Pa-Pa and Grandson Brady at Easter!!
Thursday, March 27, 2008
It Takes 2 to Tango!
Here's a piece from "Stoplight", those wonderful people that gave us the season of "Tossmas" a few months back.
This one deals with the interesting problem of activism and a school's attempt to deal with it.
Here's the link:
http://www.citizenlink.org/Stoplight/A000006646.cfm
This one deals with the interesting problem of activism and a school's attempt to deal with it.
Here's the link:
http://www.citizenlink.org/Stoplight/A000006646.cfm
The Creeping Crud of "Mercy Killing"
For years we've heard of the "right of a person to die." This assault on the dignity of human life comes from the mistaken notion that our lives belong to ourselves and not to God. Further, it allows us to be the arbiters of what a "life with dignity" is and what it isn't regardless of the truth that all human life is "dignified" because all men and women live in the image and likeness of God no matter what their condition.
Now come the Europeans, those great arbiters of culture towards which our progressive brethren tell us we should aspire. The latest from Belgium is that teenagers should be allowed the "right to die" just as adults. Belgians currently allow the "right" to anyone who is 18 or older.
Let's recall the slippery slope that has brought us to where we are. First we had the right of a woman to terminate her pregnancy in the first 90 days for urgent reasons. Then that right was extended to the entire pregnancy for any reason (with some restrictions in the last trimester). Then we graduated to allowing abortions in which the baby was partially delivered before ending life. In Europe, Belgium in particular, genetic testing is frequently done in utero and babies who are found to be genetically "inferior" are aborted.
On the other end of the life spectrum, we have witnessed the emergence of the mercy killing movement, spearheaded by Dr. Jack Kevorkian which helped people die who had determined that they did not wish to live for one reason or another. This right has been legislatively defined in some jurisdictions but not in others. In Europe, the "right to die" has been more clearly defined in law. This "right" is now being proposed to extend to teenagers.
My point is simple: Once human life is viewed as a biological accident and no longer seen as a gift from almighty God, who lives and who dies becomes a purely arbitrary decision.
My intuition on this tells me that this is nothing more than the logical endpoint of the separation of sexual activity from procreation and the corresponding breakdown of the family structure. I suppose that this would be the subject of another article had Pope Paul VI not covered so brilliantly in Humanae Vitae.
Interestingly, in Belgium it is very difficult to have your dog put to sleep when Fido's quality of life is diminished by age or infirmity. Things are much easier to do to humans than to animals. That kind of tells you a lot about Europe, doesn't it?
Here's the link to the article on teenage mercy killing:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/26/wbelgium126.xml
Here's the link to Humanae Vitae:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html
Now come the Europeans, those great arbiters of culture towards which our progressive brethren tell us we should aspire. The latest from Belgium is that teenagers should be allowed the "right to die" just as adults. Belgians currently allow the "right" to anyone who is 18 or older.
Let's recall the slippery slope that has brought us to where we are. First we had the right of a woman to terminate her pregnancy in the first 90 days for urgent reasons. Then that right was extended to the entire pregnancy for any reason (with some restrictions in the last trimester). Then we graduated to allowing abortions in which the baby was partially delivered before ending life. In Europe, Belgium in particular, genetic testing is frequently done in utero and babies who are found to be genetically "inferior" are aborted.
On the other end of the life spectrum, we have witnessed the emergence of the mercy killing movement, spearheaded by Dr. Jack Kevorkian which helped people die who had determined that they did not wish to live for one reason or another. This right has been legislatively defined in some jurisdictions but not in others. In Europe, the "right to die" has been more clearly defined in law. This "right" is now being proposed to extend to teenagers.
My point is simple: Once human life is viewed as a biological accident and no longer seen as a gift from almighty God, who lives and who dies becomes a purely arbitrary decision.
My intuition on this tells me that this is nothing more than the logical endpoint of the separation of sexual activity from procreation and the corresponding breakdown of the family structure. I suppose that this would be the subject of another article had Pope Paul VI not covered so brilliantly in Humanae Vitae.
Interestingly, in Belgium it is very difficult to have your dog put to sleep when Fido's quality of life is diminished by age or infirmity. Things are much easier to do to humans than to animals. That kind of tells you a lot about Europe, doesn't it?
Here's the link to the article on teenage mercy killing:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/26/wbelgium126.xml
Here's the link to Humanae Vitae:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Liberation Theology of Any Color is Dangerous Business
Recently, Senator Barack Obama's (D-IL) connection with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright has swamped the news. At issue are comments made by the Reverend Wright concerning the United States of America and its alleged corruption. According to the Reverend Wright, the United States is a flawed and evil institution and has been so from its start. Our nation was founded on the backs of an exploited people (the Indians) and maintained through the toil of others so exploited (the black slave population). Anything that can be positively stated about America is poisoned because of the evil manner of the country's founding. Further, this problem cannot be rectified until the oppressors are overthrown, in this case all white people, who share equally in the guilt of those who founded the nation. In fact, some of the Reverend Wright's comments go so far as to impute the guilt of the white man all the way back to the foundations of western civilization.
I'm not going to discuss the implications that this has or may have on the Obama presidential campaign. Further, I don't really want to spend much time on the merit or lack thereof of the Reverend Wright's comments except to say this: They are very consistent with a philosophical and theological construct called "Black Liberation Theology," hereinafter referred to as "BLT."
Wikipedia has a nice summary of BLT. It says, "BLT is theology from the perspective of oppressed people. It seeks to interpret the gospel of Jesus against the backdrop of historical and contemporary racism. The message of BLT is that the African American struggle for liberation is consistent with the gospel--every theological statement must be consistent with, and perpetuate, the goals of liberation.
"This theology maintains that African Americans must be liberated from multiple forms of bondage—social, political, economic and religious. This liberation involves empowerment and seeks the right of self-definition, self-affirmation and self-determination.
"Methodist James Cone is still considered its leading theologian, though now there are many scholars who have contributed a great deal to the field. One of its major concerns is with the historic and present racism in "Western civilizations" (especially within Christendom) and the ways in which Jesus urged his disciples to seek freedom for all people."
BLT's philosophical and theological roots are in Liberation Theology, a theological movement that developed in Latin America and is represented by theologians, Leonardo Boff, Juan Luis Segundo, and Gustavo Guttierez. Politically, it has strong support from Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega and others.
Liberation Theology (or LT) was initially developed in the mid-1950s as a way for the Church, particularly the Roman Catholic Church, to address what were perceived to be injustices within the social order of South America. The liberation theologians began to develop a theology of activism that mandated social change over the internal relationship of the believer to God.
Eventually, LT began to adopt a Hegelian/Marxist world view in which it saw the world divided into two camps, the oppressor and the oppressed. The oppressors were generally white Europeans and the oppressed were indigenous peoples who were held down. As was typical with Marxist theory, many of the oppressed were allowed to rise to a social level where they enjoyed many of the benefits of the oppressors, but lacked the power of the oppressor. We would call this a "middle class" and a Marxist would call it the "bourgeoisie."
LT theologians tried to redefine Christianity to fit this socio-political viewpoint. The Bible became viewed as a book written by men who had defeated and subjugated others. The Bible was the book written by the "winners" at the expense of the "losers." In this context there was little room for "inspiration". The best one could say is that the Bible could best be understood as a reflection of man's understanding of God in the social setting in which he found himself at the time.
The Bible and theology were further influenced by "materialism." In the context of LT, "materialism" refers not to the desire to possess lots and lots of stuff. Rather, it refers to the foundational principle that all that is knowable in the world is in the world of "matter." The supernatural is unknowable to us. Notice how problematic this is to a traditional understanding of theology.
Because of this change to the foundations, LT developed a new theological base. Sin ceased to be primarily something that a person did that was an offense to divine order and became something that was done against the community. Further, sin was seen as an offense that led to the subjugation of another.
The endpoint of theology changed as well. In traditional theology, the end-point is the knowledge and love of God in the life of the believer, ultimately leading him (or her) to heaven. LT holds none of that, adopting the Marxist notion that concepts such as "heaven" and "hell" are created by man to encourage the submission of oppressed people.
As the nature of sin and the endpoint of theology changed, so, too, did the nature of Sacraments. Sacraments did not exist as something given to the Church by almighty God for the purpose of sanctifying the faithful. Sacraments were signs that were developed out of the lived experience of the Church and have been used in the past as means of oppressing the powerless. The LT theologians sought to re-frame the Sacramental theology of the church in a way that brought it into line with this new view of oppressor versus oppressed.
This is, of course, a thumbnail description of liberation theology and it could be argued that I am making a caricature of the movement. Maybe so. However, what I am trying to do in this article is provide a very rudimentary framework for understanding BLT and its theological predecessor LT. Why? Because in the case of the Reverend Wright, I believe it is insufficient to simply decry what he has said. I think it is more important to understand the philosophy on which he bases his comment.
First, the Reverend Wright believes in what is, essentially, a Marxist philosohpy that divides the world into "haves" and "have nots."
