Twelfth Sunday after Trinity

II Corinthians 3:4-9 * Mark 7:31-37

He maketh both the deaf to hear, and the dumb to speak.

Have you ever doubted the kind intentions of spouse, brother, parent, or friend; given voice to that doubt, and then discovered how wrong you were? It is a fairly normal sort of embarrassment that most people have experienced at one time or other. What can we do but apologize, knowing that it probably caused more hurt than a direct insult, or just about any other kind of offense? We can all too easily let ourselves have this kind of doubt about not only people, but God. I know what it is to express frustration, even a bit of anger, thinking that God himself has let me down, only to feel very foolish when it was clear to me how much the opposite was true. He did provide and meet every need, even though I thought not, and doubted his very goodness, right up until a startling fact became clear: The need had been met by providential kindness before I thought to ask. God does not deal with us as we deserve; but, instead provides for our needs, forgives our sins, and bears us patiently.

Today's Epistle must seem quite enigmatic to modern ears. How can the ministration of death and condemnation be glorious? The Letter, that is the Letter of God's holy law, gives us no safe haven, but rather condemns everyone as a sinner. Indeed, it exposes the truth that we do not want to see.

Jesus said: "And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." (John 3:19-21)

Look carefully at those words. Note the contrast between the One and the many, that same distinction we see in the Suffering Servant passage (Isaiah 53:12): "He bore the sin of many." The One and the many, from these words of the prophet, were given exegetical treatment by St. Paul, writing to the Church in Rome:

"But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ. Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 5:15-21)

When Jesus spoke of the many, that is, "everyone that doeth evil," he compared the many to the One, to Himself: "But he that doeth truth." Who else, in heaven and earth among all the children of Adam, can these words speak of? "But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." This is why it is necessary to reject the false translation of Psalm One as it appears in the Episcopalian's 1979 Prayer Book. That version says "Happy are they who..." But, the correct translation is "Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful." From ancient times, the Church has taught that "the man" in that first Psalm is Jesus Christ our Lord, alone without sin.

By God's grace, we are able to do good works that he has prepared for us to walk in (Eph. 2:8-10, provides the basis for these words). But this is because we receive grace through faith, and by that grace are laborers together with God. This is only possible because of the Holy Spirit. Look at the astonishing words of Articles XII and XIII:

XII. Of Good Works.

Albeit that Good Works, which are the fruits of Faith, and follow after Justification, cannot put away our sins, and endure the severity of God's judgment; yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ, and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively Faith; insomuch that by them a lively Faith may be as evidently known as a tree discerned by the fruit.

XIII. Of Works before Justification.

Works done before the grace of Christ, and the Inspiration of the Spirit, are not pleasant to God, forasmuch as they spring not of faith in Jesus Christ; neither do they make men meet to receive grace, or (as the School-authors say) deserve grace of congruity: yea rather, for that they are not done as God hath willed and commanded them to be done, we doubt not but they have the nature of sin.

We fear to come to the light, because even our best works are not free of sin. Unless they are works of genuine charity, they profit us nothing. That famous chapter on love, the 13th chapter of I Corinthians, is often perceived with sentimentality as if it were a beautiful poem. But, the truth is, that chapter exposes the helplessness of our condition- that is, helpless unless God's grace is working within us. That chapter tells us that we must depend on the Holy Spirit to form within us the virtues that belong to the character of the Man, Jesus our Lord. It exposes our need for his grace.

"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing."

I look at that, and see that I have no hope if I must justify myself. Remember the Pharisee we read about only last week? He stood in the temple and prayed, but nonetheless, he hid from the light; he feared to come to the light, and hated the light. He congratulated himself by comparing himself to notorious sinners- "even like this publican." This comparison is safe, and helps us hide from the light, that light that blinded another Pharisee who approached Damascus to persecute the Church; and gave him better vision, making him into a new creation.

To approach the light is very painful, which is why the Church advises us to pray before making a confession of sin, that we will be able to make a bold and true confession. We fear to let the light of God's holiness, as he reveals it in his word, shine on us. We would rather feel righteous by our own efforts, comparing ourselves to others instead of measuring our sin by God's standard. Compared to openly known notorious sinners I might, on a good day, feel good about myself. But compared to Christ, the Man who is perfectly righteous, I cannot approve of my own thoughts, words and deeds.

This is quite normal really. But, we must overcome that fear, approach the painful, burning, blinding light by approaching it through the Man. This we can do, for we are "in Christ." And, he, the man Christ Jesus, comes into the light boldly because he is perfectly righteous. I have no strength in my flesh to endure the light, because I know that the glorious ministration of condemnation and death, by the Letter of the Law, will slay me. But, in Christ I have hope; "for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life...For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory."

To understand these things we need the same Christ to touch us who healed the deaf man’s ears, and cured his impediment of speech. Like that man, we are unable to hear the truth and to speak God's word, unless Christ heals us. The Good News is this: He forgives us and makes us into new creatures. He provided for our need, our greatest need, when we did not even know to ask for his salvation

More on the "C" word

It was our own Fr. Wells who rightly got my point in the post (below), "How is that 'Catholic' exactly?" He commented: "But perhaps the real problem is that it is WE OURSELVES who do not understand what 'catholic' means." That very danger was my point. I used the fact that I found it necessary to change the road sign for St. Benedict's as a natural lead-in to what followed. The meaning of the article was simply this: It's bad enough that the public at large misunderstand the word "catholic," but it seems that many of our own Continuing Anglicans really don't understand it either. 

