"After-birth abortion"?

"You shall not kill." -Exodus 20:13 (RSV)

"Do not commit murder; do not commit adultery; do not corrupt boys; do not have illicit sex; do not steal; do not practice magic; do not practice witchcraft; you shall not murder a child, whether it be born or unborn. Do not covet the things of your neighbor." -Didache 2:2 (a late 1st or early 2nd Century Christian guidebook)

Drawing upon Scripture and Christian Tradition, Christian ethicists have condemned an article published in The Journal of Medical Ethics in which Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva argue that newborn babies do not have a “moral right to life” because they are not “actual persons” but rather “potential persons”.

Read more at Christianity Today or at FoxNews.

You may need to re-read that because it is truly shocking. These medical ethicists are in fact arguing that it is perfectly acceptable to kill human babies, based upon a narrowing of the definition of "person." According to their argument laid out in the well-known British academic journal, there is a difference between a human being and a human person. Not all humans are, by their philosophy, "persons" in the proper sense. The Journal of Medical Ethics has even defending publishing the article, after some questioned why a prestigious academic journal would promote such an idea in the first place.

I would hope it was obvious that such an approach to ethics is extremely dangerous, not to mention completely contrary to the Judeo-Christian moral tradition that has insisted that there are certain absolute rights and wrongs that are derived from the commandments of our Creator God. It is dangerous because it means that nobody's right to life is safe (the most basic of all rights, the one upon which all the other rights depend). Once you have allowed that someone can be a human being without being a "true person" then it only takes a few jumps of rationalization to define people of a certain age or of a certain intelligence level as "non-persons." It is only a little past that to define people of low income or education levels as non-persons ("since they cannot fully value or appreciate their lives" seems to be the argument about the babies). Of course, such a view naturally raises the question "who gets to make that determination anyways?" The academics? Those with power? Those who can win a majority vote?

The Judeo-Christian Scriptures as well as the Enlightenment tradition enshrined in the American Declaration of Independence hold that the Creator God has fashioned humans such that we all (regardless of age or intelligence) posses an inherent sacred worth, to use the Scriptural language, we are created to bear the image and likeness of God. That sacred worth is the foundation and root of our notions of human rights and dignity. One of the problems with fully secular and god-less theories of human rights, as I have discussed before, is that they do not actually stand upon any firm and universal foundation. Universal human rights simply exist so long as we all (or the majority of us) agree that they exist. This is a subtle form of "might makes right" however, and it begs the question of what happens if we, or the strongest among us, decide that they no longer exist for certain elements of the poplution - as the Nazis once did.

Perhaps it should come to no suprise that the source of this dangerous and radically "anti-Christian" re-defining of "personhood" emerges from a largely atheistic academy in a Europe where religious perspectives have been somewhat marginalized. It is not that the people who make up this academy are necessarily malicious or bad (they may often be friendlier and more pleasant than many religious believers you'll meet) it is simply that their worldview does not provide that firm foundation for absolute human rights and dignities for all people, or absolute moral imperatives; instead their "ethics" are built upon shakier ground. And ideas always have consequences.

The Christian faith, drawn from the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments has from very early on made the defense of the weak a core value of our faith. All people are created to bear God's image (Gen. 1), all people are loved by God (John 3), and each person is one for whom Christ has undergone passion and death (1 John 2). Those who have no one to speak for them, those who are on the margins or are not valued by society - the widows the orphans, the infant and indeed the unborn - have always been considered the special responsibility of the followers of Christ, who so often showed care for the unvalued. The early church surprised many ancient pagans by the ways that it valued babies (who were often thrown away if their sex was not "acceptable" or if they appeared to be otherwise "imperfect"). Infants are even capable of being baptized into the membership of the Body of Christ. The Didache is one early example of the Church's rejection of abortion and infanticide, which are now both being advocated by a "respected medical ethical journal."

It is difficult to believe at times how much our world has changed since my parents were born. Our moral consensus has collapsed into a mire of competing ideas; and now the Church must with clarity and grace, and with the authority of divine love stand up and say "I will show you a still more excellent way..." We must not only oppose any force, any idea, that preys upon and destroys the weak; but we must positively show the truer, holier, and happier life that is founded in love as the way, the only way, to Peace.

Another Lent begins...

Yesterday, Ash Wednesday, marks the beginning of the liturgical season of Lent, observed by many branches of the Christian Church. What is Lent? Lent is a 40 day season in preparation for Easter that looks back to Jesus' 40 days of temptation in the Wilderness (Matt. 4; Luke 4; Mk 1); Jesus' 40 days in the wilderness in turn relfects the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness of the children of Israel before they entered the Promised Land (see Numbers, Deuteronomy, etc) and other Old Testament parallels.

As we prepare for Holy Week and Easter Sunday, Lent is for us a season of reflection, self-examination, and repentance, as we identify and turn away from those things that hinder our growth as Christians. It begins with the solemn Ash Wednesday service that climaxes with the imposition of ashes on the foreheads of the congregation, and the congregation's confession of sin using the Scriptural words of Psalm 51. This liturgy is found in The United Methodist Book of Worship p. 321 and it is closely based upon the service found in the 1979 Book of Common Prayer p.264, but without the Litany of Penitence. So this service also illustrates the familial ties between Methodists and the Anglican liturgical tradition.

What does this practice of receiving ashes mean? In the Bible, ashes are a symbol of lamenting and turning away from sins, and also of purification (see, for example, Daniel 9:3-4; Jonah 3:5-6; Matthew 11:21; Numbers 19:16-19). As Christian Churches have been doing since at least the 10th Century, we in the United Methodist Church continue to use this potent Biblical symbol to remind ourselves of our own need of repentence and spiritual renewal and purification. Like the Sacraments themselves and other practices such as burning incense in our Evening Prayer service, putting images in our stained glass windows, foot-washing, lifting our hands during worship, or making the sign of the cross over our hearts, the practice of receiving ashes on Ash Wednesday helps us engage in a way of prayer and a worship experience that is multi-sensory, rather than one based only upon speaking and hearing words.

What did Wesley really say about the Bible?

There has been a lot of talking in recent years about The United Methodist Church seeking to recover a distinctively Wesleyan identity, and not drifting into the murky bog of "anything goes" theological pluralism.

We see some signs of this tremendously important "Wesleyan turn" in the popularity of resources like The Wesley Study Bible (co-edited by Bishop Willimon) or Three Simple Rules (by Bishop Reuben Job) based on Wesley's "General Rule" of life. When we as a church are more clear about who we are and what we stand for, it will be easier for us to present a common message and witness to the world. This should mean an improvement not only in our slogan and our TV commercials, but also in our missional work everywhere.

Part of the work before us now that we have decided that we are going to be Wesleyan, is to discover again what that actually means. Many people have different ideas about what Christianity in the Wesleyan dialect actually means; for example, I have personally heard it asserted that John Wesley was a theologically ultra-conservative hell-and-brimstone preacher on the one hand and that he was a liberal and a universalist on the other hand (neither of which is exactly true). What we as a denomination, and especially as clergy, need to do is (re)familiarize ourselves with what Wesley actually did teach regarding not only the basic content of our faith, and also concerning the methods of pursuing theological truth and spiritual growth.

