THE CAKE'S THE THING- ICING'S MERELY FROSTING

I’m compromised as a follower of King Jesus.

I’m becoming more and more aware of that. It’s not news, really. Anyone who knows me could tell you as much, but I’ve become aware of an even greater disloyalty than the standard struggle to struggle with pride, anger, lust etc. The really frightening thing is that I’ve been taught this disloyalty by the very tradition that molded my allegiance to the King.

It’s deep and corrupting and ugly, and it seems to fester the deepest in those of us who (sincerely or not) protest our allegiance to Christ the loudest.

This is the sin I’ve discovered on the bottom of my shoe: I’ve sold out to Caesar. I bow before my heavenly king... after getting the wink from the Empire’s throne. When I look around, I see where I first stepped in the filth. It was in the liturgy and the politics of the religious right.

It seems clear to me that Christianity is merely the outer icing we spread on the Cake of Americanism. There are other flavors of frosting- secular, Jewish, agnostic, New Age, but slice us open and we’re all the same inside- solidly, uncritically and shamelessly “American First.”

America, not God’s people, has our first allegiance. Deep down we believe the American Government and the power of its military will change the world for the better; American democracy and its limitless economy is the message we need to get out. The gospel, well, it is mighty to save... souls, but the "good news" of consumerism is the earth altering left hand of God.

I’ve been reminded of this as I struggled with what my family ought to do for the recent Marymass celebration. I knew countless Christians world-wide were continuing the ancient veneration of the lady who bore God. I wondered, could it be that hymns of celebration and invocation were appropriate to this most hallowed of saints?

In the end my conscience dragged its heels. Years of example had worn the appropriate ruts of resistance. It just wouldn’t be right.

But…then I remembered services where we gathered as God’s people, Christ’s name was invoked and we went on to “Pledge our Allegiance” to the one nation cocky enough to declare itself indivisible before God. Ballsy, that.

I remember singing in a service dedicated to King Jesus a hymn to our earthly nation. “America, America” we praised “God shed his grace on thee.” Hmmmm. Why would these same people resist crying out to the mother of their Lord (in the words of scripture, no less) “Hail Mary, full of grace?”

“My Country tis of thee…of Thee I sing," and “Oh Beautiful for spacious skies…” Obviously, conservative evangelicals have no principled problem with praising and invoking powers other than God in their worship services. Just wait until Independence Day, Veterans Day or Memorial Day...even Scout Sunday, and you’ll see. Honoring those we believe to be on "our" side in the context of worship can't be the problem. Rather, it must be who do we reckon as belonging to that "Our." The problem must be a matter of whom we belonging to, whom we are allied with, who we believe (in our gut) to be really worthy of admiration and memory.

America, yes; our brothers and sister across the ages; No.

It’s a difficult thing to give up –if only potentially- the earthly ties that are so precious to us. But the claims of Christ require it. So does our love for those precious ones- whether family, friends, or nation. It is for their sakes that we must be the people that our baptisms declare us to be. The church exists for the sake of the world.

I’m sure that we, as conservative evangelicals, would protest that our identity transcends the boundaries of our national existence, but I’m looking for ways to make that obvious. I’m tired of having to argue that it is so- especially to myself. Surely our calendar, stories and songs would be a good place to look for what’s really under the religious frosting.

Both Labor Day and Michaelmas are fast approaching. Well…you see my point.

MOMENTARY MEN

Evangelicals are fleeing in record numbers to churches whose traditions, sensibilities and voice burrow deeply into the ancient soil of mystery, beauty and weighty common consent. This isn’t simply a religious revolution; it is one manifestation of a great cultural repentance.

The rationalistic and pragmatic disregard for glories- both light and heavy- and individualistic arrogance of modern man have rendered his world sterile, bare and almost unbearable to the human soul. Quick and shallow distraction becomes laudable and almost necessary- a blessed and charitable diversion to tingle our emptiness away.

People are looking for more. The human demand’s more.

It is doubly sad that many of the faithful within the Anglican tradition have chosen this time to sample a taste of the dehumanizing experiment that has managed to spin cultural stubble out of the gold of our Christian heritage.

It is sad first of all because of its claim. It measures Christendom against Modernity and finds Christendom wanting. It is wrong.

It is doubly sad because of its timing. Everyone who has lived through the fruitlessness of a world without magic, tradition or communal authority knows that it is wrong, and is retreating into ancient sanctuaries- even into those of their own making and imagination. Witness the growth of the pop pagan practices, which are collectively known as Wicca.

It is sad in the first place because the modern Wiccan understands creation more truthfully than does the modern worshiper of markets- even the Christian ones.