The problem is that the word "catholic" had become a partisan word for the highest of the High Church Anglicans and Episcopalians long before the St. Louis Congress. If, in fact, the name of my jurisdiction, "The Anglican Catholic Church," simply invokes that partisan division in some minds, let me be clear that it has no such meaning to me. I am not an Anglo-Catholic, even though I can do very High Church liturgy as well as the next priest. I can also do Low Church liturgy as well as the next priest, and it really is all the same to me. It is the same Lord, it is the same sacrament, and it is the same theology - at least it was written that way and should be so understood.

All my life long, growing up in the Episcopal Church from the late 1950s, and starting to learn in the 1960s, I knew I belonged to "the Holy Catholic Church." As an Episcopalian who knew only one edition, in those days, of the Book of Common Prayer, I was taught that we are both Catholic and Protestant, that we have the Apostolic Succession of Bishops, that only a priest is authorized to celebrate the service of Holy Communion, etc. That was the authorized and official teaching we all shared in the Anglican Communion.

In those decades, in Ellicott City Maryland, the High Church people went to St. Peter's (the House of Commons, as it was jokingly called), and the Low Church people went to St. John's (or the House of Lords, as it was jokingly called). Growing up in the 1930s, my mother remembers being taken to both at different times. She preferred the High Church worship, right down to the Last Gospel. My father was raised Low Church in Towson, Maryland, and lived next door to Trinity Church which his family attended. I grew up understanding that it was all, High and Low, essentially the same.

We did not "aspire" to be Catholic, because we belonged to the same Church that Christ established through the Apostles. Others, the Church of Rome (not the Eastern Orthodox, because our relations with them were different before 1976) may not have appreciated our place in the Church; but we knew who we were anyway. Protestants also criticized us for being "too catholic" for having the Apostolic Succession and a priesthood celebrating at an altar, etc.; but we just prayed for them. 

The Creeds teach us that the Church is Catholic, and that our Trinitarian Faith is Catholic. That means, as I said:

"...we use the word 'Catholic' simply to mean that we believe the whole faith, and that we belong to the One Church established by Christ through His apostles. For, when all is said and done, that is what it means: According to the whole - the whole Faith and the Universal Church."

It is a shame that explaining my decision about a church sign by the road proved to be so distracting. I hope it is because readers wanted to make sure we remain true to the theological meaning of the word "Catholic." Considering who it was that commented, I not only hope so, but think so. Indeed, we need to remain faithful to the meaning of that word for doctrine and order. If I believed that the comments were about nothing more than an emotional attachment to the sound of the word, with partisan implications as the main concern, I would be disappointed indeed. 

By now we should have established that the essence of "catholic," as Anglicans use the word, is not a matter of how many candles are on the altar, whether the priest wears a chasuble, whether the minor propers are used, etc. I hope that, by now, we have established that there is no one book more catholic, except for the Bible, than the Book of Common Prayer. 

And, as far as names are a concern: If the name of my jurisdiction of the Church merely indicates an Anglican party, then I would want to change it. But, since the name speaks of the unchanging truth and order of the Church Christ established, and our humble place among so large a company that includes the saints, I want to keep it to the end.

But that is what is has to mean in our thinking. Anything else is something much less, and not worth the breath it takes to say it.

Eleventh Sunday after Trinity

The message for the Eleventh Sunday after Trinity is always relevant to the needs of every individual. I had planned to compose a new sermon, but have felt that I am supposed to repeat this from my personal archives. 

I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you

1 Cor. 15: 1-11 * Luke 18:9-14

It is very fitting that St. Paul is the Apostle who wrote the Epistle from which we have heard this day, because of what we read this same day from the Gospel of Luke. St. Paul was, in his lifetime, both of the men in this parable. He was both the Pharisee who believed his own self-righteous delusion, and then, by God's grace, he became as the Publican who repented, confessed his sin, and was justified. Paul was, in his youth, just like the Pharisee about whom we read, thinking himself righteous and despising others. But, when coming close to Damascus in order to persecute those who were Jesus' disciples and believers, he saw the Risen Lord Jesus Christ, and at once came to see himself, Saul the Pharisee, as not only a sinner, but the chief of sinners. Instead of self-confidence before God, he acquired humility; instead of boasting he learned to confess. He confesses his sin with all humility in this very same Epistle text, as we heard:

For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 

I have no patience with many modern commenters who belittle Paul as if he continued to have the Pharisaical attitude all his life long, and who are deluded and arrogant enough to suppose that they see it in his Epistles. Any excuse will do, not to learn from the Apostle, any excuse to treat him as less than the holy martyr that he is, to speak of him as less than Jesus Christ's appointed messenger to bring the Gospel to the nations, Apostle to the Gentiles and writer of most of the New Testament. We have the witness of St. Peter that the Epistles of Paul were so revered that, even in his lifetime, the Church began regarding them as γραφή (i.e. Scriptures. See II Pet. 3:15,16).

Paul was joyful and grateful, even through all of his suffering and the persecution he endured for the rest of his earthly life. He had been set free from the worst kind of self-deception and delusion. He came to see that no man can make himself righteous, and that only by God's grace can we be forgiven and justified, and that only by the grace of God active in one's life, by the Holy Spirit who is given to us, can we become holy. The true heart of St. Paul comes across more clearly than ever a couple of chapters later, when writing about charity, the perfect and perfecting love of God for us, and within us by the Holy Spirit.

