p>I mention this for two reasons: 1. It's just interesting (knowledge for its own sake and all that) and 2. I will be moving in a few weeks' time to take up a teaching job at a new classical school in Florida. There is a link on the sidebar if you want to check it out. An opportunity presented itself that was too good to pass up, particularly the chance to be academically "useful" again and to once more have a meaningful ministry. <br /></p><p>Thus the blog will resort to its typical lack of new posts for some time as I get settled in. Thanks for reading. Stay tuned... <br /></p>a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-21559125354810268932022-04-24T03:00:00.002-07:002022-04-24T03:00:00.174-07:00Low Sunday<p>On this Sunday I am privileged to be the guest preacher at St. Paul Anglican parish in Melbourne, Florida. Here's what I have to say: </p><p>In the Book of Common Prayer, there are four selections from the Gospels given for the Octave of Easter. On Sunday, we hear about the empty tomb from St. John. On Monday, St. Luke tells of the disciples walking to Emmaus and speaking about Jesus. Only after they have shared a meal with the stranger they meet on the road do they realize it is the risen Christ in their presence. Tuesdays’ Gospel and this mornings’ are accounts of Jesus appearing to the Apostles as they are gathered in the upper room, where I am sure the very air is filled with an admixture of fear, confusion and hope. It is interesting to me that one of His first acts is to show them His wounds from the Crucifixion as proof that He lives. I’ll just bet that our first reaction upon meeting someone unexpectedly would not be to hoist a pant leg and show off that knee replacement. In fact, we spend considerable time and effort trying to conceal our wounds and imperfections from each other and ourselves. Just look at all the ads for Botox, effortless weight loss and prescriptions for various dysfunctions mental and physical that surround us in print and electronic media. Just so, there are many these days, consciously or not, who wish to conceal the wounds of Christ as well; who think that, in light of the Resurrection, His suffering and death and the torments that He received as predicted especially by Isaiah are nothing but temporary inconveniences now thankfully passed into the dustbin of history and non-being. Why? They make us uncomfortable, for they are icons of our sinfulness. The problem with trying to eliminate them is that we are not just baptized into Jesus' Resurrection, but also into His death. As soon as we have spiritually probed His hands and feet and accepted this as reality, then we inherit the obligation to follow Him all the way through the tomb. It is not always a pleasant journey: it's dark, cramped and it stinks. It is a journey that will cause us to encounter all kinds of things about ourselves that we would just as soon forget. <br /> </p><p>From a homily of St. Gregory the Great: “For whatever can be touched, must needs be subject to corruption; and whatever is not subject to corruption cannot be touched. But, in a way altogether wonderful and incomprehensible, our Redeemer after his Resurrection revealed himself in a body at once palpable and incorruptible. Yea, he revealed himself in an incorruptible body, that we might learn to seek a like glorification; and in a palpable body, for the strengthening of our faith.” <br /> </p><p>One of the fundamental principles of Christian spirituality, summed up in the Collect for today, takes up this theme of duality, of life in death, of palpability and incorruptibility, by recalling that we cannot have joy without suffering any more than we can know suffering apart from joy. Our Lord’s passion and death tell us as much. Easter is as impossible without Good Friday as Good Friday is impossible without Easter. Why, then, try to deny the undeniable? Jesus shows the Apostles His hands and feet, saying: ‘Yes, I am alive and here’s the proof of what I did for you.’ Those marks are the marks of our sins; past, present and future. Even after Easter they are apparent. And that’s okay. They show us how desperately we were in need of redemption. And they also encapsulate Christ's perfect, all sufficient work of redemption on the Cross and in the Resurrection. If we try to conceal them, we deny reality and we are not being true to ourselves. (We do the work of the 'father of lies', per Jesus' admonition in John 8:44). They are our last refuge against the forthrightness of God’s justice, but also the greatest proof of His mercy. In them, He says to us: 'a perfectly effectual sacrifice was required of you, I have offered that sacrifice for you.' <br /> </p><p>The Epistle this morning contains some rather evocative imagery: water, blood and the Spirit. In a literary sense, the entirety of the history of our salvation is presented here: from the flood waters of Genesis, to the passage through the Red Sea, down to the ministry of John the Baptist; from the blood shed at the institution of the Covenant with Abraham by means of circumcision to the blood offerings in the Temple to the perfect Lamb Who was slain once for all on the Cross; from the motive power of the Holy Ghost over the formless wasteland to the inspiration of the words of the Prophets, to Jesus breathing on the Apostles and giving them the gift of the Holy Ghost. <br /> </p><p>These three elements mentioned in St. John also make an appearance sacramentally in each of our lives as well. Water flows at our baptism, the Holy Spirit is invoked at our confirmation by the bishop, and the blood of Christ is made present in the elements on the altar each time we celebrate the Holy Eucharist. In a sense, during the course of these sacramental acts all of those things I just mentioned (from the Flood waters to the breathing forth of the Holy Ghost) are recalled and in that remembering are made present in order that we as believers might perpetually bear in heart, mind and body all that has come to pass. In Greek, this is known as anamnésis, and also forms one of the key elements in our Prayer of Consecration over the Eucharistic elements, to wit: "having in remembrance his blessed passion and precious death, his mighty resurrection and glorious ascension; rendering unto thee most hearty thanks for the innumerable benefits procured unto us by the same." In both the life of Jesus and our lives in Him, these three things point to the truth of God, as St. John tells us in the Epistle as well. That truth is intrinsically connected to both Calvary and the empty tomb. <br /> </p><p>Water, blood and the Spirit. These are not somehow mystical talismans any more than are the physical pages of the Bible or the words themselves printed thereon - able to be summoned on demand to confirm our self-assumed righteousness or to confound our perceived enemies. These things have no power to conceal our sins or to hide our true character. Neither do they have any power to erase the wounds Christ received on the Cross. And thank God for that! That is why He appears as He does to the Apostles. What they are able to do, however, is far more significant. They bring us into the fellowship that is the Church. It is at that point that our personal contribution to living the Christian life begins, where we "fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in [our] flesh, for his body, which is the church" (Col. 1:24). Then we must learn, in the words of the Collect, to: “put away the leaven of malice and wickedness, that we may always serve [God] in pureness of living and truth; through the merits of…Jesus Christ our Lord.” That is how we deal with our woundedness. <br /> </p><p>I would also like to spend some time considering the idea of leavening as mentioned in the collect, for it is an oft-invoked image of both the Old and New Testaments. One of the definitions of the verb to leaven given in Webster’s is: “to mingle, or permeate with a transforming element.” And I thought, how like the Cross and Resurrection that is. The triple aspect of Spirit, water and blood that we hear about this morning does indeed permeate our lives as Christians, allowing our entire being to be transformed into an image of Jesus Christ himself. Indeed, we have no other purpose than this: to continuously engage and be engaged by this process until it becomes indistinguishable from our very selves. <br /> </p><p>But then I thought, how like sin is this leavening also. For every sin begins on the surface, as an impulse of the intellect, having its cause from either internal or external stimuli. If it is allowed room to develop in the mind, then it finds its way to the will where it works to gain control of our motive power. After that, it is just a matter of time before we are doing or saying today what we only gave ashamed thought to yesterday. The further this process is allowed to develop, the more difficult it becomes to extricate it from our lives. Thoughts become desires, become actions, become habits, become a part of the “just who we are” that is so incorrectly affirmed by some contemporary thinking. Is it any wonder that so many people simply have no ‘moral compass’ at all these days? They are not asking for blame, but for help, in the manner proved by the Good Samaritan. <br /> </p><p>But the converse is also true. The more virtue is allowed to expand in the mind, the more it will affect our motive powers as well. Think of it this way. We live in a physical universe where everything takes up a finite amount of space. If I have a jar full of water and I drop some stones into it, what happens? Some of the water is pushed out to make room for the stones. It is the same way in the spiritual life. Virtue and vice both compete for the same amount of space that is our soul. Adding more of one will necessarily force out some of the other. What we struggle with then, is not just to remove as much of the bad as possible but also fill its place with the good. And in this process, just as some water from the jar is bound to spill over onto the floor, surely some of our own woundedness will be exposed to view, our own or that of others, just as the wounds of Christ were visible in His post-Resurrection appearances. And that is a good thing. It puts us in touch with reality (God is not deceived, no matter how hard we try). And...it is an opportunity for greater humility in our dealings with each other and ourselves. There is an oft-quoted adage that the road to recovery begins with admitting we have a problem. In the same way, our road to eternal life begins in the pierced hands, feet and side of Jesus Christ, from which flow water and blood and the Spirit of God is outpoured. <br /> </p><p>In conclusion, consider this, from the Old Testament Lesson at Morning Prayer today: "But now thus saith the Lord that created thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name, thou art mine. When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee: when thou walkest through the fire, thou shalt not be burned; neither shall the flame kindle upon thee" (Is. 43:1-2). <br /> </p><p>We who are baptised have indeed passed safely through the waters. Though their depths are dark, we have great confidence in the One Who passed this way before us. He has taken up and perfected the journey of the Israelites through the Red Sea, thus making sign and symbol come to fruition in reality. On account of this, we can now boldly accept the injunction given to the Romans: "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?" (6:3). And, in the words of the Psalmist: "Therefore will not we fear...Though the waters thereof roar and be troubled, though the mountains shake with the swelling thereof." (Ps. 46: 2-3a) <br /> </p><p>We who have received the fire of the Holy Ghost have received the gift of Him Who burns within but does not consume, the Divine reality of the type presented in Exodus. Rather do these fires serve the purpose described by the Prophet Malachi: "But who may abide the day of his coming? And who shall stand when he appeareth? For he is like a refiner's fire, and like fuller's soap: And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness" (Mal. 3:2-3). <br /> </p><p>And so, whenever our Lord comes to you, in whatever guise or circumstance of life it may be, He greets you with His peace and shows you His wounds. Do not be afraid to do likewise. In light of the events that have come to pass liturgically these past two weeks, we have been given everything we need to come to terms with them. <br /></p>a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-38423610249689016742022-01-10T18:20:00.002-08:002022-01-10T18:24:21.919-08:00Thomas Merton & Chuang Tzu (2) <p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> "Personalism and
individualism must not be confused. Personalism gives priority to the
person and not the individual self. To give priority to the person
means respecting the unique and inalienable value of the other
person, as well as one's own, for a respect that is centered only on
one's individual self to the exclusion of others proves itself to be
fraudulent." (The Way..., p. 17)</p>
<p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">I hope, in my life and
work, to cultivate a culture of personalism with those I am given to
know. It is a big ask, work for a lifetime (and then some!), and
strongly counter to the prevailing forces of our time, magnified as
they are by (anti-)social media.
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">1. Fearful conformism
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">If it really comes down to
“me vs. everyone else”, then the two prevailing options that have
manifested themselves so robustly really are the fruit of this tree -
individualism. The first, selfishness, is the driving force of our
[By “our” I refer to contemporary America. Yes, it is a gross
generalisation. But it is also plainly present and “infects” a
wide swath of our society.] politics, our economics, our religious
practice, our foreign policy, our cult of “celebrity”, our
willingness to embrace all kinds of contrary-to-fact ideas because
they appeal to the self as singular and unique, worthy of indulgence
and adoration.
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The second, fearful
conformism, is a particular problem among the young. Seeking a stable
identity, they latch onto what their peers have collectively come to
proclaim is the “good of the day” with as much fundamentalism as
they ascribe to and denounce in their elders.
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">It is ironic, then, that
at the heart of this individualism lies such a corrosive
collectivity. We are angry and resentful because we have been
influenced or told to be so by the angry and resentful social
environment we immerse ourselves in.
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The culture mirrors the
politics which mirrors the culture. It is so very ugly, poisonous,
and dehumanising. And then we think that pursuing artificial
intelligence and genetic manipulation to create “better” (And no
one is thinking this through, either. Where are the social
philosophers and ethicists to think deeply and debate the nature of
this “improvement”?) versions of ourselves either biologically or
virtually is going to solve anything. It is indeed fraudulent.
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">A part of the cure
doubtless involves a (re-)embrace of personalism. A few year ago, I
read a book by Susanne Antonetta titled “A Mind Apart: Travels in a
Neurodiverse World”. She has bipolar disorder and is friendly with
a group of folks who have various mental health issues. She worries,
as do I, that something unique and valuable will be lost to the world
if medical science and treatments are eventually able to eradicate
any such phenomena before they have a chance to appear in people.
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: center;"><span> </span>“Anyway, I have bipolar
disorder and have to tolerate lots of odd, unruly things happening in
my head....But with the challenges come the gifts. And the sense,
often raised by my correspondents, that the word <i>cure</i> is the
wrong word, and that we must begin to respect the mental processes of
the individual, think in terms of helping to get the gifts to emerge
while the challenges become as manageable as they can. We need to
develop new terms of value and of tolerance, especially as medical
work in the alteration of the gene makes possible the eradication of
our kind.” (Antonetta, <i>A Mind Apart</i>, pp. 3, 9)
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">In like manner, there are
over 6000 extant languages spoken on earth today. A statistic posted
on NationalGeographic.com says that one language “dies” every 14
days. And with it, something of the culture, the history, the way of
perceiving things, dies with it. That is a great tragedy.</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">I was going to continue on
with two other subheadings: “the tyranny of the immediate” and
“the abjuration of responsibility” both of which are symptoms of
the above discussion and are exacerbated by our uncritical embrace of
social “networking”, but I think I'll stop here with a simple
clarion call to embrace a life of personalism, to reject the
“vanilla-isation” (though I don't accept the pejorative of
“vanilla” as a synonym for plain, basic, or uninteresting as I
think it has a marvelous aroma and flavour...but I digress) of
discourse, of humanity and to embrace the authenticity of those who
don't fit in. Please don't try to advise or, God forbid(!), “fix”
us. Just be okay with our existence and know that we are doing our
best with what we have to work with and we would wish the same for
you.
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
<p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-35238740671966982742022-01-06T15:32:00.003-08:002022-01-06T18:09:55.758-08:00Thomas Merton & Chuang Tzu (1)<p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">By way of preface to my
ongoing remarks in this series, this is in no way any sort of
“formal” engagement with Merton's text. Rather is it my
engagement with some of the “nuggets” found in the text itself in a way that may only tangentially relate to the wider context in which
they are given. This is, rather, some of the operative “background
noise” present when I read the text.
</p><p>[Sidenote: As has become apparent, I
will owe a significant debt to the writing of Fr. Stephen Freeman
here. His work, both on his blog “Glory to God for all things”
and in his book “Everwhere Present”, has had a significant impact
on my thinking and helped to clarify certain theological “issues”
in a way that is both intellectually cogent and emotionally
satisfactory.]</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">And so we begin...
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">"The fashion of Zen
in certain western circles fits into the rather confused pattern of
spiritual revolution and renewal. It represents a certain
understandable dissatisfaction with conventional spiritual patterns
and with ethical and religious formalism. It is a symptom of western
man's desperate need to recover spontaneity and depth in a world
which his technological skill has made rigid, artificial, and
spiritually void. But in its association with the need to recover
authentic sense experience, western Zen has become identified with a
spirit of improvisation and experimentation-with a sort of moral
anarchy that forgets how much tough discipline and what severe
traditional mores are presupposed by the Zen of China and Japan."
(The Way..., p. 16)
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">1. Dissatisfaction
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span lang="en-US">I live with this
daily. Some of it comes from within myself, much of it from outside.
But it will not do to simply rehash a set of grievances after the
manner of social media. Rather does it become a question of
discerning what I can change or manage (very few things and in a very
limited manner) and what I cannot (most things and all people). That
is the reality of being human, of being finite, necessarily limited.
Look, after all, at the destruction that is wrought by our limited
power. Imagine if we had more, and that that "more" was not
just a product of our delusion but a fact. Thank God for our
limitedness. </span>
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">"If I have to boast,
I will boast of what pertains to my weakness." (2 Cor. 11:30 _
NASB)
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Fr. Stephen Freeman, a
veritable gold mine of quotable material, says this in an article
titled <i>The Power in Thought – It's Not What You Think</i>: "The
simple fact is that we do not know how to manage the world. We do not
know what constitutes a good outcome. We do not have the knowledge to
see the future, to understand and comprehend the collateral damage of
our management. The only guarantee of the outcome of history (and our
lives) is the goodwill of God....In the words of St. Maximus the
Confessor: He who understands the mystery of the Cross and the Tomb
knows the meaning of all things."
(blogs.ancientfaith.com/glory2godforallthings/
2018/04/16/the-power-in-thought-its-not-what-you-think/)
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">2. The Technological void</p>
<p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The advent of computer
technology and digitisation has made information more widely and
readily available than ever. If I need something for academic
research or teaching purposes, I no longer have to trek to the
library, sort through the card catalogue, speak with the reference
desk, and search through a book or periodical for what I need. It is
all available through my computer and/or "smart" phone in
the comfort of my home. In fact, such a routine as I describe, well
within my own living memory and experience (and I'm not <u>that</u>
old!) seems almost unthinkably quaint and inefficient.
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">And perhaps it is
inefficient. But at what cost have we traded inefficiency for
perpetual availability? The student has a myriad of distractions
constantly at his or her fingertips. The office worker is always just
a text message away. There is no longer a sense of the "end"
of the workday. And there has been a "flattening" of the
discernment of what is true, what is genuinely contributive to
knowledge and experience, and what is merely a load of tosh generated
by the emotive "wisdom" of the collective. Do we really now
need Youtube and discussion fora to tell us what to think and how to
react to our lived experience? Can we not even use the bathroom or
walk down the sidewalk to the grocery store without the crutch of the
smartphone?
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">There is currently no sign
of stopping such "progress" either. Our humanity will
continue to be degraded (it is an ontological crisis, which requires
an ontological solution), we will attempt to incorporate ourselves
further and further into our virtual "idols" and to
anesthetise the institutional chaos, which we have created, with
money, prescription drugs, wars, greed, useless politicking. </p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">God save
us from ourselves!
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span lang="en-US">Again, from Fr.
Stephen: "Christ is far more than a good man who set an example,
and more than a victim of social wrong-doing. The Christian story is
far richer. The nature of sin is </span><em><span lang="en-US">death</span></em><span lang="en-US">,
not mere social oppression. Death reigns over us and holds us in
bondage to its movement away from God. It certainly manifests itself
in various forms of evil-doing. But it also has a cosmic sway in the
movement of all things towards death, destruction, and decay. Our
problem is not our morality: it is ontological, rooted in our
alienation from being, truth, and beauty – from God Himself. Broken
communion leads to death. Immorality, in all its forms, is but a
symptom." (blogs.ancientfaith.com/
glory2godforallthings/2020/11/15/the-gospel-of-progress-and-the-new-jerusalem/)
</span>
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">3. Authentic sense
experience and self-discipline
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Yes, I realise the great
irony (in light of the foregoing) that I have conceived and posted
these words with an electronic device on a digital medium. But these
are simply convenient tools for me. When I have finished I will sip
my tea, pick up a good book, and later take a walk in a park.
Technology can be useful, but it can also be destructive and
manipulative (which is what its creators are counting on – how else
can they get you to believe that you need a new phone every year and
that you should gladly pay $1000 for it!).
</p><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">So I am advocating here
for a renewal of sensory experience, a greater appreciation of the
real world (there is nothing like the smell of fresh flowers, the
feeling of the sun's warmth, the sights and sounds of the beach, a
nice glass of wine and a good conversation with a friend about
meaningful things), and a re-engagement with our humanity. This will
take some conscientious practice. And then, when the virtual world
collapses in on itself, you won't be so caught off guard and realise
that life goes on without your ipad! To that end, I also recommend
“Culture Care” by Makoto Fujimura.