Second, he believes that the "haves" will use whatever means are necessary to keep the "have nots" in their place, or allow then enough of the benefits of privileged life to keep them mollified.
Third, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is, primarily, a Gospel of social liberation that has been perverted by the "haves."
Fourth, that same Gospel is not a divinely inspired revelation from God Almighty. Instead it is the testimony of those who have power and have won the struggle for control over the early Church.
In short, in following the teachings of BLT, the Reverend Wright is a misguided soul who has sacrificed the Gospel of Christ for a false gospel, a gospel of BLT, a gospel which is founded not on the love of Christ, but is founded on hate and division, power versus powerlessness, "haves" versus "have-nots". It is truly a sad situation and one that deserves the prayers of all Christians.
I'm not going to discuss the implications that this has or may have on the Obama presidential campaign. Further, I don't really want to spend much time on the merit or lack thereof of the Reverend Wright's comments except to say this: They are very consistent with a philosophical and theological construct called "Black Liberation Theology," hereinafter referred to as "BLT."
Wikipedia has a nice summary of BLT. It says, "BLT is theology from the perspective of oppressed people. It seeks to interpret the gospel of Jesus against the backdrop of historical and contemporary racism. The message of BLT is that the African American struggle for liberation is consistent with the gospel--every theological statement must be consistent with, and perpetuate, the goals of liberation.
"This theology maintains that African Americans must be liberated from multiple forms of bondage—social, political, economic and religious. This liberation involves empowerment and seeks the right of self-definition, self-affirmation and self-determination.
"Methodist James Cone is still considered its leading theologian, though now there are many scholars who have contributed a great deal to the field. One of its major concerns is with the historic and present racism in "Western civilizations" (especially within Christendom) and the ways in which Jesus urged his disciples to seek freedom for all people."
BLT's philosophical and theological roots are in Liberation Theology, a theological movement that developed in Latin America and is represented by theologians, Leonardo Boff, Juan Luis Segundo, and Gustavo Guttierez. Politically, it has strong support from Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega and others.
Liberation Theology (or LT) was initially developed in the mid-1950s as a way for the Church, particularly the Roman Catholic Church, to address what were perceived to be injustices within the social order of South America. The liberation theologians began to develop a theology of activism that mandated social change over the internal relationship of the believer to God.
Eventually, LT began to adopt a Hegelian/Marxist world view in which it saw the world divided into two camps, the oppressor and the oppressed. The oppressors were generally white Europeans and the oppressed were indigenous peoples who were held down. As was typical with Marxist theory, many of the oppressed were allowed to rise to a social level where they enjoyed many of the benefits of the oppressors, but lacked the power of the oppressor. We would call this a "middle class" and a Marxist would call it the "bourgeoisie."
LT theologians tried to redefine Christianity to fit this socio-political viewpoint. The Bible became viewed as a book written by men who had defeated and subjugated others. The Bible was the book written by the "winners" at the expense of the "losers." In this context there was little room for "inspiration". The best one could say is that the Bible could best be understood as a reflection of man's understanding of God in the social setting in which he found himself at the time.
The Bible and theology were further influenced by "materialism." In the context of LT, "materialism" refers not to the desire to possess lots and lots of stuff. Rather, it refers to the foundational principle that all that is knowable in the world is in the world of "matter." The supernatural is unknowable to us. Notice how problematic this is to a traditional understanding of theology.
Because of this change to the foundations, LT developed a new theological base. Sin ceased to be primarily something that a person did that was an offense to divine order and became something that was done against the community. Further, sin was seen as an offense that led to the subjugation of another.
The endpoint of theology changed as well. In traditional theology, the end-point is the knowledge and love of God in the life of the believer, ultimately leading him (or her) to heaven. LT holds none of that, adopting the Marxist notion that concepts such as "heaven" and "hell" are created by man to encourage the submission of oppressed people.
As the nature of sin and the endpoint of theology changed, so, too, did the nature of Sacraments. Sacraments did not exist as something given to the Church by almighty God for the purpose of sanctifying the faithful. Sacraments were signs that were developed out of the lived experience of the Church and have been used in the past as means of oppressing the powerless. The LT theologians sought to re-frame the Sacramental theology of the church in a way that brought it into line with this new view of oppressor versus oppressed.
This is, of course, a thumbnail description of liberation theology and it could be argued that I am making a caricature of the movement. Maybe so. However, what I am trying to do in this article is provide a very rudimentary framework for understanding BLT and its theological predecessor LT. Why? Because in the case of the Reverend Wright, I believe it is insufficient to simply decry what he has said. I think it is more important to understand the philosophy on which he bases his comment.
First, the Reverend Wright believes in what is, essentially, a Marxist philosohpy that divides the world into "haves" and "have nots."
Second, he believes that the "haves" will use whatever means are necessary to keep the "have nots" in their place, or allow then enough of the benefits of privileged life to keep them mollified.
Third, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is, primarily, a Gospel of social liberation that has been perverted by the "haves."
Fourth, that same Gospel is not a divinely inspired revelation from God Almighty. Instead it is the testimony of those who have power and have won the struggle for control over the early Church.
In short, in following the teachings of BLT, the Reverend Wright is a misguided soul who has sacrificed the Gospel of Christ for a false gospel, a gospel of BLT, a gospel which is founded not on the love of Christ, but is founded on hate and division, power versus powerlessness, "haves" versus "have-nots". It is truly a sad situation and one that deserves the prayers of all Christians.
Friday, March 14, 2008
The Shifting Tide of Modernist Revelation
Recently in a Christian Education class, I commented on the importance of the doctrine that states, "Divine revelation ceased with the death of the last apostle." Roughly, this means that there can be nothing new to the faith following the death of the last apostle. Faith can be clarified and more precisely defined, as the councils of history have attempted to do. What cannot be allowed to happen is a new revelation.
So here come the Modernists who state that God continues to reveal himself in new ways to his people in each generation. What this means is that there is no stable, unchanging core of faith and that faith is a culturally-determined phenomenon. More to the point, it means that faith is something that is man-defined, something we discover anew for ourselves in each generation.
Nowhere has this dangerous notion been more evident than in the discussions surrounding human sexuality. The Christian Tradition from the Bible to the Fathers to today is that the purpose of sexual activity is primarily the begetting of children and is to be exercised within the state of Holy Matrimony. Modern Christian thought has totally stripped human sexuality from its primarily procreative function and made it, primarily, a form of personal expression. This self-expression can be exercised within any life context and in any consensual circumstance. Granting the Modernist premise, then any attempt to stifle sexual expression or restrict, is a serious violation of a person's right to express themselves. A brief glance at the modern world will show the results of this thinking.
What prompted this discussion was a statement by the Brazilian Episcopal Bishops in which they said that Biblical passages against homosexual behavior are not relevant to the modern discussion. The statement is about as clear an example of the intellectual flaw and spiritual disease of Modernism that I've seen in a while and the link for it is here:
http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=7911
So here come the Modernists who state that God continues to reveal himself in new ways to his people in each generation. What this means is that there is no stable, unchanging core of faith and that faith is a culturally-determined phenomenon. More to the point, it means that faith is something that is man-defined, something we discover anew for ourselves in each generation.
Nowhere has this dangerous notion been more evident than in the discussions surrounding human sexuality. The Christian Tradition from the Bible to the Fathers to today is that the purpose of sexual activity is primarily the begetting of children and is to be exercised within the state of Holy Matrimony. Modern Christian thought has totally stripped human sexuality from its primarily procreative function and made it, primarily, a form of personal expression. This self-expression can be exercised within any life context and in any consensual circumstance. Granting the Modernist premise, then any attempt to stifle sexual expression or restrict, is a serious violation of a person's right to express themselves. A brief glance at the modern world will show the results of this thinking.
What prompted this discussion was a statement by the Brazilian Episcopal Bishops in which they said that Biblical passages against homosexual behavior are not relevant to the modern discussion. The statement is about as clear an example of the intellectual flaw and spiritual disease of Modernism that I've seen in a while and the link for it is here:
http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=7911
Sunday, March 2, 2008
The Fourth Sunday in Lent
The Holy Gospel is written in the 6th chapter of Saint John, beginning at the 1st Verse.
Jesus went over the sea of Galilee, which is the sea of Tiberias. And a great multitude followed him, because they saw his miracles which he did on them that were diseased. And Jesus went up into a mountain, and there he sat with his disciples. And the passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh. When Jesus then lifted up his eyes, and saw a great company come unto him, he saith unto Philip, Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat? And this he said to prove him: for he himself knew what he would do. Philip answered him, Two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every one of them may take a little. One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, saith unto him, There is a lad here, which hath five barley loaves, and two small fishes: but what are they among so many? And Jesus said, Make the men sit down. Now there was much grass in the place. So the men sat down, in number about five thousand. And Jesus took the loaves; and when he had given thanks, he distributed to the disciples, and the disciples to them that were set down; and likewise of the fishes as much as they would. When they were filled, he said unto his disciples, Gather up the fragments that remain, that nothing be lost. Therefore they gathered them together, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves, which remained over and above unto them that had eaten. Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet. that should come into the world.