One of the places where the contemporary Church could really use a healthy dose of Wesley is in our understanding of what it means for the Bible to be our "primary authority" (as our Book of Discipline puts it). It might be fair to say that, at least in some cases, pastors and seminaries have at times taught ideas about the Bible that represent a much lower view of Biblical authority than was ever held either by Wesley or the ecumenical Church through the ages. So what did Wesley say about the Bible and its authority?

Rev. Craig Adams has a great post examining Wesley's writings on the subject, a must read for any who would represent The United Methodist Church as its leaders.

Prayer on the Sixth Sunday after Epiphany

The following collect is one of the prayers given for the season of Epiphany in The United Methodist Book of Worship, and one of many with origins in Anglicanism's Book(s) of Common Prayer. I'll be opening our worship services with it today, especially as it fits with the Old Testament lesson from 2 Kings 5, where God reaches out with is healing grace to Naaman, the outsider to his covenant people.

O God, you made of one blood all nations that dwell on the face of the whole earth, and sent your blessed Son to preach peace to them that are afar off and to them that are near. Grant that all people everywhere may seek after you and find you. Bring the nations into your fold, pour out your Spirit on all flesh, and hasten your kingdom; through the same Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

-The United Methodist Book of Worship, 315 (taken from the 1928 Book of Common Prayer, p.38)

Diamond Jubilee

Being something of an Anglophile, I would be remiss if I didn't make sure that everyone heard about this: This past Monday (Feb. the 5th) marks the 60th anniversary of the day that Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor became "Her Majesty Elizabeth II, by the grace of God, of Great Britain, Ireland and the British Dominions beyond the seas Queen, Defender of the Faith." This 60th anniversary of Her Majesty's coming to the throne is celebrated as her Diamond Jubilee year. Elizabeth becomes only the second monarch to reign 60 years (Queen Victoria, the "Widow of Windsor," being the other - who reigned 63 years).

The British and Commonwealth nations have celebrations planned throughout the year, especially this summer, and The Church of England is circulating a prayer for the Queen in celebration of this jubilee.

Her first prime minister to work with upon becoming Queen was Winston Churchill (!), and for sixty years Elizabeth II has stood as a symbol of stability, continuity, traditional piety, and diligent grace in a tumultuous and often uncertain world; the British peoples are right to be proud of her.

The USA Today has a really nice article about this milestone and the Queen's impact: while there may be numerous monarchs around the world, in our cultural imagination there is only one Queen. God save the Queen, and all the people whom she represents.

Prayer for the 5th Sunday after Epiphany

Since being assigned by my bishop to a regular parish church last year (I had been serving a campus ministry for 4 years before that), I have been all the more careful to make more extensive use of The United Methodist Book of Worship (BOW), which is the official book of liturgy of The United Methodist Church, just as The Book of Common Prayer (BCP) is the book of the Anglican churches. Indeed, most of the structure and a good deal of the content of our Book of Worship is ultimately derived from the Common Prayer as well (a service-by-service comparisson between the BOW and the 1979 BCP will demonstrate the structural emulation).

I have continuously found that there is a great deal of liturgical treasure in the Book of Worship (to be sure, there is some less-useful stuff as well), that seems often neglected in ordering the corporate worship of our congregations. I believe that, as we try to renew our Wesleyan heritage, our seminaries should be more intentional in forming and training seminarians in the spirituality and use of the Book of Worship tradition (we have had several liturgy books over the centuries, going all the way back to Wesley's revision of the Common Prayer). For my part, I try to highlight some aspects of the Book of Worship from time to time as part of the work of this blog.

One aspect that can be easily integrated into any service is the collect or prayer of the day. As the Book of Common Prayer has a "collect" or prayer of the day for each Sunday of the year (that is also used at Morning Prayer throughout the following week), so the Book of Worship has a number of seasonal collects to be used throughout the year. The Board of Discipleship website often makes recommendations about which prayers to use, since there are several options given for each liturgical season, but not always specific prayers for specific Sundays.

Here is one of the recommendations for tomorrow, the 5th Sunday after Epiphany:

O Christ, who commanded the apostles to go into all the world, and to preach the gospel to every creature, let your name be great among the nations from the rising up of the sun to its going down, now and forever. Amen.

- Book of Worship #308, a prayer of Lancelot Andrewes

Quiet please

From Gandhi to Joe DiMaggio to Mother Teresa to Bill Gates, introverts have done a lot of good work in the world. But being quiet, introverted or shy was sometimes looked at as a problem to overcome.

In the 1940s and '50s the message to most Americans was: Don't be shy. And in today's era of reality television, Twitter and widespread self-promotion, it seems that cultural mandate is in overdrive.

Susan Cain — who considers herself an introvert — has written a new book that tells the story of how introversion fell out of style. She talks with NPR's Audie Cornish about Quiet: the Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking.

Listen to the NPR story here.

This interview includes an interesting discussion about how our society has come to value extroversion and see introversion as something negative, as we simultaneously shifted from a culture of character (embodied by Abraham Lincoln) to a culture of personality (embodied by JFK and the movie stars).

As the work-place has adopted more "team" models of production, introverts have been left behind in the business world, and are less-often groomed for leadership, even though studies show that introverted leadership may produce better results, and the collaborative models often produce sub-par results.

The author, Susan Cain, also recently wrote a piece for the New York Times called "The Rise of the New Groupthink" that addresses some of the same issues.

"You must understand this, my beloved, let everyone be quick to listen, and slow to speak..." (James 1:19)

Like Susan Cain, I too am somewhat intoverted, and am at times frustrated by living in a culture that seems to prefer and reward extroversion.

Could it be that one of the great gifts that the church can give to the world is to uplift the value of quiet, diligence, and character over and above flashy, noisey, self-promotion? Certainly there are type-A saints like St. Paul or John Wesley who are constantly going, constantly preaching and writing, constantly organizing new communities - but we also have a great number of quiet, prayerful, diligent saints to lift up as examples.

However, even in the church at meetings of clergy (whom one might expect to be introspective people), I observe that it is often the people who speak loudest and most frequently who tend to have a great deal of sway over the direction of events, while we introverts are still collecting our thoughts. That is not necessarily a problem if these volumous speakers always put forward the best, truest, deepest, and most Spirit-led ideas...but then, we have no guarantee of that. As she puts it in the interview, the loudest ideas are not always the best ideas.

Maybe the church can rediscover, and help the culture rediscover that silence really is golden. We certainly have our work cut out for us and it begins with our own interior work. One of the disappointments in my ordination process was the discovery that our silent retreat at a Benedictine Abbey was actually a "more or less quiet" retreat - in which we pastors actually talked quite a bit, as we are wont to do. The real discipline of silence (even for 2 days) was apparently too painful, too difficult for us spiritual shepherds. The fact that we find it much easier to "be slow to listen and quick to speak" shows how thoroughly our expectations about "normal" have been shaped by our culture "that can't stop talking."