Comparing his old unconverted life to the new creation in Christ that he had become (II Cor. 5:17), the Apostle wrote us this autobiographical sketch:

“Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith.”- Phil. 3: 5-9

When the Lord appeared to Saul, and made him an eyewitness of the resurrection, many things changed in his understanding. His righteous act of persecuting the Church was revealed to have been the sin of persecuting the Messiah himself, his own self-attained righteousness was shown to be a delusion, and the curse that was evident in the manner of Jesus’ death was revealed to be atonement paid by the Righteous One for the many, the sinners, thus taking away the curse from those who deserved it (Gal. 3:13). Right away, at his conversion, Paul was granted the revelation that would become his bold teaching about faith in Jesus Christ and the grace that he gives, that Jesus Christ is himself our only Salvation.

Understand what Paul always means when he speaks of our salvation by grace through faith (and remember that phrase exactly, by grace through faith). He never speaks of "faith" simply as an attribute or attitude. He means faith in a very specific way: that is, specifically, faith in Jesus Christ. If we discuss faith and works, let us be clear: Faith means this faith  in Jesus. Furthermore, as he would warn these same Corinthian Christians in a later Epistle (II Cor. 11:1f), there are other gospels and there is another Jesus, indeed, gospels and christs as varied as the human imagination with demonic influence may create.

The Gospel defined
And, it matters because in this text from Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians, we see the details listed for us so that we may know what to present if we are to preach the Gospel (εὐαγγέλιον, Euaggelion). The true Gospel of the real Lord Jesus Christ is never complete, and is never really preached, without these four facts that are brought out in today's Epistle. As there are four books we call Gospels, there is one message of the Gospel that has four facts, the facts we have already heard this day. Someone in the blogosphere wanted to argue with me that there is only one Gospel, because I referred in passing to the four Gospels. In a sense he was right: There is only one message we call the Gospel. The four books we call the Gospels all preach this message, for in each of the four Gospel books we have these four facts, which are the Gospel. In sermons of either St. Peter or St. Paul, in the Book of Acts, you will find these four same four facts.

1. Christ died for our sins as the scriptures foretold.
2. He was buried.
3. He rose the third day as the scriptures foretold.
4. He appeared to witnesses.

We need to get this right, for our own salvation and for the purpose of communicating the message. Paul wrote of the supernatural power of the Holy Spirit that is present by proclaiming this simple message. He wrote, "I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth." (Rom.1:16) The word translated "power" is a special word that is used for the work of the Holy Spirit, a word that always means miraculous power. The word is δύναμις (dunamis), from which we get words like dynamic, and dynamite. So, Paul was saying that the Gospel is the miraculous and supernatural power of God unto salvation to everyone who believes; that the Holy Spirit is the One who gives the message this power to work the miracle of salvation in each believer (if you will receive it, this makes true evangelism genuinely sacramental). God places within this message the same power that has healed the blind, and that raises the dead.

So, let us be diligent to get it right.

First of all, we must be clear who we mean when we say  Christ. We do not mean simply a good man or great religious leader. We do not mean simply a prophet. We do not mean simply a man who died for a cause, or who was unjustly condemned. We mean, as Paul calls him later in this same chapter, "the Lord from heaven." (v.47) We mean the One who is himself with God, and is God, and is also with God in the unity of the Trinity, the Word made flesh (John 1:14). We mean the one who was born of a virgin, as St. Matthew and St. Luke teach clearly in their Gospels. So, this Person we call Jesus Christ is exactly who we have professed him to be in saying the Creed:

"God of God, Light of Light, Very God of very God, Begotten, not made, Being of one substance with the Father, By whom all things were made: Who for us men, and for our salvation came down from heaven, And was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, And was made man, And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried, And the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, And ascended into heaven, And sitteth on the right hand of the Father. And he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead: Whose kingdom shall have no end."

John warns that any spirit that will not confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is that spirit of Antichrist, also called the spirit of error (I John 4:1f) That is, it refuses to confess the Incarnation, either by denying that he is God, One with the Father and the Holy Spirit, or by denying that he has taken complete human nature into his uncreated and Divine Person.

So, again.Paul writes:

Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Phil. 2:5-11)

1. Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures.

Here, as in the Creed, the phrase “according to the scriptures” means “in fulfillment of the scriptures.” Look at the 22ndPsalm. Look at the Suffering Servant passage from the 53rd chapter of Isaiah (if you do not know this entire passage, then read it and learn it at home: Isaiah 52:13-53:12):

“But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all” 

Drawing from the Epistle to the Hebrews, our service of Holy Communion puts it this way:

"All glory be to thee, Almighty God, our heavenly Father, for that thou, of thy tender mercy, didst give thine only Son Jesus Christ to suffer death upon the Cross for our redemption; who made there (by his one oblation of himself once offered) a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world." 

2. He was buried.

That is, He died, really and truly in fact, He was dead. The one Man who ever lived and did not deserve the wages of sin, death, (Rom. 6:23) was dead and buried just like everyone else.

3. He rose the third day according to (again, in fulfillment of) the scriptures.

Throughout the book of Acts the most commonly used passage of the Old Testament for this is in the 16th Psalm:

“Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth: my flesh also shall rest in hope. For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.”

This is a real and material fact, that he rose in his body of flesh and bone, transforming it into a body that cannot die.