-----
Today, on the Fourth Sunday in Lent, we set aside the violet of the season and put on the color Rose. This gentle shade reminds us that we are more than half way through this great season of penance and preparation. In the United Kingdom, today is also Mothering Sunday. Those who live in Great Britain and Ireland observe this day much in the same way that we observe Mother’s Day later in the year.
But Mothering Sunday did not start out as a feast of roses and chocolates, of Hallmark cards and fancy lunches. The origins of Mothering Sunday are tied directly to this Fourth Sunday in Lent.
On this day, we begin with a happy Introit. The original Latin word is laetare and we translate it rejoice. In the middle of our Lenten fast, the church calls us to rejoice with Jerusalem, the mother city, the city which will be the site of our redemption. Jerusalem, the mother city of the Jews, has served as the model for the Church, which is truly our mother. Tomorrow we will return to the pentitential violet. Next Sunday, we will cover our crosses and statues, we will say goodbye to our festive, Glory be to the Father, we will begin our solemn walk with Jesus to the Cross. But today, while our vestments bear the gentle shade of the rose, let’s reflect for awhile on our mother the Church. Let’s look at the characteristics that mother Church shares with mothers everywhere.
The first characteristic is that mothers give life to their children. In a very real way, none of us would be here today without our mothers. For nine months, she carried us and fed us and, eventually, delivered us from the security of the womb into a bright, unknown world. Just as a mother gives life to her children, so the Church gives life to us through the Sacrament of Baptism. In that Sacrament, where water is poured on the head of an infant, or in some cases an adult, we are cleansed from sin and brought into a new life in Christ. We symbolize that new life by clothing the baptized in a white garment, a garment that shows that we are clean and freshly born. Just as a mother gives life to the child, so the Church gives life through Baptism.
Mothers also make sure that their children are fed and that their physical needs for nourishment are attended to. So it is with the Church. In the Sacrament of the Eucharist, the Church provides the Body and Blood of Christ, under the appearances of bread and wine. This gift of the Eucharist satisfies our basic need for food and it stands as a constant reminder of the compassion of Christ who, seeing the multitudes on the mountain, fed them from just a few loaves and a few fish.
But mothers do far more than tend to the physical needs of their young. In addition, mothers also seek to nurture the spirits and minds of their children. They read them stories, they sing songs, they encourage their children when they are low, and they rejoice and play with them when they are happy. And the Church does this, too. We are nurtured by the spiritual grace that we receive from the Sacraments. Every one of the seven sacraments imparts a special grace, a special character upon all of us that gives us strength to stand up against the temptations of the modern world. In addition, like a good mother, the church tends to our minds and makes sure that we have a trustworthy guide through our lives. This is done primarily through the great gift of God’s holy Word, the Bible, and through the doctrine of the church as it has been set out from the beginning of Christianity. In both body and spirit, the Church provides for us her children with Word and Sacrament.
Finally, mothers will protect their children from harm. And so does the Church. After Jesus fed the multitudes in today’s Gospel, he commanded his disciples to go and gather up the fragments, so that nothing be lost. This is what the church does for us today and all days. The Church stands as a witness that all who are claimed by Christ in Baptism, that all who are fed by Christ in the Eucharist, that all of these are precious to the Church and are to be gathered together in love.
Here’s something interesting: Put a group of new mothers in a room and place their infants in another room that is out of sight of the first but within hearing. Let the moms converse and then have one of the babies start to cry. What do you think you will see? You won’t see the moms look amongst themselves to try to figure out whose child is in tears. Instead, the mother of the crying baby will almost instinctively respond to the sound of her child’s voice and she will go to sooth the baby. So it is with us and the Church. The Church, Christ’s body on earth, tends to you and to me in much the same way as the mother of a crying infant.
As we prepare to celebrate the coming feasts of Passiontide and Holy Week, when our Lord endured unspeakable horrors and unbearable torments, let’s today recall the unwavering love of our mother the Church, who calls us all to new life in Baptism, who feeds our bodies and souls in the Sacraments and in the Word, who desires that none us be lost, and who will provide us with a place of joy and refreshment now and for all time for all who believe.
Jesus went over the sea of Galilee, which is the sea of Tiberias. And a great multitude followed him, because they saw his miracles which he did on them that were diseased. And Jesus went up into a mountain, and there he sat with his disciples. And the passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh. When Jesus then lifted up his eyes, and saw a great company come unto him, he saith unto Philip, Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat? And this he said to prove him: for he himself knew what he would do. Philip answered him, Two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every one of them may take a little. One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, saith unto him, There is a lad here, which hath five barley loaves, and two small fishes: but what are they among so many? And Jesus said, Make the men sit down. Now there was much grass in the place. So the men sat down, in number about five thousand. And Jesus took the loaves; and when he had given thanks, he distributed to the disciples, and the disciples to them that were set down; and likewise of the fishes as much as they would. When they were filled, he said unto his disciples, Gather up the fragments that remain, that nothing be lost. Therefore they gathered them together, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves, which remained over and above unto them that had eaten. Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet. that should come into the world.
-----
Today, on the Fourth Sunday in Lent, we set aside the violet of the season and put on the color Rose. This gentle shade reminds us that we are more than half way through this great season of penance and preparation. In the United Kingdom, today is also Mothering Sunday. Those who live in Great Britain and Ireland observe this day much in the same way that we observe Mother’s Day later in the year.
But Mothering Sunday did not start out as a feast of roses and chocolates, of Hallmark cards and fancy lunches. The origins of Mothering Sunday are tied directly to this Fourth Sunday in Lent.
On this day, we begin with a happy Introit. The original Latin word is laetare and we translate it rejoice. In the middle of our Lenten fast, the church calls us to rejoice with Jerusalem, the mother city, the city which will be the site of our redemption. Jerusalem, the mother city of the Jews, has served as the model for the Church, which is truly our mother. Tomorrow we will return to the pentitential violet. Next Sunday, we will cover our crosses and statues, we will say goodbye to our festive, Glory be to the Father, we will begin our solemn walk with Jesus to the Cross. But today, while our vestments bear the gentle shade of the rose, let’s reflect for awhile on our mother the Church. Let’s look at the characteristics that mother Church shares with mothers everywhere.
The first characteristic is that mothers give life to their children. In a very real way, none of us would be here today without our mothers. For nine months, she carried us and fed us and, eventually, delivered us from the security of the womb into a bright, unknown world. Just as a mother gives life to her children, so the Church gives life to us through the Sacrament of Baptism. In that Sacrament, where water is poured on the head of an infant, or in some cases an adult, we are cleansed from sin and brought into a new life in Christ. We symbolize that new life by clothing the baptized in a white garment, a garment that shows that we are clean and freshly born. Just as a mother gives life to the child, so the Church gives life through Baptism.
Mothers also make sure that their children are fed and that their physical needs for nourishment are attended to. So it is with the Church. In the Sacrament of the Eucharist, the Church provides the Body and Blood of Christ, under the appearances of bread and wine. This gift of the Eucharist satisfies our basic need for food and it stands as a constant reminder of the compassion of Christ who, seeing the multitudes on the mountain, fed them from just a few loaves and a few fish.
But mothers do far more than tend to the physical needs of their young. In addition, mothers also seek to nurture the spirits and minds of their children. They read them stories, they sing songs, they encourage their children when they are low, and they rejoice and play with them when they are happy. And the Church does this, too. We are nurtured by the spiritual grace that we receive from the Sacraments. Every one of the seven sacraments imparts a special grace, a special character upon all of us that gives us strength to stand up against the temptations of the modern world. In addition, like a good mother, the church tends to our minds and makes sure that we have a trustworthy guide through our lives. This is done primarily through the great gift of God’s holy Word, the Bible, and through the doctrine of the church as it has been set out from the beginning of Christianity. In both body and spirit, the Church provides for us her children with Word and Sacrament.
Finally, mothers will protect their children from harm. And so does the Church. After Jesus fed the multitudes in today’s Gospel, he commanded his disciples to go and gather up the fragments, so that nothing be lost. This is what the church does for us today and all days. The Church stands as a witness that all who are claimed by Christ in Baptism, that all who are fed by Christ in the Eucharist, that all of these are precious to the Church and are to be gathered together in love.
Here’s something interesting: Put a group of new mothers in a room and place their infants in another room that is out of sight of the first but within hearing. Let the moms converse and then have one of the babies start to cry. What do you think you will see? You won’t see the moms look amongst themselves to try to figure out whose child is in tears. Instead, the mother of the crying baby will almost instinctively respond to the sound of her child’s voice and she will go to sooth the baby. So it is with us and the Church. The Church, Christ’s body on earth, tends to you and to me in much the same way as the mother of a crying infant.