Beautiful Anthem

It may shock some to discover that Fr. John Wesley disliked the use of anthems in worship because he greatly preferred songs that the entire congregation could sing. Most Methodist churches have come to embrace anthems (in addition to lots of good congregational singing, of course), as opportunities for the congregation to listen and to meditate upon the words and the heavenly sound of the music. For many of us, this is a deeply important aspect of our spirituality as Christians (as is congregational singing).

In the video below, a choral ensamble sings at the beautiful (and huge) First United Methodist Church of Lubbock, Tx. This is anthem, "Almighty and Most Merciful Father" (by William Harris) was sung at an evening Vespers service.

A Christmas gift from Middle Earth

Just in case any of you haven't seen this yet. Only one year to go. This is without a doubt the most anticipated film (for me personally) since the most recent Indiana Jones movie...which reminds me not to get my expectations TOO high. But the trailer is certainly wonderful!

Silent Night

Singing the old hymn "Silent Night" by candle light is a common and much-loved Christmas Eve tradition in Methodist and other Western Christian churches. The video below comes from the Christmas Eve service of the West End United Methodist Church in Nashville, TN; a church known for excellently practicing traditional Methodist worship. In a world in which people (even Christians) are constantly chasing after "the latest new thing," here you get a strong sense of the enduring value and great beauty of keeping worship traditions that have handed down to us through the generations.

May God bless your celebration of this high holy season+

The Daily Hours at Sewanee

When I was a sophomore in college I attended a retreat with the St. Alban's chapel college group. We went to Sewanee, TN, where we stayed at the St. Mary's retreat house and spent our days hiking and cave-exploring or bumming around the campus of The University of the South. Each day included some of the divine hours or daily office - whether it was the morning prayer said with our little group at the retreat house, or the Sung Compline by candle-light in the glorious cathedral-like chapel at the University. It was there, on what they like to call "the holy mountain," that I seriously began to consider that God's still small voice might be calling me into a vocational ministry, much like what Father Patrick (St Alban's pastor) was doing. In the years since, Sewanee has become for me a place of pilgrimage and renewal.

My experiences there were also some of my very early experiences with praying the daily office of the historic church. Now, as a pastor and especially as a member of the Order of St. Luke, I have a commitment to use the daily office to shape my regular time of prayer (much like John and Charles Wesley themselves). Most days this means, for me, praying through the morning or mid-day office from The United Methodist Book of Worship (UMBOW). The four daily prayer services found in that worship book (morning, mid-day, evening, and night) are more flexible and (potentially) shortened forms of the offices as they are practiced by Anglicans.

One of the great things about the divine hours, as is mentioned below in the video, is how they connect our daily rythms to the great story of God. The morning service as the sun is rising reminds us of the women going to the tomb around sunrise to find Christ risen, and the rising sun points us back to the Rising Son and invites us to ponder it. The mid-day office (especially in some of the prayers found in the Book of Common Prayer) reminds us in part that Christ was hung on the cross at mid-day. As the lamps are lit for evening as the sun is setting, we remember the Light of Christ, to whom John the Baptist testified, taking flesh and dwelling among us in a dark world. At compline, or night prayer, we always (in the Methodist and Anglican rites) recite the Nunc Dimitis of Luke 2:28-32 before closing our eyes to sleep and, as the Archbishop of Canterbury once put it, we 'rehearse' in preparation for the end of our own lives, commending ourselves into the hands of God.

The video below is about the use of the Daily Office at Sewanee. Below that is a version of the United Methodist rite of Evening Praise and Prayer that can be easily printed on a single piece of card stock and used privately or in groups. The prayers of the people could come in the form of a pre-scribed litany (such as the "standard" litany included in the Evening service itself at UMBOW p. 575-6, or the suggested alternative litany at UMBOW p. 495), or the people could simply lift up names, concerns, and prayers extemporaneously, with the call and response said following each concern.



==============================================

Evening Praise and Prayer
As taken from The United Methodist Book of Worship, p.574 and The United Methodist Hymnal p.878

One: Light and Peace in Jesus Christ.
All: Thanks be to God.

[ Incense may be burned with these words:
I call upon you, O Lord; come quickly to me; give ear to my voice when I call to you.
Let my prayer be counted as incense before you;
and the lifting up of my hands as an evening sacrifice. (Psalm 141:1-2) ]

The Gloria Patri may be said or sung (see Hymnal #70):

Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit,
As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.

Hymn(s) may be sung

This or another prayer may be said by a leader or by all in unison:

We praise you and thank you, O God,
for you are without beginning and without end.
Through Christ, you created the whole world; through Christ you preserve it.
You made the day for the works of light
and the night for the refreshment of our minds and bodies.
Keep us now in Christ; grant us a peaceful evening,
a night free from sin; and bring us at last to eternal life;
Through Jesus Christ and in the Holy Spirit, we offer you all glory,
honor, and worship, now and forever. Amen. (4th Century Evening Liturgy)

Scripture Reading(s)

Silence

Song of Praise: traditionally, “Magnificat” (Hymnal #198-199); or another song may be used

Prayers for ourselves and others. After each prayer the people may respond:
One: Lord, in your mercy,
All: Hear our prayer.

The Lord's Prayer

One: The grace of Jesus Christ enfold you this night. Go in peace.
All: Thanks be to God.

Maranatha!

Now that we've entered into Advent, our liturgical life is centered on watching for the coming of the Lord. We keep watch as we approach Christmas and remember his coming as a tiny child born of the Virgin Mary, and we also keep watch for his coming as King in glory, at the end of the age.

The video below features the Paul Manz anthem, "E'en So Lord Jesus quickly Come" based on the final chapter of the Book of Revelation. It is being sung by a choir at the First United Methodist Church in Dallas (which I drove by a few times when I lived there, but never attended). A favorite at downtown churches, perhaps, we sang this lovely piece a few times when I was in the choir at First Methodist of Baton Rouge as well.




Merciful God, you sent your messengers the prophets to preach repentance and prepare the way for our salvation. Give us grace to heed their warnings and forsake our sins, that we may greet with joy the coming of Jesus Christ, our Redeemer, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, on God, now and forever. Amen.

(United Methodist Book of Worship #250, and Book of Common Prayer 1979, p.211)

Roman Catholics buy iconic Protestant cathedral

The Crystal Cathedral in Garden Grove, California, has long been an Icon of the quintessentially American form of Christianity: evangelical Protestant "Televangelism." I remember occassionally catching bits of services from the famed church on cable TV throughout my life; they were not all that different than what we were doing in traditional Methodist and Baptist churches, a service of hymns+evangelistic sermon+more hymns, yet on a much grander scale. Founded by Robert Schuller, this church is affiliated with the Reformed Church in America.

Like many independent mega-churches, the position of senior pastor of the Crystal Cathedral Ministries has been "passed down" through the Schuller family, though the Schullers have been accused by some of poor leadership and financial management in recent years. In 2010 the church's leadership board filed for bankruptcy and, according to a recent NPR story, the church building has been purchased by the Roman Catholic diocese of Orange. Though other offers were on the table, the fact that the Roman Catholic diocese would continue to use the building as a house of worship was a key factor in the decision to sell to them over other potential buyers. The building will be remodeled for use as a Catholic cathedral (this will no doubt include the installation of the cathedra, or bishop's chair, to make the place a proper cathedral).