</p>a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-91387698987775753472022-01-03T18:06:00.001-08:002022-01-06T12:06:52.780-08:00Still alive...<p>Due to the press of business, posting here has been rather sparse for a while. In fact, traffic to this blog has always been minimal. I suppose that is the result when it isn't widely known, the topics are/have been rather esoteric, and the author is himself rather eccentric(?). But I find that processing through writing and editing helps to clarify my thoughts so if this is only helpful for me, so be it. </p><p>By way of renewal then, I have begun reading Thomas Merton's (another eccentric, not always understood or valued by the ecclesiastical establishment - I have always been drawn to such people, they are after my own heart) <i>The Way of Chuang Tzu</i> and shall offer commentary on both Merton's introduction as well as the poetry in the book (that he has translated from other translations).
I offer here Merton's own justification for my interest in his work: "I simply like Chuang Tzu because he is what he is and I feel no need to justify this liking to myself or to anyone else. He is far too great to need any apologies from me. If St. Augustine could read Plotinus, if St. Thomas could read Aristotle and Averroes (both of them certainly a long way further from Christianity than Chuang Tzu ever was!), and if Teilhard de Chardin could make copious use of Marx and Engels in his synthesis, I think I may be pardoned for consorting with a Chinese recluse who shares the climate and peace of my own kind of solitude, and who is my own kind of person." (The Way..., pp. 10-11) </p><p>My next post will begin the dive into the Introduction. Stay tuned...</p>a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-42732364498093473432021-05-31T14:07:00.000-07:002021-05-31T14:07:12.104-07:00Trinity Sunday <p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMI1iAZQZ3QpRDWIuIU9WMMaplBN2iwaxX_ejwg5myiYz-X2tKJYRs0833t5BIXAf3OsKc3Jq0Y5wVbUyBdcF5RGDaGP-fK9HiHUgsBVlBHIQjMS9Jng7x7pHyyqpa5uzjWaruo0DnpyQ/s720/584px-Andrej_Rubl%25C3%25ABv_001.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="584" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMI1iAZQZ3QpRDWIuIU9WMMaplBN2iwaxX_ejwg5myiYz-X2tKJYRs0833t5BIXAf3OsKc3Jq0Y5wVbUyBdcF5RGDaGP-fK9HiHUgsBVlBHIQjMS9Jng7x7pHyyqpa5uzjWaruo0DnpyQ/s320/584px-Andrej_Rubl%25C3%25ABv_001.jpg" /></a></div>"And thou shalt make the breastplate of judgment with cunning work; after the work of the ephod thou shalt make it...And thou shalt set in it settings of stones, even four rows of stones: the first row shall be a sardius, a topaz, and a carbuncle: this shall be the first row....And the fourth row a beryl, and an onyx, and a jasper: they shall be set in gold in their inclosings." (Ex. 28:15a,17,20) <br /><br />It is interesting to note that the order of the stones given for the priestly breastplate here in Exodus is reversed in the book of Revelation. The sardius, or sardine – a deep, brownish red reminiscent of blood – exchanges its first place with the jasper – which can appear opaquely white. How appropriate that in the literary and theological transition from the Old to the New Testament, the first has become last and the last, first. Just so then, the first Adam, by his disobedience, is stained with blood and death. The second Adam, Christ the sinless and unstained one, assumes his place and becomes "the first begotten of the dead" (Rev. 1:5). So the positioning of the stones in these two instances acts as a mirror image of our redemption. Life was exchanged for death, which became life again. As we read in I Corinthians 15:22: "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." <br /> <p></p><p>Consider this as well. Dr. Oliver Greene, in an article posted on Philologos.org, says: "In the Old Testament the saints looked forward to the day when the Lamb would come, they looked forward to the cross [cf. Isaiah 53], and therefore saw the Sardius...the blood-red stone...first. They looked beyond that and saw the Jasper, the clear white stone representing His power and His rule at His second coming." (philologos.org/bpr/files/j001.htm) The Lamb having now been offered once for all and the vision of the heavenly liturgy being opened out before him, the Evangelist St. John quite naturally sees things from the other side as it were where the victory of the Resurrection appears to have priority amongst the allegorical imagery. "And he that sat was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone." (Rev. 4:3a)<br /> </p><p>There are certainly plenty of other things to consider in today's Epistle. I will, however, limit myself to just two. The Rev. Isaac Williams, in a sermon for Trinity Sunday, had this to say: "The seasons of our sacred year have carried us through the great events of our Redemption, our Lord’s Birth and Temptation, His Passion, His Resurrection and Ascension, and the coming of the Holy Ghost; and now...the mystery of the Blessed Trinity is revealed; and for one half of the year from this time we commemorate by lessons of obedience this doctrine of the Three Persons in One God." (Williams, Sermon 47)<br /> </p><p>It is clear from this that the doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not just something that we hold casually and incidentally. When the Rev. Williams speaks of our commemorating this doctrine "by lessons of obedience", that can be seen in at least two instances. First of all, in the liturgical praxis of the Book of Common Prayer and several of the pre-Reformation western rites, every Sunday from now until Advent will be celebrated or commemorated as some ordinal number after Trinity. Thus the life of the Trinity becomes for us the referent in all of our public worship. <br /> </p><p>Secondly, our Lord Jesus Christ, in His divine nature, is the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. In those very lessons from the Gospels that we hear, when He tells a parable, that is the eternal Godhead telling a parable. And here we must pause to bear in mind as well that speech is impossible without both words and the breath that impels them. Thus we are hearkened back to the beginning of creation in Genesis where God speaks His Word Who is moved by the Spirit. "And the Spirit of God [which word in Hebrew, ruach (roó-akh), is synonymous with "breath", "wind" or "spirit"] moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light." (Gen. 1:2b-3) So in every instance where Jesus speaks, there before us is another manifestation of the creative power of the Triune God. Thus it becomes trebly poignant when Jesus preaches, for that is God preaching.When He heals, that is God healing. And when we read in John 11:35 "Jesus wept", in a particular sense that is God weeping. For as the Athanasian creed proclaims, "Who although he be God and Man, yet he is not two, but one Christ." So it seems pretty clear to me that we are indeed, and greatly privileged that it should be so, "commemorat[ing] by lessons of obedience this doctrine of the Three Persons in One God."<br /> </p><p>I shall return to Isaac Williams' commentary in a moment, but first a brief aside about the Athanasian Creed. It is a curious thing to me that, while it has been included in every edition of the English Book of Common Prayer from the getgo in 1549, it took until 1979 for it to make an appearance in an American Prayer Book. A variety of theories have been proposed as to why this is the case from it simply being a matter of length to our rather (in some quarters) robust embrace of principles stemming from the Enlightenment which tend to shy away from strong doctrinal statements such as: "Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly." Seemingly, yes, that is a strong doctrinal statement. But it is no more so than what we read in John 14:6, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." Two things about this whole issue. First, some of the squeamishness can be laid directly at the feet of our generically Nominalistic approach to things as a default position. The Nominalist says: I see words such as "catholic" or "perish everlastingly" and I feel that I ought not to like them, therefore they are categorically unlikeable for me. I have named them as such, and that is my truth. <br /> </p><p>Secondly, this visceral objection to such things as the aforementioned portions of the Athanasian Creed and the Gospel need not have the 'teeth' that we think it does. Philosophically, I am something of a Neoplatonist and that colours my outlook on a lot of things. I tend to think in terms of archetypes and images. Thus, I can quite sincerely both recite the Athanasian creed and mean every word of it, while at the same time not assuming that everyone who has left the practice of Christianity for a variety of reasons is simply destined for hell. It is simply not our place to judge and condemn as we do not know the circumstances. And it's no wonder so many people have been frightened away. Frankly, religion in our day has reached a low ebb. We have become so confused that we now simply apply a "Jesus veneer" to our pet neuroses and anxieties and call it a day. All I'm saying is that things don't have to be what we think they are at first blush. <br /> </p><p>Back to the business at hand, again from today's Epistle. "[T]he first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things, which must be hereafter." (Rev. 4:1) Isaac Williams continues on: "It was a voice speaking, and yet it was as of a trumpet. This combines together the two great events of Pentecost—the awful trumpet of Mount Sinai on the giving out of the Law, and the living tongues on the descent of the Spirit; the one expressive of fear, the other of love; the fear and love with which we are henceforth to live in the great mystery of Godliness, as revealed to us in the Old and New Testament." (Williams, ibid) <br /> </p><p>This transition from holy fear alone to that converted and inflamed by the Holy Ghost in the fire of His love is aptly illustrated for us in (appropriately enough) three instances in today's Gospel. Firstly, Nicodemus comes to Jesus under cover of darkness and gives for his opening volley what has, no doubt, become the default "party line" of affirming Jesus' good intentions. And yet, I don't think Nicodemus is being anything but sincere here. In light of the risk to his socio-religious position he is taking in associating with Jesus, certainly an understandable fear, he is being a cautious man. Straightway does Jesus begin to help him see by looking beyond the established way of seeing things. This new birth will take away all that has been holding him back. Jesus not only recognises the position that Nicodemus finds himself in, he offers the way out of it. Such is the goodness of the love of God overcoming the fear that has been engendered via the keeping of the Law and its accretions in the context of living under the watchful eye of the Roman state.<br /> </p><p>Secondly, Nicodemus takes Jesus too literally, thinking that he is being asked to go back in time, stuff himself back into the womb and do a second take. He is afraid that what he is being told, appealing as it is to him, is impossible. The bit about the wind blowing "where it listeth" is a good follow-on to the rector's sermon on the Sunday after the Ascension when he told us that it doesn't so much matter "how" the Ascension happened as "that" it did. Jesus is comforting Nicodemus out of what must have become an ingrained eye for fine points and details that his experience of interpreting and living the Law must have provided him. The "how" of the operation of grace in being born again of water and the Spirit is not so important as the "that" of being born of water and the Spirit, which administration thereof has been entrusted to the life of the Church. <br /> </p><p>Finally, poor exasperated Nicodemus just can't take it anymore. "How can these things be?" he asks. And Jesus gives him a brief glimpse of both the necessity of the Incarnation as well as the promise of the Resurrection in terms that Nicodemus could understand via Moses' use of the bronze serpent to heal the people of Israel, who had complained themselves into dire straits once again. Most certainly was this complaining done out of uncertainty and fear, just as the human motives of the Sanhedrin and the secular power under Pontius Pilate for crucifying Jesus were also impelled by uncertainty and fear and just as the commission of Original Sin was also motivated by uncertainty and fear. Yet, thanks be to God, such things no longer need have place among us for, as Isaac Williams says: "[The Spirit] makes present on earth the things of eternity; He reveals to the heart the mysteries of Heaven. "<br /> </p><p>In conclusion, in all the things we have considered today, the old and new Adams enshrined and foreshadowed on the breastplate of the high priest, the life of the triune God obediently considered in all the Sunday Eucharistic propers in the Prayerbook and the conversion of the stupefying fear of the Old Covenant into the reverential and loving fear of the New by the descent of the Holy Ghost, the Holy Trinity is on display in full force. <br /> </p><p>It has been said that the longer one preaches on Trinity Sunday, the greater the likelihood of falling into heresy becomes. Thus, in the face of all that is presented to us for consideration on this day, let us then fall silent and take to heart the words of Psalm 95: "O come, let us worship and fall down, and kneel before the Lord our Maker. For he is the Lord our God; and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand." <br /></p>a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-87330819965065993912021-05-16T13:15:00.000-07:002021-05-16T13:15:51.467-07:00Sunday within the Octave of the Ascension <p style="text-align: center;"> "The end of all things is at hand; be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer." </p><p style="text-align: center;">(1 Peter 4:7)<br /></p><p> A couple of things come to mind when I read or hear this verse, both having to do with our contemporary cultural situation. But first, an important caveat. Passages like this in the Scriptures may indeed speak to our circumstances, but rarely (if at all) do they speak of our circumstances in more than a generalised way. What I mean by that is that, no, the Bible does not predict or describe political or social events in 21st century America, 16th century Europe, or any other socio-political phenomenon outside of the eschatology of the Christian faith proclaimed in the New Testament during the 1st century A.D. To think otherwise is, quite frankly, to reduce the Scriptures to the status of pagan superstition and to embrace idolatry. There are many idols, just as there are many "antichrists". The current ones are neither special nor unique. "Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time." (1 John 2:18)<br /> </p><p>To resume, then, we who live in the "last times" (which began at the moment of Jesus' Resurrection by the way, and have persisted until our own day) are indeed both called to be "sober" and to witness to its lack among our fellows. In the Greek, the word translated as "sober" is sōphronéō [Strongs G4993], which can mean: to be of sound mind, to exercise self control, to curb one's passions. <br /> </p><p>Surely the embrace and dissemination of conspiracy theories is a key indicator of the lack of soberness present in our culture. Consider this, from Lifeway Research, a ministry associated with the Southern Baptist Convention: </p><p style="text-align: center;"> [C]onspiracy theories have become a growing concern for many pastors and church leaders across the country. In a recent Lifeway Research study, 49% of U.S. Protestant pastors say they frequently hear church members repeating conspiracy theories. While spreading harmful information has no religious or ideological limits, such dangerous explanations have a long, unfortunate history among Christians.Church historians, Christian apologists, and those who have personally suffered as a result of conspiracy theories say followers of Christ must be concerned with seeking and following truth. Mary Jo Sharp, author of Living in Truth: Confident Conversations in a Conflicted Culture, says there are two main reasons people are drawn to conspiracy theories—ease of understanding and escape from the ordinary....Sharp says conspiracy theories often ignore the myriad of complex beliefs, desires, and motivations humans bring to an issue. Without those complicating matters, the conspiracy theorist can more easily comprehend the issue and move on with other things. 'Belief in a conspiracy theory may be born out of a good desire to understand a situation but devolves into finding quickly digestible answers,' she says, 'like fast food for the mind.' [click <a href="https://lifewayresearch.com/2021/02/01/christians-conspiracy-theories-and-credibility-why-our-words-today-matter-for-eternity/" target="_blank">here</a> for the whole article]<br /></p><p> <br /></p><p>In other words, it is an ego-maniacal exercise in conveniently shoring up the fears and suspicions of the individual. Conspiracy theories offer an easy to comprehend explanation, a sense of fellowship with one's fellow believers, the thrill of having "inside information", and the addictive power of the passions in angrily justifying oneself to one's perceived enemies by means of the available anonymity of social media. Such things have no place among Christian people, as we read in Ephesians 4:22-24, "That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." </p><p>"Be ye therefore sober." </p><p>Something else to consider with regard to "soberness" has to do with 'being in one's right mind'. And, yes, it's easy to laugh and joke about that. But it is a very serious concern. As many of you know, I struggle with mental health issues including depression and anxiety, which have been greatly exacerbated over the course of the past year where seemingly everything is in flux and we are surrounded by chaos and despair. And the Christian Church has not been spared these things even within her own ranks. But that should not be a surprise, for we are not called to be of the world, but we still do live in the world and bear its burdens. <br /> </p><p>I can tell you that I like to know what's happening, I like to make plans ahead of time. And that is just not possible right now. And, yes, we can talk about how that is a grace and wallow in pious imaginings, but it is also a hard thing to endure. There are days when my anxiety is literally debilitating to the point I can't summon the will to go outside. I wake up in the morning fearing the worst and spend the rest of the day talking myself down from those heights. It is a destructive pathology that cannot be overcome solely by the strength of my will. I am getting help to manage these things, but I also admit that I may have to carry them around for a while, perhaps for balance of my life. Perhaps this is my "thorn in the flesh" that St. Paul talked about (cf. 2 Cor. 12:7). That is my lack of soberness. <br /> </p><p>And I tell you this for two reasons. One is simply to offer encouragement to you. We all, without exception, have things to struggle with. And it is so easy to convince ourselves that it's just us, everyone else is fine. In reality, that is mostly a façade. Much of our strength of character comes from how we choose to acknowledge this on the spectrum from outright denial to acceptance to living into our challenges under God's grace. <br /> </p><p>The other reason I tell you this is to counteract the nonsense that is spread abroad among, particularly nefariously, some Christians who see this as a sign of deficiency (of faith, religious practice, or what have you) or of demonic influence. Don't get me wrong, the dark powers have free reign to influence persons and things to destruction, but Satan didn't give you bi-polar disorder or cause your marriage to break down. There are much more prosaic causes at the root of such things. <br /> </p><p>So, no, things are not well right now. But we have no justification to expect perfection in this life. Indeed as we read just beyond the text of today's Epistle, "Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator." (1 Peter 4:19) Yes, as unpleasant as it it, there is suffering in this life as a matter of course. But there is also faithfulness. There is good and bad, there is truth and there are lies, there is darkness and there is the light that shines in the darkness and which shall not be overcome by it. <br /> </p><p>In conclusion, I would offer you this as encouragement. Every time we gather here at St. Michael's we are gathering as the Church and we are making an offering, and it is not just bread and wine, prayer intentions or money, we are making an offering to God of our whole selves. And while we rightly desire to bring all the good and beautiful things as a thank offering, it is true that we will also bring those things that are not so nice to behold: worries, impatience, fear, anger, mistrust, grievances, brokenness, the list can go on. But that's okay too. Indeed that is the whole point. God does not ask for a part of us, but the whole of us, good and bad. As I have said on Easter Sunday before, the veil of uncertainty, anguish and despair is now permanently torn away. For, you see, our God has the uncanny ability to turn that which is hideous and filled with death into something perfectly beautiful and life giving. And just as our Lord Jesus Christ passed through the Cross into the Resurrection, so are we, of our very nature as Christian people, called to do likewise. In the words of St. Gregory Nazianzen: "Let a man give all things to him who gave himself for us as the price of redemption and as the substitute of our guilt. Nothing so great, however, can be given in return, as the offering of ourselves, if we rightly understand this mystery, and if we, for his sake, become all things, whatsoever he for our sakes became."<br /> </p><p>Consider this as well, from John's Gospel: "In the world, ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." (16:33) And so, my friends, if we wish to heed His call and ascend with Him, this is the mind of Christ that we must have at all times, Who has indeed overcome the world.</p>a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-73212827334144565762021-05-11T17:26:00.001-07:002021-05-12T11:47:58.452-07:00some thoughts<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHMXAGKsH3oDosE0S4bqJFSOLR4WV8EfqX_1ITKT90HIwRwIwdz0d9k0J5_ntuuWItzrozzI2AUf0iGzgW_ZBXs4KP4nW8uzhwppRKas-x1-r3uNYlWu7TbtjQooXvFXahM-y3wcJ48Ek/s720/386px-Spas_vsederzhitel_sinay.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="386" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHMXAGKsH3oDosE0S4bqJFSOLR4WV8EfqX_1ITKT90HIwRwIwdz0d9k0J5_ntuuWItzrozzI2AUf0iGzgW_ZBXs4KP4nW8uzhwppRKas-x1-r3uNYlWu7TbtjQooXvFXahM-y3wcJ48Ek/s320/386px-Spas_vsederzhitel_sinay.jpg" /></a></div>In no particular order...