As we prepare to celebrate the coming feasts of Passiontide and Holy Week, when our Lord endured unspeakable horrors and unbearable torments, let’s today recall the unwavering love of our mother the Church, who calls us all to new life in Baptism, who feeds our bodies and souls in the Sacraments and in the Word, who desires that none us be lost, and who will provide us with a place of joy and refreshment now and for all time for all who believe.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Some Thoughts on the Love of God
About a year ago, I started a subscription to The New Oxford Review. For those who are not familiar with it, the NOR is a monthly magazine created by Anglo-Catholics who later crossed the Tiber and became Romans. The journal has a tongue-in-cheek approach to some of the messes of modern-day Christianity and its writing often crosses the line into being venomous attacks against those with whom it disagrees. In the February issue was an article by Carmelo Fallace that stopped me in my tracks. It was called, “Is God’s Love Unconditional?”
I’ve never really given much thought to that question, presuming always that the answer was, “Of course God loves all people without condition.” Wasn’t this the conclusion of the saints and theologians over the centuries? No, says Fallace, the Bible is quite clear that not only is God’s love conditional, but that those who do not follow God’s law actually earn His displeasure. I had to go back and re-read the thesis to make sure that I had seen it correctly. But there it was, Fallace was asserting that God’s love was something that definitely had conditions attached to it.
He then outlined passage after passage in both the Old and New Testaments in support of the argument. The author highlights example after example of things that God does not love: wickedness, the worship of false gods, the offering of children as sacrifices, lovers of violence, and so on. Fallace’s point is that were God’s love unconditional to those who commit these and other sinful acts, then this would place God in direct contradiction with His justice, which is also an attribute of God, and God cannot have any intrinsic contradiction in His nature. Further, all the covenants of the Bible are conditional, stating what God will do for His people if they adhere to the covenant.
Then I began thinking about some other sources that touched on this theme. The first one was our Lord’s words of institution of the Holy Eucharist. When he took the cup, Jesus said, “This is the cup of my blood of the new and everlasting covenant which shall be shed for you and for many.” Note carefully that the institution narratives do not say, “It will be shed for you and for all.” The New Testament is quite clear that Christ’s blood is shed for those who accept His sacrifice for their sins and not for all people indiscriminately. St. Paul elaborates the point further when he cautions believers not to receive the Body and Blood of Christ unworthily because to do so is to consume it to their own damnation.
Even modern Scripture scholars have wrestled with the conditional nature of God’s love. Ernst Kaesemann, a German exegete, described the relationship of the person to God in his Commentary on Romans. According to Kaesemann, everybody exists in relationship to God whether they are aware of it or not. Those who believe in Christ and have accepted His offer of salvation live under the “righteousness” of God, while those who do not or have not accepted the offer live under God’s “wrath.” In Kaesemann’s exegesis, righteousness and wrath are two sides of the same coin. To put it crassly, the side of the coin that you see determines where you stand.
Perhaps another example might clarify the point: medieval theologians often defined the love of God as being a “all-consuming fire.” Even the angels who existed closest to God were called the Seraphim, which means “the burning ones.” They were called this because they dwelt so close to the throne of Almighty God that they were literally “on fire” from His love. Hellfire, to these theologians, was the fire of the love of God, only in this case it scorched and tormented those who rejected Him, those who were out of relationship with Him.
I’ve never really given much thought to that question, presuming always that the answer was, “Of course God loves all people without condition.” Wasn’t this the conclusion of the saints and theologians over the centuries? No, says Fallace, the Bible is quite clear that not only is God’s love conditional, but that those who do not follow God’s law actually earn His displeasure. I had to go back and re-read the thesis to make sure that I had seen it correctly. But there it was, Fallace was asserting that God’s love was something that definitely had conditions attached to it.
He then outlined passage after passage in both the Old and New Testaments in support of the argument. The author highlights example after example of things that God does not love: wickedness, the worship of false gods, the offering of children as sacrifices, lovers of violence, and so on. Fallace’s point is that were God’s love unconditional to those who commit these and other sinful acts, then this would place God in direct contradiction with His justice, which is also an attribute of God, and God cannot have any intrinsic contradiction in His nature. Further, all the covenants of the Bible are conditional, stating what God will do for His people if they adhere to the covenant.
Then I began thinking about some other sources that touched on this theme. The first one was our Lord’s words of institution of the Holy Eucharist. When he took the cup, Jesus said, “This is the cup of my blood of the new and everlasting covenant which shall be shed for you and for many.” Note carefully that the institution narratives do not say, “It will be shed for you and for all.” The New Testament is quite clear that Christ’s blood is shed for those who accept His sacrifice for their sins and not for all people indiscriminately. St. Paul elaborates the point further when he cautions believers not to receive the Body and Blood of Christ unworthily because to do so is to consume it to their own damnation.
Even modern Scripture scholars have wrestled with the conditional nature of God’s love. Ernst Kaesemann, a German exegete, described the relationship of the person to God in his Commentary on Romans. According to Kaesemann, everybody exists in relationship to God whether they are aware of it or not. Those who believe in Christ and have accepted His offer of salvation live under the “righteousness” of God, while those who do not or have not accepted the offer live under God’s “wrath.” In Kaesemann’s exegesis, righteousness and wrath are two sides of the same coin. To put it crassly, the side of the coin that you see determines where you stand.
Perhaps another example might clarify the point: medieval theologians often defined the love of God as being a “all-consuming fire.” Even the angels who existed closest to God were called the Seraphim, which means “the burning ones.” They were called this because they dwelt so close to the throne of Almighty God that they were literally “on fire” from His love. Hellfire, to these theologians, was the fire of the love of God, only in this case it scorched and tormented those who rejected Him, those who were out of relationship with Him.
Monday, February 25, 2008
The Third Sunday in Lent
The Holy Gospel is written in the 11th Chapter of St. Luke, beginning at the 14th Verse.
Jesus was casting out a devil, and it was dumb. And it came to pass, when the devil was gone out, the dumb spake; and the people wondered. But some of them said, He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils. And others, tempting him, sought of him a sign from heaven. But he, knowing their thoughts, said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desola-tion; and a house divided against a house falleth. If Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? because ye say that I cast out devils through Beel-zebub. And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your sons cast them out? therefore shall they be your judges. But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you. When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace: but when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils. He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth. When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will return unto my house whence I came out. And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished. Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.
-----
The Third Sunday in Lent finds us almost at the midway point in the preparation for Easter. Most of us have given things up for the season and some of us have taken on new spiritual disciplines. But for all of us, the awareness grows that we are moving toward a significant time, the time in which we recall our Lord’s Passion and Resurrection from the dead. During Lent, there is a tendency to think in terms of the negative, in terms of what we give up, what penance we are willing to endure in order to cleanse our souls. But our Gospel today stands in stark contrast to this negative approach to this season and offers us a model for where our sacrifices and penances should lead us.
Our Gospel selection begins with Jesus’ expulsion of a dumb demon from a man. The Pharisees’ criticize Jesus and say that his ability to expel demons actually occurs because he is in cahoots with the Beelzebub, the prince of demons. Jesus responds with the famous statement that the house divided against itself cannot stand, and that if he were to cast out demons by Beelzebub, then Satan is divided against himself. Then, Jesus turns to the real meat of our passage.
In referring to those who are possessed by demons, he says, “When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, that spirit walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will return unto the house whence I came out. And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished. Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first.” In this powerful passage, the Church helps us keep our Lenten focus with three very simple cautions concerning our penances.
First, it is important for us to remember that a man’s soul can never be left empty. In our passage, we see that when the demon is thrown out, that the man’s house is swept and clean, but empty. Nothing has replaced the evil that dwelt there. And that is a lesson for us: It is not enough for us to cleanse ourselves of our sins, vices and bad habits. Just ask any recovering alcoholic. Is it enough just to quit drinking? If you don’t replace the drinking behavior with a strong spiritual life and all that comes with it, then your sobriety will probably be fleeting and you may well find yourself in a worse pickle than where you were at the beginning. It is not enough simply to cleanse ourselves from our bad habits, sins, and vices. That is important. But if all we do is rid ourselves of our sinful behavior, then we have an empty spiritual house and we are vulnerable to anyone or anything that decides to take up residence there. The soul of a man or woman which has been cleansed from sin can only be left empty at great risk.
But, with what do we fill our souls? What can we know about religion and our religious disciplines, especially during the season of Lent? Well, and this is our second point, the religion with which we fill our soul cannot be based on negatives. Oh, wait. That’s a negative, too, isn’t it? Well, let’s put it another way. True religion must be geared more toward helping people grow in Christ, rather than simply bludgeoning them with their faults and foibles. A preaching teacher once said that the easiest sermon to preach is the one that tells people about how easy it is to go to Hell. The more difficult task is to tell believers what they can do to get to Heaven. While Jesus does spend time in the Gospels taking people to task, he always balances that with instruction and guidance toward the hope of salvation. He does this because this message of hope, this positive development is not only more useful to men and women, but it is something that you and I both need to hear and long to hear. Yes, our empty houses can only truly be filled with a religion that tells us not only what not to do, but – more importantly – what we are to do.