It is sad in the second place because just when the modern world is turning to embrace the view of reality offered by our ancient faith, we have turned to pursue that which they have determined to leave behind.

Like the companies of the late 90’s that invested tens of thousand of dollars to rebrand themselves with a dotcom on the end of their name, while the internet venture balloon burst around them, those parishes will have to find the stomach and resources to return to their former selves, or they will look foolish and dated as the world moves on to its next marketing fad.

I believe it was Allan Tate who said that in our attempt to be modern men, we have only succeeded in becoming momentary men. I think that’s right.

Full Homely Divinity [HT Patristic Anglican] offers some helpful resources to those who wish to preserve an alternative way of being human. There are other valuable ways, as well. But they can’t be found in the cultures of Walmart, McDonalds or MTV.

THINKING ABOUT ICONS

This past Sunday was celebrated as The Sunday of Orthodoxy by Eastern Christians. The first Sunday of Lent has been set apart as the day on which the church offers thanks for the defeat of the Iconoclasts in the pronouncements of the Seventh Ecumenical Council. (For those interested in the historical details, you can find a helpful overview here.)

When I think of Eastern Orthodoxy, I think of Icons. The two have become so identified with each other that the commemoration of Iconography's vindication has been named the day of Orthodoxy. So this is obviously huge for our Orthodox siblings. But for Protestants (and even a few protesting Catholics, like myself) there has always been a great deal of ambivalence towards this- the last pronouncement of the unified church. My own Puritan background (and no, I don’t mean puritanical background) throws up all sorts of red flags. I’m just not sure.

The Patristic Anglican offers a helpful summary of the council’s decision:

Three main issues as follows:

I. There are two kinds of Worship or Veneration:

(a) The Reverence due to holy persons and things because they stand in somerelation to God. E.g. the Holy Scriptures, the Church, the Holy Table, the Cross, the Saints. We call this "Reverence"; the Greeks, timhtikh proskunhsiV.

(b) The Worship due to God alone. We call this, colloquially, "Adoration"; the Greeks, latreia. It is of the highest importance to emphasize the difference as strongly as possible, because there is always a danger of slipping from one kind of veneration into the other, and "the Lord our God is a jealous God." The definition is primarily a bulwark against idolatry, which it condemns in set terms.

2. All Veneration of Material Things is Relative:

The reverence for a picture passes to the person it represents. E.g. we place the photograph of our departed mother in a place of honour. But our honour or respect does not rest in the paper and the pigment, it passes through the portrait to the original. We reverence the Bible, but our worship is really addressed to the Holy Spirit Who inspired its pages; the Cross, but our worship is referred to Him Who died thereon. So with all material things. We are required by a canon of the Church of England to bow at the Holy Name of Jesus. But in so doing our worship passes through the icon of purely material sounds to the Saviour of mankind.

3. The Sanctification of Matter through the Incarnation:

Of old, God the uncircumscribed could not be portrayed. The Incarnation was a condescension to our nature. We are as God made us, with bodies and senses. Christ came that we might apprehend God through the material Image of His human nature: He Whom, as St. John says, we have seen and heard and handled. Thus it has come to pass that we can approach Him through the noblest of our senses; we can portray the God Whom we have seen.
------------------------------------------------------------

The Greek theologians present at the Conference were understood to accept this as covering the ground; there was nothing left to be said.

Working backwards, it seems to me that the third point is the most important in the debate. If we believe that God perfectly became man, then how can we have an issue with portraying him as such? In other words, the iconoclast controversy was (and is) about the Incarnation. God chose to be seen. Was it then improper to see him?

I can hear your mind working: “Ah, but an Icon isn’t a true image of him- not really.” Given the nature of an “image”, I’m not sure what that means. Does it mean that an icon is inaccurate in some ways, but aren’t all images inaccurate in some way? Is that not what Points One and Two are there to guard against: don’t confuse the image with the Archimage?

I think I’m settled on Point One. Even Free Church Evangelical’s show respect and honor to all sorts of people and symbols. Think of standing for the National Anthem or when a bride comes down the aisle, or better yet- think of not standing for the National Anthem or when a bride comes down the aisle.

I remember reading of a gentleman who explained the difference between Reverence and Adoration by saying, “If William Shakespeare came through that door, then I would stand out of respect for him. If Jesus Christ entered, however, I would fall to my knees.” Makes perfectly good sense to me.