<br /><br />It's been a year and we are still dealing with the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic. I have personally received the first dose of one of the vaccines with no ill effects. This has been a hard year for us all, not helped by the ongoing economic perils and the political events surrounding the last general election. But that is all so much <strike>wind</strike> hot air that blows where it will and is then gone. Stop trying to grasp it with a desperation that is close to idolatry. Enough with conspiracy theories, sound bites, and the twin passions of shame and anger inflamed by social media. "Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful." (Luke 6:36) After all, He gives food, water, shelter, and life to those you hate. You can, likewise, at least stop trying to bludgeon your enemies with your own inflated sense of right(and righteous)ness. <br /><br />Everything is changing, and it's scary. But so were the World Wars of the last century. So were the Napoleonic Wars. So were the upheavals of the Reformation, the Black Plague, the Mongol invasions. Heck, our ancestors were probably freaked out by fire the first time someone struck a flame too. If we have learned nothing else from modern physics, macroscopic appearances to the contrary, everything is in flux and relative to everything else. It's nothing new. We just have to adapt, more or less successfully, and believe that our stability lies not finally in this life but in the life to come. If you're like me, that is a huge ask. But, "(e)very good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." (James 1:17)<br /><br />Come back to church. If you think virtual attendance is good enough, you're wrong. If you think this, having come from a sacramental/liturgical tradition, you're even more wrong. It's time to face up to the hidden shame, the narcissism, the delusion, the lack of seriousness that dwells within you. Way too many have had poor motives for attending church and refused to learn the faith and (even the content of!) the scriptures. Being satisfied with a primary school level of catechesis and a plate full of emotional responses, they have not grown in understanding. Do you approach your job in such a half-assed way? Your marriage and/or family life? If so, more's the shame. <br /><br />Too many people in the Anglican continuum have held on simply because we are (or are perceived to be) "traditional" or "conservative". And they stop with that, making an idol out of their perceptions. Knowing neither the tradition nor what it is we are attempting to conserve, our churches are dying and our people are trapped in the morass of self-satisfaction. <br /><br />We simply must do better. We have to reach those who have not been reached by the Gospel. We must not expend more wasted energy on the apathetic. We are not anti-science. We are not homophobic or misogynistic. We are not the Republican party at prayer. We cannot afford to define ourselves solely by what we are against. We need an educated clergy, an informed laity, a firm commitment to and understanding of a life of prayer and perpetual conversion. And we need to cease and desist from bowing down before and worshiping things that are not God. <br /><br />Then, and only then, do we stand a chance of survival and growth into the 21st century and beyond. <br /><br />Does anyone else actually care?<br /><p></p>a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-44356334683338980572021-02-09T15:49:00.005-08:002021-05-11T17:27:35.946-07:00Sexagesima<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3ZqTzwUXUYiR0LRD-L0I8qmWx6AZA7ruVzrM6MJLioIsQFQCxTxNTllX71_A43pUEmiY_DyglNk3MMEADwYPtzma6F5n_dXL6e874otb-N8yUip9ONyZf84EFvgyisK_2kBITr8YbNVU/s721/573px-Solomon_and_the_Plan_for_the_Temple.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="721" data-original-width="573" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3ZqTzwUXUYiR0LRD-L0I8qmWx6AZA7ruVzrM6MJLioIsQFQCxTxNTllX71_A43pUEmiY_DyglNk3MMEADwYPtzma6F5n_dXL6e874otb-N8yUip9ONyZf84EFvgyisK_2kBITr8YbNVU/s320/573px-Solomon_and_the_Plan_for_the_Temple.jpg" /></a></div>I can readily admit that, in these dark days, I am full of anxiety and despair. Our culture continues its accelerated decline under the burdens of a pandemic, economic distress, a lack of seriousness in higher education, slogans and sound bites in the place of considered analysis, and the fact that so many will have been permanently seduced away from the Christian Church through the convenient appeal of virtual attendance even after it has been judged safe for all to return. But, on the other hand, this isn't really surprising given the widespread addictive power of the online world. People are constantly on their phones, as their creators intended. <br /><br />My concern for each of you as well as for myself is to continually respond to the saving faith of Jesus Christ, to live a life of continual conversion and intellectual assent to the truth of the Scriptures, the Creeds, and the sacramental life of the Church that is able to speak to and resist the worst impulses of modern life. And I often feel like I am just screaming into the wind or banging my head against a brick wall. And what makes me feel that way more than all else are my own faults and failings. It is so very tempting to just give up.<br /><br />In the face of that, I would ask you to consider this, from Chapter 4 of the Fellowship of the Ring: "'We still have our journey and our errand before us', answered Gandalf. 'We have no choice but to go on, or to return to Rivendell.' 'I wish I was back there', [Frodo] said. 'But how can I return without shame – unless there is indeed no other way, and we are already defeated?' 'You are right, Frodo,' said Gandalf: 'to go back is to admit defeat, and face worse defeat to come.' <br /><br />In like manner do we read in John 6:68, "Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life." So we continue on, under grace, as best we are able. And thus today I would like to consider with you Ecclesiastes 11:1-6 which is one of the Old Testament lessons appointed for Evening Prayer today in the Lectionary Tables and which concerns itself with some details surrounding belief and charitable works. <br /><br />Having famously declared that all is vanity, the sacred author examines the failures of purely human wisdom and philosophy, the pursuit of pleasures and material goods for their own sake, and the false practice of religion. In his introductory remarks to this book for BlueLetterBible.org, the 20th century American Presbyterian Dr. J. Vernon Mcgee notes that: <br /> <p></p><p style="text-align: center;">Solomon pursued in this book every avenue, experience, and interest of man in this life to find <span></span>satisfaction and fulfillment. Solomon as king had full freedom to carry on this experiment, and he was not hindered by financial or power limitations. He could go the limit in every direction. The result is “vanity” — emptiness. Frustration and dissatisfaction met him in every experiment. The conclusions are human, apart from the divine, made by the man under the sun. This is the ultimate end of man’s efforts apart from God. (www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/mcgee_j_vernon/notes-outlines/ecclesiastes/ecclesiastes-outline.cfm)<br /></p><p><br />Verse 2 of Chapter 11, which is one of the more difficult, reads: "Give a portion to seven, and also to eight; for thou knowest not what evil shall be upon the earth." St. Jerome's commentary on this verse tells us: <br /> </p><p style="text-align: center;">And in Ezekiel there are found seven or eight steps leading up to the temple. And after the 'ethical' Psalm, that is one hundred and eighteen, all the psalms are of fifteen steps by which we are first taught the law, and when the seventh is finished, we then climb to the Gospel through the 'eight steps. Therefore it is taught that we should believe with equal respect in each, the same for the old as for the new. The Jews dedicated their seventh part, believing in the Sabbath, but did not dedicate that eighth, denying the resurrection on the day of the Lord. On the other hand, heretics, Marcion and Manichaeus and all who rip up the ancient law with their savage mouths, dedicate their eighth part, taking up the Gospel. But they do not save as holy the seventh, spurning the old law. For we are not able to understand the worthy crucifixions, the worthy punishments already in mind, which are reserved for those who are moved to wickedness on earth, that is for the Jews and the heretics, and for those denying the other of the two....The Hebrews understand this passage in this way: keep both the Sabbath and the rite of circumcision, for if you do not adhere to these wickedness will come over you unexpectedly. (sites.google.com/site/aquinasstudybible/home/ecclesiastes/jerome-commentary-on-ecclesiastes)<br /></p><p style="text-align: left;"><br />This, obviously, needs some further unpacking. The "ethical psalm" that he refers to here is 119 in the Prayerbook which uses the Hebrew rather than the Greek numbering. The difference being due to whether you consider Psalm 10 as a part of Psalm 9 or standing on its own as a separate literary unit. Each portion of Psalm 119 (a meditation on the Law) is 8 verses long. And indeed the two subsequent Psalms, 120 and 121 in our numbering, consist of 7 and 8 verses respectively as St. Jerome says. <br /><br />And then he talks more specifically about maintaining the balance of both Testaments. The one is useless without the other for Christian people. Of the two heretics he mentions, Marcionites reject the Old Testament and what they see as its separate "god". Practically speaking, consider this, we Anglicans are blessed with a robust Daily Office system that includes both the Psalms and the Old Testament as integral parts of our daily liturgical prayer. Yet, many (most?) people don't make use of them and many parishes can't (or won't) offer weekday worship. Clergy all too frequently do not preach on the Old Testament. At all. Frankly, you're lucky if the priest or deacon pays attention to the Epistle during his sermon. So there is some danger of a soft Marcionism creeping into our identity. Awareness, however, is a good first step to counteract this. Don't know where to begin? Well, as a cheap advertisement, when it is safe to do so we can resume our planned Bible Study reading Dr. John Walton's treatment of Genesis Chapter 1. Stay tuned! <br /><br />The other important thing St. Jerome mentions is the devotion of the Jew to Sabbath and circumcision. Just so, the Christian must devote himself to the Lord's Day and baptismal identity. (N.B. Sunday is not the Christian Sabbath, it is the Eighth Day, the day of Resurrection and completion/ fulfillment, the Lord's Day, in Russian it is Воскресенье, literally "resurrection day" – our liturgical use of the Decalogue which mentions keeping holy the Sabbath is strictly allegorical on this point.) <br /><br />What does all this have to do with my opening remarks? Well simply that we are being encouraged by Ecclesiastes to carry on with our God-inspired work, whether the fruits of reward are evident or not in this lifetime. We are further instructed by St. Jerome not to "stop short" in our belief, to stall out on the Seventh Day but to carry on to the Eighth Day, for as Psalm 118 declares: "This is the day which the Lord has made; we will rejoice and be glad in it."(vs. 24) <br /><br />And so I bid you good cheer and encouragement. These are dark days. People, already long troubled by the rootlessness and vacuity of modern life (whether aware of it or not), are struggling. A good dose of kindness and compassion, particularly to those who are seemingly unlovable and undeserving, will not go amiss. As Lent will be upon us soon, it is an opportunity once again to regroup, re-evaluate, take ownership of our besetting sins and bad habits, and trust in the Lord's mercy and the great hope that the Resurrection is real. <br /><br /><br /></p>a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-91469259802724890012021-01-25T17:18:00.003-08:002021-01-25T17:18:27.214-08:00St. Paul the Apostle <p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSdQpHwrQiV8rogLbFkl170UiwRSE_hZtRZGvJP-TQzIQCV6d8HJ1qN-iaBTO-B9z2Q6gvq73lQMGV0FrRC2GqfgA_492MQGrD4IZ2erbZJVZtRYGTWTZ6FoL6PEqh_ZKCk3F4lnSHmsg/s720/570px-Saint_Paul%252C_Rembrandt_van_Rijn_%2528and_Workshop+%2529%252C_c._1657.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="570" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSdQpHwrQiV8rogLbFkl170UiwRSE_hZtRZGvJP-TQzIQCV6d8HJ1qN-iaBTO-B9z2Q6gvq73lQMGV0FrRC2GqfgA_492MQGrD4IZ2erbZJVZtRYGTWTZ6FoL6PEqh_ZKCk3F4lnSHmsg/s320/570px-Saint_Paul%252C_Rembrandt_van_Rijn_%2528and_Workshop+%2529%252C_c._1657.jpg" /></a></div>Christianity as a general principle is on the receiving end of a lot of criticism, much of it self-inflicted. From our sad, millennium old theological disagreements which confuse and repulse, to the embrace of the excessive rationalism of the Enlightenment which sterilised the wondrous mystery of the faith into an overly moralistic, strictly regulated behavioural programme that turns Matt. 11:28-30 into a lie (“Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”), to the contemporary substitution of the death bearing idols of politics and finance for the living Word of God. <br /> <p></p><p>One of the more recent victims of this long decline is the person and reputation of Paul the Apostle, whose conversion we celebrate tomorrow. He stands accused of everything from misogyny, homophobia, and antisemitism (deeply ironic, that) to helping prop up the institution of slavery. Now, I am in no way attempting to excuse any flaws and failings that he may or may not have possessed in this life. However, three things about such critiques: 1. It is surely impossible to have an accurate read of the state of anyone else's soul, particularly those who lived 2000 years ago. 2. Being acknowledged in the liturgy as belonging to the company of those whose sanctity is particularly noteworthy and fruitful for emulation does not guarantee that those who are lived a perfect, sinless life. People who would otherwise give no credence to any sort of "immaculate conception" seem to demand it of those they wish to take issue with. 3. There is little or nothing I can do by taking up the banner of condemnation against anyone anyway. If there is any change I have any reasonable hope of effecting, under grace, it is in my own heart. Do you want to change the world? Then the counsel of the abbot to his monks I read about two weeks ago holds: "Pay attention to yourself." It is neither your place nor within your power to deal out perfect justice tempered with perfect mercy. That is merely a delusion generated by the words of the serpent in the garden: "For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." (Gen. 3:5)<br /> </p><p>'John J. Kilgallen, professor of New Testament at the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome, begins his America magazine essay, “A Complicated Apostle,” by admitting that “when one reads or hears what Paul wrote, one often meets a personality that can seem unpleasant or even antagonizing … appearing pompous, cantankerous, superior, harsh.” Experts agree: Paul can be a difficult fellow. He exhorts love for enemies, yet is not above wishing aloud that his enemies would castrate themselves (Galatians 5:12). He calls his addressees stupid (Galatians 3:1)....Even Paul’s biggest booster, the author of Acts, introduces Paul to the reader as an accessory to a lynching (Acts 7:60). So we may well ask: why should we take seriously, let alone read reverently, this vituperative, hallucinating, conflict-ridden polemicist who was at the same time both a passionate disciple of a man he never followed and a passionate enemy, by his own admission, of those who did? Why hasn’t the world written him off as a fulminating, apocalyptic crackpot? And why has a worldwide Christian communion been celebrating his birthday?' (https://www.pbs.org/wnet/ religionandethics/2009/08/05/august-5-2009-the-real-paul/3839/)<br /> </p><p>Certainly this article is guilty of taking certain things out of context, operating under a lens of heightened suspicion that leaves no room for genuine conversion, and not acting on the three principles I enumerated above (not that there would be any expectation of that happening anyway). But I think the question at the end remains a sound one, one that can be asked of any theologian, indeed any believer. Why should we attend to what you think? <br /> </p><p>Fr. Kenneth Baker, a Jesuit priest writing in Homiletic and Pastoral Review, tells us why in a summary of the essence of St. Paul's theology: "Christ is the key to St. Paul. His theology is Christocentric. The Gospel according to St. Paul is that the Son of God became man in Jesus Christ, in order to reconcile all mankind to God the Father, by his life, passion, death and resurrection. For Paul, Christ is the glorified Christ, now reigning gloriously in heaven, and seated at the right hand of the Father. Here are some of the main points in the theology of St. Paul: 1) Because of the sin of Adam, and each one’s personal sins, all men are sinners and in need of redemption (Rom. 3:23; 5:12-21). 2) In order to save mankind, God sent his Son into the world, born of a woman (Rom. 4:4), to make a fitting satisfaction for sin. 3) That Son is Jesus Christ, who communicates his grace, and justifies all who believe in him, and are baptized. 4) The grace of Christ includes the sending of the Holy Spirit, which constitutes the believer as an adopted child of God, a member of the body of Christ, and an heir of eternal life. 5) Christ Jesus is the fulfillment of all the prophecies of the Old Testament, and has established a New Covenant to replace that of Moses; therefore, Christians are not bound by the ceremonial and dietary laws, and circumcision, contained in the Law of Moses. This means that one does not have to become a Jew in order to be a Christian. This insight of Paul made Christianity into a religion open to all peoples (see 1 Tim. 2:4)." (https://www.hprweb.com/2012/09/ the-theology-of-st-paul/)<br /> </p><p>If you demand a priori perfection of everyone you will live a very lonely life. It is a fact that the perfect Word of God is entrusted to imperfect persons in an imperfect church which both has and will continue to sully it in various ways by its imperfect witness. The 6th cent. A.D. Chinese Buddhist Sang T'san wrote:<br /> </p><p><span> </span>One thing, all things:<br /> move among and intermingle<br /> without distraction.<br /> To live in this realisation<br /> is to be without anxiety<br /> about non-perfection.<br /><br />In our present context there are two things that can speak to us as Christian people from this insight. One is that God was incarnate in time and space, "And was made man" as we confess in the Nicene Creed'; the "one thing" (perfect divinity) among "all things" (our scattered humanity). And that very act, given our own imperfection and labour under the auspices of Original Sin, means that things, even post-Easter are going to be messy, marked by failures as well as successes because the resurrection has not displaced free will. True love is not to say, "let me do everything for you". Rather, true love is "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (Jn. 3:16) Keeping this always at the forefront, and having confidence in the two primary truths of the faith that are always true, regardless of what anyone says: Christ is Risen and the Kingdom of God is come among us, will help to banish the "two-storey" thinking identified by Fr. Stephen Freeman and which pervades so much of modern thought and gives rise to so much religious anxiety, living with and in the midst of imperfection. Strive, then, to be without anxiety. For the Kingdom of God is come, in the manner that it has, whether we like it or not. <br /> </p><p>Finally, hoping that I have shed some light on how we can realistically approach and be in company with St. Paul, let me close with some thoughts by Bishop Tom Wright, formerly of Durham and one of the proponents of the "New Perspectives on Paul" school of theology (which, as an aside, is worth looking into, even if you find yourself disagreeing with some of their particulars):</p><p><span> </span>[T]he claim [of Jesus' Messiahship] only makes sense as the validation of everything that first-<span></span><span></span>century Jews like Paul had held dear (the ancient purposes and promises, the long covenantal narrative). The symbols of Jewish identity themselves – circumcision, Sabbath, food laws – were set aside, not because they were irrelevant or ‘legalistic’ but because they were forward-looking signposts to the reality which had now been unveiled. To cling to the signposts is to imply that you have not yet arrived at the reality; but the point of Paul’s gospel was that the reality had dawned in the events concerning Jesus. In him, the promises to Abraham had been fulfilled; Adam and Eve had been rescued, and with that new creation had been launched; Israel’s exile was over and ‘Israel’ itself had been transformed, as so many scriptures had promised, into a new worldwide family. This story, with this fulfilment, is the necessary substructure for Paul’s mission; and, I would submit, for ours as well. Fresh teaching in all these areas is urgently needed if we are to understand our shared mission as both the announcement of Jesus as the crucified and risen Lord, demanding the personal response of obedient faith, and the inauguration of new creation, with signs of healing and hope pointing forward to the eventual renewal of the whole cosmos. (ntwrightpage.com/2017/09/27/learning-from-paul-together). <br /> </p><p>And that, that, is why we should listen to what St. Paul has to say. It's not about him. It's not about you or I as 'rugged individuals' anxiously hoping to save ourselves by 'fixing' that which surrounds us. It's about the proclamation of the glory of God, the promise of things to come. It's because of this that we value these Epistles, this 'paperwork', amongst all the other documents we acquire in our lives as so clearly illustrated last week.