And what is it that we are to do? This is our third point: We must believe that Jesus Christ suffered, died, and rose again for our sins. He did this so that we can live forever in the presence of the blessed Trinity. Now think about that for a moment. Left to our own devices, we are separated from God by sin, both the sins of our first parents, Adam and Eve, and also by our own “sins, wickedness, and neglect.” Because of this, we can never hope on our own to ever see the face of almighty God! But, thanks be to God, Jesus Christ has taken our sins upon himself and died on the cross so that we can be free. Well, if we truly believe that, if deep down in our souls we understand this priceless gift that Jesus has won for us, then we must respond by doing good works. You see, in some ways the Reformers of the 1500s were right. Our good works, our ministry to others, our prayers, our support of our church, these things do not save us of themselves. Rather, our lives are touched by Jesus Christ and radically changed by Him. It is this action of Christ, which leads us to good works that remind us that there is more to life than just what we see in this world. The good deeds that we do further stand as a witness to others that our lives are different, that we have been touched and changed by a loving God, even though we still fall short, we still sin.
And here is our message, here is our lesson as we approach the mid-point of Lent. As our fasting and penances gets harder we recall that we are doing these deeds to remind ourselves that there is more to this life than a clean and empty soul. Our fasting and penance reminds us that there is a life beyond this world. That this life is so special, so beautiful, that we can even put on penitential purple and give up the legitimate cares and pleasures of this life to bear witness to the life to come. As our Lenten observance continues, let us continue to bear witness in our fasting to the Lord who has set us free from the bondage of sin, who has set us free to be His own forever.
Jesus was casting out a devil, and it was dumb. And it came to pass, when the devil was gone out, the dumb spake; and the people wondered. But some of them said, He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils. And others, tempting him, sought of him a sign from heaven. But he, knowing their thoughts, said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desola-tion; and a house divided against a house falleth. If Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? because ye say that I cast out devils through Beel-zebub. And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your sons cast them out? therefore shall they be your judges. But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you. When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace: but when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils. He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth. When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will return unto my house whence I came out. And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished. Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.
-----
The Third Sunday in Lent finds us almost at the midway point in the preparation for Easter. Most of us have given things up for the season and some of us have taken on new spiritual disciplines. But for all of us, the awareness grows that we are moving toward a significant time, the time in which we recall our Lord’s Passion and Resurrection from the dead. During Lent, there is a tendency to think in terms of the negative, in terms of what we give up, what penance we are willing to endure in order to cleanse our souls. But our Gospel today stands in stark contrast to this negative approach to this season and offers us a model for where our sacrifices and penances should lead us.
Our Gospel selection begins with Jesus’ expulsion of a dumb demon from a man. The Pharisees’ criticize Jesus and say that his ability to expel demons actually occurs because he is in cahoots with the Beelzebub, the prince of demons. Jesus responds with the famous statement that the house divided against itself cannot stand, and that if he were to cast out demons by Beelzebub, then Satan is divided against himself. Then, Jesus turns to the real meat of our passage.
In referring to those who are possessed by demons, he says, “When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, that spirit walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will return unto the house whence I came out. And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished. Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first.” In this powerful passage, the Church helps us keep our Lenten focus with three very simple cautions concerning our penances.
First, it is important for us to remember that a man’s soul can never be left empty. In our passage, we see that when the demon is thrown out, that the man’s house is swept and clean, but empty. Nothing has replaced the evil that dwelt there. And that is a lesson for us: It is not enough for us to cleanse ourselves of our sins, vices and bad habits. Just ask any recovering alcoholic. Is it enough just to quit drinking? If you don’t replace the drinking behavior with a strong spiritual life and all that comes with it, then your sobriety will probably be fleeting and you may well find yourself in a worse pickle than where you were at the beginning. It is not enough simply to cleanse ourselves from our bad habits, sins, and vices. That is important. But if all we do is rid ourselves of our sinful behavior, then we have an empty spiritual house and we are vulnerable to anyone or anything that decides to take up residence there. The soul of a man or woman which has been cleansed from sin can only be left empty at great risk.
But, with what do we fill our souls? What can we know about religion and our religious disciplines, especially during the season of Lent? Well, and this is our second point, the religion with which we fill our soul cannot be based on negatives. Oh, wait. That’s a negative, too, isn’t it? Well, let’s put it another way. True religion must be geared more toward helping people grow in Christ, rather than simply bludgeoning them with their faults and foibles. A preaching teacher once said that the easiest sermon to preach is the one that tells people about how easy it is to go to Hell. The more difficult task is to tell believers what they can do to get to Heaven. While Jesus does spend time in the Gospels taking people to task, he always balances that with instruction and guidance toward the hope of salvation. He does this because this message of hope, this positive development is not only more useful to men and women, but it is something that you and I both need to hear and long to hear. Yes, our empty houses can only truly be filled with a religion that tells us not only what not to do, but – more importantly – what we are to do.
And what is it that we are to do? This is our third point: We must believe that Jesus Christ suffered, died, and rose again for our sins. He did this so that we can live forever in the presence of the blessed Trinity. Now think about that for a moment. Left to our own devices, we are separated from God by sin, both the sins of our first parents, Adam and Eve, and also by our own “sins, wickedness, and neglect.” Because of this, we can never hope on our own to ever see the face of almighty God! But, thanks be to God, Jesus Christ has taken our sins upon himself and died on the cross so that we can be free. Well, if we truly believe that, if deep down in our souls we understand this priceless gift that Jesus has won for us, then we must respond by doing good works. You see, in some ways the Reformers of the 1500s were right. Our good works, our ministry to others, our prayers, our support of our church, these things do not save us of themselves. Rather, our lives are touched by Jesus Christ and radically changed by Him. It is this action of Christ, which leads us to good works that remind us that there is more to life than just what we see in this world. The good deeds that we do further stand as a witness to others that our lives are different, that we have been touched and changed by a loving God, even though we still fall short, we still sin.
And here is our message, here is our lesson as we approach the mid-point of Lent. As our fasting and penances gets harder we recall that we are doing these deeds to remind ourselves that there is more to this life than a clean and empty soul. Our fasting and penance reminds us that there is a life beyond this world. That this life is so special, so beautiful, that we can even put on penitential purple and give up the legitimate cares and pleasures of this life to bear witness to the life to come. As our Lenten observance continues, let us continue to bear witness in our fasting to the Lord who has set us free from the bondage of sin, who has set us free to be His own forever.
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Ecumenical Dialogue for Lent?
Check out this series from "what does the prayer really say." It's a billboard dialogue between three churches discussing Ash Wednesday.
Here's the link:
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2008/02/church-sign-ecumenical-dialogue-for-ash-wednesday/
Here's the link:
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2008/02/church-sign-ecumenical-dialogue-for-ash-wednesday/
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Penance and the Highway
I started my training for the Priesthood at a college seminary program in Cleveland, Ohio. Six times a year I would make the trek between my home in Nashville and our seminary campus in the middle of the snow belt on the east side of Cleveland. In January 1982, I left home to return to school after Christmas vacation. With my car packed to the gills, I set out on what started as a cold, rainy day in Nashville. By the time I reached Louisville, Kentucky, the rain had started to freeze. By Columbus, snow was falling hard on Interstate 71 and visibility was starting to drop dramatically. The final 160 miles to Cleveland were harrowing. As afternoon passed into evening and I drove into the darkness, I began to realize that my headlights didn’t seem to be working. I remember pulling off to the side of the highway to check them and I was surprised to discover that they were working just fine. They had been covered with snow, slush and debris that had frozen solid, cutting off the light. Taking my ice scraper, I got out of the warm car, waded through the muck to the front of the car, cut the stuff off the headlights and, after being pelted with slush from a passing 18-wheeler, headed off north for school. About every 50 miles or so I would have to repeat the procedure again, stopping and scraping, stopping and scraping, so that the headlights could do their job. When I saw the stories of the mid-western blizzards this year, it reminded me of this experience and I also realized that this was a good metaphor for what our experience of Lent might be.
Each year during the 40 days of Lent, we prepare ourselves in a special way for the great Feast, the Pasch, the celebration of Easter, just as Christians have done for 2,000 years. In ancient times, the Church would prepare to baptize its initiates. As the season of Lent developed, it became the custom for those who were already believers to perform penances, special acts of self-denial, in order to prepare their hearts for Easter and to remind themselves that their true home was not to be found in perishable human flesh, but in the glorious kingdom of God.
This desire to mortify the flesh in penance has led to some pretty strange beliefs, the most common of which is that God somehow benefits and we benefit in His eyes through our penances, our little sacrifices. But a little thought should show the folly of this. After all, God has no need of our penance. God is all-sufficient unto Himself. So why do it? Why give up coffee, or TV, or why say extra prayers? Why make any sacrifice if it is ultimately useless to God?
Maybe the answer lies not in God, but in us and our relationship with Him. Perhaps my trip to Cleveland in 1982 can shed some light on the question of why we need penance and sacrifice. If we think of ourselves as being on a journey toward God, we start out full of fuel and clean from Baptism. The light of Christ burns brightly in us and guides us on our way. As we head up the road, we encounter sins, difficulties, and doubts, all of which, like the ice and slush of the Interstate, cloud the light and freeze and harden on the glass making it impossible to find the way, a way which was so clearly visible before. Lent is the time when we stop by the side of the road, and we brave the rain and the cold, and we clean off our spiritual headlights so that the light of Christ can clearly guide us again. Our penance is like the ice scraper and it benefits not God, but us, in that it allows us to see the way clearly again.
