THE FIRST FISHER OF MEN

It bothers me when the tradition I’ve grown up with can’t speak with the language of scripture. That’s a problem. The almost universal indifference to the significance of this day is a case in point.

St. Paul tells us in Eph 2:20 that the church was built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets. If I were asked to identify the church’s foundation, I’d almost certainly answer- “Christ.” That’s not what scripture says, however. The foundation of the church is explicitly declared to be…men. Now, that’s the sort of thing that gets caught in my reformed throat.

Today marks the anniversary of the death of St. Peter’s older brother, Andrew. He was the first of those twelve living stones that Jesus gathered around himself. Today is St. Andrew's day. His life, work and teachings are an indispensible part of the underpinnings of the church. Today we thank God for giving us this fisherman, and we tell our children that his story belongs to them and their's to him.

Make sure to read the account of his calling to your family tonight. Maybe fish could make onto the menu this evening. You can be sure that this dear brother ate more than his share of fish.

St. Chrysostom marveled in this way:

Has anyone ever seen a simple fisherman catch people like fish? O, how great is the power of the crucified Christ! O, how great is the beauty of Divinity! There is nothing in the world as supreme as apostolic grace. Human life has seen much that is truly extraordinary and surpasses understanding. It saw Noah's ark remain afloat during the deluge and the destruction of mankind. It saw Moses commanding the elements. It saw water made hard as rock and the bottom of the sea opening up. It saw manna being sent from heaven in place of bread. It saw the movement of the sun being stopped by human prayer, and the day made longer by the prayers of Joshua. It saw a chariot fleeting through the air, and the prophet Elias carried away in it. Human life has seen many such great and amazing events. But there has never been anything like the apostles. They, being the servants of the Word, communed with the One Who, as God, cannot be depicted. They followed in the footsteps of the One Who is everywhere. They sat together with the One Who cannot be contained anywhere. They heard the voice of the One Who created everything with His Word. They traveled all over the world. They destroyed idols like savage beasts, chased away demons like wolves. They united the Church into a flock, they gathered the faithful like wheat. They weeded out heresies like chaff and sowed the word of God like the good seed...O, the great glory of Andrew! O, the depth of Apostolic wisdom! O, the fullness of his love! Let us glorify, dear brethren, this wondrous Apostle, and let us love the One Whom he had found, Christ the Messiah.

-- St John Chrysostom, Eulogy to St Andrew the First-Called Apostle HT: Orthodixie

DO I REALLY SOUND LIKE THAT...?

Christ the King REC has made available the audio of my discussions during their 2007 Parenting Retreat.

God was gracious through all my stammering. I had a wonderful time in spite of my fears.

Session One: Somewhere Over the Rainbow

Session Two: A Parents Guide to Time Travel

Session Three: The Naked Truth

THE POTTER AND HIS CHURCH

I know I said I'd be staying away, but Alastair is posting some very important thoughts on the nature of the church and God's purposes through history. It would be wrong to let this go by without trying to draw some attention to it.

The initial post was occasioned by an amazingly parochial (and self-important) view of one particular (and particularly small) sect. Its message is much needed.

The second post deals with how we are to understand what God is up to throughout the church’s history. Please give it a read.

Now, there's a third.

It occurs to me that I'd never have taken this stuff seriously (sharing the parochial and self-important understanding of the small sect mentioned above) a few years ago. The dam gave way when I understood that the Christian gospel is not "justification by faith alone." Millions of Christians were justified by faith alone before the innovation was first clearly articulated around the time of the Reformation. As Hooker said, a person can be justified by faith alone without ever knowing about or affirming justification by faith alone.

“If you confess with your mouth ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” It is faith in Christ that justifies- not faith in a particular understanding of the mechanics of how guilt is dealt with. The gospel is found....well, in the gospels.

Once this became obvious, my whole world stood on its head. There was a entire reality of roadways and commuters out there that I had never considered before. I needed to pull the car out of the backyard and head for the freeway. That was both exhilarating and terrifying.