<br /></p><p style="text-align: center;"><i>Glory to God for all things. Amen. </i><br /></p><p> </p>a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-66962448221887301762020-12-27T12:57:00.002-08:002020-12-27T13:11:15.477-08:00St. John, Apostle & Evangelist<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOcY8ooxjeH2xhv8OHKZZAkS4AnC2yo29yM99zubQHlm9156VtF8T-pD_v7cBPnQ6yxdSl_ujyxkOBnC-t7F9g3mrXW-vrVycnllXaPE_NvMWtzKovRhB2rB0XrZa8OPPuIEOCK7BxFpY/s720/611px-1490_Gleism%25C3%25BCller_Johannes_auf_Patmos_anagoria.JPG" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="611" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOcY8ooxjeH2xhv8OHKZZAkS4AnC2yo29yM99zubQHlm9156VtF8T-pD_v7cBPnQ6yxdSl_ujyxkOBnC-t7F9g3mrXW-vrVycnllXaPE_NvMWtzKovRhB2rB0XrZa8OPPuIEOCK7BxFpY/s320/611px-1490_Gleism%25C3%25BCller_Johannes_auf_Patmos_anagoria.JPG" /></a></div>Aside from Christmas and Easter, being accorded the honour and privilege of preaching today is one of the greatest occasions of the Church year. For it is the feast of St. John the Evangelist, to whom it was given the distinction that the "highest" theology in the New Testament appears under his name. On this great day, in this great season, under the mercy of the great goodness of the living God, let us then consider some portion of that revelation which was given to him to understand. <br /> <p></p><p>At Morning Prayer today, the first lesson from Exodus 33 reads, in part, "And [Moses] said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory. And [God] said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee; and I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy." (vv. 18-19) By the time we arrive at this point in the narrative, the Israelites have been delivered from their slavery in Egypt, arrived at Mt. Sinai, received the Law and the ceremonial instructions for the tabernacle liturgy, broken the Law and received it again at Moses' intercession. It has been said that Exodus "begins in gloom and ends in glory" (cf. Dr. J. Vernon McGee) And it is the same for us. The birth of Jesus is immediately preceded by the gloom of many long years of theological and moral darkness under the cloud of the Adamic transgression and the heavy weight of the Pharisaical exegesis of Moses. Afterward, that very graciousness has come among us in a mysterious and, to some, unlooked for way. Mercy has indeed been shown after the perfect manner of the Divine solicitude, now not just to historic Israel under the covenant granted to Moses, but that original blessing given to Abraham in Genesis 12:2-3 is now restored and given to Jew and Gentile alike, "And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed." <br /> </p><p>Then we come to Christmas Day itself, wherein the Gospel lesson proclaims, ""In the beginning was the Word, and the word was with God, and the Word was God....In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not." (Jn. 1:1, 4-5) The great poet John Milton, author of Paradise Lost, opens his work On the Morning of Christ's Nativity thusly: <br /><br />This is the Month, and this the happy morn<br /> Wherein the Son of Heav'ns eternal King,<br /> Of wedded Maid, and Virgin Mother born,<br /> Our great redemption from above did bring;<br /> For so the holy sages once did sing, <br />That he our deadly forfeit should release,<br /> And with his Father work us a perpetual peace. <br /><br />That glorious Form, that Light unsufferable,<br /> And that far-beaming blaze of Majesty,<br />Wherwith he wont at Heav'ns high Councel-Table,<br /> To sit the midst of Trinal Unity,<br /> He laid aside; and here with us to be,<br />Forsook the Courts of everlasting Day,<br /> And chose with us a darksom House of mortal Clay. <br /> </p><p>The Light of the world is indeed come, puts the darkness to flight, and sustains the world in being until the second and glorious coming wherein, according to 1 Cor. 15:28 "...all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." And yet it remains for the time being that there are many things that remain mysterious, not yet "subdued" to our limited, rational minds. We believe and confess that the Divine nature is one in essence, subsisting in three persons. We profess that Jesus is "very God of very God...And was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, And was made man". We are taught that, in order to be truly alive, we must die to ourselves. "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?" (Rom. 6:3) <br /> </p><p>Bishop Lancelot Andrewes, preaching the Nativity sermon before King James I in 1607, says: <br /></p><p style="text-align: center;"> Of God, the prophet Esay saith, Vere Deus absconditus es tu; God is of Himself a mystery, and hidden; and that which is strange, hidden with light which will make any eyes past looking on Him. But a hidden God our nature did not endure. Will you hear them speak it plainly? Fac nobis deus, makes us visible gods who may go before us, and we see them. Mystical, invisible gods we cannot skill of. This we would have; God to be manifested. Why then, God is manifested....Were it not a proud desire and full of presumption, to wish things so remote to come together? to wish that the Deity in the flesh may be made manifest? Yet we see wished it was, by one in a place in reasonable express terms, O that thou wert as my brother, that sucked the breasts of my mother! That is, that He might be manifested in the flesh! O that He might be! and so He was. Not only manifest at all; that is great; but manifest in the flesh; that is greater. For if gold mixed though it be with silver is abased by it, what if it be mixed with the rust of iron or dross of lead? This must needs be great in itself, but greater with us; with us especially that make such ado at any though never so little disparagement; and that if any, though not much our inferior, be ranked with us, take ourselves mightily wrong. We cannot choose but hold this mystery for great, and say with St. Augustine, [37/38] Deus; quid gloriosius? Caro; quid vilius? Deus in carne; quid mirabilius? God; what more glorious? flesh; what more base? Then, God in the flesh; what more marvellous?<br /></p><p><br />"God in the flesh; what more marvellous?" Indeed it is so. And it has been anticipated down through the course of salvation history, has come to fruition in time in a small and insignificant corner of the Roman Empire, has born fruit, been misunderstood and corrupted in the hearts of many throughout the past two millenia, but nevertheless remains true and accessible to all who would be saved. As we heard in today's Epistle, "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life" (1 Jn. 1:1) <br /> </p><p>And so, during the progress of this Christmas season, whether in covenant and mystery, whether in the joys or sorrows of everyday life, whether in knowledge or ignorance, whether in holiness or in the struggles that beset us, let our prayer and remembrance always be: "Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people" (Lk. 1:68) <br /></p>a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-43588858477355312302020-10-31T23:00:00.001-07:002020-10-31T23:00:05.827-07:00All Saints/All Souls <p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuGD1Vj6wxdrSigNKEWcBOuUYP-DU_TjrduNhVbDe2G113EkZlLlKmuVsL22PEouGlD_hynchwo0tA5miwFVGl7ckcrwvYF6jYc-gcoh_LtNdvSV3dGm_tmh-DKO5Lrn8ZZ8H5Q8flexg/s480/372px-William-Adolphe_Bouguereau_%25281825-1905%2529_-_The_Day_of_the_Dead_%25281859%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="480" data-original-width="372" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuGD1Vj6wxdrSigNKEWcBOuUYP-DU_TjrduNhVbDe2G113EkZlLlKmuVsL22PEouGlD_hynchwo0tA5miwFVGl7ckcrwvYF6jYc-gcoh_LtNdvSV3dGm_tmh-DKO5Lrn8ZZ8H5Q8flexg/s320/372px-William-Adolphe_Bouguereau_%25281825-1905%2529_-_The_Day_of_the_Dead_%25281859%2529.jpg" /></a></div>The first of these is easy to account for. All Saints Day has had proper texts in the Prayer Book from the beginning in 1549 so, obviously, the Reformers had no objections to it. Secondly, there are countless numbers who have lived especially holy lives - so many that there isn’t room on the Church calendar to accommodate them all in any practical way. Besides, who knows how many saints there are whose virtue has escaped the public notice of the Church? So we have a day to collectively celebrate them all and to thank God for the action of His grace in our lives. <br /> <p></p><p>But, it is not simply "their" day. It is ours too. For we are numbered among the saints and, yes, I purposely use the present tense 'are numbered' with good reason, it is Biblical and factual. Romans 1:7 says, "To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ." In Colossians 1:1-2 it is written: "Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timotheus our brother, To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." <br /> </p><p>Rather than just being limited to a list of those formally enrolled (or "canonised") by the Church, all faithful Christian believers everywhere are, and are called to be, saints. To this great dignity, we can only respond with the Apostle John: "See what love the Father has given us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are." (1 John 3:1a) <br /> </p><p>Yet I know that sounds like a tall, nigh on insurmountable task. And it is, were we simply left to scratch around in the dust of our own devices. But...the God of all grace has and continues to supply the will to "all that believe in Him" to live into the saving faith He has given us and to show it forth in increasing knowledge and good works. Think of it this way, as it is directly akin to that other seemingly impossible directive in Matt. 5:48, "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." The Rev. William Barclay, in his 'Daily Study Bible', gives us some helpful advice for interpreting and receiving this piece of the Good News. "On the face of it that sounds like a commandment which cannot possibly have anything to do with us. There is none of us who would even faintly connect ourselves with perfection....This word [perfect] is often used in Greek in a very special way. It has nothing to do with what we might call abstract, philosophical, metaphysical perfection....A man who has reached his full-grown stature is [perfect] in contradistinction to a half-grown lad. A student who has reached a mature knowledge of his subject is [perfect] as opposed to a learner who is just beginning, and who as yet has no grasp of things....It is the whole teaching of the Bible that we realise our manhood only by becoming godlike. The one thing which makes us like God is the love which never ceases to care for men, no matter what men do to it. We realise our manhood, we enter upon Christian perfection, when we learn to forgive as God forgives, and to love as God loves." (The Gospel of Matthew vol. 1, 177-178) That too, then, is how we live into our call to sainthood. <br /> </p><p>Here's where things start getting a little more interesting. The keeping of All Souls Day and some of the attendant customs, ceremonies, and theology surrounding it have been (and continue to be) subject to no little amount of controversy. At its heart, I believe the disputation rests on the question of the purpose of prayer and supplication for those already deceased. As a further subset to that, it seems to me that there is a generic misunderstanding of the nature of what prayer itself actually is. Let me boil this down as simply as I can. Whether you come from a traditional. liturgical church like our own, an Evangelical mega church, an underground fellowship officially persecuted by the local government in some foreign land, or what have you, we all pray. If someone is sick, we pray for them. When we are inspired by the grace of God, we thank Him in prayer. There is a cause and effect relationality to all of our thanks and praise. Need something next week? Ask for it today. Thankful for blessings received yesterday? Be sure to thank the One Who gave them tomorrow. Thus, our prayers are bound up with our existence in time. As this is the only mode of existence we have experienced, it works for us. But what about God’s perspective? In heaven there is no time. God is always present. He wasn’t kidding when He revealed His name to Moses as “I AM” (as opposed to “I WAS” or “I WILL BE”). That means that our next week is present in the mind of God right now and always will be. He sees the future because there is no future for Him. So when we petition Him, we are not seeking to change His mind or alter foreseen events because that is impossible. The gift of prayer, then, is for our benefit. It is ultimately an act expressive of faith, hope and charity. To keep on with the example of prayers of petition, when we ask for needs, we are proclaiming our belief in God. We are living out our grace-infused hope that what He has proposed for our faith is true. We are doing a work of charity by recognizing and responding to the needs of others. In short, we are keeping in communion with them. When we pray, we are acknowledging the Divine ordering of the universe [- no more, and yet no less than that]. <br /> </p><p>Keeping all that in mind, consider this, from 2 Maccabees 12: "[The] noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves from sin, forsomuch as they saw before their eyes the things that came to pass for the sins of those that were slain. And when he had made a gathering throughout the company to the sum of two thousand drachms of silver, he sent it to Jerusalem to offer a sin offering, doing therein very well and honestly, in that he was mindful of the resurrection: For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead." (vs. 42b-44) The context here is that Judas Maccabeus and his men went to engage the governor of Idumea in battle and some of the Jews of Jerusalem were killed and later discovered to have things consecrated to the gods of the Jamnites on their persons. Verse 40 attributes this as the cause of their deaths. Much more significantly, Judas finances a sin offering for these dead, demonstrating his belief in the future bodily resurrection of the dead as well as the charity of praying for their repose. This is a not insignificant instance in the Scriptures and though it is from the Apocrypha - and thus out of bounds for establishing doctrine, per the 6th of the Articles of Religion - it provides a precedent for our very human instinct to remember the dead. Again, as the Articles put it, we can read it for “example of life and instruction of manners”. And thus it leads naturally and directly into our discussion of All Souls Day<br /> </p><p>Consider what St. Augustine has to say in his work "On the Care of the Dead" wherein he has been discussing what the deceased may or may not continue to be aware of that happens on earth: "Let us not think that anything reaches those deceased for whom we care except what we solemnly pray with our sacrifices – either at the altar, or by our prayers, or by our alms. Yet this does not benefit all for whom such things are done, but only those who prepared for such benefit while they were yet alive. But since we cannot determine who these people are, we ought to do them for all those who have been reborn, so that we do not overlook anyone whom these benefits can and should reach. For it is better to do these things uselessly for people whom they will neither help nor hinder, than to not do them for someone whom they could help." (www.fourthcentury.com/on-the-care-of-the-dead) So, employing here the logic of Pascal's Wager, St. Augustine says it is better to do something potentially superfluous than to neglect something beneficial. Praying for the dead, then, places us in good company with our forebears in faith. <br /> </p><p> In conclusion, whether we are considering the saints here on earth gathered in the visible body of the Church, those who died and await the fulfilment of their hope in Christ, or those who have come to their reward in heaven, all have in common the possession of the wedding-garment in today's [Trinity XX] Gospel. What that garment might be is described by the Rev. John Boys, sometime Dean of Canterbury during the reign of James I & VI: "The wedding garment, as Origin thinks, is Christ: or as Eusebius, the new man: or as Jerome, observing of the commandments of Christ: or as a pure conversation: or as others, an upright heart, coming to the marriage rather out of duty, than for a dinner: or as others, charity: or as Gregory, grace: or as others, faith: or as others, regeneration: consist in faith and repentance All which upon the point are the very same: so that (as our divines observe) the question is idle whether faith or godly life be this garment, because good works always proceed from faith, and faith always showeth itself by good works." (The Works of John Boys, 758)<br /> </p><p>And that is the hallmark of which we are reminded by these past liturgical days and by which we are called to order our lives aright: in good works proceeding from faith and that faith showing itself in our God-enabled works. <br /></p>a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-78305046124995668982020-10-17T13:35:00.003-07:002020-10-30T12:25:30.081-07:00St. Luke's Day <p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRdp50QFsz7_c__HgFX2SYEPq9OjoBVx1Ba8Yku6Sace0XV9ACwRt_-utcDWjbv-2NkG7pf0lNoYePHvoMGMt_ltKWZYB39nT183UXJvyEzt2FtE5jtGhcln5O45YkMSKLF2etkiQ6l5c/s2048/Pompeo_Batoni_003.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2048" data-original-width="1473" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRdp50QFsz7_c__HgFX2SYEPq9OjoBVx1Ba8Yku6Sace0XV9ACwRt_-utcDWjbv-2NkG7pf0lNoYePHvoMGMt_ltKWZYB39nT183UXJvyEzt2FtE5jtGhcln5O45YkMSKLF2etkiQ6l5c/s320/Pompeo_Batoni_003.jpg" /></a></div>
<p></p><p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">"There
is something peculiar in St. Luke's day, something calm and soothing
connected with it; it occurs at a time when summer often revives a
little before it finally goes, and sheds on us a parting smile; there
is something in St. Luke's own character which speaks of healing to
both body and mind, like the good Samaritan, into the wounds of both
pouring oil and wine. We connect his Gospel especially with the
Atonement, and the mercies of God to penitents;...To these we may add
the personal history of St. Luke himself. In the service for the day
he is brought before us as the faithful companion of St. Paul in the
last view we obtain of the great Apostle....The recurrence therefore
of this day is like the last gleaming of the year itself at this
season, when a serene and bright interval precedes its close."
(Isaac Williams, Sermon LXXXVIII)</span></p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Thus
do we hear in a sermon by Isaac Williams, a 19th century English
clergyman, student
of John Keble (who is famous for his cycle of poems 'The Christian
Year' about the themes of the Sundays and Red Letter Days as they
occur in the Prayerbook) and member of the Oxford movement. Inasmuch
as he mentions "atonement" as a central theme of Luke's
Gospel, I think it is important that we spend a bit of time examining
the Biblical concept of Atonement, particularly as it manifests in
the observance of Yom Kippur, which began this year on the eve of
September 27<sup>th</sup>. Leviticus chapter 16 gives us the
necessary details of the observance of the Day of Atonement,
beginning with a reminder of the deaths of the two sons of Aaron who
were consumed by fire for making an unauthorised offering of incense.
As a consequence of this (and it matters not whether they were
literally consumed by "fire from the Lord"), Aaron is
enjoined to observe the regulations of the law with care and
exactitude and not to treat the divine ordinances with casual
contempt. Among the offerings, he is to take two goats. One will
supply blood to be sprinkled within the holy of holies while the
other will serve as the 'scapegoat'. Per verses 21 and 22: "And
Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and
confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and
all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the
head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man
into the wilderness: And the goat shall bear upon him all their
iniquities unto a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat
into the wilderness." </span>
</p><p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">That
the goat is sent bearing iniquity into an uninhabited land can be
seen as an illustration
of what later philosophers such as St. Augustine would call the
non-being of evil. Bear with me here. He says: "All of nature,
therefore, is good, since the Creator of all nature is supremely
good. But nature is not supremely and immutably good as is the
Creator of it. Thus the good in created things can be diminished and
augmented. For good to be diminished is evil; still, however much it
is diminished, something must remain of its original nature as long
as it exists at all. For no matter what kind or however
insignificant a thing may be, the good which is its 'nature' cannot
be destroyed without the thing itself being destroyed....Whenever a
thing is consumed by corruption, not even the corruption remains, for
it is nothing in itself, having no subsistent being in which to
exist. From this it follows that there is nothing to be called evil
if there is nothing good." (Augustine, <i>Enchiridion</i>,
chapter 4)</span></p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">So
the sins of the community are sent away into a place that is
perfectly identified with their
pure nature of non-being, or "uninhabited-ness" if you
will, which is a good lesson to us all as to both the interior
dispositions which our sins create both within the self and within
others (for everything we do has an impact on those around us, no
matter how imperceptible) and their ultimate consequences should
there be no acceptance of the insurmountable mercy of the Cross and
its perfect ability to convert destructive non-being into the very
fountain of all life-giving grace. </span>
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Something
else to take away from the Day of Atonement is this. As the first day
of the seventh
Hebrew month marks the beginning of the religious new year, the
celebrations of Yom Kippur on the tenth day are designed to help make
a new beginning by asking forgiveness amongst one's acquaintances,
fasting, not bathing and participating in extra prayers at the
synagogue. On the eve of the feast, the Torah scrolls are removed
from the 'Ark' and the cantor sings (in Aramaic) the Kol Nidre which
translates as: "All personal vows we are likely to make, all
personal oaths and pledges we are likely to take between this Yom
Kippur and the next Yom Kippur, we publicly renounce. Let them all be
relinquished and abandoned, null and void, neither firm nor
established. Let our personal vows, pledges and oaths be considered
neither vows nor pledges nor oaths." </span>
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">This
can seem a little unsettling when taken out of context. But, from the
Jewish Encyclopedia:
"The tendency to make vows was so strong in ancient Israel that
the Pentateuchal code found it necessary to protest against the
excessive estimate of the religious value of such obligations (Deut.
23:23). Rash and frequent vows inevitably involved in difficulties
many who had made them, and thus evoked an earnest desire for
dispensation from such responsibilities....The "Kol Nidre' was
thus evidently developed from the longing for a clear conscience on
the part of those seeking reconciliation with God." This problem
of rash and excessive oath taking is also recognised in the New
Testament. From St. Matthew's Gospel: "But I say to you, Do not
swear at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, or by
the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the
city of the great King....Let what you say be simply 'Yes' or 'No';
anything more than this comes from the Evil One." (5: 34-35, 37)
As indeed Jesus Christ here overcomes the need for swearing an oath
and rather commands those who follow Him to simply tell the truth and
to follow through on it, He also, being the perfect high priest
surpasses the blood offerings in the Temple once for all and purifies
all who believe in Him by the shedding of His own blood. There is no
more need for a continuous purifying that is only symbolic. The
sign-value of its usefulness is at an end. Calvary is thus both the
last and the greatest Day of Atonement. The exclamation of the crowd
gathered in Pilate's courtyard was even more true than they realised
at the time: "His blood be on us, and on our children." And
indeed that is the case for all who are in Christ. </span>
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">There
are some unique insights regarding this offering that are only to be
found in St.Luke's
narrative. At the institution of the Eucharist, this Gospel simply
states: "This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is
shed for you." The eschatological addition of "and for
many", present in the other synoptic Gospels is absent here.