So, as we prepare for Easter, let’s make our sacrifices, let’s do our penances. Let’s the clean the glass of our spiritual lamps, the lamps that are “the light of the world.” Let us walk together in holiness and penance during this coming Lent, so that the new Light of Christ which comes this Easter may ever shine in our hearts.
Each year during the 40 days of Lent, we prepare ourselves in a special way for the great Feast, the Pasch, the celebration of Easter, just as Christians have done for 2,000 years. In ancient times, the Church would prepare to baptize its initiates. As the season of Lent developed, it became the custom for those who were already believers to perform penances, special acts of self-denial, in order to prepare their hearts for Easter and to remind themselves that their true home was not to be found in perishable human flesh, but in the glorious kingdom of God.
This desire to mortify the flesh in penance has led to some pretty strange beliefs, the most common of which is that God somehow benefits and we benefit in His eyes through our penances, our little sacrifices. But a little thought should show the folly of this. After all, God has no need of our penance. God is all-sufficient unto Himself. So why do it? Why give up coffee, or TV, or why say extra prayers? Why make any sacrifice if it is ultimately useless to God?
Maybe the answer lies not in God, but in us and our relationship with Him. Perhaps my trip to Cleveland in 1982 can shed some light on the question of why we need penance and sacrifice. If we think of ourselves as being on a journey toward God, we start out full of fuel and clean from Baptism. The light of Christ burns brightly in us and guides us on our way. As we head up the road, we encounter sins, difficulties, and doubts, all of which, like the ice and slush of the Interstate, cloud the light and freeze and harden on the glass making it impossible to find the way, a way which was so clearly visible before. Lent is the time when we stop by the side of the road, and we brave the rain and the cold, and we clean off our spiritual headlights so that the light of Christ can clearly guide us again. Our penance is like the ice scraper and it benefits not God, but us, in that it allows us to see the way clearly again.
So, as we prepare for Easter, let’s make our sacrifices, let’s do our penances. Let’s the clean the glass of our spiritual lamps, the lamps that are “the light of the world.” Let us walk together in holiness and penance during this coming Lent, so that the new Light of Christ which comes this Easter may ever shine in our hearts.
Yet Another Beautiful Vestment for your Cabinet
With Easter coming early this year, perhaps your parish will be interested in a new festive chasuble for the Great Feast. This comes from "what does the prayer really say," a traditionalist Roman Catholic blog.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
35 Years of Roe v. Wade
It's a tragic thing when you read a statistic that reports that 2005 marked the lowest number of abortions in 2005 than in any year since 1974, with 1,200,000 babies whose lives were prematurely terminated. Roe v. Wade what have you wrought? Lives snuffed out before they begin, women who bear terrible emotional scars from a procedure that many of them did not even fully appreciate, and a culture that becomes ever more numb to death.
Here's a link to a sobering article at American Thinker on the 35th Anniversary of Roe:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/saving_the_trees_and_killing_t_1.html
Here's a link to a sobering article at American Thinker on the 35th Anniversary of Roe:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/saving_the_trees_and_killing_t_1.html
Monday, January 14, 2008
Epiphany I
The Holy Gospel is written in the 2nd Chapter of St. Luke, beginning at the 41st Verse.
Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover. And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast. And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it. But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day's journey; and they sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance. And when they found him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him. And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions. And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers. And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing. And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business? And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them. And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them: but his mother kept all these sayings in her heart. And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.
I’ve always liked television games shows. When I was a boy, one of my favorites was To Tell the Truth. Remember that one? It came on once a week in prime-time. In my house growing up, the whole family would gather around the TV, watch To Tell the Truth, and eat the popcorn that my mother had cooked in a pot on the stove. Each week, three people would sit behind a desk each claiming to be someone who had accomplished something special. These three would be questioned by a celebrity panel, usually consisting of Orson Bean, Kitty Carlisle, Tom Poston, and Peggy Cass. (If you’re under 30, don’t worry who these people were. Trust me, they were famous.) The celebrities would then attempt to guess which one of the three was the real person and which two were the imposters. The pivotal moment would come after the celebrities had cast their votes and host Bud Collyer would then dramatically ask, “Will the real John Q. Public please stand up?” And at that moment, the true identity of the person of special accomplishment would be revealed. It was a great show and, believe it or not, has a lot to do with our Gospel reading today.
You know today’s story from the Gospel of St. Luke. It’s the story of the finding of the child Jesus in the Temple. St. Joseph and the blessed Virgin Mary had come to Jerusalem for the celebration of the Passover. As they headed home, they realized with some alarm that Jesus was not with them. Panic-stricken they searched the group that they were traveling with. Not finding him there, they headed back to Jerusalem to continue their search. Finally, they came to the Temple and found Jesus there listening and questioning the doctors, those learned teachers of the Temple. And here is where the story gets interesting. But before we can get to that, we need to understand one very important piece of information.
In this story, St. Luke identifies the Lord Jesus as being 12 years old. This is one of the few times that Jesus’ age is mentioned and it is highly significant in this case. When a Jewish boy reaches the age of 12, he is considered in many ways to have reached manhood. He was placed under the Law of Moses at his circumcision when he was eight days old, but now at age 12, he was considered to be a “Man of the Law.” The young boy at that age would come to the synagogue and read the Scripture and recite passages from memory. This coming of age, known today as a “Bar Mitzvah,” was as significant for the Jewish male as Confirmation is, or should be, for the Christian. In each case, the boy becomes a man and validates for himself the promises that were made for him by another when he was just a baby. So keep that in mind, that in this story, our Lord has just come of age as a man.
And what happens when his parents find him in the Temple? His mother Mary approaches him and says, “Son, how could you have done this to us? Your father and I have been worried sick about you.” And the Lord turns to His mother and says, “Why did you worry? Did you not know that I had to be about my Father’s business?” Now note this carefully. Mary says, “Your father and I have been worried sick about you,” referring to St. Joseph as Jesus’ father. Jesus responds differently, telling his blessed Mother, “Did you not know that I had to be about my Father’s business,” referring to his real Father: God the Father. In this moment, the child who had lived in the quiet of Joseph’s home and carpentry shop stood up and identified himself to his parents. In this moment we have the first indication of Jesus’ acknowledgement of his divine nature in the Scriptures. It couldn’t have been plainer if, all of a sudden, a game show host had said, “Will the real Son of the Living God please stand up?” But this isn’t the really interesting part. That comes next.
Immediately after his own acknowledgement of his special relationship with the Father, Jesus returns home obediently with his parents and grows in wisdom and strength. Now I think this is absolutely fascinating and it tells us quite a bit about God. Notice that Jesus does not at that point assume his throne and accept the accolades of the people. Instead, he returns to his home, and grows in the same way as anybody else, with the exception of sin. What tremendous humility is shown by our Lord. Rather than exalt himself, instead he lives in perfect humility with the earthly parents into whose care God has given him and he shares their life growing a bit here and there and finally reaching maturity just like you and me.
And this is the point: As we end our Christmas and Epiphany season it’s good to recall this about the Lord. In coming among us as a man, Jesus did not want to escape or be denied any truly human experience. He wanted to know the experience of birth, he wanted to understand what it means to earn a living, and – in order to save us from our sin – he had to know what it was to die. This was truly “his Father’s business.” This giving of himself to every aspect of life is why the Lord came down as at this time for us, to pitch his tent in our camp, to live and die as one of us. As our unusually brief Epiphany season draws to a close, maybe we can take just a few more moments to worship at the manger, to adore with the wise men, and to give thanks for the God who became one of us.
Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover. And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast. And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it. But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day's journey; and they sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance. And when they found him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him. And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions. And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers. And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing. And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business? And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them. And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them: but his mother kept all these sayings in her heart. And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.
I’ve always liked television games shows. When I was a boy, one of my favorites was To Tell the Truth. Remember that one? It came on once a week in prime-time. In my house growing up, the whole family would gather around the TV, watch To Tell the Truth, and eat the popcorn that my mother had cooked in a pot on the stove. Each week, three people would sit behind a desk each claiming to be someone who had accomplished something special. These three would be questioned by a celebrity panel, usually consisting of Orson Bean, Kitty Carlisle, Tom Poston, and Peggy Cass. (If you’re under 30, don’t worry who these people were. Trust me, they were famous.) The celebrities would then attempt to guess which one of the three was the real person and which two were the imposters. The pivotal moment would come after the celebrities had cast their votes and host Bud Collyer would then dramatically ask, “Will the real John Q. Public please stand up?” And at that moment, the true identity of the person of special accomplishment would be revealed. It was a great show and, believe it or not, has a lot to do with our Gospel reading today.