I can't help but feel that this is a deeply sybolic moment. The Crystal Cathedral has been a bastion and symbol of several trends in American Protestantism during the 20th century. It is affiliated with a "mainline" denomination and has maintained classic mainline Protestant worship styles in a changing culture, resisting the move towards more contemporary musical styles. The church was also one of the pioneers of televangelism with its "Hour of Power" program airing across the continent. Like many evangelical churches (and basically all TV-churches), this one certainly has been centered around the personality of a charismatic leader.

So what might the Roman Catholic buy-out symbolize? Is this a sign of the failure of a whole model of church, or simply the failure of a few leaders to handle money well? Do we see here that, in spite of all their significant difficulties, that the Roman Catholic Church as an institution ultimately has a deeper stability than even the most dynamic of evangelical churches? Is this an example of a church that marries itself to the spirit of the times finding itself a widow when the times change?

No doubt, the ministries of the Crystal Cathedral have inspired many over the decades, and probably helped more than a few to establish and maintain a salvation-claiming faith in Jesus Christ as Lord. My prayer is that God will bless the work of the Crystal Cathedral Ministries, which will continue with or without their iconic building, as well as the work of the Catholic diocese - that in all things God may be glorified. Gloria Deo!

The Conversion of C.S. Lewis

Today, November 22nd, in the sanctoral cycle or calendar of the Episcopal Church is the feast day of Clive Staples (or "C.S.") Lewis. Lewis has, of course, been very influential in English-speaking culture and Christianity over the last 75 years, far beyond the borders of his own Anglicanism. Below is a video recounting his conversion to faith in Jesus Christ, from a documentary about Lewis, and the prayer from Lesser Feasts and Fasts.




O God of searing truth and surpassing beauty, we give you thanks for Clive Staples Lewis, whose sanctified imagination lights fires of faith in young and old alike. Surprise us also with your joy and draw us into that new and abundant life which is ours in Christ Jesus, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.

Are we in Purgatory just now?

The Incarnatio Blog (of Methodist pastor Rev. Matt O'Reilly) ran an interesting post a while back with an meaty quote from N.T. Wright about a Biblical understanding of purgatory: "purging" happens not in a cosmic prison after death, but rather it is the business of the pilgrim life in this age. Though I may be mistaken, I believe that St. Ambrose of Milan (one of the great early fathers) said some things that, while not exactly the same, could be compatible with this notion: that this life, and ultimately death at the end of this life, are part of our cleansing process to prepare us to meet the Lord God "face to face" as St. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13.

This might fit well with 2 Corinthians 4:17 (especially as the NRSV translates it compared to other translations) "this slight momentary affliction is preparing us for an eternal weight of glory..." The difficulties of this life are what strengthen us enough that we may stand glory (this is the theme of the movie "The Shadowlands" about the life of C.S. Lewis).

Much teaching that I hear (in Protestant churches, anyways) downplays or simply ignores the many Biblical teachings on the postive contributions that pain, suffering, and difficulty can make to our spiritual growth. It seems we mostly try to explain away these things, or explain why God isn't really "at fault" for them, or worry about how such teachings might be hijacked and abused by various "oppressors." Those mainline Protestants who worry about how this or that traditional teaching may be hijacked by oppressors seem particularly prone to "throwing out the baby with the bathwater" for some reason, thus you now and then hear the assertion that "suffering is never redemptive," which is clearly contrary to the Christian message of the cross. The affirmation that difficulty can help us to grow and to embrace God is a frequent theme in the New Testament and the whole Christian tradition.

N.T. Wright's argument, if correct, would naturally render prayers for the souls in purgatory as practiced among Roman Catholics quite superfluous (which Protestants have basically always asserted anyway). Yet, the reading that "this life is purgatory" would still need to account for a further post-mortem purging for (some of) the elect, (particularly on the Day of Judgment) as St. Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 3:11-15. In that sense, there might be appropriate ways to pray for those faithful who have died and are waiting to face that firey judgment. In the United Methodist Book of Worship (p. 495, borrowing from the Book of Common Prayer [1979], p. 389) we, rather in rather broad terms "commend to God's mercy those who have died, that his will for them may be fulfilled".

Check out the full Incarnatio post with N.T. Wright quote here. Also, see the video below:

Back to the Fathers: An Oden Interview

On Oct. 21st (about 3 weeks ago), in honor of his 80th birthday, Christianity Today re-ran an interview with Thomas Oden from September 1990. Oden has been a significant influence on me, especially in my seminary years through his books such as Agenda for Theology, Rebirth of Orthodoxy, and his massive ecumenical Systematic Theology in which he advocated giving much more attention to the ancient ecumenical consensus in theology and Scripture interpretation as we post-modern folks try to hear and understand the Biblical message for today.

Oden's "return to the early fathers/ancient consensus" project has often been called "Paleo-orthodoxy" (to distinguish it from 20th-Century's "Neo-orthodoxy"), though it really is just "orthodoxy" in the broadest sense. The interview was conducted by Christopher Hall, who is now a leading paleo-orthodox theologian in his own right. Some highlights from the interview are copied below, the whole article can be found here.

In place of modernity you call for "a careful study and respectful following of the central tradition of classical Christian exegesis." In other places you call this orthodoxy. What is orthodoxy?

Lancelot Andrewes, a sixteenth-century Anglican divine, stated the answer as memorably as anyone, with a five-finger exercise: "One canon, two Testaments, three creeds [the Apostles', Nicene, and Athanasian], four [ecumenical] councils, and five centuries along with the Fathers of that period," by which he meant the great doctors of the first five centuries: Athanasius, Basil, Gregory of Nazianzus, and John Chrysostom in the East; and Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, and Gregory the Great in the West.

Do you see the Holy Spirit involved in that process?

Each of these creeds, councils, and teachers confessed that it was the Holy Spirit who was forming the consensus about orthodoxy and heresy. The council definitions were not something externally imposed on the church. They emerged only to define the already prevailing general lay consent to apostolic teaching.

You would say the formation of the Canon cannot be separated from the work of the Holy Spirit.

Exactly. The Spirit guides us to all truth. The Spirit helps us to remember. It is the Spirit who both calls forth the written word and guarantees its accurate transmission. The notion of canon is impossible to conceive without the premise of the Holy Spirit's activity. God the Spirit not only enables the Canon but calls forth the community to affirm and transmit the Canon.

What would you say to someone who claims, "I've got the Bible. I don't need church history or systematic theology"?

We would not even have the Bible without its reliable transmission, which is another way of talking about the work of God the Spirit. Orthodoxy understands that God is at work in the body of Christ to form that body in history, awaiting God's own coming in the return of Christ.
Christ promised the early church the Spirit, who came on the first Pentecost and continues to dwell in the lives of the faithful. He promised that the Spirit would abide with this community, guide it, lead it to all truth, and help it recollect the words of the Lord. This is just what has been happening for the 20 centuries since the ascension. We're moving in the wrong direction when we say individualistically, "I've got my Bible; I don't need anything except these words." Protestants now need to recover a sense of the active work of the Spirit in history and through living communities. Our modern individualism too easily tempts us to take our Bible and abstract ourselves from the wider believing community. We end up with a Bible and a radio, but no church.