Perhaps this is Luke the Physician emphasising the present, healing
and reconciling quality of receiving communion for each individual in
the moment as a personal reminder of both the Upper Room and Calvary,
rather than choosing to emphasise the availablility of this self-same
grace to generations of believers to come. </span>
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">And,
speaking of Luke as physician, the collect provided in the Church of
England's Book of Common Prayer differs from the American version
thusly: "Almighty God, who calledst Luke the physician, whose
praise is in the Gospel, to be an Evangelist, and Physician of the
soul; may it please thee, that by the wholesome medicines of the
doctrine delivered by him, all the diseases of our souls may be
healed, through the merits of thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen."
</span>
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">So,
from the perspective of providing "wholesome medicines", he
gives us the (unique
to him) accounts of the Good Samaritan - wherein a broken body is
treated and given time to heal- and the Prodigal Son - wherein a
broken relationship is restored both by sincere repentance and
unconditional love always on the lookout for a first inkling of
desire to receive it.* And so here is revealed something else of the
qualities of the living God that were (perhaps) not as accessible or
explicit in the purifying rites of the Old Covenant. </span>
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">It
is both consistent and reasonable that these things, together with
all else that is presented
to us in the Gospels and reflected upon in the Epistles and the
Apocalypse (and as they
are cognizant of and in harmony with the traditions of the Old
Testament, to be seen there as well), are meant to give us as
complete a picture as we can comprehend of the Atoning work of Jesus
Christ in His person and in His sacrificial death and Resurrection. </span>
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">And
so there is a lot to come to terms with here on this feast of the
Evangelist St. Luke. But
there is really only one critical thing to remember when thinking
about the Atonement:</span></p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;">"And
he arose and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off,
his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his
neck, and kissed him." (Lk. 15: 20) </span></p><p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><>< <>< <>< </span>
</p>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br /></p><p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">*[The
father (of the parable) himself, having inculcated the 'first cause'
of this desire by his very nature (the example and care he gives his
children as he raised them and into the 'present' day of the
parable), models the great gift of God the Father in giving to us the
even the desire to be saved and to receive his Son, thereby
re-confirming the Church's opposition to the "diy" heresy
of semi-Pelagianism wherein we would be able to be the source of our
will to be saved. In saying this, it does not mean that our will to
be saved is not free, rather that it is does not originate (is not
capable of originating, cf. Original Sin) within our own will, but
supplied (principally) through the perfect will of God the Father by
the movement of God the Holy Ghost.]</span></p>
<p></p>a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-42218456651206965992020-06-14T01:00:00.000-07:002020-06-14T01:00:08.000-07:00Trinity I <br />
<div style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">
Whereas last Sunday we celebrated the glories and perfection of the Eternal Trinity, today we take a step back and look at the sins and inclinations of mortal man. It makes for quite a contrast. And I think that is a good and beneficial thing. Our post-lapsarian [i.e. our life after the commission (or fall or <i>lapse</i>, hence the expression) of Original Sin] existence is the key to understanding Christian anthropology. Without this common, received, understanding, the task of teaching and passing on the faith becomes exponentially more difficult. Thus the Lectionary has a noticeable evangelistic function as well as its practical uses in that it allows us to return to this essential theme and its consequences repeatedly in the principle context in which the Scriptures are to be encountered, proclaimed, and expounded – public, liturgical worship. </div>
<br />
<br />
Bearing that in mind, within the bounds of the 1<sup>st</sup> Lesson for Morning Prayer and the Epistle and Gospel appointed for today, we encounter some teaching and exhortation on discernment and mindfulness in how we approach what we say, what we think, and what we do. <br />
<br />
Firstly, consider this from Jeremiah 23:32, "Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith the Lord, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them: therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the Lord." Let's be honest, we like to lie. And there are many reasons why: to avoid blame and/or consequences, to deflect our own sense of shame, to gain social or economic advantage, because it is expected ('everyone else does it'), and I'm sure a myriad of other excuses can be proffered. It seems easy, and there is a certain thrill in 'getting away with it'. But it is problematic not simply because it is unethical and immoral, though that is certainly the case. In his novel "Love in the Ruins" (which is curiously apposite for our current situation), Walker Percy has his main character (Dr. Thom More) reflect on the nature of lying: "When I left the hospital, I resolved not to lie. Lying cuts one off. Lying to someone is like blindfolding him: you cannot see the other's eyes to see how he sees you and so you do not know how it stands with yourself." And in that cutting off of the self, we express (however subconsciously) a desire to remove ourselves from the communion of the Church, from the communion of the saints, and from our participation in the life to come. We take up the example of the tempter in Genesis rather than the Saviour in the Gospels. "But let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No, 'No.' For whatever is more than these is from the evil one." (Matt. 5:37, NKJV)<br />
<br />
Secondly, "If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?" (1 Jn. 4:20) It's pretty rare that any of us would come right out and say "I hate you" to anyone. But it is awfully easy to accuse, to willfully misunderstand, to think that we have a complete perspective and have nothing further to learn. In other words, I may not say I hate you, but I sure think it. I, like most of us, have experienced all of these things. In the 14 years since I have been ordained, and in the 10 years in and out of formation programs before that, I have been accused of various heresies, yelled at by a parishioner about a matter of which she had insufficient knowledge, been told I needed to see a psychiatrist to sort out my "head/heart issues", told I was not open to the formation program, asked to place my trust in people who proved themselves (quite publicly and as a matter of record) to be untrustworthy, and the list can go on. Let me state quite clearly, I am not seeking pity or to exonerate myself. I am a weak and sinful man. I don't know everything. I have to live with mental health issues. It comes natural to me to remember and hold onto resentments. No, I don't tick off most of the boxes that have been placed on the list of the "perfect priest". And, maybe they were right who thought I shouldn't have been ordained. I am not a corporate man, I don't follow the crowd, I dislike coffee hour, I am aware of my difficulties. But when I stand at the altar and look at the cross, I am reminded that if we were not so deeply broken, there would have been no such need for a deeply radical atonement to be made for us. And yet the fact remains that precisely such an atonement has been made. And that is why I hope and keep struggling to the end. <br />
<br />
Lately, I have been thinking much about the petition in the Lord's Prayer "as we forgive those who trespass against us". In Greek these 'trespassers' are <i>opheilet</i><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif;"><i>ēs </i></span>(i.e. debtors, those who owe an obligation). It is deeply, and sadly, ironic that it comes so naturally to us to accuse others of not meeting their obligations and refuse to see that we ourselves are in the same boat. (cf. Matt. 18: 21-35) Perhaps now is a good season for practicing a deeper self-examination for us all and of seeking forgiveness where it needs to be sought and applied. <br />
<br />
As to what we do, "And it came to pass, that [Lazarus] died and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, as was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom." (Luke 17: 22-23). Fr. Stephen Freeman, commenting on this parable, has said: "The point of the parable is found in its end: 'If they have not listened to Moses and the Prophets, neither would they listen to someone even if he came back from the dead.' It is not a parable about the topography of the after-life, but a comment about our present life and our unwillingness to hear the gospel....If you want to know the way to go – if you want to know how things work – then you have to know the heart of God. You have to know God himself. And this is all that we need to know for life here – and life hereafter. God Himself is our heaven – and in the teachings of the Fathers – God Himself is our hell – for hell is nothing other than our self-imposed refusal to accept the love of God. It is that refusal that brings its own torment. If we have the eyes to see – we are already traveling the roads of heaven and hell – already dwelling in the bosom of Abraham or in the torments of Hades. The geography of that journey is the geography of love and mercy, kindness and forgiveness – or contrary – hatred and judgment, violence, self-conceit, slander and calumny." (blogs.ancientfaith.com/glory2 godforallthings/2011/10/19/the-geography-of-heaven-and-hell/) <br />
<br />
Just to add a quick addendum to this analysis to bring it in contact with my main point, the trouble for the rich man is again a willed cutting off of common cause (i.e. communion) with Lazarus. His wealth and position, giving him a sense of security, allowed him to ignore that which cannot be set aside, the encounter with humanity itself. <br />
<br />
As a side note, I would counsel you specifically that, with regard to the present social upheavals in our country, while the politics themselves are ontologically irrelevant, the people involved are not, even those you disagree with. <br />
<br />
In conclusion, Trinity Sunday and that immediately following are two great pillars exemplifying a reliable, orthodox Christian anthropology. As it is demonstrated in the theology and worship of the Church, so must it specifically leave its mark in the lives of individual believers, and that as manifested in what we say, what we think, and what we do. "Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another." (1 Jn. 4:10-11) a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-15751157566115496152020-05-12T16:19:00.000-07:002020-05-12T16:29:00.140-07:00Mother's Day <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgU-25a6HvOn3VdBR-9DioGJjiC5rwMeXyfDvl17AsiNOOd9TXfke8h2jvWTqe5pHoMDJbu0mQyB9thZrplALdS3JM3j7n_-04vSyJkgK6MCC0X2FtoI0M-25APIeS1Rq-bUjI6ic8IkW4/s1600/Kazan_moscow.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="450" data-original-width="371" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgU-25a6HvOn3VdBR-9DioGJjiC5rwMeXyfDvl17AsiNOOd9TXfke8h2jvWTqe5pHoMDJbu0mQyB9thZrplALdS3JM3j7n_-04vSyJkgK6MCC0X2FtoI0M-25APIeS1Rq-bUjI6ic8IkW4/s320/Kazan_moscow.jpg" width="263" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://orthodoxwiki.org/Our_Lady_of_Kazan" target="_blank">Our Lady of Kazan</a> </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
This past Sunday the civil calendar reminded us to consider motherhood. The church calendar also provides (at least) two occasions to do so in the Springtime – "Mothering Sunday" on the IV Sunday in Lent and also the Annunciation on March 25th. Having something to say about family life, then, will be my theme for today. <br />
<br />
Not having been called to marry and sire children, it certainly isn't my place to expatiate on the virtues and duties of spouses and parents devoid of any practical experience. What I can speak to, however, is the experience of being raised in a family. I was fortunate as a child to have a stable home life. My parents seemed to strike a good balance between being either too strict or too lenient. Home was a safe place and, while I enjoyed staying over with friends, the experience was inevitably a "foreign" one where the rules, expectations, and scheduling were not what I was accustomed to and I was always glad to be back home among that which was familiar. <br />
<br />
And, ideally, that is a function also of the Church, either in its larger geographical or local (parochial) manifestations. I think that is one of the major reasons why the ecclesial scandals and upheavals of the 20th and 21st centuries that we have and will continue to live through are so difficult to deal with. A place to belong that ought to be "safe" (i.e. dependable in terms of its theology, morality, and avoidance of criminal behaviour) has, in too many instances, betrayed the trust that was expected, nay required, of it. And this is something that transcends denominational lines and "political" labels (a conservative vs. liberal praxis of Christianity) and wounds the entire body of Christ. <br />
<br />
<div class="sdfootnote">
Inasmuch as the familial has been betrayed by its own, it can also be properly healed only through its own. And I think that is true both of the 'meta-issues' that confront us as well as those lesser things we are called to deal with personally in our daily lives. In his "Dialogue with Trypho" [written sometime in the latter half of the 2nd Century A.D.], Justin Martyr says: "He became man by the Virgin, in order that the disobedience which proceeded from the serpent might receive its destruction in the same manner in which it derived its origin. For Eve, who was a virgin and undefiled, having conceived the word of the serpent, brought forth disobedience and death. But the Virgin Mary received faith and joy, when the angel Gabriel announced the good tidings to her that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her, and the power of the Highest would overshadow her: wherefore also the Holy Thing begotten of her is the Son of God: and she replied, 'Be it unto me according to thy word.' And by her has He been born, to whom we have proved so many scriptures refer, and by whom God destroys both the serpent and those angels and men who are like him; but works deliverance from death to those who repent of their wickedness and believe upon Him." [en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/
Ante-Nicene_Christian_Library/Dialogue_with_Tryph]
</div>
<br />
So I think it is appropriate to also consider Mary on this Mother's Day. And while it was, and is, certainly a right consequence of the Reformation to put a halt to the excessive and frankly idolatrous practices that had arisen surrounding the cultus of the saints, I think there is an equal danger in underemphasising the significance of who she is and of what great dignity she was called to in the operation of the economy of redemption. The Scriptures both provide sufficient testimony to her as an exemplar of faith (thus refuting any need for further, "clarifying" doctrines as taught by the Church of Rome) and give us evidence of her participation, along with that of the other women disciples, in the life of both the pre and post-Resurrection fledgling Church (thus indicating that there are proper roles for both sexes, and that one ought not to impinge on the other). <br />
<br />
As to the supposed "silence" of the canonical Scriptures, John Henry Newman in a sermon on the Annunciation preached at St. Mary's Oxford (Church of England), offers a two-fold response. The first is that the Scriptures are written to the glory of God, not to the honour of this or that saint, praiseworthy and notable though they may be. As to the second:<br />
<br />
"But, further, the more we consider who St. Mary was, the more dangerous will such knowledge of her appear to be. Other saints are but influenced or inspired by Christ, and made partakers of Him mystically. But, as to St. Mary, Christ derived His manhood from her, and so had an especial unity of nature with her; and this wondrous relationship between God and man it is perhaps impossible for us to dwell much upon without some perversion of feeling. For, truly, she is raised above the condition of sinful beings, though by nature a sinner; she is brought near to God, yet is but a creature, and seems to lack her fitting place in our limited understandings, neither too high nor too low. We cannot combine, in our thought of her, all we should ascribe with all we should withhold. Hence, following the example of Scripture, we had better only think of her with and for her Son, never separating her from Him, but using her name as a memorial of His great condescension in stooping from heaven, and not 'abhorring the Virgin's womb.' And this is the rule of our own Church, which has set apart only such Festivals in honour of Blessed Mary, as may also be Festivals in honour of our Lord; the Purification commemorating His presentation in the Temple, and the Annunciation commemorating His Incarnation. And, with this caution, the thought of her may be made most profitable to our faith; for nothing is so calculated to impress on our minds that Christ is really partaker of our nature, and in all respects man, save sin only, as to associate Him with the thought of her, by whose ministration He became our brother." [Newman, <i>Parochial and Plain Sermons: The Reverence Due to the Virgin Mary</i>, Ignatius Press, p. 313]<br />
<br />
Such 'silence' as this is also appropriate to us in our Christian profession. We had only better be thought of with and for God's Son – our Lord Jesus Christ. "And ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's." (1 Cor. 3:23) <br />
<br />
And so, on this Mother's Day, I commend to you the example of Mary. I offer my blessing, encouragement, and gratitude to those who have undertaken the needful and honourable estate of parenthood. After the manner of Justin Martyr's “Dialogue” above, just as many social and personal problems can be germinated in a troubled family context, so can they be avoided and/or dealt with in a healthy family context. And finally, let us ever keep to the forefront of our remembrance and living that all may "know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fullness of God." (Eph. 3:19) a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-32277630111820240202020-04-18T21:00:00.000-07:002020-05-12T16:29:11.429-07:00It's a sabbath...like it or not <br />
<div align="CENTER" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<i>Gen. 2:2-3"And on the seventh day God ended his work which he
had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he
had made."</i></div>
<br />
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
</div>
<br />
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
Here in April of the year 2020, a great portion of the planet is
under some type of quarantine due to the outbreak of what has been
called the coronavirus. While it is not as deadly as some other
pestilences that have occurred throughout human history, it is
certainly very contagious and, hence, some otherwise extreme
precautions have been called for and, indeed, sensibly mandated.</div>
<br />
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
Among the great hallmarks of contemporary economic theory and
practice in the developed world is the two-fold principle of 'produce
and consume at all costs'. Some of the progeny of this relentless
system include targeted advertising to our personal communication
devices that we keep powered on most of the time in order to keep up
to date with information (God forbid that we 'miss out on something'
- thus feeding into the narrative that we have an overriding
imperative to consume, be it information or durable goods and
investments), an increasing lack of well-defined boundaries between
work and personal life, and few reliable social security structures
to fall back on in case of illness, injury, or economic downturn that
prevents being able to work. The system thus forces those, especially
among the poor and not-well-connected, to continue to eek out a
subsistence living while sick themselves and potentially
contaminating a large swath of other people with whatever ailment
they are carrying. Such a situation is not ultimately sustainable
and, whether by virtue of concerted public action or uncontrollable
compulsion, will be interrupted.</div>
<br />
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
And now it has been. So it seems that we have, for a time, a
situation that requires of us the impetus to stop and take stock of
what it is we have been living like/for. And that is no bad thing.
And it is not my purpose here to dive into economic or political
theory. Rather, I am interested in how we as individuals and as
Christian believers can respond to this circumstance that we find
ourselves in, and that not by choice.
</div>
<br />
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
Our society, in many of its younger constituent members (and, yes,
this is a generalisation, but anectodal evidence is strong in its
favour) has become completely enthralled to the fast pace of
technology and that has affected not only how they see themselves,
but in the works and reactions they produce. In other words, our
consumption has a profound impact on who we are, how we see
ourselves, and how we relate to our fellows. Indeed, it has
'consumed' us. Movies and television shows have become much more
'intense' (and loud), there is a great impatience for the 'next big
thing' to be developed and to discard that which it replaces, there
is a serious increase in attention deficit disorders in young
students and twenty somethings to the point that sitting still and
being alone with one's thoughts is an almost unthinkable exercise.
Our culture has become obnoxious, rude, loud, overstimulated, and
ill-considered. The present virus has taken some of the teeth out of
this monster that has been self-generating for some decades now. And
that is a good thing.
</div>
<br />
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
For a significant minority among us have a hard time interacting
with, let alone understanding or desiring to participate in, the
frenetic pace that has arisen. We would prefer a nice cup of coffee
or tea, a good book, a long walk, a meaningful conversation with a
close friend, and/or some time to recover after having been to
work/school/running errands that exhaust us. We may be used to
feeling closed off from the great crush of humanity, able to fend for
ourselves, not mind being alone with the thoughts that rumble through
our own head-space, become resilient enough by the training of our
nature/mental condition to not panic when something serious occurs
that requires our adaptation to circumstance beyond our immediate
control. That has been our whole life. It is a blessing, especially
now, that may not have felt like one during the many long years of
our trying to come to terms with ourselves.
</div>
<br />
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
It is now up to the majority to try and cope without some of the
innate tools that we might possess. Thus, they will need patience and
compassion as they struggle with the discomfort of being
not-themselves. A sabbath is here, at the end of our man-made works,
whether we like it or not.
</div>
<br />
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
</div>
<br />
<div align="CENTER" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<i>Ex. 20:8-11 "Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six
days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is
the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work,
thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy
maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy
gates: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and
all that is in them, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord
blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."</i></div>
<br />
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
There are at least a couple of significant things to notice here in
this passage from Exodus. The first is that we, who are made in the
image and likeness of God, are called to imitate Him in the
conclusion of His creative acts. After the six days of creation, He
stops to bless what He has done. And we can do the same thing by
being more mindful of what we do and how we do it. Whether it is our
work, our prayer, our interactions with family/friends/strangers
(especially on the internet!), a certain casual unawareness has crept
into our social discourse that allows us to keep people at a
distance, comment on (read "disapprove of") some aspect of
theirs and feel justified in doing so. Rather are we called to bless
and to be a blessing to others. And it can be done, even if we
disagree, even if the other party is objectively "wrong",
and in those times when the wisdom of the Spirit calls us to say
nothing at all. Then will we be able to stop and and to see the
blessing in what we have done or avoided, which becomes another
barometer for reading the condition of our own hearts and to
understand more clearly what sort of conversion we are being called
to at this particular time.
</div>
<br />
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
The other thing, which ties into the first point, is that "the
stranger that is within thy gates" is also specified as being
included in this sabbath keeping. It is a call to be both kind and
generous to those in our midst, especially if they are hard to be
kind to. You may be the agent of change God has called to help them
become whole through your example and prayer. It is a fearful thing
to obstruct the good purpose of the good God and try to replace it
with our own sins and failures. A sabbath is here, at the end of our
man-made works, whether we like it or not.