I understood for the first time that an automobile can be driven by people who have no idea of what's going on under the hood. Happens ever day, and I ought to be wary of mechanics who want to deny that, or who claim to be able to understand engine operations that are in fact hidden from view.

Sure, if I prefer I can tinker, modify and postulate on what's going on under that hood... the one that came from the manufacturer without a release lever... all day long, but I shouldn't look down on those who just get in and drive or who have a different idea of what's going on under the hood that neither of us can, in fact, open. The most important concern is that the thing is running. After all, a car is for driving, and there are those who have been on the road a lot longer than I; maybe they know a thing or two that I don't. Is it possible?

GOD'S KINGDOM IN MY BACKYARD

This past weekend was a good one.

My nephew had a group of friends over Saturday night to celebrate a major milestone in his life.

I want to thank them for including my family in the evening.

Our Lord out did himself in framing the event - at least to my North Georgia sensibilities.

Like a soldier with chocolates, he handed out small prizes to each of the five senses his prodigal mind first dreamed up untold ages ago. The weather was perfect- just cool enough to make the fire enticing. Along with cozy warmth, he gave the clean sharp taste of liquid bread, the smells of roasting food and well nurtured fine tobaccos, the croaking of frogs and laughing children…all within the exotic context (for a middle aged type like me, anyway) of the moonlit coolness of early morning’s lateness.

It struck me as I sat there arguing theology with a young man who was obviously more earnest than I, that this was how it was supposed to be. I knew that in a world that is so transparently bent…this night was a gift.

As wonderful as our Lord’s “framing” was that evening, his truly transcendent work shown in the safety, warmth and community created by the people who were present. This is no small accomplishment in a gathering of drinking twenty-somethings.

I thought of how the world could learn the true nature of celebration from these young men and women. I saw (and more importantly, my children saw) that God’s Spirit makes a difference in how one parties. And thankfully it has nothing to do with being a wet blanket. We are to feast exuberantly with care and concern, with welcome and hospitality, with warmth and safety.

The alcohol worked its biblical magic of making hearts merry. The attractive energy that God designed to spark spontaneously between men and women crackled flirtatiously. Testosterone was present in doses that only a young man can handle and yet… no boisterous fights broke out, everyone stayed clothed and we didn’t misplace a soul. The chaotic power that each of these gifts constantly threaten to unleash was held in place by the underpinning ballast of the Christian gospel. No small thing, that.

Christ was present feasting with us. And the group’s conscious yielding to his claim as Lord of the Feast allowed us to taste a little of what our creator had in mind when he dreamed up each of these dangerous gifts.

The result was as different from the average college party as can be imagined. The ladies were safe, little children running in and out of the circle were welcomed onto laps and middle aged outsiders were included to the point of forgetting they weren’t twenty-five, anymore.

People passing by might have noticed the fire’s warmth flickering on the celebrant’s faces, but they’d have to come closer to know that it was much more...Nothing to see but a fire and some friends, but the reality to be experienced was the very body of Christ.

My backyard had become a Sacrament of what each of us hopes for and an enactment of God’s own perichoretic inner life.

For a few hours my family had become home to these precious people… and they had given us back the same.

OUR CHURCH HAS GONE A WHORIN'

The following is a comment by Mark Krikorian found on National Review Online.

The head of the Episcopal Church, Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, is complaining about Nigerian Anglican bishops coming to Virginia this weekend to formally install the head of the conservative breakaway denomination in this country. Here's what she said: "Such action would violate the ancient customs of the church."I kid you not. The female head of a church with a practicing homosexual bishop planning to "marry" his lover, a church that could accept into seminary the adulterous homosexual governor of New Jersey, a church that embraces splitting open babies' skulls and vacuuming their brains out, is complaining about violating ancient customs? Wow.

HT: Orthodixie

MERE CHRISTIANITY DEFINED

I’ve grown fond of describing myself as a “Mere Christian.” Makes me feel all “Lewisian,” I guess. That’s always a good thing…Lewis-ian. Not sure how to spell it, but you know what I mean.