You have told about a dream in which you were walking in the New Haven cemetery. You came across your own tombstone and the epitaph read, "He made no new contribution to theology." Were you happy or distressed to read that?

In my dream I was extremely pleased, for I realized I was learning what Irenaeus meant when he warned us not to invent new doctrine. This was a great discovery for me. All my education up to this point had taught me that I must be compulsively creative. If I was to be a good theologian I had to go out and do something nobody else ever had done. The dream somehow said to me that this is not my responsibility, that my calling as a theologian could be fulfilled through obedience to apostolic tradition.

The Lord is my Shepherd

The First United Methodist Church of Lubbock, Texas is one of the great "cathedrals" of United Methodism. Not in the technical sense, but like many of the Old World cathedrals, this congregation actively seeks to worship God "in holy splendor" in a large and beautiful gothic sanctuary, and they support numerous ministries, including a solid music ministry.

The video below comes from a Sunday service of worship as the choir sings the ancient and beloved words of Psalm 23. This Psalm resonates deeply with some of the other Scriptures, such as Psalm 100 and Ezekiel 34 that are set forth in the lectionary for the final Sunday of this Christian year, celebrating the Reign of Christ the King on Nov. 20th. In the video below one gets a glimpse at some of the best of our classic United Methodist worship arts and traditions, from the architecture to the vestments and paraments, from the stained glass to the wonderful choral music. All of this "holy splendor" calls the attention of our hearts to Him who is glorious Beauty itself.

Prayer for All Saints Day

We bless your holy name, O God, for all your servants who, having finished their course, now rest from their labors. Give us grace to follow the example of their steadfastness and faithfulness, to your honor and glory; through Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen.

-from The United Methodist Book of Worship, 415

Bumper Sticker Christianity

Here is a selection from the remarks of the Rev. Dr. Timothy C. Tennent, president of Asbury Theological Seminary, at the 2011 convocation. Though some in the United Methodist 'establishment' may still view this evangelical school with suspicion, I've long respected Asbury, and seriously considered attending school there, in large part because of its uncompromising commitment to being Wesleyan, no matter what others may think. No doubt this institution has been one major factor in the more general recovery of Wesleyan theology in United Methodism in recent years. Asbury trains more United Methodist clergy each year than any of our "official" United Methodist seminaries (and Duke would likely be the next largest clergy supplier).

In the video below Dr. Tennent, a Methodist elder (presbyter), calls fellow evangelicals to task for reducing the gospel to slogans. In some ways this might be what has made evangelicalism successful, it is after all much easier to communicate a simple "slogan" gospel than it is to communicate, say, a deeply nuanced covenantal and sacramental theology. So evangelicals have dumped much of the difficulties of deep theology, focusing on "the basics," and with wide effect. What the Bible gives us, however, is not always simple - it is as deep and complicated and nuanced as real life, and it calls forth deep and real Christians, as Sacred Scripture puts it:

"Therefore let us go on to perfection, leaving behind the basic teaching about Christ, and not laying again the foundation: repentance from dead works and faith toward God..." (Hebrews 6:1)

Dr. Tennant and Holy Scripture, call us to move beyond the "continuous partial attention" of our digital world, to really "attending upon the ordinances (and oracles) of God," and call others to do likewise. Certainly the Bible and also the Christian tradition, from the Fathers to Aquinas, from Luther to the Wesleys, from Newman to Lewis to Wright offer us a deeply thoughtful, and intellectually rich and fulfilling faith. One of the really counter-cultural calls of the contemporary Christian, especially if he would be "evangelical" in the broadest sense, is to call people to move beyond "partial attention" to deep reflection and hard thinking.

I like what John Wesley said, "But it is not part of my design, to save either learned or unlearned men from the trouble of thinking.... On the contrary, my intention is, to make them think, and assist them in thinking. This is the way to understand the things of God."
(From the Preface to Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament.)

Lewis on modern academic theology pt.3

This is my concluding reflection on Lewis' essay, "Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism," delivered to Anglican students and scholars at Cambridge in 1959. You can read the full essay in Christian Reflections. Here is how Lewis finishes out his essay:

"Such are the reactions of one bleating layman to Modern Theology. It is right you should hear them. You will perhaps not hear them very often again. Your parishoners will not often speak to you quite frankly. Once the layman was anxious to hide the fact that he believed so much less than the Vicar: he now tends to hide the fact that he believes so much more. Missionary to the priests of one's own church is an embarrasing role; though I have a horrid feeling that if such mission work is not soon undertaken the future history of the Church of England is likely to be short."

Lewis' quip about the layfolk hiding how much they do believe from the 'Reverends' reminds me of the opening of Luke Timothy Johnson's book, The Creed:

"Many Christians know that deadly moment at a party when their friends realize they actually believe something everyone has merrily been belittling. They recall their own stammered reassurances, their tortured reinterpretations, their relief when the conversation moves on, their self-contempt. They may never have heard of Nietzsche, may not be able to define Modernity, and may think of the Enlightenment as a chapter in a first-year college textbook. But their embarrassment at being seen as believers reveals them to be Christians whose view of the world has been shaped less by the Christian creed than by its cultured despisers."

What happens if the culture or the atmosphere of the theological seminary inculcates a deep unease with actual faith, so that the seminary trained clergy shift uncomfortably in their seats when the people of Christ begin speaking of actual moves of the Spirit in their lives, or actual miracles that have occured in response to prayer, or of their deep commitment to submit themselves to "living under" the words of some passage of Sacred Scripture?
Having attended a fine seminary of an historic Protestant church, I do believe that there is a degree to which the viewpoint and fundamental assumptions of "the cultured despisers" is very present, alongside a deep Christian faithfulness.

That is probably unavoidable to some extent; could it even be strangely helpful if it causes some students or faculty to attempt to recover the art of apologetics?

Still, I think the seminaries would do well to make abundantly clear that they exist for the faith and the life of church, to explore and pass along the faith of the church at the highest intellectual levels, and train clergy to do the same in the local setting. However, as I've said before, I believe one shortcoming of our seminary system in recent decades has been a focus on the intellectual dimensions of clergy training to the neglect of training in prayer, discipline, discernment, and other spiritual matters.

Thankfully, in recent years most of our seminaries have greatly improved in this area, adding spiritual formation groups and putting greater emphasis on the spiritual life. My hope and prayer is that the day will come when our seminary communities have a more monastic character, in that the students are all engaged in rhythms of prayer, work, and study together on a daily basis. I believe Nahotah House, the Episcopal Church's most Anglo-Catholic seminary, follows a similar model.
Surely, such a deep communal devotional life will radically "re-contextualize" the intellectual work, so that the same conversations or discussions, within this broader life of prayer and service, have a more obvious spiritual connection (or are more obviously useless and speculative). I'm happy to report that, from what I hear, there are neo-monastic houses now connected with our seminaries at Southern Methodist University and at Duke; though this is not yet part of the normal seminary experience, we are perhaps making strides in the right direction.