</div>
<br />
<br />
<div align="CENTER" lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<i>Mark 2:27 "And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for
man, and not man for the sabbath."</i></div>
<br />
<br />
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">In like manner after
the Scribes and Pharisees who have, up to this point in St. Mark's
Gospel, accused Jesus of forgiving someone's sins, not fasting, and
breaking the sabbath, so their modern analogues in the secular world
seek to shame people into altering their behaviour by criticising
those who leave their homes (without knowledge or consideration of
the circumstances involved) and those who have no homes (for not being in one! and for which all sorts of things are blamed but one of the principle causes, the vagaries of the unrestrained free market which capitalises & commodifies everything in its wake and leaves those behind who cannot afford to invest in its "liberties".) It seems that the "professionally
irritated" are among us in force as they were in the 1<sup>st</sup>
century. We can, however, be thankful that the modern day Reddit
warrior has not, for the most part, set his sights on religious
practice. Back then, someone was healed of a physical disability, a
group of people - as likely as not alienated from the religious
establishment of the day - have found someone who will accept them
and lead them, hungry folks found a legitimate source of food. Today,
people put themselves at risk to care for the needy. Are those really
such bad things? Are they worthy of complaint?</span></span></div>
<br />
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"> It's a matter of
priorities. If even the great David himself knows that the Torah is
meant for his benefit, not to constrain him, how much ought we to be
encouraged by his example and to take after it. "Think not that
I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to
destroy, but to fulfil." (Matt. 5:17) In light of this, there is
no good reason for the Scribes and Pharisees to be unsettled by Jesus
or for us to be unsettled by the Coronavirus. </span></span>
</div>
<br />
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;"> Jesus
here shows us how to read and interpret the Scriptures properly. He,
as the Incarnate Word, is the definitive reference point for all that
has been written and that which is to come. The heart of the Gospels
is the account of the passion, death and Resurrection of Jesus.
Everything else about the narratives flows out from that. The same is
true for the whole of the Biblical narrative. The Gospels themselves
are the heart. The Epistles, Wisdom literature, Prophets, and Law are
concentric circles surrounding the Gospels. The two outermost rings,
</span></span><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Genesis</span></i><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">
and </span></span><i><span style="font-weight: normal;">Revelation,
</span></i><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">the
'book ends' if you will, describe for us the relevant beginning and
end of salvation history. And if these latter two seem confusing,
filled with bizarre imagery and things that cannot be taken
literally, well...think about what they are attempting to
communicate: the life and creative power of the Omnipotent God and
the response of His beloved creation to His own greatness. No small
task, that.</span></span></span></span></div>
<br />
<div align="LEFT" lang="en-US" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"> And so, as we
continue to live out our days and contemplate our existence and
perhaps what sort of changes to our own lives we need to continue
after the pandemic runs its course, it is critical that we keep in
the forefront of our minds what our Christian profession entails. It
is not the keeping of a specific liturgy, the right to assemble
together in a public place, or reminding other people of their faults
and shortcomings (chances are as likely as not they're already aware
of those without your intervention). Rather it is believing in the
Lord Jesus, holding the right faith according to the Creeds, allowing
the Word of God to constantly take deeper root within our hearts, a
consciousness that we are a communion of believers (even in the midst
of separation) which both embraces and transcends the physical
reality, and a living faith in the reality of the Resurrection,
during busy seasons and during times of rest, whether chosen or
enforced. A sabbath is here, at the end of our man-made works,
whether we like it or not. </span></span>
</div>
a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-46946780967743658962019-02-10T14:28:00.001-08:002019-02-10T14:28:33.409-08:00Epiphany V<div lang="en-US" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">The tradition of the Rule of St. Benedict*, almost 1500 years old now, is known for both its practical wisdom as well as the detail which it provides for the arrangement of the Daily Offices. Speaking of how the Psalms ought to be employed, the Rule says:"Above all else we urge that if anyone finds this distribution of the psalms unsatisfactory, he should arrange whatever he judges better, provided that the full complement of one hundred and fifty psalms is by all means carefully maintained every week...We read, after all, that our holy Fathers, energetic as they were, did all this in a single day. Let us hope that we, lukewarm as we are, can achieve it in a whole week." (from Ch. 18, <i>RB80</i>, p. 215) <br />
<br />
Quite analogously, Thomas Cranmer applied the same methodology to the 30 day Psalm cycle in the Book of Common Prayer. If the monks of old could accomplish such in the course of a week, let us hope that we, preoccupied as we are, can manage the same in a whole month. And now, on account of 20<sup>th</sup> century liturgical tinkering, a majority of the Psalms can be read at Morning and Evening Prayer over a period of 6 or 7 weeks. As the saying goes, 'not that there's anything wrong with that' <i>per se</i>, but it does indicate a tendency in both our prayer and preaching habits to somewhat marginalise the Old Testament generally and the Psalms in particular. So I rejoice on these Sundays when Morning Prayer is our service order because not only can the Psalms be preached on from the pulpit (as at any other time), but also proclaimed in the context of public worship, the very function for which they were composed originally.<br />
<br />
So we read this morning in Psalm 112:2 "His seed shall be mighty upon earth; the generation of the faithful shall be blessed." From St. Augustine's "Exposition on the Psalms": "The Apostle witnesses, that the works of mercy are the seed of the future harvest, when he says, '<i>Let us not be weary in well doing, for in due season we shall reap</i>;' [Galatians 6:9] and again, '<i>But this I say, He which sows sparingly, shall reap also sparingly</i>.' [2 Corinthians 9:6] But what, brethren, is more mighty than that not only Zacch<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif;">ae</span><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif;"></span>us should buy the kingdom of Heaven by the half of his goods, [Luke 19:8] but even the widow for two mites, [Mark 12:42] and that each should possess an equal share there? What is more mighty, than that the same kingdom should be worth treasures to the rich man, and a cup of cold water to the poor? (<a href="http://newadvent.org/fathers/1801111.htm">newadvent.org/fathers/1801111.htm</a>) And so here we have two significant things going on. The first is a preview of the theme in the Epistle about working mercy and that in the Gospel lesson about the nature of the harvest. <br />
<br />
The second is the noting of both Zacchaeus and the widow giving away that which was dearest to them. For Zacchaeus it was the money he had stolen by means of legally acceptable fraud; for the widow it was all that she had to provide for herself in this life. In some ways, they couldn't be more different, but here St. Augustine is considering them as two sides of the same coin, so to speak. Though he uses the phrase “buy the kingdom of heaven”, it should be understood as a rhetorical examination, What is it worth to you? Once again, the same question is being put to us that I brought up last time only in different words: <i>What is it worth to you?</i> - <i>Who do you say that I am?</i> In response, are we willing, like these two people given as examples, to surrender everything? And not just money, but all those other things most dear to us: comfort and security, ego, pretense, anger, resentment, fear, anxiety, suspicion, etc. It's all got to go. And if that sounds impossible? Well, just look carefully at the Cross where literally everything has already been surrendered. <br />
<br />
The Epistle today is somewhat unusual as it is not an exact quote from the Authorised Version of the Bible. Likewise on Trinity 15, the Gospel lesson on that date is taken from the American Standard Version, which is a late 19<sup>th</sup>, cent. update of the good old King James. Whereas we heard about “a heart of compassion”, if you flip to Colossians 3:12 in the KJV you will read “bowels of mercies”. The late Fr. Lou Tarsitano, preaching on this day at St. Andrew's Church in Savannah, GA. back in 2000, had this to say: "[W]hile 'a heart of compassion' is an effort to provide an example of what that strange expression means, it hides more than it reveals....Thus, St. Paul approaches the mystery of human life, body and soul, on this earth, when he says, 'Put on bowels of mercies.' He means more even than 'love' and more even than 'a heart of compassion.' He expects us to call up every kind of mercy, even for those that we do not approve of or for those who have made themselves our enemies, from our 'guts' – from everything that is in us, from everything that makes us who we are. He expects us to become the living examples of mercy, and not merely to think about it, and especially when some other person doesn't deserve mercy in our ordinary human calculations." (<a href="http://lectionarycentral.com/epiphany/Tarsitano.html">lectionarycentral.com/epiphany/Tarsitano.html</a>) And if that sounds impossible? Well, just look carefully at the Cross where literally everything has already been accomplished.<br />
<br />
Speaking of mercy, we now move from our own receipt of instruction by St. Paul to God's own example in the Gospel lesson. It seems that the unidentified “enemy” was not content merely to destroy all or a portion of the future harvest, but wanted rather to plant so much confusion that the sower wouldn't be able to tell what he was even looking at. I think that describes us in our post-Edenic, lapsarian state quite well, don't you? <br />
<br />
And just as Newtonian mechanics are quite sufficient to describe the functionality of matter and energy in the universe on a macroscopic scale but cannot accurately guide us down to a quantum level of understanding what it is that really structures that which we observe, just so in moral theology the “Newtonian world” (so to speak) of the Covenants given to Noah and Abraham, the Commandments given to Moses that followed and the Natural Law before them becomes insufficient to describe the person redeemed by and justified in Christ. The Resurrection literally changes everything and reveals the foundational structure of what we have been observing throughout the course of recorded salvation history, including the fact that the harvest is not ours to accomplish, but only to partake of.<br />
<br />
Consider what Fr. Robert Hart says about the Gospel lesson: "The plants that are called tares are very much like wheat in appearance, but they lack the nutritional properties of wheat. You can’t eat from these weeds. However, it is very difficult to distinguish with the eye between the tares and true wheat....No, the Lord does not uproot the wheat in order to destroy the tares. Consider what it would mean if He did. Look at Saint Paul. If ever there was a tare that deserved uprooting, it was the persecutor of the Church, Saul of Tarsus. He had been confident in his own righteousness as a Hebrew of Hebrews, a Pharisee who was, as touching the Law of Moses, blameless. And, the crowning virtue of his righteousness was his zeal that he demonstrated by persecuting the Church. When the Lord Jesus appeared to him, as he approached the Damascus Gate, and was knocked to the ground, Saul learned that his crowning achievement of righteousness was actually the great sin of persecuting none other than Messiah Himself by persecuting His people. What had been in Saul's mind the seal and mark of his righteousness, was in reality a filthy rag, a grievous sin. And, at the same moment that he was being made aware of the enormity of his guilt, he was being shown mercy, called from the darkness of ignorance and sin into the light of Christ, and to the righteousness that comes by faith in Him. It is no wonder that this whole theme would dominate the message of what, today, we call Pauline theology. And so it is, this one-time enemy of the Church became Saint Paul the Apostle.” (<a href="http://anglicancontinuum.blogspot.com/2014/02/fifth-sunday-after-epiphany.html">http://anglicancontinuum.blogspot.com/2014/02/fifth-sunday-after-epiphany.html</a>)<br />
<br />
Here is the lesson for us. Rather than getting all worked up over the future condition of one person or another (tares or wheat, how can we even discern?!? Yet it remains sorely tempting to try), simply pray for the conversion and salvation of all, especially those who seem particularly unlovable and undesirable or just plain wicked after the example of Ananias in Acts 9. Remember too, that it is quite likely that there are those who think the same about you or I (i.e. unlovable, undesirable, just plain wicked). Please God, they will pray for our own conversion of heart as well. We are called to love all and to forgive all, even as Christ has forgiven us. And if that sounds impossible? Well, just look carefully at the Cross where literally everything has already been forgiven. And that unfathomable harvest of Divine mercy, that locus of compassion, leads us right back into the Psalms where they are blessed who fear the Lord and take great delight in his commands.<br />
<br />
<br />
*Speaking of which, if you haven't read it yet, I heartily endorse Rod Dreher's "The Benedict Option". My only real disagreement with Dreher is his assumption that the <i>post-Constantinian</i> Church-State-cultural cooperative (in all its various forms) was ever a good thing that we should strive to someday be able to return to. (See my previous post and feel free to disagree with it. That is simply my opinion.)</div>a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-13041017362962626592018-11-19T12:25:00.001-08:002018-11-19T12:25:56.931-08:00Trinity XXV<div style="text-align: center;">
<em>Daniel 3:8-30 Matthew 24:23-31</em></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<em></em> </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<em><>< <>< <><</em></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<em></em> </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Now that we are approaching the end of the Ecclesiastical as well as the secular year, the Scripture lessons in the lectionary focus, appropriately enough, on eschatological themes. Today we are being warned to redouble our faithfulness in the face of both a coercive civil power as well as the idolatry of false religion that has at its base not Christ, but the ego. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br />
If you would once again follow me back in time, the original 1928 Daily Office lectionary indicates most of the third chapter of Daniel as the first lesson for Morning Prayer on this day, wherein is recounted the casting of the three Hebrew men into Nebuchadnezzer's furnace for refusing to bow down before an image he had set up, to wit:<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
"Then Nebuchadnezzer in his rage and fury commanded to bring Shadrach, Meshach, and Abéd-nego. Then they brought these men before the king. Nebuchadnezzer spake and said unto them, Is it true, O Shadrach, Meshach, and Abéd-nego, do not ye serve my gods, nor worship the golden image which I have set up?...[I]f ye worship not, ye shall be cast the same hour into the midst of a burning fiery furnace; and who is that God that shall deliver you out of my hands?" (Dan. 3:13-14, 15b) </div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
And I'm sure you know the rest of the story. The furnace was so hot that those charged with casting the king's victims into it and standing watch were themselves consumed by the flames, yet the three young men were unharmed. Nebuchadnezzer was so impressed that he released them and, in a great act of completely missing the point, now commanded the death and destruction of any who spoke ill of the God they worship. <br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
And therein lies our own word of warning. For the first three hundred years of its existence, Christianity was an illegal movement persecuted by the civil authorities. Not only did it survive under such circumstances, it flourished after the pattern of Christ Himself who tells us in John 12:24, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit." My friends, that is the 'natural' state of Christ's Church here on earth. I would suggest that what we have become so accustomed to seeing from a now centuries-long perspective, Church and State living peaceably side by side if not outright assuming each other's duties and obligations, is not the proper environment in which the Gospel can grow and prosper unaltered. What is in fact 'upside down' we have accepted as 'right-side up' because that is what we have been told (with varying degrees of insistence) and is the draught we have imbibed. It is far too early to tell, but perhaps things are now changing and Christianity will no longer effectively be an arm of the state. Many people are afraid of this. Well, let me be the positive contrarian and tell you that what can be a source of anxiety and panic is actually cause for rejoicing and greater hope. At this juncture in western history, Christendom (that symphonic and symbiotic relationship of Church and empire) has played itself out. And frankly, if I may say so, not a moment too soon! As we read in Psalm 146:3 "Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help." For they, like Nebuchadnezzer, will turn on you in a moment's notice and all the transitory money, power and influence that they can offer will still not be able to save you. "Happy is he that hath the God of Jacob for his help, whose hope is in the Lord his God." (vs. 4)<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
"[I]f any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not." (Matt. 24:23) Joel Osteen would tell me that Christ is found in positive thinking and prosperity. I don't believe him. Dr. Creflo Dollar would tell me that Christ is found in possessing a great fortune. I don't believe that either. Arianism and Islam would tell me that Christ is simply a great creature (and, thus, incapable of making Atonement without a greater-than-he, external assistance). If the Church's teaching of the Scriptures is true, that simply cannot be the case. The former Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church would tell me that Christ is found in the Millennium Development Goals of the U.N. They, of their very nature, lack the ability proclaim that Christ is risen. The great Christian empires, democracies and other secular governments have desired to tell me that Christ is present in absolute agreement with politics and constitutions, bureaucracy and legal compulsion, campaigns and backroom deal making. If a tree is known by its fruits, I don't believe that either. For what all of these contrivances give freely with one hand, they will eventually take away with the other after the fashion of Nebuchadnezzer himself. This is the fatal logic of the zero-sum game, of fear incarnate through threat of scarcity, of covetousness and the passion of desire that has marred our theological history from the beginning with the murder of Abel by his own brother Cain – a great sorrow that did not have to be so. In the words of Rabbi Jonathan Sacks in his book "Not in God's Name: Confronting Religious Violence", "God may choose, but God does not reject. The logic of scarcity- of alpha males and chosen sons – has no place in a world made by a God whose 'tender mercies are on all his works' (Ps. 145:9)." <br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
One of my all-time favourite quotes from Fr. Stephen Freeman has to be: "The Kingdom of God has come whether we like it or not." And, if we're being honest, a lot of us don't like it because we cannot control its parameters and force it into the blindness of a singular lens, try as we might! The Kingdom of God is not synonymous with politics, economics, the 'successful' life of quiet desperation that so many people 'achieve' in the modern world, nor even with the heaven imagined by those who still dwell in the two-storey universe where we do our thing 'down here' and God is watching 'up there' where we will eventually get to after the terms of our contract expire, sufficient effort has been expended, or our anxiety has propelled us. That is all wretched, meaningless nonsense. And here, in the words of Dostoevsky's 'underground man' is where it can all go: "Because I only talk a good game, I only dream in my head, but do you know what I want in reality? That [it] all go to hell, that's what! I want peace. I'd sell the whole world for a kopeck this minute, just not to be bothered. Shall the world go to hell, or shall I not have my tea? I say let the world go to hell, but I should always have my tea." (from "Notes from Underground") But, unlike the 'underground man' whose intent was to write off his fellow persons among whom he was not able to find his place, we are called by our Lord in similarly strong words to that single-mindedness of which He is both Author and Exemplar: "And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father. But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead." (Matt. 8:21-22) This is <u>not</u> a rejection, but a fulfilling in which all are invited to partake.<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
If it is found neither in empires nor in bureaucracies, neither in the practice and belief of much that is contemporary calling itself 'religion', do you wish to see the Kingdom of God as it actually is? Then you will find it right here during these numinous moments in the midst of the liturgy, you will find it in the persons of the poor and disadvantaged who still gladly give what they can and pray with thanksgiving, you will find it in your own heart when you freely love those who are become your enemy through their fault or yours. Mostly, though, you will find it not in the life of competition for position and anxiety over having 'enough' (of whatever it is you have been told to pursue), in the shame of comparing ourselves to others and bargaining for the merest scraps of information and recognition (looking at you social media!) That is the offspring of this modern society (and many others throughout history). But rather that Kingdom is to be found in the life of grace freely given through our baptism and continuous conversion to the Lord Jesus, in Whom alone is salvation and eternal life. <br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
So, there is good news here. There is occasion and opportunity that has never existed here in the two centuries since the creation of this country. Following the Lord Jesus will no longer automatically gain you advantage and preferment. But that's okay, for the two great principles are always true and present: Christ is risen and the Kingdom of God is come among us. Nothing else really matters. So it is quite right to pay the circumstances of our existence in the world no mind whatsoever. As we are instructed in 1 Cor. 2:6, "Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect; yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought." And, we can also take courage that Jesus counsels us in John 21 against needless worry, comparison, and false choices (as if there were a scarcity of Divine love to go around) and shows us instead what we ought to be about: "Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me." (vs. 20-22)</div>
a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-31450529801309213562018-08-06T12:16:00.000-07:002018-08-06T12:16:25.176-07:00Transfiguration<div style="text-align: center;">
"For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
(2 Peter 1:17) </div>
<br />