N. T Wright has tempted me with Simple Christian, but this sounds to much like Simpleton, and it’s a tactical blunder to draw undue attention to one’s weaknesses. I’ll stick with Lewis’ designation.

By Mere Christian our dear brother meant to indicate the ground common to all Christians.

Nothing fancy.

Nothing extra.

Just “the stuff.”

It’s a sort of modern Vincentian Canon (Quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est- What has been believed everywhere, always, and by all); it has all the weaknesses and attractions of the same. On the plus side we have an acknowledgement and affirmation of the essentials- along with the history that formed them. On the negative side we have the ambiguity created by the sheer simplicity of “everywhere, always and all.”

Everywhere and always…really? And what about “all”- all of what?

Doesn’t seem very helpful; does it? But I think that St. Vincent was assuming presuppositions that we would tend to question. He knew what belief in a truly catholic church meant. He could point to one.

If we were asked to point at the catholic church, we’d end up indicating a body that is oxymoronically called Roman, yet universal. A part of the catholic church, for sure, but not the whole shebang. That’s a problem for the modern application of St. Vincent’s formula- and for Lewis’, as well.

So I thought it might be helpful to make explicit what I mean by the term “Mere Christian." In a nutshell, it seems important to me that we restore St. Vincent’s presuppositions. We need to know “where and by whom” the “always” has been believed.

The fullest measure of the radically least is fourfold. (Yeah, I know. I had to reread that a couple of times, too.) The recipe requires four ingredients. Here's how I figure it-

(1) The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, as "containing all things necessary to salvation," and as being the rule and ultimate standard of faith.

(2) The Apostles' Creed, as the Baptismal Symbol; and the Nicene Creed, as the sufficient statement of the Christian faith.

(3) The two Sacraments ordained by Christ Himself--Baptism and the Supper of the Lord--ministered with unfailing use of Christ's words of Institution, and of the elements ordained by Him.

(4) The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in the methods of its administration to the varying needs of the nations and peoples called of God into the Unity of His Church.

The one, holy, catholic and apostolic church is that community which is entered into by baptism, fed and sustained by Christ in the Eucharist and committed to living the story attested to…by the bishops who trace their authority to Christ and his twelve apostles.

(Editorial note because my daughter says I'm confusing- Begin my part of imaginary conversation with irate reader here)

So there it is- Mere Christianity. No more and no less. I think you…

What was that?

I’m out of my freakin’ mind…now I wouldn’t say…

Sola what? Sola Scriptura?

Yeah, I believe in… What?

Scripture is the rule and ultimate standard of faith. I affirm that. I said th…

Wait, wait, wait.

This is the problem I was trying to get at in the beginning. Scripture isn’t enough. In fact, if we stick with scripture alone, then we end up without a bible. Let me come at it from another angle; hear me out.

Why does scripture matter?

Owe! Come on! I’m asking a serious question.

Why does it matter? Scripture is the final authority- the ultimate rule for faith and practice- because it is the authoritative depository of what God was up to in Christ.

Right?

It’s not important apart from its message. It’s not uniquely significant as an object. It’s foundational importance is found in what says. It does us no good, if it’s not read…and understood. Scripture doesn’t form the bedrock of our identity by…well, lying there and being bedrock; rather it tells us authoritatively what God was up to in Christ. Everything flows from this.

In the final analysis it matters because of what it says about the identity, life and mission of Jesus. It matters for the story it tells.

Now, what does it say about the identity, life and mission of Jesus? What story does it tell?

It’s been told different way, you know. That’s okay- within reason. The problem comes when the Christian gospel morphs into another story altogether.

Imagine you have me over to your house, the kids are playing in the floor at our feet and I offer, “Want to hear a story?”

“Yeah,” they respond as they gather around expectantly.

“This is the story of Little Red Riding Hood,” I begin. “It’s my favorite story. My daddy used to tell it to me and his daddy told it to him. It goes like this: Once upon a time there was little girl named Little Red Riding Hood. She loved grandmothers- with all of her heart…”

You smile and relax back into the sofa. This is nice. It reminds you of being small and listening to the same tale from your Father.