Point Two might seem too vaguely metaphysical when it speaks of “honor passing onto something else”, but the examples given resonate with me. I can remember when my Granddaddy was hospitalized from a heart attack. I didn’t know it at the time, but he wouldn’t be coming home. I was in the fifth grade. I’d never been catechized in the mechanics of veneration passing on to the original, but I understood it in my eleven-year old Fundamental Baptist heart. I can remember wrapping a photograph of Granddaddy in a blanket and trying to sneak it into the bathroom with me. I was embarrassed with my weeping and felt a little too soft at wanting to hold the picture close. I sat on the bathroom floor, arms wrapped around the photo, and cried. It was my Granddaddy that I was reaching for. I believe my young heart found him through the image.

Again, even Evangelicals understand this. Consider an obvious political one- burning cloth isn’t significant, but burn a U.S flag and there will be hell to pay from the Religious Right. And rightly so, if you love America. Is this not true precisely for the reasons given in Point Two above?

Why is proper to honor our nation in this way, but not our God?

Perhaps it is the actual practice that turns me off. I’m not into a lot of kissing and bowing, but I guess that is the point- culturally I don’t express respect in this way. Might compliance to the teaching of the Council be satisfied- maybe even required- through more familiar Western practices?

Still chewing on it, but I suspect that The Pontificator’s First Law applies here: When Orthodoxy and Catholicism agree, Protestantism loses.

DR. LEITHART ON STRIPPING THE YEAR

There are two radical concepts that I hope to pass on to my children regarding time and God's purposes.

The first is an understanding of Christ's kingdom as "the end" come back into the present. We are colonists from another age. This is hugely important. The second is an appreciation that the story begun in Genesis is our story. It didn't come to an end with the last chapter of Acts; our God kept right on writing. He's writing still.

Dr. Leithart has a thought provoking comment regarding how the rejection of the Christian Calendar undermines this understanding of continuity.

SOME RANDOM THOUGHTS ON THE SEASON OF LENT

Why Lent?

Hmmm. Answering that question might take me through every one of my pet peeves. This could be a really long post, but I need to resist, to refrain, to exercise some self-control. It is Lent, after all.

So I thought I would outline a very brief apology by introducing the season to those friends and family who might be wondering about us…more than usual, I mean…because of the black smudges of ash on our head.

Please keep in mind that the following points are not meant to be exhaustive, nor even adequate, really. For the most part they are simply statements without argumentation. Perhaps the statement will be sufficient.

We’ll start as broadly as possible:

1. Every society forms its members by having them share in the common ritual of its tradition.

Far from being mere “icing on the cake,” ritual is unavoidable and necessary to the existence of a people. Think of those things that surround/define being an American. The attempt to be “ritual free” is itself an expressive and symbolic ritual.

2. Societies memorialize those events and people that are the most important to the societies' identity by dedicating a calendar day to them.

Americans celebrate the Fourth of July, President’s day, Martin Luther King Day, etc. A people’s calendar reveals their values.

3. The Christian Church is the City of King Jesus.

Though living in the midst of other nations, the church exists as a colony of its own motherland. (WARNING-UNAVOIDABLE DIGRESSION ON FAVORITE PET PEEVE: This does not mean that we will one day escape our current home. For example: The citizens of ancient Philippi were Roman citizens. Many of them were transplants from Rome, itself. Being Roman in the midst of a Grecian countryside did not mean that everyone would one day move back to Rome. Rather, it meant that they would maintain their identity with and allegiance to the home land. They were Romans who just happened to be living in Greece. In times of trouble, they would look to the sea, not as a means of escape “homeward”, but to await the arrival of their Emperor who would come to defend them.)

4. The Christian Calendar celebrates the life of our King and contributes to the formation of his people into a people.

5. The Christian church is the body of Christ.

This is the meaning of our Baptisms. We are united to him. His life is our life. His death, our death.

6. The Christian should follow the life of Christ in a concrete, regular and meditative way.

For those who make use of this cycle, Christ’s life becomes our life, yearly. Most Christians still celebrate Christmas and Easter, while arbitrarily ignoring His Baptism, Ascension or Transfiguration. Oddly, they will manage to work in American holidays like Mother’s Day or Veteran’s day, but have no regard for Pentecost. What does this say about their most basic identity?

7. God sanctions seasons of thankful Feasting.

Creation was meant to be flooded with the glory of God. Just like the pointing finger, it was meant to direct us to the Creator. Embracing it in celebration was meant to be an embrace of him whose glory it revealed. But...

8. God calls humanity to seasons of meditative abstaining and fasting.

Creation must never be confused with God. The refracted glory of God, coming to us through his creatures, can easily lead people to confuse the image for the real thing. It is good for us to renounce the good on occasion, so that we can recall this important truth.

9. The Christian life is one of Community.

We are the people of the Triune God. God’s life is communal. Salvation into that life is communal, too. (See 3, 4, & 5 above) We are meant to help each other in living out who we are declared to be at and through our baptisms. Therefore it is beneficial to feast, fast and meditate together as a people.