The extreme center...

United Methodist Bishop Scott Jones wrote a book about our doctrine that called The United Methodist Church "the extreme center." That is a good description. We are a church and a (Wesleyan) theological tradition that quite deliberately sees itself as at once "catholic and evangelical and reformed" (2008 Book of Discipline, para. 102, page 59).

We hold to the ancient catholic faith of the undivided church, especially as expressed in the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the formulation of the Council of Chalcedon (para.101, page 42). Through Anglicanism we've inherited the classic 'catholic' liturgy and order of the ancient church, adapted to our own context (this, after all, is why Scott Jones is a 'bishop' not something else). We use the tradition and experience of the whole catholic/universal Church, across the ages to help us interpret Scripture.

Our official doctrinal statements, the Articles of Religion and the Confession of Faith, not only reaffirm this catholic faith, but also clearly embrace some of the key insights of the Reformation era: such as vernacular liturgy, married clergy, justification by faith, the offering of the Holy Sacrament in both kinds to the lay people, and especially the primacy of Biblical authority. So we are a reformed as well as a catholic church, especially in our emphasis on the primacy of Biblical authority for the life of the Christian Church.

We are also a church that has from the beginning been an evangelical church, seeking to share the good news (evangel) of Jesus Christ through word and deed with the whole world. We were, historically, deeply connected with the "Great Awakenings" and "revivalism" as Methodist preachers called upon sinners everywhere to repent, to accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, and then to express that faith through changed lives and concrete actions in the world. We have always emphasized the need for each sinner to personally experience the forgiveness and salvation of Christ; and from the beginning we have been singing those great revivalistic songs.

This comprehensive identity, catholic+reformed+evangelical, is the great strength of Wesleyan Christianity. You get a little hint of that in the video below from Trinity United Methodist Church (Wilmette, Il). The church's worship space and the sung doxology, "Praise God from whom all blessings flow" by Anglican bishop Thomas Ken (Hymnal #95), are clearly inherited from our Anglican/catholic roots. The hymn that is then sung ("Pass me not, O gentle Savior") is one of the great evangelical revival hymns (351 in The United Methodist Hymnal). In an Episcopal or Catholic church you might get this glorious worship space, and the rich liturgical and sacramental worship that it signifies; in a Baptist or Evangelical Free church you might get this wonderful and heart-felt revival hymn; in this United Methodist Church you are given both.

Lewis on modern academic theology pt.2

This post is a follow-up to my first post reflecting upon "Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism," a paper written and presented by C.S. Lewis for a gathering of Anglican seminarians at Wescott House, Cambridge in May 1959. Lewis, a "sheep" from the flock of Christ, over whom these seminarians will soon have charge, writes:

"Now for my second bleat. All theology of the liberal type involves at some point - and often involves throughout - the claim that the real behaviour and purpose and teaching of Christ came very rapidly to be misunderstood and misrepresented by His followers, and has been recovered and exhumed only by modern scholars. Now long before I became interested in theology I had met this kind of theory elsewhere. The tradition of Jowett still dominated the study of ancient philosophy when I was reading the Greats. One was brought up to believe that the real meaning of Plato has been misunderstood by Aristotle and wildly travestied by the neo-Platonists, only to be recovered by the moderns. When recovered, it turned out (most fortunately) that Plato had really all along been an English Hegelian, rather like T. H. Green.
I have met it a third time in my own professional studies; every week a clever undergraduate, every semester a dull American don, discovers for the first time what some Shakespearian play really meant. But in this third instance I am a privileged person. The revolution of thought and sentiment which has occured in my own lifetime is so great that I belong, mentally, to Shakespeare's world far more than to that of these recent interpreters. I see - I feel it in my bones - I know beyond argument - that most of their interpretations are merely impossible; they involve a way of looking at things which was not known in 1914, much less in the Jacobean period. This daily confirms my suspicion of the same approach to Plato or the New Testament. The idea that any man or writer should be opaque to those who lived in the same culture, spoke the same language, shared the same habitual imagery and unconscious assumptions, and yet be transparent to those who have none of these advantages, is in my opinion preposterous. There is an a priori improbability in it which almost no argument and no evidence could counterbalance."

The idea that Lewis criticizes here - that a 20th century American or German scholar knows better than 1st Century Christians in Palestine what Jesus really taught - is one example of the monumental arrogance of much of the modern intelligentsia (precisely what Lewis meant by "chronological snobbery"). And yet this is precisely the (often unspoken) idea upon which much of our academic theology is founded.

It makes far more sense that the ancient Christians, who inhabited the same thought-world of the New Testament authors would have all kinds of insights into the New Testament that simply elude the modern scholar. I am reminded of the New Testament professor at LSU, who pointed to the different "versions" of the Lord's Prayer and certain parables; he cynically asked teenage Christians, "If you really believe in the Bible, which of these versions is the infallible truth, how could they both be, since they are different?" as if the existence of more than one version of a teaching on prayer or a parable in the Gospels somehow implied a necessary contradition.

What the professor's question completely misses is what it means for Jesus to be a travelling preacher. Like Jesus, I've done a little travelling preaching and teaching myself and like any preacher, I know that we often reuse sermons, stories, illustrations - sometimes even to make different points in different contexts - and of course every time you tell it, it is just a bit different. Any preacher would know this. The fact that we see this in the Gospels, far from demonstrating contradition, simply lends credence to the historical narrative (so, Luke and Matthew put the Beatitudes in different sermons preached in different places...perhaps it is because Jesus preached on the Kingdom-shaped life more than once!). That a well-educated professor could miss this point shows a poverty of insight (and perhaps in some such instances it is a voluntary poverty, conveniently ignoring genuine historical possibilities for the sake of spreading skepticism in young minds, after all).

Lewis hits on one major reason why I believe that Tom Oden and other "paleo-orthodox" (or just plain "orthodox," it means the same thing) theologians are quite right to look to the consensus of the ancient church in Scriptural interpretation. The Protestant Reformers drew upon Scripture and the Early Fathers to help reform the Medieval Church; their cry was "ad fontes!" - "back to the fount." This is also precisely what Wesley means by looking to "primitive" Christianity as a guide for Christian teaching. My own New Testament professor in seminary, representing the very attitude that Lewis critiques, encouraged us to resources and commentaries that were less than 30 years old in our study of the sacred text, as if the Spirit had been utterly silent before his own career began. Modern scholarship has certainly brought us some valuable insights into the New Testament, but Lewis, Wesley, and the Reformers had it right: we should learn first from the Ancient Church, and in our studies as pastors the Modern scholarship should not be used as a substitute for the classic tradition, but as a supplement to it.

The development and popularity of the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture series (edited by Tom Oden) is an important development in the recovery of that ancient witness that Lewis (along with Wesley, and the Reformers) is talking about. May the church of the next century recover the ability to listen to voices from beyond just the last 30 years, but from the whole communion of saints, and especially those fathers of the early days who lived and breathed in the same culture as the New Testament writers themselves.