I continue, “She loved them boiled and fried. She loved them raw and pickled, but her favorite way of eating grandmothers was roasted with carrots and potatoes…”

You come forward in your seat. “What are you talking about?”

“What do you mean?” I ask.

“What are you telling them?”

“Little Red Riding Hood,” I answer.

“No, you’re not.”

“Sure I am.”

“No, you’re not.”

“Sure I am. I’ll prove it. This is the Story of Little Red Riding Hood. Once upon a time there was little girl named Little Red Riding Hood. She loved grandmothers- with all of her heart…”

“But simply calling it Little Red Riding Hood doesn’t make it Little Red Riding Hood. It’s a different story.”

I’m surprised at your arrogance. “Says who?” I ask. “There’s Little Red Riding Hood, there’s her Grandmother; if you’d let me finish you’d see that there is also that infuriating do-gooder “the big bad wolf. It’s all there.”

Maybe you can see my point. There’s all sorts of room for variations without compromising the fairy tale. Maybe you have the child carrying muffins in her basket, but I think that Grandmother prefers chocolate chip cookies. Perhaps you have Grandmother living to the West while I locate her in the South. I think Red Riding Hood has golden hair, but you know that it’s auburn. Plenty of room for variation while remaining the same story.

But there are certain lines you can’t cross without turning it into a different tale altogether. How many lines? Well there’s probably an infinite number of ways to switch it over. We humans have great imaginations. The only ones we know about for sure are the ones various yahoos have already tried. Little Red Riding Hood as cannibal, for example. That’s one way of telling a different story.

With the resurrection and ascension of Christ and the subsequent outpouring of His Spirit upon his people, the kingdom began to spread. The gospel, the spell (or story) of God began to go forth. It was told in Italy and Greece, Turkey and Spain. Eventually the “angels” in Britain heard its telling and the people of Egypt and India. The story. The one story.

But from the very beginning people began to tell it in such a way as to subvert it into another thing altogether. They used the same words- son of God, Jesus. They told the same plotlines, mostly, but they meant different things by them…they changed them at crucial points. And so St John had to warn against those who denied that Christ had come in the flesh. Different story, that.

How many ways are there of screwing up the narrative? We’ll probably never know. But we can know the ways it has been tried, and they usually consist of an almost infinite number of variations on four main themes. They deny that Jesus was truly God, perfectly man, distinctly both or indivisibly one person. Alerting us to these variations is the role of The Ecumenical Creeds of the church. They tell a story, but in need of fleshing out. They parade out the main plotlines without which the story would be deficient…perhaps, even other than that which was originally given. They mark the major digressions which the bent hearts of men and women have preferred to the gospel. They summarize, they preserve The Story itself by creating a fence around the truth. Inside, somewhere is truth. Out there, everywhere is error.

“In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God and the word was God.” So says our source.

“He wasn’t exactly God, you know” offers a competing storyteller. He makes a pretty good case, too- from the source itself. After all, there’s only one God. Jesus prayed to him, and grew hungry, tired, afraid….dead. God doesn’t do any of those things. What St. John means is…"

Like I said, he makes a good case. The only problem is that it’s not the way those who walked and talked and died for Jesus told the story. That’s not the story they- and through them- we were given.

Notice the different elements in play:

(1) Two contradicting versions of Christ (two stories) both appealing to (2) the same source (the Bible)

Do you see that Mere Christianity involves both (a) an authoritative source (b) properly understood?

Which is the correct understanding? What is the standard? For those who take seriously Jesus’ claims, it is the story as he told it. Ah! And where are we to find that?

We find it among the people to whom it was first given. We need to learn and be formed by them- to become one of them. How is this done- what does faithfulness to the story of a God who eternally exists in community require here? Baptism and Communion answer this.

Adherence to Mere Christianity has so far required of us three elements: (a) the source (b) the truthful understanding of the source and (c) membership and communion with the people being formed by the source. Which brings us to the last (and most contentious point)

Where are they to be found?