You know today’s story from the Gospel of St. Luke. It’s the story of the finding of the child Jesus in the Temple. St. Joseph and the blessed Virgin Mary had come to Jerusalem for the celebration of the Passover. As they headed home, they realized with some alarm that Jesus was not with them. Panic-stricken they searched the group that they were traveling with. Not finding him there, they headed back to Jerusalem to continue their search. Finally, they came to the Temple and found Jesus there listening and questioning the doctors, those learned teachers of the Temple. And here is where the story gets interesting. But before we can get to that, we need to understand one very important piece of information.
In this story, St. Luke identifies the Lord Jesus as being 12 years old. This is one of the few times that Jesus’ age is mentioned and it is highly significant in this case. When a Jewish boy reaches the age of 12, he is considered in many ways to have reached manhood. He was placed under the Law of Moses at his circumcision when he was eight days old, but now at age 12, he was considered to be a “Man of the Law.” The young boy at that age would come to the synagogue and read the Scripture and recite passages from memory. This coming of age, known today as a “Bar Mitzvah,” was as significant for the Jewish male as Confirmation is, or should be, for the Christian. In each case, the boy becomes a man and validates for himself the promises that were made for him by another when he was just a baby. So keep that in mind, that in this story, our Lord has just come of age as a man.
And what happens when his parents find him in the Temple? His mother Mary approaches him and says, “Son, how could you have done this to us? Your father and I have been worried sick about you.” And the Lord turns to His mother and says, “Why did you worry? Did you not know that I had to be about my Father’s business?” Now note this carefully. Mary says, “Your father and I have been worried sick about you,” referring to St. Joseph as Jesus’ father. Jesus responds differently, telling his blessed Mother, “Did you not know that I had to be about my Father’s business,” referring to his real Father: God the Father. In this moment, the child who had lived in the quiet of Joseph’s home and carpentry shop stood up and identified himself to his parents. In this moment we have the first indication of Jesus’ acknowledgement of his divine nature in the Scriptures. It couldn’t have been plainer if, all of a sudden, a game show host had said, “Will the real Son of the Living God please stand up?” But this isn’t the really interesting part. That comes next.
Immediately after his own acknowledgement of his special relationship with the Father, Jesus returns home obediently with his parents and grows in wisdom and strength. Now I think this is absolutely fascinating and it tells us quite a bit about God. Notice that Jesus does not at that point assume his throne and accept the accolades of the people. Instead, he returns to his home, and grows in the same way as anybody else, with the exception of sin. What tremendous humility is shown by our Lord. Rather than exalt himself, instead he lives in perfect humility with the earthly parents into whose care God has given him and he shares their life growing a bit here and there and finally reaching maturity just like you and me.
And this is the point: As we end our Christmas and Epiphany season it’s good to recall this about the Lord. In coming among us as a man, Jesus did not want to escape or be denied any truly human experience. He wanted to know the experience of birth, he wanted to understand what it means to earn a living, and – in order to save us from our sin – he had to know what it was to die. This was truly “his Father’s business.” This giving of himself to every aspect of life is why the Lord came down as at this time for us, to pitch his tent in our camp, to live and die as one of us. As our unusually brief Epiphany season draws to a close, maybe we can take just a few more moments to worship at the manger, to adore with the wise men, and to give thanks for the God who became one of us.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
And now for something completely different...
I know that some folks really didn't like the clown "Mass" and also that I've been a little serious lately. So, as my way of lightening up a bit, follow the link to this one. It's called "Liturgical abuses," but it's really more funny than abusive.
Here's the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waon5FH5Fjo&feature=related
Here's the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waon5FH5Fjo&feature=related
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
I've Got to Hand it to You!
CNN.com has posted a story about a man who chopped his hand off and cooked it in the microwave because he thought it had "the mark of the beast." The best line in the whole story:
"It is not immediately clear whether the man has a history of mental illness." Let me point something out to CNN that should be relatively obvious: It's now VERY clear that the man has a history of mental illness!
Here's the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/01/09/hand.cut.off.ap/index.html
"It is not immediately clear whether the man has a history of mental illness." Let me point something out to CNN that should be relatively obvious: It's now VERY clear that the man has a history of mental illness!
Here's the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/01/09/hand.cut.off.ap/index.html
Monday, January 7, 2008
Shoddy "Research" Exposed
As a practicing clinical psychologist, I have been bothered for sometime about a tendency in my profession to use absolutely abominable research to "prove" a social hyptohesis. For example, when I was in graduate school, we were taught that for psychological research to be considered competent a researcher had to have a well-defined working hypothesis. "Well-defined" means "operationally defined", that is, you had to be able to define the working hypothesis in ways that were objectively measurable. Secondly, social research, as with all research, began with the premise that the "null hypothesis," the hypothesis that the working hypothesis was invalid, was correct. Hence the job of any research was an attempt to disprove the null hypothesis Contemporary social science has turned this on its ear, often working to prove the null hypothesis rather than disprove it. In other words, much research works from the presumption that the experimental hypothesis is correct and the null hypothesis is invalid, the opposite of what should be done. This, combined with poorly defined experimental hypotheses, has created a real problem in social science research.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the area of gender psychology and the psychology of the LGBT culture. Now I'm not saying that the conclusions these researchers are reaching are necessarily wrong. What I am saying is their methodology is so slipshod that we don't have enough of a reliable and valid research base to make an informed judgment. Sadly, this "research" is often used to define social policy in our legislative offices.
Here's a link to an article from a Swedish writer that describes the problem as it is experienced in that country. Perhaps this should give us some pause for serious reflection on the potential impact of the lack of scientific rigor in the work of some social scientists.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/subverting_science_to_ideology.html
For those that are interested, an interesting resource on this and similar issues is:
Wright, R. H., and Cummings, N. A., eds. (2005). Destructive trends in mental health: The well-intentioned path to harm. New York, NY: Routledge.
Also, a classic volume with strong implications for social science research is:
Rychlak, J. F. (1981). A philosophy of science for personality theory (2nd edition). Malabar, FL: Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the area of gender psychology and the psychology of the LGBT culture. Now I'm not saying that the conclusions these researchers are reaching are necessarily wrong. What I am saying is their methodology is so slipshod that we don't have enough of a reliable and valid research base to make an informed judgment. Sadly, this "research" is often used to define social policy in our legislative offices.
Here's a link to an article from a Swedish writer that describes the problem as it is experienced in that country. Perhaps this should give us some pause for serious reflection on the potential impact of the lack of scientific rigor in the work of some social scientists.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/subverting_science_to_ideology.html
For those that are interested, an interesting resource on this and similar issues is:
Wright, R. H., and Cummings, N. A., eds. (2005). Destructive trends in mental health: The well-intentioned path to harm. New York, NY: Routledge.
Also, a classic volume with strong implications for social science research is:
Rychlak, J. F. (1981). A philosophy of science for personality theory (2nd edition). Malabar, FL: Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company.
Sunday, January 6, 2008
The Epiphany of our Lord
Here beginneth the 2nd Chapter of the Gospel according to St. Matthew.
When Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea, in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him. When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born. And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet, And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel. Then Herod, when he had privily called the wise men, enquired of them diligently what time the star appeared. And he sent them to Bethlehem, and said, Go and search diligently for the young child; and when ye have found him, bring me word again, that I may come and worship him also. When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was. When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy. And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh. And being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way.
--
Several years ago, my wife and I had the opportunity to fly to Denver, Colorado, for the Provincial Synod. As our Delta flight cleared the Mississippi River heading westbound, the populated areas of the East receded into the background and soon we were left with mile after seemingly endless mile of unpopulated land, where not even a road was visible. This continued for several hours until we finally touched down at Denver International Airport. I remember thinking that night how incredibly big the United States of America actually is. And I realized that I, and probably most people, had very little idea of the size and magnitude of our great nation. In fact, most people’s view of the world is conditioned strongly by the area in which they live. It’s kind of like the poster that I used to have in my living room, “The New Yorker’s View of the World.” In the poster, the buildings of Manhattan were quite vivid, but everything beyond it quickly faded into insignificance. Now, what does all this have to do with the Epiphany, that charming story of the Magi, or the wise men, who came to visit the baby Jesus in the manger in Bethlehem? What possible connection could there be between the vastness of the American West and this Biblical story?
In order to answer that question, we have to understand a little history. Specifically, we have to know something about the Messiah and Israel’s expectations for him. First, it’s important to remember that the people of Israel considered themselves to be God’s chosen people, a people set apart by a Covenant, a special contract, between God and Abraham. In this Covenant, God said that, “You will be my people and I will be your God.” For their part, the people responded by promising obedience to the Law that would be given to Moses. The expectation of the Jewish people was that God would ultimately give them dominion over the world. As Jewish thought developed and as the land was conquered, not once, but several times, that salvation was presumed to come from a Messiah, a Chosen One or, more literally, “The Anointed One,” who would come and restore the Kingdom of God. The Messiah would then place Israel at the head of all the nations and God’s divine order would be in place for all time. The important thing for us is the understanding that the Jewish people considered the coming of the Messiah to be an event whose effects would be primarily for them and that this coming was not necessarily for people outside of the covenant. Also, it would occur at the end of time. So, the expectation of Israel for the Messiah was both apocalyptic and redemptive for the Jewish nation.