George MacDonald on prayer requests

From this coming Sunday's Lectionary Bible readings:

"Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. Let your gentleness be known to everyone. The Lord is near. Do not worry about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God which surpasses all understanding will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus." (Philippians 4:4-7, NRSV)

The excerpt below comes out of From the Library of C.S. Lewis, a compilation of short selections from writers across the Christian tradition, all of whom had some influence on the thought of C.S. Lewis. If you are looking for a "reader" in the Chrsitian Tradition, an absolute necessity for the United Methodist pastor, this is an nice one.

But if God is so good as you represent Him, and if He knows all that we need, and better far than we do ourselves, why should it be necessary to ask him for anything?"

I answer, What if He knows prayer to be the thing we need first and most? What if the main object in God's idea of prayer be the supplying of our great, our endless need - the need of Himself? What if the good of all our smaller and lower needs lies in this, that they help drive us to God?

Hunger may drive the runaway child home, and he may or may not be fed at once, but he needs his mother more than his dinner. Communion with God is the one need of the soul beyond all other need; prayer is the beginning of that communion, and some need is the motive of that prayer. Our wants are for the sake of our coming into communion with God, our eternal need.

This Day in History...

According to NPR this morning, today in 1535 the Coverdale Bible was published by Myles Coverdale, an English presbyter/priest. It was the first complete Bible to be published in modern English. Coverdale went on to become bishop of Exeter. So as we continue to celebrate the 400th anniversary of the exquisite King James Version (1611) of the Bible this year, we also today celebrate the 476th anniversary of the Coverdale Bible.

Lewis on modern academic theology pt.1

"Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism" was the name of a paper written and presented by C.S. Lewis for a gathering of Anglican seminarians at Wescott House, Cambridge in May 1959. I read this paper recently and believe that many of his points are still quite relevant to the renewal of (mainline) theological education. Lewis confesses that he no doubt has many mis-understandings because he is an outsider to the theological academy (the academic study of the New Testament in particular), but even this may make his comments all the more helpful for these students of theology:

"Though I may have nothing but misunderstandings to lay before you, you ought to know that such misunderstandings exist. That sort of thing is easy to overlook inside one's own circle. The minds you daily meet have been conditioned by the same studies and prevalent opinions as your own. That may mislead you. For of course as priests it is the outsiders you will have to cope with. You exist in the long run for no other purpose. The proper study of shepherds is sheep, not (save accidentally) other shepherds. I am a sheep...And now I start my bleating."

We see here one good argument in favor of having a genuinely diverse theological faculty or curriculum, at least when it comes to "radical new understandings/methods": so that we do not have a complete assimilation of the student into some "academic worldview" that turns out to be a passing fad (remember Process Theology?) or totally useless to the actual work of pastoring (remember Process Theology?). There has at times been a very real divide between the intellectual (and spiritual) priorities of the seminary on the one hand and the actual needs of the local parish (and indeed, the soul of the Christian) on the other. It is critically important that the seminary remember, through and through, that it exists for the church, to provide intellectually, morally, and spiritually qualified spiritual shepherds. For that work we should always look to the time tested methods and theologies that have endured the centuries, while fads came and went.

This same issue of "theological parochialism" also plays out in a broader way in the church: we may at times forget how vast the Church of Jesus Christ actually is. This is why I tell my Methodist friends they really ought to go spend enough time with Charismatics or traditionalist Roman Catholics to begin to understand how they think and believe. By the very nature of denominationalism, we often end up working primarily with people who have had a very similar faith experience to our own, and this can cause us to neglect or even despise the insights we might gain from listening to other brothers and sisters in Christ.

On the holiness of Christian leaders

As mentioned a while back, I am currently reading (at a ridiculously slow pace, I confess) The Book of Pastoral Rule by St. Gregory the Great. I am hoping to learn a bit more about spiritual leadership and the care of souls from the wisdom of the ancient church than what was included in my seminary training. In keeping with a suggestion I received, I will from time to time be reflecting and commenting on this ancient text.

Here is a memorable line from Part I, section 4:

For no one who is imperfect should dare to seize a position of spiritual leadership, just as no one who staggers on level ground should set foot on a cliff.

Those who become pastors or shepherds should not be "imperfect" or else they endanger themselves as well as those under their charge. What we mean by "perfect" is something that is discussed frequently among Wesleyan Christians, since John Wesley insisted that we should all be "going on to perfection." He also required, and this requirement remains a part of our ordination process in the United Methodist Church, that those seeking to become Methodist clergy should affirm that they are "going on to perfection" and also that they "expect to be made perfect in love in this life" (see The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church, 2008 para. 336; p. 246).

All of us who are ordained have answered "yes" to those questions, implicitly agreeing with St. Gregory's statement above. Some may have done so with fingers crossed, but many of us after meditating upon the nuances of meaning of the word "perfect" have done so with a clear conscience.

In Wesley's day, the 18th Century, it seems the word "perfect" had a bit more nuance than it now does in contemporary English usage. In once sense, it simply means "mature" or "grown up." In fact, today's Bible translations often render the Greek (telos) as "mature" where the old translations rendered it as "perfect" (for example, compare 1 Corinthians 2:6 in the NRSV and ESV on the one hand with the KJV). I do expect to be spiritually grown up or mature in this life, by God's grace, I hope to have already had a moment or two of maturity here and there.

On the other hand it seems that in 18th Century usage, as still today, "perfect" also had the sense of "utterly complete," "sublime," and "faultless." In Ephesians 4:13 we find this word used to describe being "grown up" (thus, "mature") but grown up into the image and full stature of Jesus Christ, who is the pure and sinless One, so that "mature" here also takes on the loftier sense of "perfection." I believe this is the destiny of every Christian in the coming age, though clearly it seems that not all reach it before death.

In seminary we were told that Wesley believed he knew other people who had reached this level of growth, but did not claim it for himself.

Of course, there is a line of connection between being spiritually mature and going on to the "full stature of Christ." The one who is spiritually mature is precisely the one who is most aware of his own faults and sins, yet who also is most determined to pursue holiness and Christ-likeness in his lifestyle. It is the one who is mature who wants to become glorious and luminous. Thus one can be perfect (spiritually mature and grown up) while still pursuing perfection (theosis by utter union with Christ) and freely admitting not yet to have attained it (see Phil. 3:12, and those being the words of Saint Paul, who was not only a saint, but also an apostolic leader).

This is basically the view of St. Augustine who wrote: "The Apostle (Paul) speaks of himself as both perfect and imperfect: imperfect when he considers how much righteousness is still wanting in him but perfect in that he does not blush to confess his own imperfection and makes good progress in order to attain it (perfection)." (On Two Letters of Pelagius, 3.19)

Perfection can mean maturity or it can mean attaining to the "fullness of the stature of Christ," and it would seem that "perfection" can also be used to describe the person "in process" - already mature, still pursuing Christ-likeness. Indeed we use "Christ-likeness" or "holiness" in just the same ways.