This is particularly crucial. Do you see why? The other three points depend on this one. If we don’t know where they are, we (c) can’t learn and be formed by them. If we can’t learn and be formed by them, (b) we can’t be sure we understand the source properly; if we can’t be sure we understand the source properly, (a) we (and this is surprisingly not understood)…can’t be sure that we have the source at all.

Just as there’s always been many competing ways of telling the story, there has always been competing works claiming to be part of the source. The recent silliness in the media over the Gospel of Judas is a case in point. In the beginning- as still today- there were literally dozens of works considered by various individuals to be “source material.” Often these works made more obvious or explicit the “alternative storylines” the competing storytellers espoused.

Here's the point: There simply is no list within any of the books of the New Testament clarifying which books belong in the New Testament.

How do we know what is “source material” and so, what is not? We rely on those to whom they were originally given. Doug Wilson has rightly said that before we can come to Scripture, we must pass through a creed. We call this creed The Table of Contents. Or in other words: the problem with New-Testament-Only-Christians is that they are left without a New Testament.

So, how do we know where to find them? Where is the church found…for sure?

Perhaps it’s a more difficult question than you might think. There are many competing groups and “peoples.” Each baptizing. Each with its own version of the story.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, for example, asks why the more popular version of the gospel is the right one. Why indeed? They believe the bible’s declaration that Christ is God’s only begotten son. They just don’t believe that he is “God of God, light of light, very God of very God.” They’ll dunk you and they also have a peculiar position on “source material.” Maybe they’re the real deal. How do you know? Are those of us living two thousand years from Christ’s earthly visit left to our own discretion and judgment about the truthfulness or falsehood of ancient things?

Thankfully, it’s not such a difficult question. We simply need to know where “they” are. How do we do it? The same way we locate any other group. Can you imagine asking “I wonder where congress is…the real congress, that is?”

“Well, Congress is over there.”

“But how do you know it is the real congress?”

“Because it received its authority- its authentication- from the congress that assembled before it, and they received theirs from the one before that….all the way back to the original institution. No reasonable person asks where it can find Congress, or the Presidency, or the county School Board. Likewise, no one need wonder where to find the church. While there are various individuals, parishes and institutions the church can be traced consistently back to the Apostles and their Lord through its shepherds.

This is why we find the martyr St Ignatius of Antioch writing in 110 AD “Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishops, or by one whom he appoints. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic church.”

It may be that we can “happen” upon the true source. We might get really lucky regarding its proper understanding. Then, if our luck and scholarship holds, we can identify the independent manifestation of the one true body. Maybe. But it would be disingenuous. You would be depending on the authority of the church’s continuity to arrive at a, b and c. before throwing them overboard in the sixteenth century. Seems a bit selective. We started in the air, built the ladder under us and then climbed down to survey the job. No one believes that. Something fishy is going on.

If we happened to get a, b and c right on our own and against all odds (though how would we know), we would leave those who came after us vulnerable and uncertain at each stage, because we went about it precisely backwards.

If we want to know with certainty where the church is, we simply need to follow her back to her Lord. Certainty, in regards to Mere Christianity requires- indeed, begins with- (d) the Historic Episcopate.

Being able to tell where the church is is an essential part of Mere Christianity; knowing for sure where it's not is dubious extra.

A LITURGICAL EXPLANATION OF THE DAYS OF HOLY WEEK

A Liturgical Explanation for the Days of Holy Week
by
The Very Rev. Alexander Schmemann, S.T.D.

PATRON SAINTS OF BEER

Here's some interesting information regarding beer and a few of the church's better known members.

Perhaps not Lent appropriate...but Easter's coming!