So with this background, let’s look at the Gospel today. Jesus is born in Bethlehem because his father is from the House of David and the actions of the Roman Emperor had brought Joseph and the pregnant Mary to the city of Joseph’s ancestors. In that small town that exists just five miles due south of Jerusalem, the Holy Family was resting following the birth of our Lord. Into their humble dwellings come Wise Men from the East. Wise Men probably would have been astronomers, men who studied the stars and sought the signs of the age in them. This differs significantly from astrologers who seek to divine the future from the stars.
These Wise Men, the Bible doesn’t really tell us how many there were, had followed the star from the east, hoping that it would lead them to the Great King. They didn’t necessarily know where it would lead them and they didn’t what or who they would find. But they pressed on for what was probably hundreds of miles because they knew that they had to follow this star. First, it led them to Herod’s court, but Herod was not the King they were seeking. So they followed the Star and it led them to the stable, that glorious stable, where the Lord Jesus lay surrounded by Joseph, Mary, and the lowly creatures that dwelt there. They offered him gifts for a King: Gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Much has been said about the significance of these elements but we’re not going to talk about them today. Instead, we’re going to look at the Wise Men’s visitation from a slightly different perspective.
As recounted by Saint Matthew, the coming of the Wise Men from a strange and foreign land changes completely the understanding of who the Messiah is and who he came for. The Messiah was not one who would come in power and glory. Instead the Messiah came as a helpless little baby. The Messiah was expected to be for the Jewish people only. But the visit of these Magi from foreign lands who came to worship him demonstrated a more powerful truth: That the love of God is not limited to this people or to that people. Instead, the love of God is for all who gaze upon and worship Jesus Christ as Lord. The Gospel today shows us that the plan of God is much bigger than we can ever imagine.
Down through the centuries, we have continued to follow the Lord. Here in Athens, we meet on this special hill and celebrate the Messiah who came to redeem all people. But Christianity and its saving message is so much bigger than our little church. It extends to every continent and every nation. Where we worship in freedom and with the protections of our Constitution, in other nations our brothers and sisters risk their lives every time they gather for the Holy Eucharist. And, in terms of time, Christianity has encompassed literally billions of people who have found hope and freedom from their sins in Jesus Christ for over 2,000 years. The Manifestation of Christ to the Gentiles that we call the Epiphany stands as a witness of God’s love for all people and His desire that all people accept him and Jesus Christ, whom He has sent. Only now, this Manifestation does not find its fulfillment in the following of the Star. Now its fulfillment is the following of the way of the Holy Cross.
The grandeur and expanse of the American West defies any one person’s ability to conceive of the size of our great nation. How much greater is the Lord, whose coming was announced by a Star and who won our redemption on the Cross.
When Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea, in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him. When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born. And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet, And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel. Then Herod, when he had privily called the wise men, enquired of them diligently what time the star appeared. And he sent them to Bethlehem, and said, Go and search diligently for the young child; and when ye have found him, bring me word again, that I may come and worship him also. When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was. When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy. And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh. And being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way.
--
Several years ago, my wife and I had the opportunity to fly to Denver, Colorado, for the Provincial Synod. As our Delta flight cleared the Mississippi River heading westbound, the populated areas of the East receded into the background and soon we were left with mile after seemingly endless mile of unpopulated land, where not even a road was visible. This continued for several hours until we finally touched down at Denver International Airport. I remember thinking that night how incredibly big the United States of America actually is. And I realized that I, and probably most people, had very little idea of the size and magnitude of our great nation. In fact, most people’s view of the world is conditioned strongly by the area in which they live. It’s kind of like the poster that I used to have in my living room, “The New Yorker’s View of the World.” In the poster, the buildings of Manhattan were quite vivid, but everything beyond it quickly faded into insignificance. Now, what does all this have to do with the Epiphany, that charming story of the Magi, or the wise men, who came to visit the baby Jesus in the manger in Bethlehem? What possible connection could there be between the vastness of the American West and this Biblical story?
In order to answer that question, we have to understand a little history. Specifically, we have to know something about the Messiah and Israel’s expectations for him. First, it’s important to remember that the people of Israel considered themselves to be God’s chosen people, a people set apart by a Covenant, a special contract, between God and Abraham. In this Covenant, God said that, “You will be my people and I will be your God.” For their part, the people responded by promising obedience to the Law that would be given to Moses. The expectation of the Jewish people was that God would ultimately give them dominion over the world. As Jewish thought developed and as the land was conquered, not once, but several times, that salvation was presumed to come from a Messiah, a Chosen One or, more literally, “The Anointed One,” who would come and restore the Kingdom of God. The Messiah would then place Israel at the head of all the nations and God’s divine order would be in place for all time. The important thing for us is the understanding that the Jewish people considered the coming of the Messiah to be an event whose effects would be primarily for them and that this coming was not necessarily for people outside of the covenant. Also, it would occur at the end of time. So, the expectation of Israel for the Messiah was both apocalyptic and redemptive for the Jewish nation.
So with this background, let’s look at the Gospel today. Jesus is born in Bethlehem because his father is from the House of David and the actions of the Roman Emperor had brought Joseph and the pregnant Mary to the city of Joseph’s ancestors. In that small town that exists just five miles due south of Jerusalem, the Holy Family was resting following the birth of our Lord. Into their humble dwellings come Wise Men from the East. Wise Men probably would have been astronomers, men who studied the stars and sought the signs of the age in them. This differs significantly from astrologers who seek to divine the future from the stars.
These Wise Men, the Bible doesn’t really tell us how many there were, had followed the star from the east, hoping that it would lead them to the Great King. They didn’t necessarily know where it would lead them and they didn’t what or who they would find. But they pressed on for what was probably hundreds of miles because they knew that they had to follow this star. First, it led them to Herod’s court, but Herod was not the King they were seeking. So they followed the Star and it led them to the stable, that glorious stable, where the Lord Jesus lay surrounded by Joseph, Mary, and the lowly creatures that dwelt there. They offered him gifts for a King: Gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Much has been said about the significance of these elements but we’re not going to talk about them today. Instead, we’re going to look at the Wise Men’s visitation from a slightly different perspective.
As recounted by Saint Matthew, the coming of the Wise Men from a strange and foreign land changes completely the understanding of who the Messiah is and who he came for. The Messiah was not one who would come in power and glory. Instead the Messiah came as a helpless little baby. The Messiah was expected to be for the Jewish people only. But the visit of these Magi from foreign lands who came to worship him demonstrated a more powerful truth: That the love of God is not limited to this people or to that people. Instead, the love of God is for all who gaze upon and worship Jesus Christ as Lord. The Gospel today shows us that the plan of God is much bigger than we can ever imagine.
Down through the centuries, we have continued to follow the Lord. Here in Athens, we meet on this special hill and celebrate the Messiah who came to redeem all people. But Christianity and its saving message is so much bigger than our little church. It extends to every continent and every nation. Where we worship in freedom and with the protections of our Constitution, in other nations our brothers and sisters risk their lives every time they gather for the Holy Eucharist. And, in terms of time, Christianity has encompassed literally billions of people who have found hope and freedom from their sins in Jesus Christ for over 2,000 years. The Manifestation of Christ to the Gentiles that we call the Epiphany stands as a witness of God’s love for all people and His desire that all people accept him and Jesus Christ, whom He has sent. Only now, this Manifestation does not find its fulfillment in the following of the Star. Now its fulfillment is the following of the way of the Holy Cross.
The grandeur and expanse of the American West defies any one person’s ability to conceive of the size of our great nation. How much greater is the Lord, whose coming was announced by a Star and who won our redemption on the Cross.
Friday, January 4, 2008
Pay Attention to This
In Great Britain, some ministers of Parliament are questioning Catholic Bishops about "fundamentalist teachings" in the Roman Catholic Church. Here in the United States, the First Amendment should protect our churches from this type of behavior, but when this is combined with recent US governmental investigations of evangelical preachers led by a REPUBLICAN Senator (Grassley, R-IA), it suggests that all Christians, including Anglican Catholics should be vigilant.
Here's the link:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2233421,00.html
Here's the link:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2233421,00.html
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
What Are These Clowns Up To?
Oh, my! Just when you think you've seen it all, along comes another one. I don't know where this "Mass" allegedly took place, but it has to be seen to be believed. I've never witnessed a "Clown Mass" before seeing this video. Note, please, the use of a punch-bowl for the wine, and the bubbles for incense. Of course, if we start listing all of the offending pieces, this post will have no end. In fact, strap yourself into your chair, wrap some duct tape around your head to keep it from exploding, and follow the link to this site:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZ6KWt49wIA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZ6KWt49wIA
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
Activism and Religion
One of my major beefs with many contemporary priests and ministers is that they tend to define ministry simply as a social activity that could be just as easily carried out by a social worker. Sadly, no one in ministry has seemed to embody this activism more than Jim Wallis. See the following article at Spectator.org for more:
http://spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12493
http://spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12493
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)