4. He appeared to witnesses.

This fourth fact is essential to the Gospel. Without these eyewitnesses, the resurrection of Christ would be a mere story. But, the resurrection of Christ is a fact of history, recorded with the blood of martyrs, men who saw Him alive again after His resurrection. While Saint Paul was writing this Epistle, many of these witnesses were yet alive, giving the Church that assurance and confidence that it needed to survive the earliest days of persecution. The Greek word translated "witness" throughout the New Testament is μάρτυς (martus). It became our English word martyr. Originally, it meant a witness, one who testifies. Eventually, this witness or martyrdom, testimony of seeing the risen Christ, cost the eyewitnesses their lives in this world; but having seen the resurrected Christ, they despised death; they feared the grave no longer.

Months from now, in the winter on January 25th, we will celebrate the Conversion of Saint Paul. On that day, we clergy wear white, and the altar is decorated with white. If the feast is about Saint Paul, then surely we ought to wear red, should we not? Red is the color of martyrs. But, the Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul is not about Paul; it is about the last Easter appearance recorded in Scripture, a part of Easter “out of due time,” just as Saint Paul was called by seeing the Risen Christ “as one born out of due time.” His conversion came from being a witness of the resurrection of Christ, at which point he learned all of these things we meditate upon today. He learned that he was a sinner. He learned that he was forgiven. He learned that this forgiveness was given by the sacrifice of Christ on his behalf.

St. Paul has told us what the message is that we call the Gospel. There is no substitute for it, unless we choose to turn away from God, and preach an entirely false message. Then we have a great many choices to pick from, but all of them end in eternal death. Some of those messages are nice, warm and fuzzy, or inspirational. They enable people to avoid the cross, loving their own christ and hating the cross of the real Christ (Phil. 3:17-20). They avoid the bloody business about Christ's sacrifice, his offering up of himself for our sins. They avoid that crude material stuff about rising again in a body of flesh and bone, and teach a purely heavenly and spiritual salvation that has nothing to do with real life, and makes no demands. They have no Incarnation, no cross, and no resurrection. They require no repentance and offer no forgiveness. Turn away from these false gospels. Reject them in favor of the true Gospel that consists always of these four facts, these four facts that you must keep in your heart and have ready on your tongue:

1. Christ died for our sins as the scriptures foretold.
2. He was buried.
3. He rose the third day as the scriptures foretold.
4. He appeared to witnesses.

How is that “Catholic” exactly?

The word “Catholic” is so misunderstood that I removed it from the parish road sign and website some time ago. It was one of the best decisions I ever made, because after that we began to grow in number again. People in this part of North Carolina assumed that “St. Benedict’s Anglican Catholic Church” just had to be tied to Rome. After some newspapers first reported the whole Anglicanorum Coetibus scheme in September 2009, and the public gained some sketchy knowledge of that in some vague sort of way, we had several visitors; but none of them were potential members. If anything, we appeared to them to be guilty of bait and switch, using the word “Catholic” without being in communion with Rome.

Of course, Anglicans have always used the word “Catholic.”  We have never accepted Rome’s claims to a monopoly on it. Neither have the Eastern Orthodox. When we say the Creeds, and mention the Catholic Church and the Catholic Faith, we are not speaking about somebody else. Retired Abp. John Hepworth of the TAC was completely wrong when he insisted that Anglicans “aspire” to be part of the Catholic Church. He, personally with a few others, “aspired” be Roman Catholic, apparently without having to follow all their rules. How that will all end up is not our problem (and it looks pretty bad for them). But, we use the word "Catholic" simply to mean that we believe the whole faith, and that we belong to the One Church established by Christ through His apostles. For, when all is said and done, that is what it means: According to the whole - the whole Faith and the Universal Church.

           But, the confusion that led to the sad spectacle of Anglicans “aspiring” to something they already possessed is a danger that still lurks beneath the surface. And, so it will until we have a firm and confident grasp of genuine theology, and can properly understand the Gospel and the Church. What I am about to write is not an exhaustive effort at that, for what I have written in my “Essays on ClassicAnglicanism” has set forth my humble efforts to that end. I will, however, in this spot challenge assumptions that endanger Anglicans who take too seriously the doctrinal developments of the See of Rome.

1.     The Patriarchates are not essential to the Church.

It was stated in Canon III of the First Council of Constantinople, in 381 AD: “Because it is new Rome, the bishop of Constantinople is to enjoy the privileges of honour after the bishop of Rome.” Many things were in those canons, some of which no church endeavors to keep because they lost their relevance after a period of time. Yet, for some reason, many Anglicans believe that the political structure of the Catholic Church is somehow static, not subject to change. This is spite of historical developments, such as the establishment of the Patriarchate of Moscow, or of Rome’s establishment of a Patriarch of Venice, and Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem. Both of the Two One True Churches have had no qualms about adaptation to the ancient structure.

2.     So Rome has no special authority

The reason so many people think there is something “Catholic” about trying to fit into the ancient structure of Patriarchates is simply because the Two One True Churches continue to make bold claims, as if there was something sacramental about Patriarchates. But, the claims they make are for purposes of exclusion, not evangelism and not edification. And, Rome’s claims exceed the others for sheer boldness and audacity. The system worked in ancient times, but has no revelation supporting it. If it keeps some order today, then it serves a purpose for parts of the Church, maybe. But, there is no evidence that part of the dogmatic doctrine of the Catholic Church is that every church must be under one of the five Patriarchates - or is it six?

            The Church has bishops and Apostolic Succession, both for valid sacraments and for order. This includes the need to be faithful to “the Faith once delivered to the saints.” It does not require adherence to some Patriarch in an ancient city just because, well, that’s how it was in the days of the Roman Empire.