The Christian manifestation of God's glory begins its full fruition at Christ's baptism. As the Holy Ghost descends upon Him, we hear the voice of the Father declare: “Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." (Mk. 1:11) The three occurrences, or theophanies if you will, of this utterance all come at the most significant moments in Jesus’ ministry on earth and thus are not just "wow moments" chosen at random. They point to the three traditional roles ascribed to Him of prophet, king and priest. He is a prophet because He comes to tell us of the things of God through His preaching and healing ministry begun at the river Jordan. He is king because He is thesecond Person of the Blessed Trinity reigning forever in Heaven, manifested so dramatically on Mt. Tabor. He is a priest because He offers the one liturgical oblation, to which all the blood offerings of the Old Testament rites pointed, of Himself on the Cross. Seeing their connexion, let us now consider each of these happenings in some more detail. <br />
<br />
John's baptism, particularly of Jesus, has a significance both historical and analogical, and not simply because these are things that we have assigned to it. We are to see that Jesus' coming is going to completely transform and fulfill all that has come before by His participation in the lived Covenant given to Moses and developed by Israelite tradition. Now, it can appear problematic that Jesus here presents himself for a baptism of repentance. We who profess the orthodox faith say of Him in the Nicene Creed: "God of God, Light of Light, Very God of veryGod". Consider that in the grand scheme of Christianity (particularly with regard to the Cross and Resurrection, without which everything else becomes meaningless), a fallible god in need of conversion and repentance is entirely laughable and useless. Thanks be to God, that is not the case. Thus we are not in any meaningful way similar to the present day devotees ofa self-inflicted Mt. Olympus and the errant, fickle deities that have been enthroned there by pathological fiat. Rather does Jesus come to confirm His own humanity and to reaffirm the message of John. What John had been preaching to those gathered about him was in fact perfectly consistent with both the Old Testament prophets and the newly inaugurated ministry of Jesus, to Whom all that had come before did indeed point and in Whom all would find perfect fulfillment. Herein is the glory of this first facet of the triple theophany recounted in the Gospels. <br />
<br />
In the second instance, the Transfiguration, there is no seeming paradox to contend with. The Divinity of Christ is displayed before the eyes of the chosen Apostles, who are absolutely dumbfounded. As the perfect humanity of Christ is established and confirmed in His baptism, so does the Father confirm for us on Mt. Tabor that Heis pleased to throw the full weight of the Godhead in our direction, for our benefit. If ever there were any doubts in the minds of Peter, James and John, it has certainly been illustrated for them beyond the shadow of a doubt that “the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory.” The Gospels are showing us that yes, the two natures in the one person of Jesus Christ is in fact an authentic revelation, doctrine commended to the faithful as worthy of beliefand entrusted to the care of the Church to preserve for all ages. <br />
<br />
The other thing to note about the Transfiguration is the topic of conversation amongst Jesus, Moses and Elijah. In a sermon about this subject the Rev. John Mason Neale, the great 19th cent. Anglican priest and hymnographer, said: "And what did they talk of? If wehad not been told, how different a conversation we should have imagined! We should perhaps have thought that they would speak of that kingdom which the LORD had come on earth to establish; that kingdom which shall never be destroyed, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail; that kingdom which shall be from sea to sea, and from the flood unto the world's end. Nothing less. 'They appeared in glory, and spake of His decease.' To talk of death in the height of this glory! To talk of a shameful death,-a death of agony,- amidst such brightness as the world had never before seen! Yes: but the text does not end so. They 'spake of His decease which He should accomplish.' What a wonderful word! When do we speak thus? We say that a man accomplishes deliverance from death, but to accomplish death itself,who would thus talk? It tells us how freely, how earnestly, our LORD set about His Passion, according to that saying of His: 'I have a Baptism to be baptized with, and how am I straitened till it be accomplished.'... And that indeed was a glorious subject for a season of glory. This was a brighter and better vision than Moses had, when he gat him to the top of Pisgah, and beheld all the land which GOD had promised to His people. This was a nobler prospect than Elijah had, when the chariot was bearing him up above the clouds, and his mantle fell from off him." (John Mason Neale, Sermon XV, "The Three Tabernacles") <br />
<br />
There are many facets of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ to fix our attention on. But no matter which you choose, they all lead to the passion, death and Resurrection. There is no getting around that, and that is a good thing. And so these instances of <ahref kerygma="" target="_blank" www.thefreedictionary.com=""><a href="https://www.thefreedictionary.com/kerygma" target="_blank">kerygmatic</a> </ahref>parallelism that we have noted in the Gospels are now brought to completion on Calvary by the centurion’s statement: “Truly this was the son of God.” (Mt. 27:54) The Evangelists have collated pregnant instances of both the perfect humanity and the perfect Divinity of Christ and now show us that the redemptive work of the Cross is as efficacious as itneeded to be. The humanity of the Jesus who humbly submitted to St. John’s baptism is offered on the Crossin a perfect sacrificial act of love. The Divinity of Christ exhibited on Mt. Tabor is able to offer the perfect sacrifice and to have it accepted on our behalf. This is both something that only humanity could do and that only God could do. Take away one of these two elements and the whole scheme of redemption loses its potency, the remainder becomes nothing more than an empty ritual, a cosmic farce performed not out of love and mercy, but merely out of disinterested condescension or, what's even worse, a sort of sanitised blood-lust and wrath. In the words of Fr. Stephen Freeman: "For various reasons, some people are determined to make the economy of salvation to be linked with the Wrath of God. If you do not repent, then God will do thus and such... I have always considered this representation of the gospel to be coercive and contrary to the love of God. I have heard convoluted ways in which this wrath is interpreted to be 'the loving thing to do' but I do not buy it....But it is essential in our witness to the God Who Is, to always relate the fact that He is a loving God, not willing that any should perish. He is not against us but for us. This is utterly essential to the correct proclamation of the Gospel." (from "Glory 2 God for all things", God's Wrath, Jan. 15, 2009) <br />
<br />
There is one more thing to note. On this day some 73 years ago, the world was forever changed when, in the context of a state of war, a nuclear bomb was detonated over Hiroshima. And whatever side of the debate you find yourself on as to whether this was a justified, proportional response or no, the fact remains that such action could only be taken within a grievously broken world wherein remain unconverted men who, above all else, desire power. What, then, do we do with this? From an article two years ago in the magazine of the Orthodox Peace Fellowship, In Communion: "The Transfiguration is a promise to a broken world. A promise that all scars will be healed, all divisions overcome, all wars ended, and all souls restored. The Earth will no longer be a crucible of destruction, but the realm of the Kingdom. Atomic radiation will not shine forth from broken bodies, but the uncreated light from transfigured ones. Men will no longer aspire to harness the power of God, but will kneel before their king. There will no longer be cause to be afraid." (Nicholas Sooy, In Communion, Aug. 2016) <br />
<br />
And so, as Jesus calls us each and every day to follow Him, we too can and must assume a portion of His threefold role as prophet by striving faithfully to live an authentic Christian life that will preach to others by our deeds and disposition, as priest by making offerings united to His of both praise and repentance, and as king by longing for the coming of His Kingdom which is indeed here among us as we are told by St. Mark: "...The time is fulfulled, and the kingdom of God is at hand..." (Mk. 1:15). And we know what our dignity both is and will be in His Kingdom: "Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might bepartakers of the divine nature." (2 Pet. 1:4) And then, when we come at last to our own particular death and judgment, our Father in heaven will be able to say of us, always on account of the work of His Son accomplished perfectly for us as we could never accomplish for ourselves: This is my beloved child in whom I am well pleased.a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-52764945757589819592018-07-31T10:53:00.000-07:002018-07-31T10:53:08.914-07:00Trinity IX<div style="text-align: center;">
"[The] holy Apostle Saint James, leaving his father and all that he had, was obedient unto the calling of...Jesus Christ"</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
"A certain man had two sons: And the younger of them said to his father, Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to me. And he divided unto them his living. And not many days after the younger son gathered all together, and took his journey into a far country, and there wasted his substance with riotous living." (Lk. 15:11-13) </div>
<br />
<br />
As the Church celebrated St. James this past week on July 25th, three quick things of note occurred to me:<br />
<br />
1. Whereas the Apostle James, who may or may not have caught wind of John the Baptist's preaching about Jesus, nevertheless surrendered his livelihood at a moment's notice to follow Him, someone he had no first hand knowledge of with no prior, contractual assurances about what the future would hold; the younger son, who had literally known his father and family his entire life and was bound to them by ties of blood and filial affection, was able (in effect) to wish his father's death to his face by asking for his stake of the inheritance and then remove himself far away from them to lead a life of self-indulgence along with, I am sure, many other carefully crafted plans for his own future enjoyment.<br />
<br />
2. Whereas St. James was witness to the preaching and healing ministry of Jesus, the showing forth of the Divinity of Christ in the Transfiguration and the wonderful miracles of the feeding of the thousands and the raising of Lazarus from the dead; the younger son was forced into the worst of circumstances when the money he depended on ran out, had to take on undesirable work and, ultimately, had to come face to face with his shame and steel himself to beg forgiveness from those he had mindlessly cast aside as utterly worthless and literally dead to him.<br />
<br />
3. But...here's the really good part. These things happened, and continue to do so today. And we can, I think, take great courage and comfort in the examples of both these men. Whether early in the day or late, whether before or after any of us have sinned, there is always room for repentance, forgiveness and the embrace of the Lord Jesus. As we learn in Matt. 20:14-15, "Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee. Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own?" And with what great generosity is the gift given? It is almost shocking to our sensibilities, particularly our great regard for the 'fairness' of debt, vengeance and retaliation. "But the father said to his servants, Bring forth the best robe, and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet: And bring hither the fatted calf, and kill it; and let us eat, and be merry: For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry." (Lk. 15:22-24)<br />
<br />
<br />
"He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches" (Rev. 2:29) “and let all the people say Amen.” (Ps. 106:46b) a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-57920887117372821122018-04-19T12:25:00.000-07:002018-04-19T12:25:36.808-07:00Easter II<div align="center"><em>II Samuel 1:19-end I Peter 2:19-end John 10:11-16</em></div><br />
<br />
As has become my custom since last summer, I have been using the original daily office lectionary appended to the 1928 Book of Common Prayer. The first lesson given for this morning is the last portion of the 1st chapter of II Samuel. This is a marvelously providential choice as it allows us to do some hermeneutical heavy lifting with respect both to the overall Biblical narrative and to the Eucharistic propers for today more specifically. <br />
<br />
From II Samuel 1:19-21: "The beauty of Israel is slain upon thy high places: how are the mighty fallen! Tell it not in Gath, publish it not in the streets of Askelon; lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoice, lest the daughters of the uncircumcised triumph. Ye mountains of Gilboa, let there be no dew, neither let there be rain, upon you, nor fields of offerings: for there the shield of the mighty is vilely cast away, the shield of Saul, as though he had not been anointed with oil." <br />
<br />
Firstly, consider these words at their 'face value' in the context of the narrative. This is a portion of David's lament after learning of the death of King Saul. Notice both his righteous indignation against the death of the anointed king as well as the depth of filial affection directed toward the man who had, earlier, persued David and those loyal to him in order to kill him. We'll come back to that in a while as we examine the Epistle. <br />
<br />
In an effort to dig down a bit deeper from the surface of the literal meaning, the curious onlooker is as likely as the formal student to encounter the historical-critical method which seeks, as its name implies, to understand the biblical texts in their cultural and temporal contexts with as much scientific objectivity as possible and as little conjecture as necessary. Some who adhere to this approach as a principle vehicle of interpretation have, however, stretched the meaning of 'necessity' well beyond the breaking point. <br />
<br />
Pope Benedict XVI, in the Foreward of the first volume of his work "Jesus of Nazareth" talks about both the usefulness as well as the limits of this methodology. "The historical-critical method – let me repeat – is an indispensable tool, given the structure of Christian faith. But we need to add two points. This method is a fundamental dimension of exegesis, but it does not exhaust the interpretive task for someone who sees the biblical writings as a single corpus of Holy Scripture inspired by God....On painstaking reflection, it can intuit something of the 'deeper value' the word contains. It can in some sense catch the sounds of a higher dimension through the human word, and so open up the method to self-transcendance. But its specific object is the human word as human." (Jesus of Nazareth; vol. 1, xvii)<br />
<br />
So it seems clear from these remarks that there is yet something still needful when we approach the Scriptures. Going even further 'under the surface' from historical criticism, we arrive at the typological method of reading the Scriptures, itself quite prominent among the Fathers of the first Christian centuries. To be sure this methodology did not originate with them, but is found in the text of the inspired writers themselves. Consider Romans 5:14: "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come." What the Authorised Version renders as 'figure' is 'typos' (tóo-pahs) in Greek. According to Strong's Concordance, 'typos' (G5179) can mean (among other things): a stamp or die; a style or resemblance; a figure, form, manner, pattern, or print. In the specific context of this verse from Romans, then, Adam is the<em> type</em> whereas Christ is the <em>anti-type</em>. <br />
<br />
In order to clarify the nature and function of typological interpretation further, consider this from <a href="http://www.oxfordbiblicalstudies.com/article/opr/t94/e1969" target="_blank">OxfordBiblicalStudies.com</a>: "Some of what happened in the OT is seen to be anticipations of events recorded in the NT, and some of the narratives in the gospels seem to be reflected in the Acts. The anticipations are called ‘types’ and the fulfilments are the ‘antitypes’. Thus the story of the Exodus is repeated in the synoptic gospels; the Israelites cross the Red Sea, yield to temptations of doubt and disillusionment for forty years in the wilderness, and then Moses on Mount Sinai presents the people with the Law. In the gospels Jesus is baptized in the water by John, is tempted for forty days in the wilderness, and then gives the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7). The difference is that where Israel failed, by repeatedly grumbling and doubting God's determination, Jesus succeeded. The gospels are, as it were, retelling the story of Israel, but giving the events of Jesus as its climax and rationale.... The principle behind such exegesis is that God had the same purpose in the NT as he always had (cf. Heb. 13:8). He is consistent. Though his plan failed because of Israel's weakness, he did not change his plan but brought it to completion through Jesus."<br />
<br />
Now, all of this has been by way of preparation to consider the Old Testament lesson that I started out with. I would suggest that king Saul is, in this case, a <em>type</em> foreshadowing Christ on the Cross. He is, as indeed is the Lord Jesus, God's anointed, killed on the heights of Gilboa as Christ was on Golgotha. "The beauty of Israel is slain upon thy high places" by one who was unaware of the ultimate gravity of his actions. Saul's attendant tells David in II Sam. 1:10: "So I stood upon him, and slew him, because I was sure that he could not live after that he was fallen: and I took the crown that was upon his head, and the bracelet that was on his arm, and have brought them hither unto my lord....And David said unto him, Thy blood be upon thy head; for thy mouth hath testified against thee, saying, I have slain the Lord's anointed." Surely there is an echo and prefiguring of St. Luke 23: 33-34: "And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left. Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do." <br />
<br />
And while it is an easy thing to contrast David's order to kill Saul's attendant with Christ's call to the Father for forgiveness toward those who have crucified Him, in reality both are simply being faithful to the Covenant in place at the time, to wit: David has exacted an "eye for an eye" whereas Christ perfectly exemplifies the Summary of the Law we were reminded of at the beginning of today's Liturgy. <br />
<br />
The other thing to note in this text from II Samuel becomes David's lament over the man who had persued him unto death. And that is a remarkable thing in and of itself. Who among us is possessed of sufficient virtue to genuinely lament the death of those who hate us and wish us harm, grevious or otherwise, justified or not? David's response is also noteworthy in that it preceeds the theology of the Epistle. "For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully....For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps." (I Peter 2:19, 21) Here, then, in David's lament, is yet another example of <em>type</em> preceeding <em>antitype</em>. "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do." <br />
<br />
The conclusion of the Epistle is a natural segue into the Gospel lesson. Jesus said, "I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep." (Jn. 10:11) In <a href="http://lectionarycentral.com/easter2/WilliamsGospel.html" target="_blank">his sermon for this Sunday</a>, the Rev. Isaac Williams noted: "As the Lamb was slain from before the foundation of the world, so is He ever the good Shepherd that gives His life for the sheep; it is His own inseparable attribute. I am the good Shepherd: the good Shepherd giveth His life for the sheep. He that died for us, and gave us that proof of His love, has not gone away, and departed, and left us in the wilderness, but is even now with us as the good Shepherd. He is not indifferent about us, of our ways and doings, but as a man careth for his own, which he hath bought at an exceeding high price, so He, as the good Shepherd, careth for us."<br />
<br />
Once again, this returns us to a consideration of David. His original occupation was also tending his father's flocks from which he was called to defend the Israelites against the Philistine army and their champion Goliath who had inspired fear in all the men of Saul's army. Later on, he put his own life at risk once again defending himself against Saul himself in order to bring peaceful rule to Israel. And if David, as <em>type</em>, out of his sin with Bathsheba begat Solomon who would reign as the wisest of the Kings, so Christ as <em>antitype</em> would, out of the death wrought by Adam's sin, beget mankind again as adopted children of the Father who once again have access to eternal life. "I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep."<br />
<br />
Now that we have gone hither and yon to consider some of the prefigurements of the Old Testament effective in and of themselves as signs and symbols of the glory to come yet never able to bring about what they pointed to until the Incarnation itself brought reality out of their shadows and into His own glorious light, there is one more thing to consider about Christ our Good Shepherd. The two verses which follow immediately upon today's Gospel lesson read: "Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it up again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again." [Jn. 10:17,18] We too have a share in this power of laying down and taking up again. Just as I have noted before that we share in the creative power of God's Word by use of our own words to build up or destroy, to bless or to curse with our tongue, so we too have an active and participatory share in the power to lay down our burdens and sins. Should it be your lot to be (over)burdened with anger, resentment, impatience, pride, envy, hatred or anything else listed in Galatians 5, as by your own will you had taken them up originally, so under God's grace now is the time to lay them down. As we read in Romans 6:19: "[A]s ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness" by the grace won for you by Christ our Good Shepherd. <br />
<br />
In conclusion, Martin Luther, in <a href="http://lectionarycentral.com/easter2/LutherGospel.html" target="_blank">his sermon for today</a>, tells us: "Comforting, indeed, it is to be the happy lambs who have a welcome refuge in the Shepherd and find in him joy and comfort in every time of need, assured that his perfect faithfulness cares for and protects us from the devil and the gates of hell. Relative to this subject, the entire Twenty-third Psalm is a beautiful and joyous song, of which the refrain is, 'The Lord is my Shepherd'."a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-85088161056256118972017-12-07T12:19:00.000-08:002017-12-07T12:19:23.338-08:00Brother Paphnutius - an ongoing parable (Part VII) <div style="text-align: center;">
"And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body." (Mk. 14:22) </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<>< <>< <><</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<strong>Uncertainty</strong></div>
<br />
366 A.D. - the Egyptian desert (early winter) <br />
<br />
Br. Paphnutius loves the Book of Common Prayer and quantum physics (the whimsical irony of neither one of these having been conceived in his lifetime being completely beside the point!). In its American edition of 1928 there is a prayer that includes (on pg. 37 for those following along at home): "Give us grace seriously to lay to heart the great dangers we are in by our unhappy divisions." If in his own day, the Gnostics and the Arians were the loudest of the divisive, just imagine what he would think if he could see the state of Christianity in the 21st century! <br />
<br />
At the least(!), these divisions are at their heart a disagreement over what particular texts mean as we read them in the Bible. And that got Paphnutius thinking, 'what happens when someone reads something from the Bible? Do they bring their own biases and individual ways of thinking?' (Yes.) 'Will any one person ever have enough information to be able to read it in isolation?' (Not likely.) 'Are the decrees of the Council of Nicaea an accurate representation of what appears in the pages of the Scriptures?' [Paphnutius is banking on it, with good reason (cf. the rhetorical point immediately preceeding this one).]<br />
<br />
So, when reading the Bible, is it simple or complex? Neither? Both? <br />
<br />
How's about this? Let's say, for argument's sake, that it is "ontologically simple" yet "theologically and literarily complex". <br />