10. The uniqueness of special times is augmented by a period of preparation.

Liturgically and experientially, we begin to long for Easter Sunday through the austere liturgical practices of Lent.

11. If we are to follow the example of Christ and his servants, it is necessary to… follow their examples.

The heroes of Scripture fasted and abstained during intense periods of seeking after God. We ought to do the same. Christ himself fasted for 40 days in the wilderness. Lent is the church’s commemoration of this time in Christ’s life and an appropriate time to consider the spiritual disciplines of abstinence and negation.

12. A regular check-up, or to switch the metaphor- a regular tune up is necessary for healthy Christian growth.

To switch the metaphor yet again, just as an annual spring cleaning allows a household to start fresh and new, Lent encourages a person to search through the corners of their lives for those cobwebs and dust bunnies that may have been overlooked. Individuals who are likely to go to the trouble of spring cleaning aren’t likely to forgo regular and thorough cleanings throughout the year. A weekly mopping doesn’t cancel out the need for Spring Cleaning and vice versa.

13. Fasting or abstaining from normal pleasures reveals the depths of our depravity and the weakness of our flesh.

It’s amazing how irritable we can become when we grow slightly hungry. Skip a meal or two and you’ll see. We are spoiled and soft, and we don’t know it. Feel in control? Try giving up T.V. for 40 days.

14. Christ’s resurrection required his death on the cross; his crucifixion was a result of our sin and estrangement.

Lent is about Easter. We cannot understand God’s work of mercy and redemption without understanding our own sin, misery and corruption. Spiritually, Lent prepares us for a true celebration of resurrection by enabling us to understand our great need. This awareness of our sins is going somewhere…we’re heading towards the cross of Good Friday and from there to Resurrection Sunday.

15. Those who oppose the observance of Lent likely disagree with one of the points above.

We observe Lent because the lessons of our Lord’s temptations are important to us, but so easy to forget. We observe the season of Lent because that is simply what his people do and we are zealous to belong; we observe the season of Lent because those who have gone before us give testimony to its importance, because we know that we do not know how much we need a savior- how far short we fall, even today. We observe the season of Lent because we love Easter and are committed to marking the renewal of creation in as grand a way as possible. We observe the season of Lent because the glorious blessings and God-given tastes of this life can confuse and disorient us to their true meaning- God’s love made tangible. We observe the season of Lent because there are needful things that require our attention- things important, but lacking urgency. If not at Lent, when will we attend to them?

ADDITION 2/23/2007

Good stuff:

Fr. Will Brown on keeping a holy Lent - Part 1 - Theory, Part 2 - Practice [HT: Jason]

Some Random Theses On Ordination

A myopic set of thoughts generated by narrow minded considerations and personal questions, which set forth a snapshot of my thinking on the subject as of 8:53p.m. on 2/3/2007. Might comment on each at a later time.

1. Christ is The High Priest.
2. Salvation comes through Union with Christ, so that what is his becomes ours.
3. This includes his priestly authority and responsibilities. Everyone who is united to Christ shares in his priesthood- we affirm the Priesthood of all Believers.
4. Christ was anointed for his priestly duties at his baptism.
5. We are objectively united to Christ and anointed as priests at our baptism.
6. To be a priest is to serve before God in his house.
7. Service implies the “Other”- one is not a priest for himself, but always for another.
8. If all Christians are priests, then it is certainly permissible to refer to a minister as a “priest.”
9. The church is the body of Christ on earth- mystically united to her head. Both head and body make up the Christus totus.
10. Therefore, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic church has been charged with speaking and acting in Christ’s name for she is, in reality, Christ acting and speaking. We are “to be Christ to each other”- for that’s what we are through our baptisms.
11. Apostolic continuity is preserved through the priesthood of the church- her member’s baptisms.
12. The historic Episcopacy is a powerful and helpful memorial of that unity and continuity. It is apostolic in origin and originally catholic in practice. It's loss should be lamented and remedied.
13. Ordination is the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic church’s- that is, Christ’s- declaration that an individual has been examined and charged to speak, whether through word or action, for King Jesus. It is no longer Rev. Smith speaking, absolving, baptizing, etc, rather it is Christ. Liturgy must reflect this precious truth.
14. The pastor's authority is not due to some ontological change conferred through ordination. All baptized Christians, in fact, speak and act for Christ. Rather it is a pastoral matter of authority and role. An individual should have complete assurance in the church of God that she is being fed, forgiven, received and washed by Christ himself- not some yahoo with a penchant for the spotlight.