             3.The order of Priest is bigger than celebrating the Eucharist.

That’s right. I hate to shock, shock the religious sensibilities of closet Romans who lack the will to convert; but, the reason our ordinal puts everything back into balance is because priests are not ordained only to celebrate the Eucharist; in fact not even primarily to celebrate the Eucharist. E.J. Bicknell wrote truly and in perfect consistency with the Scriptures, the Fathers of the Church and every ancient Ordinal used by the Church in the Patristic period, the following: “As we have said, the English word priest by derivation simply means 'presbyter'. But it has acquired the meaning of 'sacerdos'. The Christian presbyter in virtue of his office is a 'priest'. Priesthood is one of his functions.”

            You cannot be more “Catholic” than to be faithful to the Scriptures, the Fathers of the Church, and every Ordinal used by the Church in the Patristic period. You can, however, be more Roman and more Medieval. I prefer to be truly Catholic. So, I see the priesthood as not only the office that includes valid celebration; it is also a pastoral and teaching office, and requires exercising authority for the good of the people. 

            

            The real problem, of course, is that some Anglicans allow Rome to set all the terms, and that some of our people think we must “aspire” to “Rome or Orthodoxy.” I think we see less of that fantasy thinking, with its unrealistic romantic assumptions, and its bullying assertions, than we did a few years ago. Partly, we have helped to clear up the confusion on The Continuum. But, until we realize that our beliefs and way of life are founded on Christ and the Apostles instead of doctrine humanly developed (at best) , the danger is not over. The real message of the Oxford Movement, over all, was that Anglicanism already is Catholic, to the full extent that it should be. How did that idea become corrupted?

1.  A footnote in A Theological Introduction to The Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England, E.J. Bicknell took up the matter of Anglican orders when writing about Article XXXVI. 

.

Fr. Wells' Bulletin Inserts

ST MARY THE VIRGIN

Although August 15 is not a Prayer Book holy day, it seems hardly credible that we have no feast in honor of the gentle and lovely woman most intimately involved in the Incarnation.  From early times, August 15 has been celebrated as her day.  It has been marked by various names.  The most ancient and universal title for this feast is the Dormition of Our Lady.  That is an unfamiliar word which means "falling asleep."  It emphasizes that St Mary was not a martyr, as were most of the saints whose feasts are kept in the Prayer Book kalendar. 

In more modern times, this day has come to be called the Feast of the Assumption, celebrating a post-Biblical legend that after her death Mary's body did not decompose but was miraculously transported to the heavens. Before we reject this pious opinion too quickly, we must acknowledge that the New Testament gives some tantalizing hints of such a belief.  St Paul wrote (I Thess. 4:17) of those who will be "caught up together in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air," and St John  penned a majestic description (Rev. 12) of the "woman clothed by the sun."  So rather than giving undue honor to the Mother of God, the picture of Mary already in glory shows the ultimate destiny of every Christian. "Be ye faithful unto death, and I will give thee the crown of life" is Christ's promise to her and to us as well.

Even if Scripture is silent concerning the end of Mary's earthly life, the Church has given her the title "Mother of God."  That  appellation still offends many, just as it offended the heretic Nestorius.  He was willing to call her "Mother of Christ," but not "Mother of God."  "Mother of God" seems to imply something false, that Mary is the mother of the Godhead,  Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,  as if Mary herself were a Goddess from eternity.  Such a notion would be beyond heresy, a leap into sheer paganism.

When we say, as we must say, that the Virgin Mary was the Mother of God, we are saying quite emphatically that the One to whom she gave birth was none other than God in the flesh.  Her Son Jesus Christ was and is Deity Incarnate.  So the title "Mother of God" at bottom line is not a statement about Mary herself but a statement about the One to whom she was Mother.

From the moment she surrendered herself to the Archangels's message ("Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word") until the day of Pentecost when she was occupying an honored place amongi the apostles, we see Mary as the most faithful and obedient disciple, the model for all Christians.  Concerning her we sing, "O higher than the cherubim, more glorious than the seraphim, lead their praises; thou bearer of the eternal Word, most gracious, magnify the Lord."                     LKW

Tenth Sunday after Trinity

“Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.”

- I Cor. 12:3

We must consider two venues when we think of this basic confession of Christian Faith (Jesus is the Lord): the Church and the World.

1. Within the Church:

We make this very confession in this specific portion of the Creed: “…Begotten of his Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of very God; Begotten, not made; Being of one substance with the Father; By whom all things were made: Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, And was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, And was made man…”

The Jewish people had once known the ineffable Name of God which is represented by four Hebrew letters that correspond to our Latin alphabet with the letters YHVH (יהוה). This is the Name that is in the original Hebrew text every time that you find the word LORD rendered with every letter in the higher case, that is, in the KJV and other English translations that follow ancient Jewish and Christian tradition. The prophet Jeremiah had said that, upon their return from Babylon, this Name would no longer be pronounced by any man of Judah. The tradition of the Jewish people was to use the word Adonai whenever reading aloud from Scripture the Holy Name of God, that name YHVH. The Hebrew word Adonai, which means “the Lord,” would be substituted by a Jewish reader; and this still is Jewish practice to this very day. The First century Christians who relied on the Greek translation called the Septuagint (generally rendered LXX for the seventy rabbis who translated it) were accustomed to finding this Name of God translated as Kyrios (Κύριος), the Greek word for “Lord.”