<br />
Let's see how Paphnutius breaks this down using the text quoted at the head of this article. It is indeed ontologically simple. Jesus, acting prior to the surety of His Crucifixion and Resurrection (which is, by the way, the WHOLE POINT of the entirety of Scripture) begins His fulfillment to the Passover act by means of the chabûrah meal [in order that it might be subsequently repeated regularly (see Gregory Dix) - that whole bit about fulfilling, not abolishing, the Law being entirely germane here]. <br />
<br />
Thus the "take, eat" of the Last Supper is ontologically simple. <br />
<br />
But there is all sorts of other stuff going on here. This account was written down (and has been translated through) multiple languages and textual recensions of (generically slight) different readings so that words such as "take", "eat", "do this", "remembrance" "my body" cannot simply be taken at face value but must be looked into through cultural anthropology, literary analysis (including etymological development), their relation to the rest of the narrative in context, the teaching of the Fathers of the first centuries A.D. (remember that bit about not being able to work in isolation?!), and other means. <br />
<br />
Consider this as well. The "communions of antiquity" (Rome, Orthodoxy, Miaphysite), the Reformed bodies (Lutheranism, Presbyterianism, Anglicanism, etc.), and the modern movements (non-denominational, revivalist, prosperity, etc.) cannot agree on what this verse means. <br />
<br />
Thus the "take, eat" of the Last Supper is, at the same time, theologically/literarily complex. <br />
<br />
The point (yes, there is one) is that this is a pretty important specific subject (as it is mentioned not only by all 4 Gospels, but also in Acts and the Pauline Epistle to the Corinthians) so we (at bare minimum) need to keep our thinking clear (even if, as seems likely, there will never be entire agreement). <br />
<br />
In our thinking, perhaps Heisenberg can help clear away some of the mental jetsam that is such an obstruction:<br />
<br />
"As an example, he considered the measurement of the position of an electron by a microscope. The accuracy of such a measurement is limited by the wave length of the light illuminating the electron. Thus, it is possible, in principle, to make such a position measurement as accurate as one wishes, by using light of a very short wave length. But...the Compton effect cannot be ignored: the interaction of the electron and the illuminating light should then be considered as a collision of at least one photon with the electron. In such a collision, the electron suffers a recoil which disturbs its momentum. Moreover, the shorter the wave length, the larger is this change in momentum. Thus, at the moment when the position of the particle is accurately known, Heisenberg argued, its momentum cannot be accurately known." (see <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-uncertainty/">https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-uncertainty/</a>)<br />
<br />
Phew! What?!? <br />
<br />
Simply this. Delving too deeply into the complexity, we can (and have) gotten quite lost and shifted the point (which is indeed to "take, eat" not "look, dispute"). Exclusively relying on the simplicity (particularly when such is conceived in modern terms such as plain, unadorned, easy to understand and not in a philosophico-theological construction of non-compartmentalisation and evident teleology) moves us to where some are at today [i.e. drowning in a sea of Nominalism (of their own making!)]. <br />
<br />
[Now, if you will excuse him, Br. Paphnutius is off to attend Sunday Liturgy so that he might "take" and "eat". <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
To be continued...</div>
a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-25676589387495643122017-09-25T11:47:00.001-07:002017-09-25T11:47:26.637-07:00Lancelot Andrewes, Bishop of WinchesterToday is the date of death [Well, sort of. England at the time was still on the Julian Calendar] of the venerable Lancelot Andrewes, sometime bishop of Winchester and translator of a portion of the Authorised ("King James") Bible. <br />
<br />
Some of <a href="http://anglicanhistory.org/lact/index.html" target="_blank">his works</a> can be found at this link. <br />
<br />
Here is the collect we used at <a href="https://stmichaelswilsonville.org/" target="_blank">our parish's</a> morning prayer yesterday:<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
O God, <em>who hast put in Thine own power <br />the times and the seasons</em>; as Thou didst endue <br />Thy bishop Lancelot Andrewes with the grace <br />of the Apostolic ministry and the virtue of godly learning,<br />so give us the like grace <em>that in all fitting and acceptable times</em><br />we may pray unto thee and come at last into the fulness <br />of Thy great glory. Through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.</div>
<br />
This is my own composition. The italicized portions are taken and adapted from the "Horology" appearing in a translation of Andrewes' "Preces Privatae".<br />
a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-62441823126416777682017-06-06T12:57:00.000-07:002017-06-06T12:57:48.586-07:00"Western troparia" to the Holy Ghost O God the Holy Spirit, light and life, <br />living fountain of all spiritual reality,<br />the essence of wisdom and the Spirit of knowledge, <br />refining fire proceeding from refining fire; <br />as we recall the great mystery of your descent at Pentecost<br />come again among your own who desire to be blessed and hallowed <br />by your life giving power that we may be a blessing<br />and a hallowing to all mankind. <br />
<br />
O Great Promise of the Word made flesh,<br />as we look forward to His coming again with power and great glory,<br />assist us to redeem the time as the days are evil. <br />
<br />
Therefore we offer and present unto You O Lord, O Holy Spirit,<br />ourselves and our souls and bodies in the company and fellowship<br />of those who have shed their blood and won the palm of martyrdom<br />in our day. May we all be a reasonable, holy, and sweet-smelling sacrifice <br />unto You, likewise to the Eternal Father and to the Risen Son,<br />living and reigning ever one God, throughout all ages<br />world without end. Amen. <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<>< <>< <><</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">This is an original composition by me with influences from the Scots '29, S. African '54 and American '28 Eucharistic canons as well as prayers at the Lamplighting Psalms from the Byzantine Catholic rite. - D.E.S. </span></div>
a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3764998786903317704.post-42774108704055919862017-05-27T12:56:00.000-07:002017-05-27T13:00:30.848-07:00Br. Paphnutius - an ongong parable (Part VII) <div style="text-align: center;">
"In the beginning..." (Genesis 1:1) </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<>< <>< <>< </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<strong>Atonement</strong></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
366 A.D. - the Egyptian desert (sometime in the Autumn) <br />
<br />
What a lovely Fall afternoon! The papyrus harvest, more plentiful than usual, is drying in the sheds. There will be plenty of work to do over the Winter in making paper and copying manuscripts for use of the brethren. The monastic choir has been sounding more harmonious lately when they gather in the church to sing Vespers before the daily meal. There have been no wars, or rumours of wars, for over a year now. In short, life is good for the Egyptian monks. <br />
<br />
As philosophy is the luxury of the fed and housed, Br. Paphnutius has been entertaining some guests today who asked him about the particulars of the Fall of Mankind recounted in Genesis and the Atonement wrought on the Cross and in the Resurrection. Basically, their questions [loaded with preconceptions such as a literal 6 day creation and the making of Adam and Eve as the first two people exactly as described in the Hebrew text] boiled down to this one: "Father, what does it all mean?"<br />
<br />
"Well", said Paphnutius. "Let's start at the beginning. 'In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.' As far as I have always been concerned, the rest of the story up until the serpent's appearance is just a commentary on that first sentence. Did any of it actually happen as described? It may or may not have. Remember when we discussed the four senses <strong>[Editorial note:</strong> For those of you reading along at home, those are the literal, the allegorical, the moral, and the anagogical.<strong>]</strong> in which our Scriptures can be read and how it is not only possible, but likely that these senses blend together in the various parts in greater or lesser degree depending on context and circumstance? Well, I think that very thing is at play right here at the beginning of the story. If you can find a good balance of the senses and get past needing 'Adam' and 'Eve' to be historical prototypes and see them rather as archetypes in the midst of the unfolding of creation, then I think you can stand on pretty solid ground intellectually and spiritually. Nowhere in this text do the creation stories demand to be taken literally. But that doesn't mean that what they are telling us isn't true, it just isn't true in the easiest possible way to read it. Somewhat related to this, when we look out into the night sky and observe the heavens, I imagine that we will someday be able to see further out and discover more about the operation of the sky. If it isn't exactly as described here, well that's not really a problem. If you think 'the heaven and the earth' is the most important piece of the sentence I quoted from Genesis, you have entirely missed the point." <br />
<br />
"Okay, you have our attention." said one of Paphnutius' interlocutors. "What is the point?" <br />
<br />
"The point", my dear fellow, "is 'God created'. That is the essence of the opening line of Genesis. Everything else follows on from that. If you just keep your wits and 'senses' about you, you can read the text without getting bogged down by things that have no primary bearing on what is being communicated. Consider this. Today, when I woke up, after keeping Vigil, I walked out of my cave and turned right to collect some water. That is an historical event that was witnessed by some of the brethren and so they and I can be assured that I actually did this thing. It is 'true'. Conversely, it is 'false' to say that I turned left when walking out of my cave. I could have, but I chose not to. In this instance, I could have made at least four different decisions: turning to the right, turning to the left, going straight ahead, or remaining in the cave. It is only because we live in a linear time cycle that there are such things as the past and the future, events that happened and events that didn't happen. It is like floating down a river which has such a strong current that we can neither swim against it nor get close enough to the shore to see what lies beyond. <strong>[Editorial note:</strong> If our perspective is that of the one in the river, then God's perspective is, at the very least, of the one standing on the shore who is free to travel to all points up and down the watercourse...and beyond.<strong>]</strong> Perhaps we can extend this metaphor further."<br />
<br />
By now, the heads of his guests were beginning to spin. "What do you mean, Father? This is a bit much to digest before dinner."<br />
<br />
"Bear with me, please" replied Paphnutius. "I have given some consideration to these matters and it does me good to speak them out loud in order that they might breathe the free air of discussion, consideration and challenge."<br />
<br />
"We'll do our best" said the guests in unison. <br />
<br />
"Now, where was I? Oh, yes. What if, from the time I made my first decision, my life, like a river, branched off into each of the possibilities. Therefore, my choice caused me to 'float' down one of the branches rather than the others. Since I am floating at water level in this metaphorical river, I cannot see beyond its banks. And this brings us back around to the text in Genesis. Could there not also be other 'channels' or 'tributaries' wherein other persons are also experiencing the consequences of their decisions independently, yet we are all moving in the same direction? If 'Adam' and 'Eve' are indeed the archetypes I claim them to be, then the subsequent revelation of the Prophets, the Wisdom literature, the Gospels and Epistles all proclaim a common telos as the Greeks would put it. In other words, though we can't/don't see them in the Genesis narrative, all other tributaries are flowing into the main channel eventually and, thus, all moving in the same direction." <br />
<br />
"Yikes" said the guests, again in unison, much like a Greek chorus. "But there's only one universe, and God created it. What is this business about rivers, and multiple choices. It's too complicated." <br />
<br />
<strong>[Editorial note:</strong> Please don't get bogged down by the side issue of whether or not all possibilities are necessitated into being. This is not, after all, a script from Dr. Who. The prime purpose of this mental exercise, as Paphnutius will get to straight away, is to bring some perspective to our perspective (i.e. We see what we are able to and/or need to; that doesn't exclude the presence of other 'peripherals').<strong>]</strong><br />
<br />
"Yes, it is complicated" replied Paphnutius. "But what I'm getting at is that perhaps only the course of one of the 'river-tributaries' is being described in Genesis. Remember that what is written there must logically have been committed to paper long after what is being described and retold by oral tradition. It is hard, nay impossible, for those floating in the river to describe what is beyond its banks, let alone what is at the head of the watercourse which, for them lies many leagues behind and around multiple twists and turns." <br />
<br />
"I think we are in agreement about that. It does strain the imagination, but makes sense. Where are you going with this, Father?" <br />
<br />
"It gets us back to the nature of truth. I started out by telling you that it was a 'truth' that I walked out of my cave this morning and turned to the right. We instinctively assume, then, that my turning left was a falsehood as I didn't do that. But...as it was a possibility that I do so, perhaps the 'left branch' of that part of the river still exists as a route untaken. Therefore, the possibility exists that that is also 'true', we just won't ever see it since we cannot 'swim backwards'. That is our perspective. And if that is the case about small things of no lasting consequence such as the direction I travel in order to obtain water, might it not also be the case that we are only seeing a singular perspective 'from the river' being recounted in Genesis? Thus it is possible that other people are involved in the story of the Fall over a longer period of what we experience as time that we just don't [need] to hear about. Thus we arrive back at my proposition that 'Adam' and 'Eve' are presented to us as literary and theological archetypes of the disobedience that we live under as human beings. Was there a talking snake and a couple of bites out of a piece of fruit? Maybe, maybe not. The devil, in this case, is in the generality, not the particulars." <br />
<br />
"Does the bishop know you teach like this?" they said, somewhat incredulously.<br />
<br />
"I have no secrets from him, but he hasn't asked. Let me ask you a question, and thus give you another example to chew on of what I am talking about. What is the most important part of this verse? 'And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.' (Genesis 1:31)<br />
<br />
The youngest of the guests, somewhat timidly, offered: "God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good"? <br />
<br />
"Yes" said Paphnutius, almost exultantly (at least as exultantly as one who has dedicated his life to silence and contemplation can get). "That is exactly the point. Now, tell me this. Is God all powerful?" <br />
<br />
"Of course" she replied. <br />
<br />
"Can we destroy what He has made?"<br />
<br />
She had to think for a while and consult with the others, knowing now that simple, "face-value" answers were not the order of the day with this monk. "I would say, in part, but we cannot undo the universe, if that is what you are asking."<br />
<br />
"That is a good insight" replied Paphnutius. "Consider this, then we can break for dinner. You asked me originally about the nature of the Fall in Genesis. We have considered what it means for something to be 'true' in the light of decisions to be taken, realising that what is copied on a page may not be the whole of the story, just the part that we need to see to understand the point of its being recounted, and that, like good literary, visual or musical arts, something need not be literal in order to be true. I will admit that I like to read Homer and Plato for leisure. Does it matter whether Helen of Troy or Socrates were real people, modeled on various personages or completely fictional? No. They 'exist' on the page and in minds and souls of the readers and the author. And they have something to teach us about the quest for beauty and goodness. So, yes, I can confidently say they are 'true' even if they are not literal. But enough about that for now. Whoever, and for whatever duration of time, precipitated the commission of Original Sin, we seem to have teased out that it is not possible for us to completely undo the good work of our heavenly Father. Thus I take severe umbrage at some Christians whose views do much damage to our faith and those who are sincerely trying to follow Christ by insisting on there being strictly a literal, historical, singular meaning to the text<strong> [Editorial note:</strong> The position given here could thusly be summarised as 'That's all there is and we are seeing it'. Paphnutius' proposition here is that there may indeed be more and we are only seeing a (needful) portion of it.<strong>]</strong> and who assign terribly tragic consequences to it. I am told they refer to it as 'total depravity' wherein our hearts are described as completely dead and that we became unable even to will the will to do good in the small, everyday circumstances of our life. Thus do they read this portion of Genesis concluding with 'Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.' (Genesis 3:23) Your instinct, young lady, seems a good one to me. While we can bend and irreparably [for us] maim the pieces, we cannot undo the universe and its occupants whose existence, we are told, is 'very good'. <br />
"Dear Father, that's all well and good, but we're hungry. After the meal, may we know your thoughts on the sacrificial lamb?"<br />
<br />
"Of course" <br />
<br />
Just then the bell was rung for the common meal that was shared with any guests and, in particular, the poor who presented themselves at table. <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br />
"If I were hungry, I would not tell thee: for the world is mine, and the fulness thereof. Will I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats?" (Psalm 50: 12,13) </div>
<br />
After a fine and satisfying, if not overly opulant meal, Br. Paphnutius and his guests returned to their Socratic dialogue [which, by this time had morphed into more of a monologue, but...]. "We have now arrived at a good place" continued Paphnutius, "to consider how God is." <br />
<br />
"But we know that already", said one visitor who had remained silent up until now. "We have the Scriptures and the statement of faith of the Fathers of Nicea." <br />
<br />
"We do indeed, and they serve their purpose well. Let's dive on in."<br />
<br />
With a raised eyebrow, his latest inquirer asked, "What? Not another river story I hope."<br />
<br />
"Not 'what', but 'how' " said Paphnutius with the indication of a smile. "We have been told to call God 'Abba/Father' and that should remind you of the man who raised you. When you disobeyed, did he ever cut you off completely from the family and its interests?"<br />
<br />
"No, of course not." <br />
<br />
"In light of that, then, consider this." Paphnutius arose, took a scroll from its place in the clay jar, unrolled it, and read: "If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone?...If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him." (Lk. 11: 11a,13) <br />
<br />
"But the instance in Genesis seems more severe," they retorted. <br />
<br />
"Does it indeed? Then consider this." And he unrolled a bit further and continued to read: "A certain man had two sons: And the younger of them said to his father, Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to me. And he divided unto them his living." (Lk. 15: 11-12) Paphnutius laid down the scroll and looked about the room. "In his asking for this, does this son not thereby effectively wish his father dead in claiming prematurely what is reserved for him at that time?" <br />
<br />
"That seems to be the case."<br />
<br />
"Is this a 'severe' enough instance to consider, then?"<br />
<br />
They all agreed that it was. <br />
<br />
"Then, in light of what he did, consider what becomes of this son." And Paphnutius continued to read: "And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land; and he began to be in want. And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine." (ibid., vs. 14-15) <br />
<br />
"Now", said Paphnutius. "Place yourselves in such a position that you are the father who has been dishonoured in such a way. And then imagine that you can see the straightened circumstances into which your child has gotten himself. Is now the time to demand substitutionary sacrifices in order to placate a sense of wrath? Will you then beat your other son senseless in order to 'make up for' what the first has done?"<br />
<br />
"Of course not", they all vehemently agreed. <br />
<br />
"Think upon, if you will, the 'scapegoat' in Leviticus and the animal sacrifices in the Temple that were an intrinsic part of Judaic worship. What is the purpose in their sacrifice? Do they take our place? Are they being punished? Or does the rite confer a 'sweet-smelling savor' that is consumed in the liturgical offering? If the latter is the case, then that, I contend, is also what the Lamb of God on the Cross is – a liturgical offering, not a penal substitution. The Lord Jesus is consumed in the fires of suffering on the altar of the Cross in the same manner as the first fruits, flesh meat and incense were consumed by the literal fires of the altars in the Temple. The covenant and rites of the Old Testament are now completed for all time, and through His death our archetypal preference for death is now converted back into the 'sweet-smelling savor' of our innocent creation. We are now made new and prepared for life again."<br />
<br />
All sat in silence for some time; some pondered, others prayed. Finally, breaking the quiet of the room: "Consider this my friends." And Paphnutius continued to read from the scroll: "And he arose, and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him." (ibid., vs. 20) <br />
<br />
And he said: "That, my dear fellows, is us. God Himself is so good that He has willed and inspired our turning, our 'arisal' from all eternity. There are many needless things that have been theorised about what it means that we have been atoned for. It is nothing more complicated than this. We have wished for death instead of life. That wish was granted, though that was not what we are made for. The Lord Jesus has Himself arisen from the dead so that we might be able to follow him and do likewise." <br />
<br />
The moral of (this part) of the story: Br. Paphnutius hasn't talked this much since we first encountered him. This visit with his guests was more like a Socratic monologue! But hey, they asked! They did, however, pray together both before and after and no one left angry or upset that what they assumed to be right was not necessarily the way that everyone else saw things and that the notion of God's wrath, source of so much anxiety for those on either side of the fence (and everyone in between) perhaps is not the overriding issue that it has come to be in some circles, along with its connexion to an attractiveness of its fulfilling the notion of a "comeuppance" against those who we feel have wronged us or those close to us or those who disagree with our deeply personalised religious notions (whether they bear a semblance to what is good, true and beautiful or not). The beauty of the practice of religion is that it should be taken so personally. The trouble with the practice of religion is that it can be taken so personally. Wisdom lies in seeing the difference. <br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br />
To be continued...</div>
a disciplehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07139732076011555979noreply@blogger.com0