And, I believe, this is coherent with John Wesley's own teaching: "Christian perfection, therefore, does not imply (as some men seem to have imagined) an exemption either from ignorance, or mistake, or temptations. Indeed, it is only another term for holiness. They are two names for the same thing. Thus, everyone that is holy is, in the Scriptural sense, perfect. Yet we may, lastly, observe, that neither in this respect is there any absolute perfection on earth. There is no perfection of degrees as it is termed; none which does not admit of a continual increase. So that how much soever any man has attained, or in how high a degree soever he is perfect, he hath still need to 'grow in grace' and daily to advance in the knowledge and love of God his savior (see 2 Pet. 3:18)...He, therefore, who liveth in true believers hath 'purified their hearts by faith'; insomuch that everyone that hath Christ in him, the hope of glory, 'purify himself, even as he is pure' (1 Jn. 3:3)." - Sermon XXXV, "Christian Perfection," 1.9 & 2.6

So, to return to St. Gregory's point, let no one become a spiritual leader who is not holy and pursuing deeper holiness. For it will surely be difficult to train others in a way of living that we have not yet learned ourselves.

How well are we the clergy (and other Christian leaders) doing here? Have we a deep knowledge of Christ and of things Spiritual? Are we deeply formed in God's Holy Word and shaped by prayer and the sacraments and the other spiritual disciplines? Are we people of genuinely pure, charitable, and holy character? I suspect we are in fact a very mixed bag.

Not too many days ago I attended a "Sacred Trust" training event about "boundaries" for clergy. In particular it reminded us not to cross unethical sexual boundaries. The presenter shared a number of horrifying anecdotes of clergy from her conference who had said and done a number of extremely inappropriate (not to mention sinful) things, some of it online. The fact that such a training event even exists to tell us things that are already taught in the Bible is a reminder of how far short any of us may fall of the heavenly calling we have received, and how very present temptation remains for each of us.

Yet the promise and the vocation remains before us, "I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me." (Phil. 4:13)

Rumor has it: Archbishop to step down in 2012

It is now being reported that the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, is planning to step down next year. It is believed that Cambridge University will create a position for Williams so that he can pursue an academic life; he studied, taught, and served as a chaplain at Cambridge.

Archbishop Rowan, aged 61, could serve almost ten more years, since he is not required to stand down until he is 70 years old, however reports indicate he would like to give his successor plenty of time to settle into the role of archbishop before the next Lambeth Conference (probably in 2018), which will no doubt have plenty of difficult issues to deal with.

It is also being suggested that the Archbishop of York would act as a caretaker until the new Archbishop of Canterbury could be selected. Bishop of London Richard Chartres has been suggested as a likely successor as Archbishop of Canterbury. Chartres recently preached the homily at the Royal Wedding, has a close connection to the Royal family, and has had an increasingly prominent place in the media (at least I've noticed and linked this blog to more articles about him in recent months). Interestingly, while Rowan Williams made paving the way for women bishops one of the goals of his reign, Bishop Chartres, a traditionalist, is reported to oppose womens' ordination (which, perhaps more importantly, presumably makes him a traditionalist on sexual issues as well).

The full article from "The Telegraph" can be found here. And some other links are at the Duke Divinity Blog.

Personally, I think this is likely a good change for Anglicanism. Rowan Williams is a gifted academic theologian, but I do not believe his reign as archbishop has been effectual for strengthening the Anglican Communion. I wonder what the election of Chartres could mean for the row within the Church of England over women bishops (since many Anglo-Catholics are threatening to leave for Rome if they do not receive some special protections for their position that, as yet, they do not have), and also for the wider divisions within the Communion.

Perhaps the next archbishop, whomever he may be, will provide a more decisive leadership that will bring the current crisis to some sort of resolution, rather then attempting the impossible task of appeasing all sides of controversial issues, even where they are diametrically opposed to one another.

Catholics help repair Anglican cathedral

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese has pitched in $25,000 to help with millions in repairs needed to the Washington National Cathedral (Episcopal).

“The National Cathedral holds a special place in the hearts of all of us in Washington,” said Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington.
“So many recognize it as a national house of prayer, and indeed its magnificent Gothic spires are a reminder of our constant need to raise our hearts in prayer to God in the midst of all our daily preoccupations.”

It is nice to hear of Christians from different demonimational streams looking to help one another (since all too often we hear Episcopalians and Catholics bashing one another for being either too rigidly narrow-minded or too liberal and heretical). The full story is here.

If you'd like to make a contribution to restoring the Cathedral you can find more info here.

Feast of St. Augustine of Hippo

I've often heard, among my knowledgable Roman Catholic friends of that great quote from Augustine about believing in the Bible because he first believed in the authority Church. I suspect what he is really talking about is not a particular theoretical model of the magesterial authority of the bishops (certainly he is not talking about the infallibility of the pope), but rather the authentically holy lives of the people in the community who are therefore clearly trustworthy.
Here (in a letter to St. Jerome) he speaks of his estimation of the Bible:

For I confess to your charity that I have learned to yield this respect and honor only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error. And if in these writings I am perplexed by anything which appears to me opposed to truth, I do not hesitate to suppose that either the manuscript (MS) is faulty, or the translator has not caught the meaning of what was said, or I myself have failed to understand it.

As to all other writings, in reading them, however great the superiority of the authors to myself in sanctity and learning, I do not accept their teaching as true on the mere ground of the opinion being held by them; but only because they have succeeded in convincing my judgment of its truth either by means of these canonical writings themselves, or by arguments addressed to my reason.

I believe, my brother, that this is your own opinion as well as mine. I do not need to say that I do not suppose you to wish your books to be read like those of prophets or of apostles...

St. Augustine of Hippo, Letter LXXXII, NPNF1, vol 1. p. 350

I appreciate Augustine's humility before the text, especially for so learned a man. These ideas of his are widely held and taught today across the Church, particularly among Evangelicals. One of the troubles that has beset the historic churches since the rise of critical scholarship is precisely a loss of humility before the text, and perhaps by implied extension, before God himself. If the seminary professors do not fear the Lord, we should not be surprised if the pastors they train do not either. And if pastors do not fear the Lord, we should not be surprised if the God they proclaim is less than compelling to those who would listen to them.

One of the great benefits of the renewed interest of recent years in studying the Early Church Fathers is precisely that we can relearn an approach to our faith that is intellectually rigorous while also remaining deeply faithful and reverent. There is a long tradition of seeing the practice of worship, the doing of the liturgy, in the Church as a way of doing theology. Perhaps we should also say that at its best, scholarly theology should be a form of worship.

A Day in the life of a bishop

I ran across this article from The Guardian: A Working Life, following a busy day in the life of English Bishop Richard Chartres of London (who recently delivered the homily at the Royal Wedding). His day sounds a good deal more full of busy-ness than mine, yet it seems he finds time for extensive reading and reflection. Humbling.

I thought this quote profoundly true, pointing I think to that holy middle ground between liberal, revisionist theology and practice on the one side and "we have to do this because we always have" reflexive and unthinking traditionalism on the other:

"A person with a sense of history and no sense of destiny is no doubt a very boring fellow; a person with a sense of destiny and no sense of history is a very dangerous fellow."