So, when we say that Jesus is the Lord, we are saying that this man who walked the earth, lived, died and rose again is Himself to be identified with the God of Israel who made heaven and earth. We are saying that “the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.” We are confessing the Incarnation. On that day when the apostle Peter said to Jesus, “thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God,” the Lord answered him, “Flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee, but my Father in heaven” If you know, and can say with all your heart, that Jesus is the Lord, you are saying that He is one with the Father. You are saying, therefore, that “the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.” You are saying that God the Son has taken human nature into His Divine Person, our created nature into not-created Person. You are saying that He has taken what is alien to Him, our human nature, yet all the while remaining wholly other from every created thing as the Word (λόγος) and only begotten Son.        
  

This He has done to save us from sin and death and to forever sanctify and transform human nature, giving us by grace what we cannot by nature have, and so make us partakers of the Divine Nature, as is written by the apostle Peter.1 This is why you cannot say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost. Yes, someone can say the words, perhaps, without conviction. But, to speak of the Incarnation with faith, you must have the Holy Spirit within you making Christ known to you.

2. Confessing Jesus as the Lord before the world.

This is more difficult. When the ancient persecution of Christians became the law of the empire, to the ears of a Roman Magistrate such a confession, that Jesus is the Lord, became a crime punishable by death. The empire had one lord, and that was Caesar. Furthermore, Christians were taught to obey and honor all earthly authorities, including Caesar; but (and here is the rub) only as far as the informed Christian conscience allows. The Church was taught to obey and honor Caesar’s title as emperor, but not his ultimate title, his claim to total authority over the human conscience. For that must be formed by the word of God, not by culture, custom or politics.     

Caesar was believed to be the lord and god of his empire. Eventually, for a Christian to save his life if charged with the crime of Christianity, he had to renounce Jesus. The words in this section of the Epistle show that persecuted Christians had been pressed to renounce Jesus by calling Him accursed in the region around Corinth, like a preview of the persecution that would soon be standard throughout the empire. Once the empire began to enforce the law that made Christianity a capital crime, one had to renounce Jesus as Lord, and then make an offering of incense to the image of Caesar, thus recognizing him as the lord and god of the whole world.  

An early form of official persecution had taken place already in and around Corinth. Certain lapsed believers sought to be allowed back quickly into the fellowship of the Church by claiming that the Holy Spirit had guided them to renounce Jesus, even to call Him accursed, in order to be spared. Saint Paul addresses this by teaching that such a notion is impossible. Paul, in this passage, did not set aside the possibility of forgiveness and restoration of those believers into the fellowship of the Church (for God does forgive sins, and so must we); but nonetheless he firmly corrected their unacceptable excuse and wrong idea.

Here in the modern Western world we cannot identify easily with the ancient Christians, who could at any moment face denunciation to the authorities, who might even have their services raided. However, in other lands Christians in our own time are faced with the power of the state, that Beast that has suffered a mortal wound and yet lingers before that wound brings about its inevitable death,2 the power of the state demanding to be acknowledged as lord and god by trampling the human conscience. The Twentieth century saw more martyrs than all previous centuries combined, and we see no change in the world even now except for the fall of one state, the Soviet Union. How poor an excuse it is, therefore, if under a threat no more serious than social pressure, we fail to live up to the dictates of an informed conscience and so declare by word and deed that Jesus is the Lord.       

Of course, it is also true that human pride is given no room by the courageous examples of the martyrs; for Saint Paul tells us that if we are faced with death it is only by the Holy Spirit that we have the power to confess Jesus as the Lord. C.S. Lewis once wrote: “Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.” And, this virtue requires the Holy Spirit giving us grace to say “Jesus is the Lord.” 

The confession that Jesus is the Lord means that He is equal to God. It acknowledges, by using His human name, Jesus, that the Word was made flesh. It carries within it the truth that “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners.”3 It proclaims in its present tense form that Jesus Christ is risen from the dead, and is alive today. This confession is a manifestation that the Holy Spirit is in us. Jesus is the Lord of life and death, of heaven and earth, and of all things; He is One with the Father. This confession, Jesus is the Lord, foretells that Jesus Christ will come again to judge the quick and the dead, and that His Kingdom shall have no end.

********************

1.*  “Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.  (II Pet. 1:4)”

2. Rev. 13:3 seems to predict a mortal wound to the empire, but survival of its basic evil.

3. I Tim. 1:15

The Transfiguration

Fr. Laurence Wells  "Bulletin Insert"

Here we are, in the dog days of summer and nearly half way through the long season of Trinity (the “Trinity Trek”), celebrating the mysterious feast of our Lord’s Transfiguration.  That word means a change of appearance and refers to what Matthew, Mark and Luke all tell us, that “his countenance was altered, and his raiment was white and glistering.”  This happened while Jesus was praying by night on a certain mountain, alone with Peter, James and John. 

 

This vision of Christ in glory (which Peter later insisted was no “cunningly devised fable” but an event to which he was an eye-witness) sounds almost like one of the appearances of the Lord after His resurrection.  But all three Synoptic Gospels insist that this took place during the course of His earthly Galilean ministry (just as we celebrate it in the rather dull season of Trinity).

 

One detail which sets this event apart is that all three Evangelists made an unusual effort to date it within the narrative.  Luke says “about eight days after.”  After what, we have to ask.  The preceding event must be important, since the Gospels are mostly vague about the time-sequence of events.