AMEN

"As I maintained in Crisis, Opportunity, and the Christian Future, the Protestant age is coming to an end. That means that the Reformed faith and Presbyterianism are also coming to an end. The paradigm is exhausted, and the world in which it was worked out no longer exists. We must take all the great gains of the Calvinistic heritage and apply them with an open Bible to the new world in which we are now living. We must be aware that there is far more in the Bible than the Reformation dealt with, and that many of our problems today are addressed by those hitherto unnoticed or undeveloped aspects of the Bible. Those who want to bang the drum for a 450-year old tradition are dooming themselves to irrelevance. Our only concern is to avoid being beat up by them as they thrash about in their death-throes. "

James Jordan- The Closing of the Calvinistic Mind

MAKING THE GOSPEL DIFFICULT

“Scripture and tradition require to be read in a way that brings out their strangeness, their non-obvious and non-contemporary qualities, in order that they may be read both freshly and truthfully from one generation to another. They need to be made more difficult before we can accurately grasp their simplicities.... And this ‘making difficult’, this confession that what the gospel says in Scripture and tradition does not instantly and effortlessly make sense, is perhaps one of the most fundamental tasks for theology.”
—Rowan Williams, Arius: Heresy and Tradition (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), p. 236. [HT: Alastair]

I like that.

If it makes instant sense to ears trained in the spirit of this age, could we have possibly heard it correctly? Isn't this another way of saying that we must always be sure that we are proclaiming the gospel of Christ's kingdom- not the latest "self-evident" fad of this passing age?

WOULDN'T IT BE NICE

I’ve heard it from many different quarters lately- “The most important thing the church can do for the world is to be the church.”

Could it be that simple?

No, really. Could it?

Does the church only need to live what it claims to be- an alternative society, the earthly manifestation of the life of God, a different way of being human, a foretaste of heaven, the glorious renewed image of a fiery yet tender Conquering lamb, the very body of Christ?

Lot’s of cool sounding stuff, there. Makes me want to jump right in. I want to be fiery and glorious and …a heavenly foretaste, but what does it mean…really, practically, and is it enough?

When the life of the Trinity intersected our world, it ended up on a cross; and it continues to turn over the sod of Adam’s creation with a plow that’s distinctly cross shaped.

My wiser brother N.T. Wright said that God found the pain and the guilt of the world, stooped underneath it, lifted it up and carried it himself.

I've been told that there's nothing in that statement but rhetorical flourish. It has no meat or content. It's like saying "all the world needs is Jeeessssusss", but it does have meaning. It means that God found the hurting and the guilty and he behaved as if their misery and corruption were his responsibility. Though totally innocent, he responded as if these things were his doing- his own fault.

In a fallen world, that’s what the life of God looks like. It's "fiery' with a twist. "Heavenly foretaste" with a bitter tang.

But wouldn’t a society of people committed to living that out daily be an anomaly in our world- a strange and wondrous beacon and hope?

Amidst all the self-serving and self-glorifying pettiness of our lives, the body of Christ marks off, like a bubble in an expanse of water, a different reality. Out there it’s wet. In here it’s dry.

Right?

Isn’t that your experience with the church?

The most important thing the church can do for the world is to be the church.

The difference doesn’t lie in our weapons, though they do differ. It’s not that we do with bibles and prayers what the world does with bombs and mines. That’s not being a new creature; that’s being better armed.

The real difference is in our aim. We don’t seek to glorify ourselves by pointing out the failures of others, rather we wish to throw ourselves away so that the other can experience the life they were meant to live. The call to follow Christ is a call to be used up for our enemies' sake. We find our lives by loosing them.

Right?

The most important thing the church can do for the world is to be the church.

Is it enough for me to tell the young girl that abortion is not an option- that she must carry the unwanted child for the rest of her life? Is it enough to point out her “corruption” and lack of self control? Are we being the church then?

Or do we need to be the place where she is enabled to do the right thing, the hands from which God’s forgiveness is offered, an encouraging symphony of transparent “me, too”, and honest companions in a messy life of compromise and shortcomings?

“I can’t afford the baby.”

“We can,” Christ answers back.

“No one will love me, if they know”

“We do,” Christ answers back through an embrace.

“The pain and guilt are too much”

“But there not yours, there ours,” Christ smiles.

Would people want to be part of something like that? Would such a place make a difference in the world by simply giving the world another way of being the world?

Wouldn’t it be nice to know?

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.

WHY DOESN'T GOD JUST SHOW HIMSELF?

Jeff Meyers offers some helpful thoughts on Mediated Authority.

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.