 

The Transfiguration follows, after the interval of a week, upon the critical event of Peter’s great confession, which is the hinge episode of the Gospels, the great turning point of Jesus’ ministry before His Passion.  “Who do men say that I am?  Who do ye say that I am?  Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

 

Now, before they have caught their breath, the outspoken Peter and the two ambitious brothers James and John , who aspired to high position in the king-dom, are allowed to see a vision of exactly Who Jesus Is.  While this is a momentary change in His appearance, it is no change in His person or nature, but a sudden revelation of His deity, as the eternal Son or Word of the Father. 

In this vision He is conversing with two personages of long ago, Moses and Elijah, who represent the Law and the Prophets, the Scriptures of the Old Testament.

 

Peter (who still has some learning to do) devoutly proposes that they build three tabernacles or booths) in which Jesus, Moses and Elijah might be enshrined.  But at that suggestion, Moses and Elijah disappear and Jesus is left alone with His disciples.  The heavenly voice repeats the statement uttered at His baptism: “This is my beloved Son,” but adds the command, “hear Him.” 

 

In Jesus Christ, in His humility and His glory, we see Someone far greater than Moses and Elijah or any other “hero of the faith.” He is unique.  Therefore in His presence we are commanded to hold our tongues, to give up our own religious ideas, and to obey.                                    LKW

The Transfiguration of Our Lord

Re-Posted from August 6, 2008
A sermon by Bishop Joel Marcus Johnson, Rector of St. Andrew's in Easton, and Bishop Ordinary of the Diocese of the Chesapeake.
The Lesson: Exodus 34:29
The Psalm: 27, Dominus Illuminatio
The Epistle: II St. Peter 1:13
The Holy Gospel: St. Luke 9:28
+In the Name of God: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Amen.
¶Poor Peter. He had to decide which mountain he wanted most, whether Mount Tabor or Mount Calvary. As James and John went with him to Jesus’ prayers on Mount Tabor, the brothers still were smarting from the fresh humiliation of their mother having begged Jesus for thrones to be bestowed upon them; they were in no position to side with Peter in his argument against the Lord’s revelation to the twelve of his impending Passion. Fervent in denial, Peter’s expectations were heightened on the suddenly fashionable Tabor.
¶As the Lord Jesus prayed there, he was transfigured, or, as Matthew and Mark put it in the Greek, he was metamorphosed. Their description of Jesus’ altered countenance was so intense that King James’ word smiths had to coin a term to describe it: glistering.
¶Understand, this was no miracle, but the sighting of the Lord’s normal appearance, the veil of his humanity momentarily lifted; the robe of flesh clothing the Word who had chosen to be numbered among the transgressors here parted to reveal Very God. No, there was no light shining upon Jesus, but his deity radiating from within. This was how Moses and Elias had seen Jesus, the vision glorious which they had known in him.
¶Then, just as the Father and the Holy Ghost had joined Jesus at the beginning of his public ministry, at his Baptism, so now did they join him at its close, the Three Persons of the Holy and Undivided Trinity revealed in the same place and time. The Father again spoke from heaven of his pleasure in the Only-Begotten Son; and just as the Holy Ghost had appeared at the Jordan mikvah as a dove, so now did he come in the cloud to be present with this holy Jesus, whom these prophets had known intimately through the Spirit’s vision bestowed upon them.
¶Why in particular was Jesus joined by Moses and Elias? Simply said, it is because he was the fulfillment of everything they had taught: the Messiah, the Chosen One of Israel whom they had known through the revelation of the Holy Ghost, Moses having delivered the Law, Elias the chief of the prophets. But if you want it said a little more complex, they were ‘types’ of the Messiah. By ‘type’, I do not mean they were sort of or kind of like messiahs, but that by their beings and teachings they had ‘resembled’ one like them but so much greater. God had revealed this much to Moses: "I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him." (Deuteronomy 18:18)
¶Moses, in the closing moments of his leadership, participated in the most telling prophecy yet of the Saviour, when instructed by God to strike the rock which had followed them. "Hear now, ye rebels; must we fetch you water out of this rock? And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice: and the water came out abundantly...." (Numbers 20:10) Now, this rock actually was the presence of Christ among the people of Israel, the water from it the symbol of his precious blood. We know this because St. Paul teaches us, "[They] all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ." (I Corinthians 10:4)
¶There is a very peculiar fact about the water from that rock. It is described by a strange Hebrew word, which transliteratesmeribah, translating as the water of strife, or the water of contradiction. It bespeaks the never ceasing stream of grace from God to his people, even in their most rebellious and contentious moments against him.
¶Elias, Elijah if you prefer, was known as the chief and greatest of prophets, and especially because he was drawn up into heaven by a flaming chariot via a whirlwind. Many Jews (and remember that Judaism, then as now, was a multi-sectarian religion) considered Elias to have been a prophet in a sense so great that he was a messiah, and who, because he departed this world alive, could return alive. Some Jews today believe he will return again. In fact, there is even a Christian tradition that he will precede Christ’s return, his purpose to convert the Lord’s own Jewish people, and then their rabbis!
¶The Archangel Gabriel would comfort old Zacharias by likening his son St. John Baptist to Elias: "Many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord." (St. Luke 1:16) You may recall, in fact, that the priests and levites thought John to be Elias returned. (St. John 1:19)
¶So now, can you imagine how raced the hearts of Peter, James and John? You would have thought that on the holy mount they had learned so much of the Cross when hearing God in Christ, with the Law and the Prophets, speaking of "his decease," of his redemption of the world; and of the joyous joining there of the Father and the Holy Ghost! I must believe that the brothers, the sons of Zebedee, had taken it in, because merely a few years would pass after Jesus "decease" that the courageous James would be the first Apostle to witness for the Lord Jesus in martyrdom; and John, seasoned by time so many years later, would receive the apocalyptic Revelation. You and I know that Peter would wholly understand these things only after Jesus’ Passion and Resurrection, and especially at Pentecost.
¶But, my beloved, not today. As I have told you that Peter was fervent to deny Jesus’ foretelling of his Passion, his expectations for a bloodless Christianity were heightened on this day. And I have told you also that Peter was torn over which mountain to choose: The romantic garden spot of Tabor, or the stinking, blood-sodden rot of Calvary, where, by an old Jewish myth, was buried the skull of Adam.
¶So Peter desperately appeals to his seeming fatalistic Lord to build three shrines here, for each of the nobility in the cloud. He thinks he can prompt God in Christ into self-aggrandizement. Satan has tried this before, hasn’t he? And Jesus had called Peter ‘Satan’ in another event, hadn’t he? "He turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men." (St. Matthew 16:23)
¶No way the Cross! Peter wants a bloodless Christianity, a religion vacant of struggle against sin and the way of death. He wants a religion of Mount Tabor, not a religion of Mount Calvary.
¶The unconverted spirit of the old Peter is alive and well today, in the Church of Social Cachet, the Church of Sentimental Footsteps Carrying Us on the Beach, in the Church of The Success Culture, and in the Church of Sexual License and Better Bowling Scores: Such as these Jesus calls the church of the whited sepulchre, the churches "that be of men." It is a Mount Tabor Christianity with benign shrines. But the religion to which Jesus Christ, the Son of God, calls us is that of Mount Calvary.
¶You see on Mount Tabor what you should want to see forever, the radiance of his face (....it’s all right, go ahead, look at him in Cimabüe’s crucifix over the altar, gaze into his loving eyes), that face which in weeks after Tabor will bear the thorny crown of ignominy, soon to be "sore wounded"; spattered with blood beaten out of him by the Roman guards, the same blood’s Real Presence on our Altar this holy day and every Sunday, each Sunday a little Easter. And look today on his glistering raiment, because you won’t see it on Mount Calvary, stripped away to reveal him, in Wesley’s words inspired by St. Paul, "robed in flesh, our great high priest," that flesh which had been the tabernacle of his divinity, which had come among us, full of Grace and Truth.
¶You know how I am forever telling you that your religion must be as intensely practical as it is mystical. As with all else, even the Transfiguration of Our Lord must speak to your heart.
¶Mine? On August 6, 1963, I paused for a few days at The Abbey of St. John the Baptist at Collegeville, Minnesota. (I know the arithmetic is a mystery to you young people, who have always known that I am only thirty-nine years old.) In those days, St. John’s was the most populous Benedictine monastery in the world. Well, I was en route to my undergraduate experience in Chicago and needed a few days of prayer. So, at the Abbey on this day, the Feast of The Transfiguration of Our Lord, I thought to myself: Goodness, it looks more like Easter, so decked out in flowers and lights, ebullient to the ear in joyous chant!
¶I asked my old friend the choirmaster, Fr. Gerard Farrell, of blessed memory, how this could be. And he replied in such a way that I was reminded of the passage from the Revelation to St. John which we always read on All Saints’ Day. "These are they," he began, "who’ve seen death beyond measure, and who’ve fled to Jesus, because they know he’s the only one who can make sense out of Calvary, to know the one who died there, who’s still alive."
¶Well, you know, I was a kid, and I’d thought every monk was some kind of world-wise sophisticate like Thomas Merton. But Fr. Gerard explained to me that most of the monks were farmers or common labourers, ordinary people like you and I, who either had enlisted or were drafted into two world wars. For them, there was no Mount Tabor to which to return. They wanted, they lived for, the life-giving religion of Calvary, knowing this is the place from which Jesus saves!
¶You see, just as Peter would have to decide whether to choose Tabor or Calvary — rather, whether his would be the Christianity of Peter or Jesus — you and I must decide, too. The old Peter’s path is to one hell of a realm of materialism where you fret over the meaningless vintage of your failure to redeem yourself; whereas the other by simple humility and submission will lead you to the royal wine of heaven. Simple as that!
¶My beloved, given that St. Andrew’s faces some serious days ahead, I tell you we’re going to succeed because we have chosen the right mountain. We will stand some ridicule because we have chosen not to imitate the world’s vision of the Church, but because we have chosen Jesus as Lord and Saviour, and so his salvation and sacrifice as the mission and message of his Church. One day, rich or poor in the world’s sense, we’ll be able to answer to the Lord Jesus in his Day of Judgement.
¶But listen, as Peter was transformed, so shall we be transformed; Christ changes all things and all persons who come to him. For here’s what Peter wrote years later of the Transfiguration. Please read it aloud, and listen not only for the sublime poetry; but understand this same Jesus can touch your heart, too.
¶"We had been eye-witnesses of His exaltation. Such honor, such glory was bestowed on Him by God the Father, that a voice came to Him out of splendour which dazzles human eyes. This, it said, is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased..... We, his companions on the holy mountain, heard that voice coming from heaven, and now the word of the prophets gives us more confidence than ever. It is with good reason that you are paying so much attention to that Word: It will go on shining, like a lamp in some darkened room, until the dawn breaks, and the day star rises in your hearts." (II Peter 1:16-19; tr. Ronald Knox.)
+Joel Marcus Johnson, Chesapeake